At no point did I say a CRI (ME) could teach for an SE. You made that up.

A CRI may teach the holder of an NPPL SSEA to fly microlights and add the ML class to the NPPL. There is no solo element. The holder of an NPPL with ML may be trained by a CRI to add a SSEA. There is no solo element.

Nobody mentioned a CRI converting an NPPL to a JAA FCL license.

What you going to make up now to support your argument?

Did I..........?

---------------

Did you not?............

Just remind me what licence you can add an SEP to if you are an NPPL with microlight rating?

Please read JAR-FCL, LASORS and the requirements including for example solo training that must be completed to get an SEP from an SSEA.

Regards,

DFC

LOL, that is the most breathtaking example of cutting and pasting to make your point I have seen. I suggest reading and using all off what I wrote in context.

You have surpassed yourself this time DFC.

DFC seems to be trying to make a point about NPPL holders and adding an SEP with a CRI training - which of course you can't do, it would be an SSEA. All of which is a total red herring to the original question as nobody is trying to add an SEP to a NPPL from what I read of the debate.

The main thing a CRI can't do is if the student involved wanted a JAR-PPL from an NPPL he/she would have to engage the services of an FI, don't think anyone is disputing that.

Before I became an FI, I was a CRI and successfully trained numerous NPPL microlighters for their SSEA ratings and also a lot of people renewing SEP ratings on lifetime PPLs - all worked out fine.

I think the CRI is a great rating as long as people holding it and training with it know their limitations (it is only gained with minimum training) and are working in a supportive environment. I work with other CRIs now, and for example I know if they get a student for a rating that really needs a lot of work on core flying skills (landings for example), they might pass him/her over to an FI for a couple of hours brush up then continue on. All quite sensible and pragmatic.

Amen to that!

With regard to the SEP I was simply pointing out that someone was wrong to say;

Regards,

DFC

Yes DFC, you have proven that your pedantry is legendary. What I should have said is SSEA rather than SEP. I bow to your worshipful excellence.....:p:p:p:p

Sorry Bose, I did not quote you in full. Here is the full quote;

I take your point that what you intended to say was "SSEA or SSEA or vice versa"

:D:D

Regards,

DFC

Once upon a time, in fact until the 30th June this year, on a UK NPPL the SEP class rating existed. It then became a requirement for all NPPL holders to go through a paperwork exercise and have SSEA with a rolling 2 year period.

There are many people out there who had NPPL licenses and had an SEP rating added to them after holding a Microlight rating and vice versa and all the ealry ones were issued by the NPPL Group/CAA with and SEP rating not an SSEA rating.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

Can a CRI teach aerobatics? If so, do they have to have any additional qualifications or training?

Has anybody completed a CRI rating with BCFT at Bournemouth?

Many Thanks

I'm going to dredge up this ancient thread rather than start a new one. I'm doing a CRI course myself shortly, and prior to that have been wading through the regulations to try and get a clear handle on what a CRI can, and can't, do. I've come up with the following list (supported by another 8 pages of notes and references I've not posted here). I'd be grateful for any confirmation, disagreement, or comments on any of it...



What can be done

• To get a CRI you need either a PPL or higher licence with at-least 300hrs including 30hrs on class.
• A CRI may carry out instruction for recurrency, familiarisation, or differences training.
• A CRI can be paid to instruct in a joint or sole owned UK PtF, UK CofA or EASA aeroplane. In a permit aeroplane, any subsequent examination must be unpaid. The person being taught, unless the aeroplane is certified for public transport, must be an owner of the aeroplane being flown.
• If the aeroplane is joint owned and has an EASA CofA, the previous maintenance inspection must have been signed for by a licenced engineer, with no subsequent pilot maintenance.
• The CRI can fly the biennial flight with an instructor required for JAR PPL(SEP), NPPL(M) or NPPL(SSEA)
• The CRI can teach for differences training for any of tailwheel, VP/CS, retract, turbo/supercharged engines, pressurisation, EFIS, single-lever power – so long as they’ve completed this training themselves.

