Instructors, a rare breed indeed!!
 

I just wanted to canvas the forum on a fact that was worrying me for a while and seems to be getting worse. Two airfields I fly from seem to be in dire straights on the training side due to the lack of instructors. The airlines now seem to have hoovered up the long time instructors and the prospect of shelling out serious money for a CPL and an instructor rating seems to now be hitting hard and killing off the career flying instructor. I presume the multi pilot licence to be introduced will make the situation even worse.
The pre BCPL days of having the required hours and then doing just the flying instructor course seemed to work much better and gave the part timers a chance. I know AOPA were looking at the instructor rating and the need for a CPL, a licence which I believe is totally unecessry if you want to remain an instructor. All the best instructors I have flown with have all been of the pre BCPL variety.
Is the instructor shortage starting to hit elsewhere across the UK and does anybody know any more of the AOPA findings/recommendations?
Nick

I sent the East Mids Flying School an email and....

Dear Mr Jinkster,
Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding Instructor positions.
Unfortunately we have no vacancies at present but will keep your details on file should an appointment become available in the near future.
We thank you for your interest in our School.

Kind regards

******* ******

hmmm....:hmm:

I know that my previous school had a lot of trouble replacing me when I left. I gather they are now staffed by a number of part-time instructors, who all have other jobs which pay their bills, and instruct for a bit of fun on their days off. Which, it could be argued, makes for some of the best instructors out there, but I know it's not what my previous boss was looking for.

As I see it, apart from increasing the number of part-timers, the only way schools will be able to continue to find instructors if the demand for airline pilost continues to increase is to pay them a sensible wage. Unfortunately, it's difficult to see how this will happen without putting up the prices for the customers.....

It's also worth noting, to Jinkster, that when I was looking for my first instructor job, I applied to over 90 schools, and had quite a few replied like the one you had, and several that didn't reply at all. I did a bit of flying for one school, which didn't work out too well (they told me it was a full-time position, but didn't have any students so I couldn't make any money). Then, after a couple of months, I got two job offers and heard of a position at a third school. I accepted one of the offers and worked there for two very pleasant years. So stick with it, because they might just mean exactly what they said in their letter.

FFF
---------------

I think the lack of flying instructor situation will only get worse. Also if the powers that be have their way the MPL (Multi Pilot Licence), which as I understand it will require no flight training in "real" a/c before going onto the jets, is just around the corner.

The writing was on the wall when they got rid of the self improver route. In those days there was always a supply of young keen instructors building their hours prior to moving on to airline work. Also with the increasing commercial pressures none of the the air transport companies will allow their pilots to do the odd bit of instructing to keep their hand in as these hours count towards flight time limitations.

Most of the instructors who are left are getting more geriatric (me included) and when they expire who will take their place?

Mind you the big air transport undertakings want the MPL because this will save them a lot of money and perhaps go a long way to stemming a lack of "suitable" pilots which would limit their commercial plans/expansion. Whether this will be good for safety long term is highly debatable.

Interesting times ahead!

That is perhaps what is needed for FI's to get a decent salary and perhaps become a career instructor instead of heading for the big companies.

I am glad that this is happening, if you want good FI's you have to give them decent conditions, if not they wont last long, and of course their motivation wont be the best one (remember about this chapter of human factors and the influence of motivation in the subject's performance?).

GA wont die because of lack of FI's, the market laws will rule as they always do, working conditions will improve and there will be people willing to instruct as a career rather than a way of gaining hours, for the time being only few do, i am sure if conditions were better more would do.

I personally do not think the MPL will have a big impact in GA, the people that will go this way were bound to do an integrated course if the MPL thing wasn't invented, and they wouldn't be going to do their basic training in any PPL school.

Most of the guys i worked with followed the self improver path rather than integrated, the MPL without having an agreement with an airline is an economic suicide for somebody who has not been "choosen" by a company, that is why i do not think it will have a big impact on GA.

Also, the number of airline pilots who instruct part-time is restricted more than ever by the 900 hours per year rule. Everyone works much harder than in the past so most companies run their pilots up close to the limit.

