Time on type to instruct - JAR-FCL
Time on type to instruct - JAR-FCL
Hi
The figure 15 hours on type to instruct crops up now and again. Does anyone know where this comes from: ANO; LASORS; FAR-FCL2? Be grateful for a concrete reference.
Thanks TT
The figure 15 hours on type to instruct crops up now and again. Does anyone know where this comes from: ANO; LASORS; FAR-FCL2? Be grateful for a concrete reference.
Thanks TT
Guest
Posts: n/a
From LASORS :
H1.1 "All instructors shall unless specified otherwise: [...] have at least 15 hours experience as pilot on the
type or class of aeroplane on which instruction is
being given..."
wich is just a copy of JAR-FCL 2.310 :
"All instructors shall [...] have at leat 15 hours
experience as pilot on the type of helicopter on
which instruction is to be given,..."
H1.1 "All instructors shall unless specified otherwise: [...] have at least 15 hours experience as pilot on the
type or class of aeroplane on which instruction is
being given..."
wich is just a copy of JAR-FCL 2.310 :
"All instructors shall [...] have at leat 15 hours
experience as pilot on the type of helicopter on
which instruction is to be given,..."
Is it 15hrs or is it merely hold a type rating ?
LASOR is guidance material and that paragraph does say aeroplanes.
As of amendment 3 of FCL-2 the 15hrs requirement disappeared.
And as the uk has not yet implemented amendment 4 surely amendment 3 still stands.
The CAA may interpret this differently if asked, I've just checked amdt 3 its not there.
V.
LASOR is guidance material and that paragraph does say aeroplanes.
As of amendment 3 of FCL-2 the 15hrs requirement disappeared.
And as the uk has not yet implemented amendment 4 surely amendment 3 still stands.
The CAA may interpret this differently if asked, I've just checked amdt 3 its not there.
V.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Actually paragraph H1.1 is "general information" for the part H1 "JAR FCL FI(A), FI(H) & TRI(E) Ratings".
A few sentences later, you have the differences between planes and copters = the first sentences are relevant to both types.
Still, I didn't check the amendments
A few sentences later, you have the differences between planes and copters = the first sentences are relevant to both types.
Still, I didn't check the amendments
Fred
Agreed about H1.1 being general, however as I said
I'd still stand by all of that.
Having had a number of discussions with Policy last year over some issues with aeroplane and helicopter licensing similarities (and differences), from a licensing point of view a number of times their decision was often based on something like 'does it say aeroplanes or helicopters' in the relevant paragraph. Equally they have said that if there is already a precedent in the aeroplane world they will follow that, although that normally seems to apply to interpretation of similar rules rather than things which just aren't there.
I am sure a phone call would clear it up, If I get chance I'll give them a call on Monday.
Obviously this dicussion really only applies to the UK CAA and their interpretation.
V.
Agreed about H1.1 being general, however as I said
LASORs is guidance material and that paragraph does say aeroplanes.
Having had a number of discussions with Policy last year over some issues with aeroplane and helicopter licensing similarities (and differences), from a licensing point of view a number of times their decision was often based on something like 'does it say aeroplanes or helicopters' in the relevant paragraph. Equally they have said that if there is already a precedent in the aeroplane world they will follow that, although that normally seems to apply to interpretation of similar rules rather than things which just aren't there.
I am sure a phone call would clear it up, If I get chance I'll give them a call on Monday.
Obviously this dicussion really only applies to the UK CAA and their interpretation.
V.
Just got off the phone to the authority.
It is type rating only at the moment in the UK. When the relevant bits of FCL2-4 are implemented in the uk which may be as soon as November 06, the requirement will be
15hrs on type,
or an instructor test with an FIE(H) if you have less than 15hrs but want to teach on that type.
Cheers
V.
It is type rating only at the moment in the UK. When the relevant bits of FCL2-4 are implemented in the uk which may be as soon as November 06, the requirement will be
15hrs on type,
or an instructor test with an FIE(H) if you have less than 15hrs but want to teach on that type.
Cheers
V.
I have it on good authority that the 15 hour requirement was omitted from FCL-2 and thus LASORS in respect only of helicopter instructors due to a typo.... involving a whole missing paragraph.
My quick reading of Change 4 doesn't necessarily suggest that the 15 hour experience requirement will be reapplied. In any case, the whole issue is up for discussion at the forthcoming CAA seminar. My personal view (and I have been instructing/training SE/ME in a variety of environments since 1980) is that there should be an experience requirement for Restricted instructors, though not necessarily as much as 15 hours. For all instructors, if it is the first type of a class: eg, after conversion from SEP to SET (or vice versa!) they should have perhaps 15 hours on the first type in class before instructing, but a lesser requirement for subsequent types in the class. After all, assuming that the current type rating requirement is (Change 4) reduced to 2 hours plus the test, it would be reasonable to spend a further few hours flying the aircraft from the LHS and undergoing a check (in LPC format?) in the LHS. This could, however, be a FTO/TRTO administered check, with Head of Training approving the instructor's competence to fly and instruct from LHS on the recommendation of a FE/TRE.
My quick reading of Change 4 doesn't necessarily suggest that the 15 hour experience requirement will be reapplied. In any case, the whole issue is up for discussion at the forthcoming CAA seminar. My personal view (and I have been instructing/training SE/ME in a variety of environments since 1980) is that there should be an experience requirement for Restricted instructors, though not necessarily as much as 15 hours. For all instructors, if it is the first type of a class: eg, after conversion from SEP to SET (or vice versa!) they should have perhaps 15 hours on the first type in class before instructing, but a lesser requirement for subsequent types in the class. After all, assuming that the current type rating requirement is (Change 4) reduced to 2 hours plus the test, it would be reasonable to spend a further few hours flying the aircraft from the LHS and undergoing a check (in LPC format?) in the LHS. This could, however, be a FTO/TRTO administered check, with Head of Training approving the instructor's competence to fly and instruct from LHS on the recommendation of a FE/TRE.