The regulations do not (appear to) specifically state the following, but they seem reasonable extrapolations

• A CRI can instruct for transfer between NPPL(SSEA) and NPPL(M), in either direction, but a separate examiner will be needed for the NPPL(SSEA) skill test, and the CRI could not authorise any solo flight before issue of their NPPL(SSEA)/
• A CRI with appropriate experience and differences training could train for the 3-axis/flexwing differences training on microlights in either direction.
• A CRI(SPA/SEP) could provide a ME-only pilot with the necessary instruction to obtain/return SEP currency.

Questions for which I can’t seem to find answers:

• Does a CRI need a CPL to get paid? Presumably they do, but the regulations seem to imply the opposite.
• Can a CRI teach aerobatics?

G

Quick answers to your questions.

See http://www.nationalprivatepilotslice...20REV%2008.pdf

This specifically mentions CRIs and what they are entitled to do towards NPPLs.

Correct. This is in LASORS Section H0:

"Holders of JAR-FCL licences which contain appropriate Instructor Ratings (and Examiner Authorisations) may exercise the privileges of the ratings/authorisations included in their licences on Microlight aeroplanes
and SLMG’s but shall first undertake any necessary differences training."

Correct. You will be training a licence holder towards the SEP Class Rating.

Yes, since it is commercial activity.

Yes.

HTH.

ifitaint...

Until 8 April 2012, anyone can teach aerobatics without needing to hold an instructor rating of any kind. This has been done to death on a number of occasions on this forum.

How good someone who has had 3hrs training is at doing all those things is another debate though.

ifitaintBoeing - thank you - that document is one I'd not tracked down, and clarifies things massively.

blagger - quite. One hopes that the proof of the pudding is in the CRI skill test; for myself I'm willing to be tested and if I'm not up to it, retrain or give up - and then take advice from much more experienced instructors wherever it's available. What the general success/pass/fail rate, particularly from 300hr PPLs (about the point in my flying career where I made my greatest every f**k up in the air) however, I have no idea.

Billiebob - Interesting, since I gather that the FI(R)/FI ratings contain a "no aerobatics" restriction don't they? [I'm not an FI, and would not consider myself competent to teach aerobatics even if I was - I just about maintain enough currency to fly basic manoeuvres and get myself out of trouble, so am purely interested.]

G

The no aeros FI restriction has always been a big anomaly - I don't know whether there has ever been an incident / investigation where an FI has been teaching aeros who hasn't had the restriction removed?

Genghis - don't get me wrong, I have flown with a number of CRIs who are very capable. Equally I've flown with a number who aren't even up to PPL test standard. I think the key is the attitude of the individual - someone who keeps their skills fresh, keeps up to date with legislation, knows their limitations and learns from / is supported by more experienced instructors etc.. will be fine.

Ah well, we can all think of safety regulations that seem borne out of imagination rather than reality. I'd start with yellow jackets.

I think that any aviator, and any instructor, should try to continuously seek mentoring and push themselves towards best practice. We all know people who do this superbly (I used to fly a lot with the chap who is now CAA's Chief Test Pilot - he would insist on a full lessons-learned debrief from every flight, no matter how trivial, and I'll bet he still does), and we all know people who - well - don't: who regard their last skill test as a temporary abberation and they can slip back into more relaxed habits now.

I don't think that any branch of pilot has a monopoly on either mode of behaviour - but I can see why a PPL-only CRI should be a matter for concern. Hopefully the courses, skills tests and the periodic revalidations, will work to counter that, in the same way that line checks and company standards should for full time professional aviators.

G

Unfortunately though a CRI can revalidate by experience and hence go from the initial test without ever flying with an FIE/FIC again! I think every other time should be a test like the FI rating.

Blagger, then the changes afoot for CRIs under EASA won't disappoint you!

Genghis, you will see that CRI Seminars are now available for exactly the reasons you describe. Whilst they are not a requirement, they are an excellent way to keep up to date with the many changes we are facing.

ifitaint

Just an aside - my shiny new CRI rating, having now arrived, does not include the "no aerobatics" phrase I've seen on the licences of pilots with the FI / FI(R) rating.

G