If we instruct for free, we understandably get slated by those who get paid for it and either way if the school is making money out of us, even if we don't, it still counts towards the 900.

I'd love to instruct more than I do (no more than about 50 hours a year, all at the going rate) but I'm either too knackered on my days off or hitting 900 hours and the day job has to come first as it pays the bills.

Myself - I have always wanted to fly a shiny jet (just like most other 20-odd year olds) and also instruct to build hours.....

However with the cost of training the way it is, most people dont have much choice but to go to the airlines and pay of there debts! I for one will definately come back to bash round in a C150 part time if I can (900hr limiting) and instruct, its great fun, easy work and rewarding! :ok:

Jinkster-Check your pms

Cheers

Nick

It would be nice if the old PPL instructor system was reintroduced.

PPL's like myself who, for reasons of family, jobs, ect cannot, or do not wish to fly commercially but who would love to instruct and help out. I won't get into the payed/unpaid debate other than to say that nearly all my instructors were PPL's, some payed, some not .... all very good too. I know that in France for instance many instructors are PPL's and many used to here until some bright spark decided they needed a CPL (or at least the paper exams). It says that to instruct an instructor has to demonstrate knowledge to CPL level. In the UK this is interpretted as "pass the ground shool exams" To do this now, you have to do compuslory ground school and then the exams themselves. Who in work or with a family can afford this in time, let alone money? The CAA could easily interpret the wording in a different way and therefore allow someone wanting to instruct to "demonstrate" appropriate knowledge in a different way. This could mean take the CPL exams but skip the compulsory ground school, or perhaps a stand alone exam?

Bring back PPL instructors I say!

SS

ok i have read some comments but i am not fluent in english so maybe i did not understand very well what you said...

So if i understand, pay of instructors in UK is bad...but do you know that in france most of instructors (maybe 90%) are free ?? :( sad truth... because here, the flying club are association.
so most of instructors get a an another job.

and if i understand is there a lack of instructors in UK ?? so is it "easy" to become an instructor in UK ? because I think I will do FI rating...

In France the situation is :

The french CAA (DGAC) will want that most of instructors get just a PPL..not CPL!!
why ?? beacause CPL are paid!! and not PPL !! and the students do not pay an instructor, that is why the prices of hourly rates are more low than in UK...
and the second reason, instructors with a CPL, left flying club when they find an airline job whereas instructors with just PPL stay longer...

so if in UK there is a lack of instructors and plus they are paid, I am quickly doing a FI course!! :}

Going to create mayhem......but I must admit I did learn 300 times more bits of information as a CPL than a PPL.....

Its not just all about a CPL (getting paid) or PPL (not getting paid) now is it??? :hmm:

I'm sure you did Jinkster, but how much of it can you honestly say is essential to know to teach at PPL level? I'm not trying to belittle the CPL (I may very well decide to do the CPL myself one day), what I am saying is that to teach basic PPL, experience backed up by the FI course itself should be quite adequate. Having to take the CPL papers is rather OTT, especially as to take them these days you have to attend a fair bit of compulsory ground school even if taking the home study route. It's going to cost at least £2k on top of the £5-6K for the FI/R and require possibly two or three, two week blocks of time + three weeks? FI course. There are many experienced PPL's out there who (dare I say it) actually know loads more about the relevant issues to do with PPL type flying than the majority of fresh CPL's would have a clue about. This talent is presently being wasted, as few will go to all that expense to teach alongside another career. OK, you can say they shouldn't ... but they used to, and they did a bloody good job. What's so different now that CPL and PPL instructors cannot work side by side? A PPL instructor is unlikely to be teaching advanced stuff so why not share the load?

I hear all the arguments about poor wages ect ect, but to be honest it doesn't really effect my sensibilities. I work in a notoriously under paid and overworked profession, so whilst I can empathise, I'm not over impressed by the "I work soooo hard, but get soooo little" line. At the drop of a hat most instructors would be off as soon as that first airline position became available anyway (be honest!). Those that stay should move up the instructional ladder to teach IR, CPL ect and be paid accordingly at that level. GA is never going to make lots of money at PPL level, but it's also not going to attract new customers if the instructional prices escalate beyond sensible limits. PPL instructors would provide a good base, with enthusiastic, experienced people to breathe new life into what is becoming a fast declining, ego chasing and elitist rich mans pastime/profession.

