PPL +FI

[pipertommy]

Hi, what is the limitations for a ppl with FI rating these days? Can they get paid? No longer limited to teaching lapl? Thanks.

[rudestuff]

You can get paid. You need CPL knowledge passes to teach PPL and above. Not required to teach LAPL.

[pipertommy]

So no CPL passes no ppl teaching. You'd only be able to teach lapl.

[AllanA]

I know a PPL/IR who holds FI(A), MEP CRI, IRI and instructs part time NPPL, LAPL, IMC/IR(R), Night Ratings and MEP along with holding a GR(A) and RT Examiner chits but doesn’t have CPL exam passes. Just doesn’t instruct for EASA PPL. So the assertion that it is LAPL only isn’t strictly accurate.

[Whopity]

So the assertion that it is LAPL only isn’t strictly accurate.

According to the Rgulation it is:

FCL.915.FI FI — Prerequisites
(2) hold at least a PPL(A) and have:
(i) met the requirements for CPL theoretical knowledge, except for an FI(A) providing training for the LAPL(A) only

It is entered in the holder's licence.
Don't confuse the priviledges of seperate qualifications.
Teaching IR is a privilege of the IRI qualification for which 800 hours under IFR is a prerequisite if not a full FI; the ME is a privileged of the CRI(ME) qualification. Night rating traing would be restricted to holders of a LAPL only!
Additionally, FIs qualified under the old National, before CPL knowledge was a requirement, have grandfather rights so may not have CPL level knowledge.

[AllanA]

You make a good point Whopity, people shouldn't confuse privileges with qualifications.

The assertion that an FI(A) without CPL TK can ONLY teach a LAPL is incorrect. You can by, different routes, gain the privileges to teach for the issue of other qualifications even if you don't have grandfather rights. The entries on another licence I have seen about are as follows:

FCL 905.FI applies as in (a)(b)(e)(g)(IR(R))(h)/For LAPL only

It must be a niche teaching LAPL, IMC/IR(R), MEP and night qualifications along with RT Exams and ground exams. Actually, there is nothing stopping a PPL instructor holding a flight examiner certificate either as far as I know. I don't know how many IFR hours this chap has but I know he holds a full EASA IR and if over 200 IFR hours then any reason for not being able to teach, for example IR for candidates training via the CB-IR route?

[MrAverage]

I thought an MEP CRI (as opposed to someone who'd done the full Multi Instructor course) could not do initial multi training?

[Duchess_Driver]

A CRI can only teach someone who already has a licence, but there is no difference between what an FI with ME CRI and a ME CRI can teach as far as the ME aircraft is concerned. A ME CRI could not teach an ab-initio PPL on a twin but an FI with ME CRI could......

An IRI must also have ME CRI privileges to teach the ME IR.

[Whopity]

MEP CRI (as opposed to someone who'd done the full Multi Instructor course)

The ME CRI is the full Multi Instructor Course!

[Mickey Kaye]

OhAlso remember that if you meet the requirements of the CRI rating after completion of the FI course you can apply for a CRI rating at the same time. And you don't need CPL TK for that either.

And a PPL without CPL TK can also teach for the NPPL and all its associated ratings including microlight.

[MrAverage]

Thanks again Whopity, I now realise I was thinking of a PPL without FI(A) doing the ME CRI (who would be so limited) which was not the subject of the thread.

[anchorhold]

So these days if instructing on a PPL, to be paid do you need a class one or class two medical? Also if your renewals, medicals, traveling cost are in excess of what you are being paid, are you deemed as being paid, as you have made no profit, that assuming you are self employed.

[Whopity]

to be paid do you need a class one or class two medical?

A PPL requiures a Class 2 and a CPL a Class one, so if you instruct using PPL privileges you only need a Class 2 medical. The privilege to be paid is part of the EASa privileges of the PPL.

You are probably thinking back to the days of the CAA ratings pre 1999 when a Class 2 was required to instruct, but a PPL only needed a Class 3.

[Kemble Pitts]

A PPL with either CRI or FIC can be paid for instructing.

[flying jocks]

Originally Posted by rudestuff

You can get paid. You need CPL knowledge passes to teach PPL and above. Not required to teach LAPL.

hi rudestuff.

The last bit 'ppl and above' is this written down anywhere in EASA rules? If so please quote. I held an ATPL, now a PPL with FI. Can i teach CPL?

cheers

FJ

[rudestuff]

Check out post #5 - Whopity posted the reference. Having previously held a CPL or above should meet the requirements. The interesting question is how do you ''lose'" an ATPL?

[Whopity]

I held an ATPL, now a PPL with FI. Can i teach CPL?

You cannot teach for a licence that you do not hold so a PPL holder cannot teach CPL. You could probably get your ATPL reissued or perhaps a CPL as you have already held one.

[flying jocks]

Originally Posted by rudestuff

The interesting question is how do you ''lose'" an ATPL?

Not having a current class 1 medical and JAR licence expired. Cannot convert to EASA professional licence.

[redpassion]

just one more question

Hello, I'm an Italian Pilot, few days ago i have passed an AoC as FI with my PPL WITHOUT CPL/TK.
I'm really surprised (and also worried about) to understand that in your opinion (and thanks for that) an FI Limited to Lapl, DO NOT has the same privileges of an CRI SEP, (where the CPL TK is not requested).
I have another work in the aviation contest, but i do not found money under my bed, and FI rating was really expensive (but i have to say i am now another type of pilot).
What i would to say, is that my FI Instructor told me, "you can act with all the prvileges of an FI except for teaching for PPL training. I choose full FI instead of ridiculous 3 hr CRI course to be really prepared to instruct something (and now it is).
Is really incredible that a training of 3 hours (10% of 30hrs needed for full FI) give you all the privileges mentioned above and the full FI Training Don't. Really hard for me to understand.
Under this point of view a FI training limited to LAPL is totaly useless!
I have to check again with my instrucor and maybe with the authority, there is any recently change in this point?
More than a question, a hopeness...is a HPA Training (dedicated to whom doesnt hold a ATPL/CPL TK) proove an CPL TK?
Thanks a lot. I'm really sad now to think, that in the same day (or may be the same flight), was possible to attend both FI and CRI AoC, paying less than in two separate session. really really nervous.

[Duchess_Driver]

Under this point of view a FI training limited to LAPL is totaly useless!

Not so... the LAPL should eventually become the default qualification for people wanting to learn to fly.... I am surprised that (in the U.K. in my experience anyway) there are few schools offering it.

No, HPA does not qualify as TK for CPL.

The full FI course equips the applicant with the skills to assess the ab-initio exercises - the CRI course not so. The only thing a CRI can do that an FI can’t is in the initial stages where the FI is restricted they must operate under supervision of an ATO/FI. A CRI has no such initial restriction.