Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

What is a 'QUI'?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

What is a 'QUI'?

Old 22nd Apr 2016, 16:07
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,502
What is a 'QUI'?

When securing military accreditation for the NPPL, it was agreed as follows:

Flying Training. Any previous flying training on Single Engine Piston (Land) aeroplanes conducted by an FI(A) or current Qualified Flying Instructor (QFI) may be counted towards the 32 hour minima of flying training and consolidation required before the applicant may take the NST and GST required for the grant of an NPPL(A) with SSEA Class Rating. This may include:

a) Service Flying Scholarship flying.
b) Elementary Flying Training (EFT) flying.
c) University Air Squadron (UAS) flying.
d) Service Pilots under training.
e) Service Pilots withdrawn from flying training.
The infamous Marston report changed the UAS syllabus and introduced the 'air experience' syllabus. So the NPPL credit was amended to exclude any credit for 'interesting passenger flying', so that only flight instruction delivered by a QFI or the holder of a valid civil FI(A) certificate would be credited. As would PIC time.

However, I gather that there's now another category, that of 'QUI'. What does that stand for and what do they do? Is this a new term for a C-to-I QFI or what?

The reason I ask is that, as currently written, technically 'QUI'-delivered flight instruction may not credited. Hence it would be good to know what a 'QUI' actually is before the NPPL P&SC can decide whether to make a suitable credit recommendation to the CAA.
BEagle is online now  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:04
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 610
Not heard if that one - wonder if that "U" is unmanned!
Chris Kebab is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:21
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 1,026
There now exists a type of QFI with restricted teaching privileges, up to first solo I believe. it is designed as a stop gap until CFS can slot them in to the system for a full lobotomy. I don't know if this is it.

edit: this is for UASs

Last edited by beardy; 22nd Apr 2016 at 17:36.
beardy is online now  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:23
  #4 (permalink)  

Gentleman Aviator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
Age: 70
Posts: 3,385
Isi't that what used to be a "B2"?

At least they'd done the course .......
teeteringhead is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:28
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 178
Half a QWI, simples.
Minnie Burner is online now  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:33
  #6 (permalink)  

Gentleman Aviator
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
Age: 70
Posts: 3,385
Minnie
teeteringhead is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:37
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 62
Posts: 6,996
QUI not defined by the MAA ...

MAA RA 2125 Flying Instructor Training

CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 17:42
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,637
If I was a betting man I'd say it is meant to read QWI and someone made a typo.
BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 18:05
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 29
As I understand it, no spinning, no engine failure after take off. Not sure that QUI is real or just made up by those that have completed only part of the QFI syllabus and are now instructing on UAS. Supposedly they will complete the full QFI syllabus in due course.....
Caramba is online now  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 21:35
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 36
My sources tell me it is Qualified University Air Squadron Instructor
Interim stop gap to man UAS with instructors graduated from CFS who have done all the Airborne Instructional Technique training and all the basic UAS syllabus sorties plus basic Aerobatics. Interim as CFS predicted they were not able to mange the volume of instructors required. The reality is that some of them have been pushed straight through the full QFI syllabus due to capacity existing at CFS after all. It is said that any QUI would return to CFS to complete all the advanced stuff when capacity allowed. Not sure how this would affect accredited schemes etc. I believe they do "graduate" from CFS as B2 QUI so its just the content of what they are allowed/qualified to teach not the quality of the teaching that is affected. That's all I can glean from those itk.
kbc
klingonbc is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2016, 07:56
  #11 (permalink)  
GipsyMagpie
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
This seems an unenforceable restriction on the hours you can use towards the licence. As far as I know, the qualification of the instructor is not recorded in a logbook of the student. If you are taught Effects of Control 1 by a heroic Jedi master A1 QFI or a brand new QUI the logbook entry will be identical.

So its all down to the morals of the applicant and the person who signs the MAS form. Not a good way to police a regulation.
 
Old 23rd Apr 2016, 07:59
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 62
Posts: 6,996
If it is as Klingo suggests ... BONKERS is the only word for it
CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2016, 08:36
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,502
Are these 'QUI's trained and tested to at least FCL.930.A standard?

Would someone please tell MAA that there's no such thing as an EASA Instructor 'Rating' these days...
BEagle is online now  
Old 23rd Apr 2016, 09:12
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 723
RRS-B will be turning and spinning in 'is grave ! ...... LFH cfs


.......................
Lordflasheart is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2016, 09:03
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,502
Well, so far all I can gather is that a 'QUI' hasn't completed the full CFS course and been cat'd, so hasn't been trained and tested even to B2 QFI standard?

It is vital that early, formative exercises are correctly taught. A 'QFI' or civil FI(A) has been trained/tested to a known standard - hence any training delivered by such instructors at a UAS may be fully credited towards the NPPL.

Whereas there is no such guarantee with a partly-trained 'instructor'...
BEagle is online now  
Old 24th Apr 2016, 09:06
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: front seat, facing forwards
Posts: 1,029
Of course it's all speculation until you know the facts.


And I don't suspect HQ CFS or anyone else cares whether or not these specific sorties can be accredited for a civil qualification....this is military flying training satisfying its own needs.


Just saying like....
just another jocky is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2016, 12:25
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Still on the beach (but this one's cold).
Posts: 142
The QUI is trained by the same people in the same location to the same standard as the extant EFT Tutor QFI. The difference is the syllabus they get to teach is restricted to the basic exercises to meet the need of the majority of the pupils they will be teaching. It's a reasonable solution to the problem from the organisations perspective, a UAS will only have a handful of trainees that get beyond first solo. Would be a bit of a chafe from an individual's perspective to spend an instructional tour unable to teach the fun stuff at the end of the syllabus though.
Mach the Knife is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2016, 12:36
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 62
Posts: 6,996
Might as well give R C Simulations a shout and ask them to come up with a Tutor PPT for the UAS ... That way you won't need any qualified instructional staff ...
CoffmanStarter is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2016, 14:36
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,502
Mach the Knife wrote:
The difference is the syllabus they get to teach is restricted to the basic exercises to meet the need of the majority of the pupils they will be teaching. It's a reasonable solution to the problem from the organisations perspective, a UAS will only have a handful of trainees that get beyond first solo.
What 'basic exercises' do these part-trained instructors deliver?

Only a handful of trainees that get beyond first solo? Is that really so? In other threads it's claimed that UAS students still get quite a lot of flying...
BEagle is online now  
Old 24th Apr 2016, 15:33
  #20 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,327
Qui? Surely, it ought to be "which", rather than "what"?
ShyTorque is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.