SS

Ducking quickly :E

SS (how appropriate :E , no need to duck).

I can see where you are coming from and in future days perhaps it will all change as the instructor leave for 'better' pastures.

Good luck :ok:

Having been fortunate to gain my instructor's rating when I was a mere PPL with 150 hours in command I can see everyone's point of view particularly as I could take my time to acquire my CPL and ATPL on the self improver route. Having been a part time fixed wing instructor who at one time worked as the only fixed wing air taxi pilot for a helicopter firm, I was interested to note that their rotary wing instructors were paid a living wage! This is due entirely to market forces and that there are no "glamorous" jobs at the end of a rotary wing PPL as their might be if the cheaper fixed wing path is followed. Over the last 30 or so years all the arguements have been considered and one point has been the wish to establish the career fixed wing instructor as the poor quality of fixed wing instructor has been noted by those who use it as a means to hour building. Over those years it has been made more "difficult" to get a fixed wing instructor rating to try and circumvent this problem. First it was the BCPL, now as we know, new instructors are expected to hold full CPL's before taking the FIC. It has made little difference as the new CPL with 1000 hours in his logbook is infinitely more attractive to most airline employers than the guy with 250 hours thus using instructing for hour building is in as much demand now as it has ever been.
Once again we appear to be entering a phase where there is a demand for newly qualified pilots and the instructors who have been waiting for their airline opportunity for years, living in penury as an instructor to keep current if nothing else are now taking the opportunities now offered with both hands. It has happened before and will do so again. Let us hope that this time market forces will force up instructor wages to the levels of our helicopter colleagues and enable those who want to make a career out of instructing to do so.
Another market force which has affected matters is the ease in borrowing money these days. I just managed to self fund my own CPL, but the I.R. was beyond me. After much planning I went to my bank manager, flashed my CPL and told him that I wanted to borrow a maximum of £3000. It was the first request of this nature he had ever received and I walked out of his office with an unlimited overdraft to go and get my rating! (Yes it was quite a few years ago - 1980 to be precise).
A few years ago I found myself flying with a newly qualified first officer who confessed that her loan to get her CPL/IR exceeded £80,000. Aparently she could only afford on her wage to pay the interest on her loan, not any of the capital back.
I hate to say it but easy money like this has made it so much easier for people to train for the CPL which has lead in part to the situations we have seen over the last few years. I hate to think of the numbers of people out there who have failed to get a job, run out of money, lost their recency as a result and are now either bankrupt or seriously considering it. They have probably given up all ideas of a career in aviation and will possibly regret the decision they made to train for the rest of their lives.

P.P.

LEVC

Sensible quote LEVC!

I am currently going through ATPL and WOULD like to be a career instructor - I have taught people in the past and it seems to be a NICE way to earn a modest living.

From my PPL training, I (and several other students) felt hindered by the attitude of some instructors. Several seem to have a chip on there shoulder (others are better balanced with chips on both!) openly complaining that the world owes them a favour because THEY decided to spend money and time to get a Comercial License - "I should be respected and treated like a God; them I will consider acting like a professional". Maybe something can be learned from the humble driving instructor who can earn a reasonable living without the label of 'failed F1 driver' or similar

Many people in other walks of life spend time and money to try to develop themselves - not always successfully. However, the attitude of many instructors DAMAGES the chances of the career instructors (my OWN target) gaining a sensible wage.

REMEMBER - its nice to be important...... but it is more important to be nice.

If instructors were paid more than the average office cleaner then they may elect to stay in post.

Wages have historically always been low in this sector and because of this 'unprofessional' wage many vote with their feet.

Its NOT just about leaving for the airlines its also directly a consequence of the low labour rates.

