CRI(ME) Requirement for ME IR Instruction
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 55N
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
"The cost of gaining approvals is likely to kill the freelance Instructors pretty much dead I suspect".
I think the costs, which are unlikely to decrease, may well have a terminal effect on small schools and clubs as well.
"The cost of gaining approvals is likely to kill the freelance Instructors pretty much dead I suspect".
I think the costs, which are unlikely to decrease, may well have a terminal effect on small schools and clubs as well.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The standardisation is going to be an interesting issue. Our students are taught by the same team and generally the same Instructor where possible throughout a course. All of them are standardised by me and teach the same content in the same way in accordance with our approvals.
A freelancer is going to teach how they see fit and then throw them over the wall so to speak into an ATO where the change of pace is very likely to be an issue for the student in terms of adapting to different process and methods. I can see this leading to a considerable increase in training time for the student to adapt which of course will be blamed on the ATO not the free lancer.
The other issue I suspect is that we do a considerable amount of training in an FNPTII, this allows the student to practice what if scenarios and re run at the click of a mouse areas that are pooched up. A freelancer is not going to have access to this which will mean a lot of training done in the aircraft and a real increase in the cost of obtaining an IR. Our sim is half the price of the aircraft.
A freelancer is going to teach how they see fit and then throw them over the wall so to speak into an ATO where the change of pace is very likely to be an issue for the student in terms of adapting to different process and methods. I can see this leading to a considerable increase in training time for the student to adapt which of course will be blamed on the ATO not the free lancer.
The other issue I suspect is that we do a considerable amount of training in an FNPTII, this allows the student to practice what if scenarios and re run at the click of a mouse areas that are pooched up. A freelancer is not going to have access to this which will mean a lot of training done in the aircraft and a real increase in the cost of obtaining an IR. Our sim is half the price of the aircraft.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the costs, which are unlikely to decrease, may well have a terminal effect on small schools and clubs as well.
bose-x wrote:
That would clearly be an undesirable situation. However, if the freelance instructor is 'associated with' a specific ATO and suitably standardised, it would be less of a problem. Except for the standardisation costs, of course - and the perception by an ATO's resident instructors that a freelance instructor is taking the bread from their mouths.... Which would require careful management.
But it could suit an ATO to use a nominated freelance instructor for certain specific elements of the course, particularly if the course is for a student using his/her own aeroplane, perhaps?
A freelancer is going to teach how they see fit and then throw them over the wall so to speak into an ATO where the change of pace is very likely to be an issue for the student in terms of adapting to different process and methods.
But it could suit an ATO to use a nominated freelance instructor for certain specific elements of the course, particularly if the course is for a student using his/her own aeroplane, perhaps?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no doubt that there will be a few schools that may consider it or even benefit from it. For us it's unlikely as we have full and part timers that get the priority.
Keeping externals standardised is cost and effort that I can't really justify.
Keeping externals standardised is cost and effort that I can't really justify.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That would clearly be an undesirable situation. However, if the freelance instructor is 'associated with' a specific ATO and suitably standardised, it would be less of a problem. Except for the standardisation costs, of course - and the perception by an ATO's resident instructors that a freelance instructor is taking the bread from their mouths.... Which would require careful management.
goes against the reason for the CB IR and (possibly) the EIR in the first
place.
Independent Instructors should be welcomed as a source of potential new
students for ATOs - not seen as a threat to existing work of ATO Instructors.
Although the result of any flight training should be to produce safe,
competent pilots - The actual aim of any training (what a student is
paying for) is for the student to obtain Test Standard flying - which
does not have to be only by fully standardised training.
Keeping externals standardised is cost and effort that I can't really justify.
an Instructor Report is required, along with a flight test by the ATO to
assess competency.
If student is competent, but does things slightly differently to your
course - it shouldn't matter.
An ATO will need Course Approval for CB IR and EIR.
As part of that just put in a line saying that students joining a course
with prior IFR training are not required to amend their methods provided
an equivalent level of safety and competence is demonstrated and maintained.
Level Attitude wrote:
Oh I can really see an ATO doing that.....
An ATO will need Course Approval for CB IR and EIR.
As part of that just put in a line saying that students joining a course with prior IFR training are not required to amend their methods provided an equivalent level of safety and competence is demonstrated and maintained
As part of that just put in a line saying that students joining a course with prior IFR training are not required to amend their methods provided an equivalent level of safety and competence is demonstrated and maintained
there will be a formal requirement for the EIR and C-bM IR courses to be approved, in common with all other courses for Part-FCL licences, ratings and certificates, even though freelance instructors may teach part of these courses.
When the applicant has: - completed instrument flight instruction under the supervision of an IRI(A) or an FI(A) holding the privilege to provide training for the IR; or - prior experience of flight time by reference to instruments as PIC on aeroplanes, under a rating giving the privileges to fly under IFR or in IMC, these hours may be counted towards the 40 hours above up to a maximum of 30 hours.
In any case, the flight instruction part of the training course shall include at least 10 hours of dual instrument flight instruction in an aeroplane at an ATO
Whopity, the point being made is that, if an ATO is content to accept the maximum 30 hrs training from one or more 'non-associated' freelance, non-standardised instructors, it might well be far more difficult to prepare the student for the Skill Test in 10 hrs than if the training had been delivered by the ATOs 'all singing from the same hymn book' instructors.
The ATO would also need to convince the Authority that it had a sound process for managing such a situation.
However, if the freelance instructor is associated with the ATO to such an extent that he/she is fully conversant with their SOPs etc., the problem is rather less.
