Commercial Instructors rating?
 

I read a posting recently about how to become an instructor for the instrument rating.

Someone replied that the minimums were to hold the rating, attend a five hour course and do a flight test.

Is it similar for becoming a Commercial Flight Instructor?

What would a CPL (only) holder have to do to be allowed to teach CPL stuff?

Any difference for a CPL/IR holder?

Any difference for an ATPL holder?

Any difference for either a CPL or ATPL who already has a BCPL instructor rating?

------------------
Hunting is bad!!
Support the right to arm Bears!!

There is no such thing as a 'Commercial Flight Instructor'.

To conduct flight instruction for the issue of a CPL(A) a FI(A) must have completed at least 500 hours of flight time as a pilot of aeroplanes including at least 200 hours of flight instruction (and, of course, himself hold a CPL(A)).

There is no difference for holders of an IR, ATP(A) or any other qualification. Standardisation training is up to the individual school as approved by the CAA

Mind you, any school willing to employ an instructor with the minimum qualifications is probably worth avoiding.

Just to comment on your point of not employing instructors with minimum time/qualifications, how would one go about becoming experienced if they couldn't start off in the first place?


[This message has been edited by helimutt (edited 21 January 2001).]

In the PPL schools and flying clubs - where else?

Just as an addendum to Rolling Circle's appropriate comments :
i) There was in fact,in the seventies, a Commercial Flying Instructors Rating! Would you believe "Commercial" was typed above the ordinary F.I. title on your Rating page!

ii) To be a "Commercial" Flight Instructor these days means being employed by a CAP509- Approved FTO and,after appropriate extra training in house, being subjected to examination by a CAA appointed Examiner.
This allows you to instruct with that FTO only and is invalidated as soon you leave.
I think that's the case anyway - always open to further comment?

Rgds, Sleeve.
;) ;) ;) ;)

Sleeve Wing - That was the case when the UK CAA gave a damn about the quality of training provided at UK schools. Unfortunately those days are long gone - schools themselves now determine if and when instructors are fit to instruct their students, the CAA no longer have any say in the matter. 'Lunatics in charge of the asylum' seems an appropriate phrase.

These days, quality has been ditched in favour of quantity. One large school in the south midlands, for example, used to select its ME instructors on the basis of their instructional ability

The latest crop were, however, selected only on their ability to make a dent in the school's 12,000 hour backlog. Rumour has it that, not surprisingly, they found the challenge of flying and teaching in a ME aeroplane, not unlike walking and chewing gum, somewhat beyond their ability.

Thankfully the architect of this novel method of selecting instructors for advancement is, it is rumoured, about to join a, soon to be long-haul, UK operator as a F/O. Talk about being promoted beyond ones ability!

Thanks for that, RC.
A couple of years ago I had the opportunity to re-join "a large school in the South Midlands".
Got the wrong vibes altogether after a quick recce. Just not the same feel anymore.
Back in the days of CB the place had a feeling of urgency and direction.I believe also that the Standards Flight no longer exists?
Obviously I did the right thing although I really had a damned sight more to offer in the way of experience than on the previous occasion.All I had then was a couple of thousand hours and limitless enthusiasm (and some super studes.)
The CAA contact was regular and reciprocated then.The "product" obviously gained as well.
Seems your attitude is right up there with mine. Shame we haven't met.Or perhaps we have !!!
Rgds, Sleeve.

;) ;) ;)

[This message has been edited by Sleeve Wing (edited 22 January 2001).]