If we reverted to PPLs teaching PPLs then the CPL as a standalone licence would die - no point

I fully agree with PPL's becoming instructors (as I've said, I was one myself) The fly in the ointment then was that it was a cheap way of gaining the magic 700 hours reguired to remove the requirement of having to do an expensive approved course for the CPL. What we need now is for there to be no advantage in gaining an instructor's rating on the road to obtaining a CPL, or maybe these days a frozen ATPL. Of course a few hundred hours of instructing gives additional experience, but this should not be a mandatory requirement as it was for all but the very rich then.

P.P.

Not sure what you mean by "no point"? No point in allowing PPL's to instruct? or no point in having a CPL as a stand alone licence?

If it's the former, then you have swept away any arguments for or against without so much as a "but" or "if" :mad: If it's the latter then nothing is changed. The CPL as a stand alone licence is very limited anyway but hasn't died yet. Unless you add something like a FI/R, or IR a stand alone CPL simply allows you to earn money by flying, as you know. It doesn't get you a job automatically ... that bit is up to you and the direction you wish to go. An FI/R should be added if that is what you want to do, not just as a means to an end. If it is, then you can't really expect to be payed hansomely as you're likely to leave as soon as an airline job becomes available. IMHO, it should only be added if you genuinely want to teach, or if instructing is genuinely relavent to what you want to go on to later. This may cut the number of CPL's getting an FI/R, but I doubt it as you still need those hours under your belt to be attractive to airlines ... that is why most (not all I know) CPL's become instructors in the first place. Career instructors should get payed well, but that is why I say that advanced training is where the wages should be aimed. It's a commercial world, and just like other industries where experience is a requirement, those without, tend to be payed poorly until that experience is gained. If (and I doubt it will) this ultimately reduces instructor numbers, then the argument for PPL instructors is further backed up.

So saying "no point" has no point in itself does it?

SS

Guys - Interesting and on-going debate

Why not see what EASA brings as regards to PPL instructors


I have been on both sides of the debate. When I was a PPL I did not relish the cost or time and sacrifice involved in gaining the (what I considered to be unnecessary) cpl. But I did distance learning, sold my car and got on with it. Now that I have done the hard work I can see it from the other perspective and don't wish to see my hard work and effort eroded for those who haven't been as focused or determined. There is a difference in skill level and knowledge between CPL and PPL whether you care to admit that or not.

Bottom line - if I was still a PPL I would vote for PPL instructors (and I have some sympathy with th case put forward).

Please don't tarnish all CPL Instructors as hateful young hour builders who hate PPL students, that is Bo££oc$s

If market forces and current regulations are left alone then Instructors pay should rise, if not and we allow PPL instructors then that should lead to lower costs for students and instructing for free.

Instructors - PPL or CPL
 

Have to say that although, many moons ago, I instructed on a PPL (later 'grandfather rights' (R) BCPL), the course leading to the JAR CPL Skill Test - if done properly - is a good one and provides a solid foundation in operating an aeroplane in a professional manner. These days, my instructing tends to be for post-PPL students and, in general, I'm more comfortable with the the general level of professionalism / airmanship shown by students trained by today's CPL-qualified instructors than I ever was under the old 'PPL Instructor' system.

Whilst I'm sure that some of the old-style PPL instructors were good in their own way, there's no substitute for having to prove yourself at the professional level and be subject to at least some form of standardization before passing on your 'expertise'. Whether the CPL / ATPL ground exams are relevant to any of this is another matter - pretty questionable in my view.

In summary... I don't see a need for instructors to have regurgitated the many random facts of the CPL / ATPL ground exams, but let's have instructors who've passed a professional-level Skill Test - whatever we do, let's not simply bring back PPL instructors - they were outlawed for a reason!

Snakecharmer,

Is the FI/R itself not a decent test of skill then? I have a couple of CPL FI friends who reckon the CPL skills test was a walk in the park compared to the FI/R? Where you a crap instrutor as a PPL? Are you saying that many, most or virtually all PPL instructors were crap also? I found all my PPL instructors to be highly skilled and vary experienced ... I must have been lucky? Also by what you say, the magority of French PPL's must be pretty lacking too, as most of their instructors are just PPL's. Also a NPPL M having been trained by a non CPL instructor can simply do some differences training and fly virtually all the same two seat aircraft that most PPL's in this country fly ... but obviously in a much less skilled way.