The ATO would also need to convince the Authority that it had a sound process for managing such a situation.
However, if the freelance instructor is associated with the ATO to such an extent that he/she is fully conversant with their SOPs etc., the problem is rather less.
Last edited by BEagle; 28th Jan 2014 at 14:18.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I note that nearly all of this discussion is framed in terms of the needs of ATOs and their staff instructors rather than the needs of the students.
Is it just possible that there is a connection between that attitude and the reason why some students like to work with an Independent?
Only asking
Is it just possible that there is a connection between that attitude and the reason why some students like to work with an Independent?
Only asking
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: York
Age: 53
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad isn't it.
But then when you are paying 10 grand for your sim to be approved and god knows what in time and money in writing and getting manuals approved its no surprise really.
But then when you are paying 10 grand for your sim to be approved and god knows what in time and money in writing and getting manuals approved its no surprise really.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: My house
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LA
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you statement regarding the aim of training. It should not be training to pass the test, it should be training to safely operate the aircraft at the appropriate level. At which point a student will be able to pass the test however the end goal is not the pass.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you statement regarding the aim of training. It should not be training to pass the test, it should be training to safely operate the aircraft at the appropriate level. At which point a student will be able to pass the test however the end goal is not the pass.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What students pay me for is to keep them and their families as safe as possible in years to come.
They are more than willing to pay for more long briefs, which go way beyond the syllabus, and more training time, to achieve that.
Passing the skills test is a step on the road.
Having said that, there are far more students out there who want to get their IMCR or IR in the statutory minimum time and hours. That's fine, but the result will be different.
It's horses for courses and isn't great that people have the choice?
They are more than willing to pay for more long briefs, which go way beyond the syllabus, and more training time, to achieve that.
Passing the skills test is a step on the road.
Having said that, there are far more students out there who want to get their IMCR or IR in the statutory minimum time and hours. That's fine, but the result will be different.
It's horses for courses and isn't great that people have the choice?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The customer is king and in this new EASA world the customer can do the bulk of IR training with an independent instructor (and why not?)
Previous IFR flight experience will count count and can be credited so the smart ATO's will work with freelancers to ensure that the customer gets the appropriate standard of training.
Previous IFR flight experience will count count and can be credited so the smart ATO's will work with freelancers to ensure that the customer gets the appropriate standard of training.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or the ATOs will close ranks and not accept training from free lance instructors against their approvals. It may be that the customer is king, but without an ATO the previous training is worth squat if the ATO does not want to accept it.
Despite the fact that I would standardise Timothy in a heart beat and accept his training, there are not many independent instructors that I would be prepared to do this with.
*** I make the point that Timothy is a friend who I have known for several years and have examined and consider to be an excellent pilot not just from his internet posts.....
Despite the fact that I would standardise Timothy in a heart beat and accept his training, there are not many independent instructors that I would be prepared to do this with.
*** I make the point that Timothy is a friend who I have known for several years and have examined and consider to be an excellent pilot not just from his internet posts.....
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose,
I have been "validated" by a number of ATOs, and am delighted that you would accept my training as well, so the next point isn't about me or you.
...and that point is that if someone has 30 hours of independent instruction and presents themselves to an ATO that won't accept them, there will always be another ATO across the road, or across the water, that will.
It is also hoped that the number of CBM-IR and EIR approved ATOs will be far greater than the JAR IR ones, giving the student more local choice.
But only time will tell.
I have been "validated" by a number of ATOs, and am delighted that you would accept my training as well, so the next point isn't about me or you.
...and that point is that if someone has 30 hours of independent instruction and presents themselves to an ATO that won't accept them, there will always be another ATO across the road, or across the water, that will.
It is also hoped that the number of CBM-IR and EIR approved ATOs will be far greater than the JAR IR ones, giving the student more local choice.
But only time will tell.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see many new ATOs springing up to offer the new flavours of IR. My guess is that it will be the existing ATOs that add the approval as the cost of setting a new ATO is just eye watering and in what is a dwindling market is probably not cost effective. This is apparent from the number of RTF calling it a day because they can't manage the transition just from RTF to ATO.
Therefore I would say that any prospective candidate wanting to go to an ATO and have the training by an unknown accepted ensure up front the ATO will accept it. I can't see many doing so for the reasons mentioned earlier.
But as you say, only time will tell.
Therefore I would say that any prospective candidate wanting to go to an ATO and have the training by an unknown accepted ensure up front the ATO will accept it. I can't see many doing so for the reasons mentioned earlier.
But as you say, only time will tell.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole point is to stop the market dwindling.
I have been talking at Friedrichshafen about this for some years, and the interest in Europe is huge. I hope and believe that this will be the next big thing, and I think that ATOs who think that it will be business as usual will miss out big time.
I have been talking at Friedrichshafen about this for some years, and the interest in Europe is huge. I hope and believe that this will be the next big thing, and I think that ATOs who think that it will be business as usual will miss out big time.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with Timothy on this one sorry Bosex
If a prospective client presents him or herself with previouse IFR hours and experience logged by a suitably qualified IRI are you seriously going to screw them around just because you want to buck the system that has been put in place, they will soon realise who the old school monopy ATOs are and spend their money with more enlightened ones.
Let's face it an IRI is not something that is given away to anyone
If a prospective client presents him or herself with previouse IFR hours and experience logged by a suitably qualified IRI are you seriously going to screw them around just because you want to buck the system that has been put in place, they will soon realise who the old school monopy ATOs are and spend their money with more enlightened ones.
Let's face it an IRI is not something that is given away to anyone