ATO Requirements for CFI - Where to find info
 

AMC2 ORA.ATO.210 Personnel requirements -

"instructional duties related to the flying courses provided..."

(b)(2) The CFI should, except in the case of ATOs providing flight test training, have completed 1 000 hours of flight time as pilot-in-command (PIC). At least 500 of those hours should be on flying instructional duties related to the flying courses provided, of which 200 hours may be instrument ground time

Hi,

Was wondering if anyone could help me find some explanation or definition of the above phrase.

What I need to know is:

a) What is the interpretation of 'instructional duties'? Does that mean only in-flight instruction, or include the ground time, and say, theoretical knowledge time too?
b) 'Related to the flying courses provided...' - Is that phrase specific to 'type of aircraft'? E.g. Does instructional duties (type rating instruction for XYZ aircraft) count towards the requirements to be a CFI at a place which only does type-ratings for ABC aircraft?

If anyone could point me towards an explanation or an FAQ portal, where I could get an official explanation I would be most grateful.

Thanks in advance.

cl12pv2shttps://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....4182c8e005.png

I guess it depends upon the interpretation of your authority. I know of a case where the proposed candidate had 4500 hours TT which included 480 hours of “airborne” instruction but 200 of those were as a TRI on the 737. In all other respects he was the ideal candidate with good instructional technique, leadership skills, management ability and administrative/organisational skills.

His sim and ground time were not acceptable. Perhaps a different inspector/authority would have looked on the situation differently and said yes. I also suggest the complexity and scope of the ATO would be a point of consideration as I know of another gentleman who had only 800hr TT/600hrs Instruction for the PPL who was appointed CFI of a small one aircraft ATO because “no-one else could be found”.

Best recommendation I can give is to speak with your CA and “seek their guidance”.

I agree fully with the above comments.
Clearly they need 1000 hours flight time. I would therefore interpret the 500 hours as time spent as a flight instructor giving airborne instruction with one exeption that 200 hours of that may be ground instruction in a Synthetic Training Device. I have never really worked out how an instructor logs Instrument Ground Time as it really counts for little and is probably conducted at a consol.
To be relevant, instruction would need to be in the same category of aircraft, eg. aeroplane or helicopter and other issues would be the type of trainig, ab-initio versus post graduate. The regulator wants to know that the CFI has sufficient knowledge, through experience of the type of training he is required to supervise.

Duches Flyer / Whopity,

Thank you for your replies.

There does seem to be a lack of clarity on what the 'relating to the courses provided' means. Relevancy of instruction, as Whopity suggests, should be at the 'kind of course' level, rather than the 'aircraft type' level. Otherwise, for an ATO which provides courses in a number of different types, the CFI must have 500 hours instructional duties in each aircraft type! This could get absurd.

Duchess - - ironically, speaking with my 'CA' is exactly what brings me here! Unfortunately, the CA can interpret however they want, which in my case, seems to be 500 hours instructional duties in EACH type-of-aircraft we intend to offer!

Let's see if anyone else has come across this before!

cl12pv2s

I have heard this before in relation to the DGAC France!

The French aren’t the only ones.... in a similar vein one place I was set to work at wanted me to do 30hours on a Tecnam twin despite having ‘a few hours’ on PA30/PA34/BE76/DA42 in the instructional arena...

Likewise, I have no idea how much instruction I have given in a sim and no real desire to record it....