I'd be happy with a tough pre-FI/R skills test if the FIR one is deemed not up to scratch? Or a harder FI/R skill test? What erks me is the ridiculous need to obtain the CPL ground exams to prove an appropriate level of knowledge to teach basic PPL. Even these wouldn't be too bad if you didn't have to do the compulsory ground school which makes obtaining these exams so expensive these days. Why is it that our CAA has interpreted the JAR standard required to become an instructor in a different way to other European countries? Where's the level playing field?

Still we can stay as we are and like the title of this thread says, instructors can remain a rare breed ... well, at PPL SEP level anyway. The microlight, SLMG and gliding though, will probably continue to flourish (until mode S kills that off ... but then I guess you proffesionals would prefer that we amateurs were grounded anyway).

SS

SS

Shortstripper... the CPL skill test may not be the biggest hurdle in aviation, but if you care to study the words I used, I stated that, if done properly, the course leading to the Test can provide a firm foundation. Neither did I say that I was rubbish (!), but I had a fairly broad aviation background prior to instructing - that background was not, however, mandated as a requirement!

I did not state that all or many PPL instructors were rubbish, but it's a fairly sound principle that a requirement to prove oneself at the professional rather than amateur level is more likely to lead to an overall raising of standards than not having such a requirement. However, it is indeed difficult to find the relevance of most of the exams to low performance SEP flying!

Snakecharmer does NOT speak with forked tongue !

If Instructors become a rare breed then we will all be driving Bentleys pretty soon so bring it on !

Come on guys not all professional instructors are crap and not all PPL Instructors are Gods gift to aviation. A bit of balance is required. The CPL flight test and exams do raise the bar a tad although I agree that it is overkill and extra unnecessary cost for teaching a student how to fly.

I would be overjoyed if CAA refund me for the CAA exams and flight training costs when the PPL instructor makes a noble come back so that I can buy my car back.

[
No. but you implied that most were!

And I wasn't suggesting that a fresh faced PPL with no experience should teach. My PPL instructors were vastly experienced and so I question why such PPL's should not be allowed to instruct now?

Well that's where I agree, and that was my point.

Funny that you should choose to put it that way rather than, say ... "not all professional instructors are Gods gift to aviation and not all PPL instructors are crap" Kind of sums up what most CPL instructors think of anybody who doesn't aspire to CPL/ATPL level.

I've never suggested that the CPL is not a level worth obtaining, or that CPL instructors cannot be very good or dedicated as instructors. However, I do believe that PPL instructors are not to be desmissed as amateurish idiots with nothing worth teaching. It would be nice to see new PPL's come out knowing that the PFA exists, that there is more to flying than club aircraft, big airfields and ratings. This is where experienced PPL instructors can breath life into the rather stale club scene of today. There are good professional instructors and good schools ... but to many just take money and churn out uninspired PPL's who fly for a year and give up, having never attended a fly-in or flown anything other than the aircraft they learnt in. When you say that the CPL insures a level of skill PPL's cannot compare with, I'd question it slightly. You can attain CPL with 200 hours in one summer, having only flown one type in nothing but good weather. Hardly likely I know ... but possible, but most of you seem to like sweeping statements about PPL skill levels too :mad:

SS

Instructor Pay
 

I have seen many references to Instructors’ having better pay to improve retention; the flip side of course would be an increase in prices. Solution: Let’s get rid of this ridiculous tax on Avgas.

I would give both testi:mad: s to be a full time career Instructor; however, I could not take the large loss in income from my current job.

Chris
Part-Time FI(A)

Shortstripper,

I understand many PPLers have the skill set, and relevent experience to make good instructors. There are also those (myself included) who spent more time looking at my 'confuser' than I did at my text books during my PPL course.

The requirement to complete the CPL groundschool course does unfortunatly stop some 'would be good' instructors teaching. But it also ensures a basic minimum technical knowledge, above that of PPL level, so when students ask the slightly more in depth questions the instructors level of knowledge is above that found in the PPL text books.

