Peter wrote:
Sure you can do 30hrs with a freelance IRI but how many of them are out there? Nearly zero.
It always comes back to the most fundamental difference that drives 95% of the changes of the industry structure: Just prevent people from flying airliners without an ATPL (and I really mean an ATPL and not that marketing version “frozen ATPL” which is a CPL with some stupid multiple choice cramming).
The sole reason why there are so much more freelance IRI in the US is not that the Americans like the right seat in a run down C-172 so much better than the left seat in a B737 but rather that they have no option. Just tell all European “ATPL-geduates” that they need to fly another roughly 1.000hrs before they can hope they can do what they dream of, and they have the option of a) pay for these 1000hrs and have fun or b) teach as FI, IRI, etc. and get at least some of your expenses paid and you will see a completely different industry in Europe.
In the European system in which you do your IRI rating when you want to be IRI, how could one be surprised that these people then actually work as IRIs (in a flight school) rather than becoming “freelance”. There are only very few (if any) jobs out there, where freelance is really better than a fixed job.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Peter wrote:
Sure you can do 30hrs with a freelance IRI but how many of them are out there? Nearly zero.Considering that there are nearly zero, we must be very lucky to have two as members of my club.
I know at least three I can fly with around London.
A great many FAA freelance flight instructors do it for fun, and/or as a side line for a bit of extra cash. It’s not a job, just a fun activity based on a CFI rating picked up along the way. I think I’ve only paid for a Flight Review once, and that was because I wanted to fly with somebody new. In that case the guy retired early from business and got a CFII as something to do, along with a glass panel C182 and LSA Cub. He lives in his hangar with them on the weekends and takes a few students. The guy I’ve been doing them with recently is not an up and coming wanna-be airline pilot, he is a retired American Airlines captain, former USN fighter squadron commander and habitual antique aircraft restorer and homebuilder. I can also do them with the guy who taught me to fly originally, who is also the A&P IA who signs off the plane annually. His real job is as a tech rep for a turbine engine company. Over the years I’ve never had trouble finding a CFI friend who wants to fly with me a bit when asked.
The imposition of the BFR requirement on FAA Pilots is a relatively recent thing (1970s IIRC) and who knows whether it has had any effect on anything. Just like medicals.
The sole reason why there are so much more freelance IRI in the US is not that the Americans like the right seat in a run down C-172 so much better than the left seat in a B737 but rather that they have no option
Rather than “have no option” I would say “they can make a living doing it” (in the US). BTW by “IRI” you must mean “CFII”.
Anyway, does this NPA bring us anything really new and useful?
Ibra wrote:
it will be painful to get an FAA ATP with this rythme
Sure, but then one wouldn’t go that route if the objective is to build hours. Much better to do the diamond distances mentioned, taking off at sunrise and landing at sunset. Get to 1500 hr much quicker 
Peter wrote:
The US “BFR” system cannot be adopted no matter how much safer – for obvious political reasons.
For sure. For one thing, there is (almost) no paperwork for the bureaucrats. Just a CFI on-the-spot logbook entry and it’s a done deal. No forms to complete and submit, no new licence to issue. The FAA credit card style just isn’t compatible with the EASA maximal paperwork mandate.
skydriller wrote:
lionel wrote: The minimum of 1h for the biennial SEP refresher training (for revalidation) is abolished.lionel wrote:
To keep both engine types current, the requirement to have two biennial “SEP training” flights (one if in each of the two engine types)????
You might have misunderstood what I wrote. Let me rephrase: the biennial SEP refresher training (for revalidation) is not any more required to last at least 1h. Instead, its contents is specified in some more detail than before.
Peter wrote:
If you compare the revalidation requirements of a Euro FI with those of a US FI, there is a big difference, which translates to much more availability in the US system.
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.
Peter wrote:
You are indeed lucky to have any IRIs around It’s hard for them to make money.
They make money on PPL training… In any case we don’t have any full-time instructors. They are all instructing as a side activity.
If EASA trusted its instructors or engineers for that matter then they would approve the individual as it is they don’t they approve the organisation.
These changes do appear to be quite positive but are basically correcting mistakes that have been previously made and Q4 2022. How long.
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.
Pre-EASE (or pre-JAA), was it possible to get an IR completely with a freelance IRIs before 2000 (or before 1980) under national rules?
PS: ignoring those who got IR ratings by simple “transition” to JAR/EASA (with national CPL/BCPL)
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?
If you have to fly from Norfolk to London to see an IRI (or him to fly to you), you better off biting the bullet and go straight to an ATO, if IRI & ATO are in the same place, unless you are flying with him after 7pm, it gets into ATO politics
If no freelance IRI nearby (+no IAP, +no touring aircraft), I don’t see how much help one can get from the “FAA system”?
AFAIK, the only advantage of FAA IR is relaxed theory, but not sure about the extra benefit from Part142 vs Part61?
It seems lot of people just go and do it in Part142 setup rather than Part61…
