I think you mean Part 141. The reason why Europeans have been going to Part 141 schools is because a Part 61 school could not issue the I-20 form – see here. You can use a Part 61 school but they are taking a risk; I know some who have done that route and got away with it 
but it is getting more risky since, IIRC, DPEs are supposed to be checking on these details nowadays.
Regarding freelance training, the main difference is that if you fly with an EASA FI, outside of an ATO, the resulting logbook entries are not “illegal” (neither you nor the FI should get prosecuted for the flights, subject to the payment regs not having been breached, and that just means the FI needs EASA CPL exam passes IF the training is overtly towards EASA papers) but they are of no use, except
For sure if there is no IAP and no plane then you can’t do a whole lot of IR training 
but for most of the typical IR customer the name of the game is flexibility, which is much easier with going freelance.
Airborne_Again wrote:
That may be, but your point was that EASA don’t trust freelance instructors in this case. They do. Also, as you might know, 30 hrs (out of 40) of CB-IR training and probably all of BIR training can be done with freelance instructions.
Still sounds like EASA doesn’t trust the very instructors it gave licences to, if you cannot do ALL of the 40 required CB-IR hours with a freelance instructor.
alioth wrote:
Still sounds like EASA doesn’t trust the very instructors it gave licences to, if you cannot do ALL of the 40 required CB-IR hours with a freelance instructor.
Almost sounds like EASA doesn’t trust the examiners to fail the people who come to a flight check not prepared well enough. ;)
On that note, over in FAA-land there is a significant amount of DPE-shopping going on, isn’t there? Based on how unreasonable they are, mainly, not necessarily on cost.
Ibra wrote:
If no freelance IRI nearby (+no IAP, +no touring aircraft), I don’t see how much help one can get from the “FAA system”?
The Canadian licensing system is more helpful here. Only 5 hours of dual instrument flight time for the Canadian IR needs to be received from the holder of an ICAO FI (including IRI) rating/certificate. The remaining 35 hours of instrument instruction can be obtained as dual instrument flight time from any ICAO CPL+IR or ATPL+IR holder, who has 500 h PIC. This is not particularly useful if the instruction is done on a non–Annex I aircraft in UK/EU owing to the requirement in FCL.900(a)(1)(ii) for the instructor to hold an appropriate certificate issued iaw Part-FCL.
@RobertL18C FCL.900(a)(1)(ii) should address a Q you raised in another thread. The rule does not apply to persons instructing on non–Annex I aircraft flown in the UK but registered elsewhere than in the UK when the aircraft operator resides, is established, or is principally based outside the UK. It does not appear that ANO art 253 (restriction on commercial operations in aircraft registered elsewhere than in an EEA state) will be altered on IP completion day by SI 2019 No 645.
Based on how unreasonable they are, mainly, not necessarily on cost.
Examples, please, from the US.
Ibra wrote:
As far as I can see for CBIR, it does give the option for freelance IRIs but it seems to work only in two options 1/ in “club” with touring fleet where both instructors & students are “member of the club”? or 2/ student & instructor are based in the same airfield and one of them is an aircraft owner?
CB-IR cases the way I see them:
1) Pilots that own a plane and want personal and more individual instruction. I teach all over europe if desired. I do it because I enjoy working with people. Remuneration is, as has been mentioned, second to doing something fun and rewarding for a little extra cash.
2) Pilots that have access to a plane, or can rent one, and save a few thousand € by going the CB IR way.
Peter wrote:
Examples, please, from the US.
A whole site for ranking DPEs; example
A good recommendation from reddit; and another one.
And some not-so-great ones from reddit as well; some people delete the original complaint, but the comments paint a picture
And, to top it all up, some more experiences so that people can judge for themselves.
That’s really funny. Yes; it is sad that people end up posting this stuff. I had a really grumpy DPE in Arizona, too. I normally keep away from Reddit – a horribly structured site.
But, actually, it is a good thing that you can do this. In Europe, you could not because generally the examiner is allocated to you by the CAA, and if you get a bad one, you can do very little about it. When I was going for my JAA IR test, I was warned by one FTO instructor that one of the CAA-allocated examiners is a total sadist (was “debriefing” a flight until 10pm) and if I get him allocated I must phone in “sick” and keep doing that until I get another one.
I was not meaning to imply being able to select a DPE is a bad thing, I agree it is good, as is a way to learn about an “edge case” one might want to avoid. I think you can ask for a specific examiner in Poland as well, and the schools usually have ones they work with; not that I have had much experience, but never a bad one, knock on fiberglass.