In my opinion the CAA have got this one right, the CPL ground course (although weighted to commercial operations) is a good way of improving on the basic knowledge taught at PPL and private flying level. The FI course will provide the flying standards and teaching skills required to instruct.

SW.

So an experienced PPL isn't likely to have expanded his/her knowledge over the years since passing their PPL? :hmm: I suppose pilots of 5, 10 ... 20 or more years know little more than was required to pass their original test?

Oh well, I suppose trying to put my ameteurish case on a forum filled with professionals was always likely to draw few friends :ugh:

SS

I'm always interested in these threads, being a CPL FI myself.

I don't think that a reduction in fuel tax will improve the pay/conditions for flying instructors. What it would do is to allow the various schools to compete for custom at a lower price level. The students would likely benefit from slightly cheaper flying, I expect.

My school operates at around £115-ish per hour (dual), I think. Now, the fuel consumed averages at 32litres per hour. I would guess that its cost is something like £1.20 per litre. How much of this is a tax on aviation, I wonder?
Anyone out there enlighten me?

In any case, why should any aviation fuel be tax exempt?

As to the CPL question. I think that, by and large, the person who has attained the greater level of qualification is most likely to be the better pilot. Bear in mind that piloting has relatively little to do with handling skills (flame suit ON!)

An argument which proposes that PPL FIs would be as competent as CPL FIs, must be applied to all walks of life if it is to be consistent. Would it hold water if it was applied to Doctors, Solicitors or members of any other professional body?

Would you rather have a surgeon who had learned by observation only, rather than one who had received a formal academic training? They may both have excellent "hands", but the educated one is more likely to have a more complete comprehension of his task, I suspect.

More importantly, when the educated one encounters a problem which he has not experienced previously, he has an academic background which he can interrogate in order to arrive at a sensible solution. If that academic background is not available, the surgeon is left with nothing but experience....and in a novel situation he has no experience.

For my money, the perfect flying instructor has a fulsome meld of experience and qualification....both having been demonstrated regularly by test.

The underlying issues, though, are pay and conditions....at least, that's how I construe things. The industry' goal seems to be simply to coerce instructors into working as cheaply as possible. Flying schools are generally profit-driven...I've seen little evidence of any drive for quality. Why? 'Cos it costs money and there is a supermarket mentality which is prevalent.

Very many of my students cannot afford to fly. So, they scrape through a PPL and rapidly drift away. It's probably the same at your school.

I don't buy any argument that smacks of "instructing for the good of the student/light aviation". Flying is an industry and I can't imagine anyone instructing for free, unless they're desperate for flying hours, or perhaps need a hobby.

I know that, if I was instructing pro bono, there'd be a sight fewer pupils with whom I was prepared to persevere. You all must have encountered students who are not temperamentally suited to flying....ones that you wish would simply quit. Sensible ones self-select, of course, but there's always a few who persevere with flying training beyond the bounds of decency. They're hard work and I certainly wouldn't fly with these people for a hobby.Would your unpaid FI put up with these, I wonder?

Time for me to quit, I'm rambling.

Bogbeagle

What a daft analogy := A doctor would have had formal acedemic training to become a doctor in the first place ... ever heard of one who's learned by observation only? They become surgeons by choosing that speciality and honing that particular skill in a hands on way under supervision. Where's the relevance to flight training here? :confused:

It would be nice to have some input from a current PPL instructor, and I don't mean one who was, but who later went on to get a CPL. That sort, if expunging the virtues of PPL instructors are akin to politicians happy to see students saddled with huge debts having received a free education themselves :mad:

You're quite correct though, a "perfect instructor" is likely to be one who has vast experience in many spheres of aviation, is professionally qualified, totally committed to teaching and patient ... even if the student is not of the "right stuff" but wants to learn anyway :rolleyes: . Yes a CPL FI will have proved him/herself at a professional level and that's great, but they may not actually have much "experience" ... So what's best? An experienced amateur or an inexperienced professional? I suppose that may depend on where the student is planning to take their new found skill, I don't know? Ok I admit that is taking it to the extreme and adding a certain amount of assumption, but I'm simply trying to show that all is not black and white. In fact, it could be argued that a professional teaching qualification would be far more appropriate than a CPL when it comes to teaching people to fly ... how many instructors possess one of those?

