FI(R) and CFI

[sixgee]

A couple of questions.

Is there any advantage to obtaining a CRI as the same time as an FI(R)? For example being able to do refresher training on people outside of an ATO DTO environment and not requiring to be under the supervision of an FI?
The rules seem to suggest that in applying for a CRI an FI only exempts you from the Teaching and Learning element, not the flying or the groundschool. Surely this doesn’t make sense. Can you apply for an FI(R) and a CRI simultaneously based on the same course?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I run both in parallel, and yes. CRI lets me operate outside supervision when instructing non ab-initio students, and also should I not get enough instructing hours in, the revalidation requirements for CRI are only 10hrs in 3 years, not 50hrs (which would be true versus both FI and FI(R).

I don't know about applying for both at once - I had CRI for some years before then doing the FI course. Given that, it seems a no-brainer simply to keep CRI on my licence.

G

[sixgee]

Interesting points Ghengis. So even if (if you will excuse me) a CRI is in some ways a lesser rating than an FI an FI doesn’t give you the privileges of a CRI rating should you not meet the instructional hours requirement.

Another thing that seems a little unfair is that I believe to instruct in a simulator for an initial IR requires either an FI or an STI, so in a sense the FI includes the privileges of an STI.

Should my FI have lapsed by more than three years then to obtain an STI would involve regaining my FI rating first, but if I were no longer able to obtain a medical then that would be impossible. No amount of training (say 100 hours or more) in a sim would enable me to get an STI.

Whereas a significantly lapsed STI could be assessed, do some training and a test and be ready to go again.

Forgive me if I am under a misapprehension, but it is quite a long time since I last instructed (just retired from the airlines) and am thinking if coming back to some kind of instructing.

[Whopity]

an FI doesn’t give you the privileges of a CRI rating should you not meet the instructional hours requirement.

No; the priviledges of a CRI are contained in an FI rating however; a stand alone CRI does not have the same limitations as an FI(R) poor drafting of the regulation and poor interpretation of the course content with regard to cross crediting.

I believe to instruct in a simulator for an initial IR requires either an FI or an STI, so in a sense the FI includes the privileges of an STI

In order to teach for an IR the FI would need to have 200 hours under IFR and have completed the IRI training course. Much the same qualification is required for an STI except that they don't require a medical certificate.
Going back to your original question there is an advantage to completing a CRI at the same time as a FI(R) it will broaden the scope of what you can do, simply because of poor regulation. If you go back later to add the CRI then you will have to repeat a large chunk of ground school and do another 3 hours flying training even though you have already done it as the only credit is the T&L. By the time you remove the Restriction there is no point doing a CRI as you effectively have it in the FI.
The CAA has recently started to charge FIC providers for each course they offer, so for a one man ATO it is no longer cost effective to offer the shorter courses as you will never cover the costs.

[sixgee]

Of course you are correct Whopity about the requirement for the FI to have applied instrument instructional privileges (by satisfying the hours IFR and the content of the IRI course.
My original complaint still stands though, I was an instructor with the applied instrument privileges, but I can see no way to gain an STI without regaining my FI first, which for example I understand I would not be able to do should I be unable to obtain a medical, or should I just have no desire to instruct in aeroplanes again. It just seems daft to me that no amount of training in a sim (say 1000 hours to labour a point) would gain me the ability to instruct in a sim, whereas if I had a STI lapsed by 20 years, I would be able to renew it.

Regarding the FI/CRI point you say that an (unrestricted) FI includes the privileges of a CRI. I was really just thinking out loud whether there were any circumstances where you would qualify for the renewal of a CRI if you had one (say less than 50 instructional hours but more than 10 and met some of the other requirements), but not for an FI. Could you then exercise the privileges of a CRI without actually have the letters CRI printed on your licence? Because the only certificate you do have, the FI would have lapsed.

[Whopity]

Yes it does seem quite ridiculous that an FI who has had the priviledges more than 3 years ago appears disadvantaged compared to a STI who is renewing after more than 3 years. I think the best course would be to approach the CAA via an ATO who could make the case to them through their OPS Inspector. I recall a FI wh was instructing in the Sim and on loosing his medical could not continue in the Sim until he had completed all of the requirements of a STI. Don't waste you time going directly to the CAA. Incidentally you don't need a medical certificate to renew your FI, only for the issue of a licence.