Let's get something straight here; I'm not coming from the angle of a PPL wishing to easily become an instructor. I'm a long time PPL who was taught by (mostly) PPL instructors before the rules were changed. I expect some, if not all of those instructors probably do now have CPL's (if they are still teaching). The point is that I don't agree that they were likely to have trained me to a lower standard than CPL instructors teach the students of today. Yes one day I might possibly like to teach, but it won't be for a few years as family and other commitments swallow up any spare cash (spare cash ... what's that~?). When I do, it will probably be at NPPL level as I'm sure the rules will have changed to something more akin to what I've alluded to by then anyway. It's fine gaining a CPL if you have ambitions to go on to fly for airlines or even if you wish to make instructing a career, but I fail (even after these less than eloquent explanations) to see why a basic instructor of PPL's has to spend out so much to prove what a couple of stand alone exams could quite easily show ... that is, an appropriate knowledge to teach basic PPL flying.

SS

The requirements for an entry level instructor have to be set somewhere.

So would you rather be taught by a low hour PPL or a low hour CPL, thought as much :ugh:

The Flying Instructors Rating is a professional teacher's qualification. The aim of the course is to teach the candidate how to teach. I'll grant that it's rather a short course for such a complex skill-set.....It should probably be several hundred hours in length. But then, perhaps the PPL should comprise 100-or-so hours with, maybe a minimum of 50 hours classroom work. You sure don't know much after 45 or, heaven help us, 32 hours.

bogbeagle

Who said anything about a low hour PPL instructing? Of course an appropriate level of experience should be required. Surely the instructor rating course itself should seperate the grain from the chaff?

Yep you're quite right, but then is a 200 hours enough for a CPL? ... Look, all I am trying to suggest is that the old system with PPL instructors worked ok back then ... why not now? This thread started off with someone wondering where instructors of the future might come from as they were worried about the percieved lack of instructors coming along. I merely suggested that PPL instructors could fill a gap if there were more of them. I then said that it was mainly the cost and time involved in passing the CPL exams that put most off. I've nothing against taking the exams (even though I still feel they're OTT) ... but why oh why! can a non CPL aspiring PPL not just take the exams without the need for expensive ground school? If they can pass the exams then they have proven the have knowledge to CPL level. This could also be achieved by bringing in a stand alone test ... costing a lot less, but acheiving the same aim! Even if there were a clause attached saying that if a full CPL was later desired, further groundschool or whatever was required ... where's the problem? I still cannot understand why this is allowed in France but not here? Where's the level playing field that JAR or whatever was supposed to bring about? ... What a joke!

OK ... I'll crawl back under my rock just like a good little PPL should :(

SS

SS,

From some of your comments it seems like you are the one who wants a divide between PPL and CPL pilots. know one has suggested that anyone should crawl anywhere.

I agree with you that a PPLer that wants to become instructor shoudn't need to learn about flight at FL320. Yes there is room for a stand alone exam for PPLers wishing to become instructors. I think though that the manpower to put a course together and overview the exams would mean a very expensive course for those few candidates per year that want to undergo it.

Every good aviator I know strives to learn more about aviation than they need to know. Is doing a CPL course not doing this?

Thankyou Sam,

I'm glad to see a more balanced reply. However, I've said from the beginning that I'm not anti CPL or trying to drive any devides. I simply think the present system requires too much in time and money to make becoming an instructor attractive. Indeed, if CPL's didn't need to use it as a stepping stone in terms of hours building, I'm sure we'd be in real dire straits as few would bother!

Of course it is, but you'd don't really need to get the CPL (and spend all that money) to improve your knowledge if you have no desire to make a living from flying. I'm not knocking those that do, it shows commitment, but they are probably hoping to do it for a living. There are amatuer experts in all walks of life ... you don't have to be a professional to excell in anything.

SS

Why the discussion
 

I'm sorry to say but this thread appears to be in the same format of several other 'instructor threads'.

Why are there so many who hide behind the arguement that instructors should be paid a better rate for the job - when at the slightest chance of a they describe as a 'real' flying job are happy to offer their service free or for minimal wages just to get started.
(please note I also regard instruction as a real job)

However, the thought of PPL's taking the same enthusiastic attitude to teach is met with hostility about them 'stealing the bread from our mouths'.

Get a life and stop wingeing. PPL's everywhere hear moaning instructors going on about how little they are paid and how much the world owes them - especially in the past 10 years.

For recent 'Commercial Pilots' who have taken the choice to teach (either to keep current, get money, or enjoy flying with someone else paying) - please remember YOU HAVE A CHOICE! If the terms don't suit you walk away - it will be appreciated more than a whinge your way through the days!

It is also worth noting that the 'pitance' you get (in many cases over £20 per hour) is someone elses hard earned cash - probably harder earned than the instructors role.
:ok:

Advocate for Devils

I don't share any of your views and can't help wondering why you are posting such nonsense on a forum with the title "Flying Instructors and Examiners" if you think that we are all rubbish

Remember this is.........

A place for instructors to communicate with one another because some of them get a bit tired of the attitude that instructing is the lowest form of aviation, as seems to prevail on some of the other forums!

So if you are already a PPL instructor - best of British
:mad:

If you are not an instructor and haven't paid your dues because you perceive the hurdles to be too difficult, too expensive, or you just can't be arsed then FOXTROT OSCAR to another area of the PRUNE website and get a life.

unfazed,

Apologies if I touched a nerve! If you took the time to read my previous reply you would already know I am in the process of trying to become an instructor (long way to go).

While the financial reward is also important to myself I have my eyes wide open. Having recently completed my PPL. I am no 'natural pilot' and accept the fact I will be spending £10.000's to get where I want to be - MY CHOICE!

Your hostile reply (without checking the facts!) is an excellent example of some of the attitudes I have highlighted. THANK YOU FOR PROVING SOME OF MY POINTS AS ACCURATE.

I am aware of MANY excellent instructors- several who have not only helped me get where I am today but also have actively encouraged me to look at the 'career instructor' route.

My point is aimed squarely at the MINORITY who are so protective of themselves and so selfcentred that they will down hearten and scupper the aspirations of others because they cannot cope the the chips on their own shoulders.

MCC I understand to be a requirement for the airlines - including the ability to work with and respect others opinions! I simply think instructors could be helping themselves more by helping each other!

I don't think there is much of an argument about paid CPL or unpaid PPL FI's.

There are very, very few new PPL FI's now. I haven't met any (apart from the occasional CRI) for quite a while. Infact, I haven't met that many new FI's at all. Certainly nothing like the numbers of a few years ago.

My solution to this is two fold. Firstly make instructing a true career path, rather than the current stop gap. This will improve standards and breed some passion back into instructing. This can only be done with better pay and a long term path for FI's. Pay isn't the only motivator, but not enough can be an even bigger demotivator.
Secondly, make it so that anyone who holds an FI rating, is able to be paid. To ensure sufficient knowledge, the course should be longer and more involved than it currently is. There should be some dispensation for a CPL holder, since they have already demonstrated a greater level of knowledge.

This may not be a panacea, but it can't make things any worse than they currently are and you never know it may even help!

In answer to the inevitable "...but how can we pay FI's more?" The simple answer is that we charge more for the instructor and we as an industry work hard to try and reduce the costs. Fuel tax being a prime example, ridiculous over-priced parts being another area. Moving the UK a few hundred miles south might also help so we can get a few more days in the air aswell!

SAS,

At last! A considered and sensible approach to the problem without the "them and us" attitude that others have mentioned! :D

SS

Advocate for devils

I have checked your posts again and although you might well be studying to become an instructor your posts do appear to be negative towards CPL instructors (and not in a minority way either).

These guys are the ones teaching you what you need to know, they might be getting a bit frustrated teaching someone you obviously know it all already.

So why not simply pass the ATPL exams and then put your money safely back in the bank and go straight to the FI course. Then you will be a PPL instructor and you won't need a CPL course, you won't spend thousands of pounds and you can demonstrate what a great PPL instructor you are.