Yes, in France lot of instructors were able to teach for Brevet-de-Base or LAPL without CPL TK in a “cheap club environment” with many students being able to convert later to a full PPL with additional hours or just re-do zero-to-hero PPL in minimum hours “somewhere expensive”
I always find it mind blowing that one can take passengers for A-A trial flights the morning while he is trying to finish his EASA/JAA PPL the afternoon
That’s what I said, I think. And they have the exams to do for no good reason.
No, I know plenty career FI by choice, not because they flunked any tests.
Anyway, since training up to the point of the LAPL skill test is the same as the training for the PPL, in Germany you can start the LAPL course with any LAPL-FI and shortly before the skill test just switch courses and do the rest instruction (some hours radio nav and basic instrument flying and your solo cross country, if planned correctly) with a full FI. The local authorities support this behaviour of the school.
The legislation/changes to Part-FCL reported by CarlosJ earlier in this thread relate primarily to introducing extra UPRT (Upset Prevention and Recovery Training) for commercial pilots. Experienced instructors will be given extra training which they can then deliver themselves. 5 hours theory and 3 hours flight instruction for all new CPL/ATPL students. It’s been in regulatory pipeline for some time. EASA FAQ page here
There seems to be a couple of unrelated changes squeezed in, specifically the number of ATPL exams reduced by one to 13 (by combining VFR/IFR communications). Anyone with an IR is now exempted 3 rather than 2 theory exams if they proceed to take CPL – the new combined communications exam is added to HPL and Met. I didn’t spot any other minor changes, but might easily have missed some.
I had thought one of the major points of the new revised Basic Regulation was that references to “complex” aircraft would not be used. This new legislation is littered with the term, presumably because it’s been in preparation for three years.
I don’t think this will affect private pilots much. If you are taking a type rating for a complex aircraft (eg that shiny new TBM) then you might expect some additional upset recovery training.
As also reported, AOPA is working towards removing the full CPL theory exam requirement for PPL FIs, and even suggest this could happen as soon as 2019, but I suspect there will still be a need for some formal exam to be taken.
I’m a bit surprised at the proposed removal of the FCL.905.FI FI (d) requirement for 500 hours total time plus 200 hours PPL instruction before you can instruct for a CPL. An instructor would already have at least 100 hours PPL instruction in order to become unrestricted, but if done quickly then perhaps could be achieved within about 350 hours total time. Clearly it’s inconsistent with no instruction required at all to start instructing for the IR (as a standalone IRI, you just have to have 800 hours IFR logged and take the short IRI course/test). What is far more relevant to me is the requirement to pass and retain a Class 1 medical in order to instruct for CPL – the Class 1 initial is more difficult with advancing age, and the extra costs (£500+ for the initial alone) seem unjustified only to be able to instruct CPL rather than PPL/IR students. But you can’t have a CPL rating issued without a Class 1, and you can’t instruct for CPL without a CPL rating.
Also I would have expected commercial flight schools to want some more experience before teaching for the CPL itself. For example, a recent advert I saw for a UK commercial ATO is looking for a minimum of 1,000 hours instruction of which 400 is ME/IR (including experience instructing in FNPT II simulators). Class 1 medical mandatory but a night rating optional.
Thanks for the clarification, DavidC.
Hello to everyone! I’m a fresh new instructor!
Unfortunately, i’m a PPL holder with no TK. (I’m an air traffic controller).
Before to start the training, evaluating between CRI and FI course (also thinking about the cost!) I was assured from the Flight scholl that as FI (also without TK) is possible to teach all the staff that a CRI can. Now, going a little bit indeep and also reading some forum I understand that this is not. After received my new licence from the Authority i wrote them back to ask clarification about that point (They put in my licence the Privileges FCL.910.FI Training for LAPL ONLY
(no answer received)
It really hard to believe and understand how a training as FI consisting of 30 hrs flt time, Do not qualify you as a training of 3 hrs (my school elevate to 5 ). Really a no sense. If this limitation will be clear europewidely I think that noone about GA will decide to became a FI. Doing the TK CPL, its a really hard staff. (I tried!) Personal issue, family, work, this lead to a shortage of time on a daily basis to use for study. This moves the Flight school enviroment to fresh Atpl Pilot, that noAirlines want to hire, or may be they do not like the Airline stile of life. They will teach what they have been teached, to be frustrated on A Cessna 152 thinking to an A320. Noone teach them to land in few meters, to lift off on a wheel with a tail dragger, or as to come back on your step in front of a mountain peak that you are not able to overfly, with a barrel roll. The pleasure of flying! Waiting fot my CAA reply i hope that as someone says this limit for PPL NoTK will be removed, but at least giving to FI limited the privileges to act as a CRI. Now if the worst scenario will be confirmed i have to evaluate to undergo to a CRI training! it’s really incredible! Thanks to everybody to provide info to FI community!
Apply for the CRI! There’s no reason for the CAA not to issue it since the FI-course is so much more intense than a CRI-course. You need to have more flight experiences though (300hrs on aeroplanes).
I’m already qyalified as FI. But it makes no sense that i Have to apply for a CRI training. That means, other 3-5 hours training, other study lesson on Long Briefing, and of course another AoC (very expensive) plus i have to move to a very far away school due to the Aeroclub nearby to my house do not provide CRI qualification.
I’ve already pass 300 hrs, and what i hope ad is reasonable, is that the TK limitation will be defintely removed AT LEAST for who hold an IR (or CB-IR or EIR). as someone says previously, the difference between lapl and ppl is radio navigation , (but I have also been teached during FI training regardless of my limitation).
To became an IRI is very difficult, due to, for who as me are already FI qualified, you have to collect 200 hrs of IFR flyght (50 hrs possible on SIM), but still remaining 150 hrs IFR on real plane. quite a lot if ou have to pay all of them! how is supposed that you can collect without paying a large amount of money???
A competency check for an FI will also renew a CRI. That´s the information I found on the German LBA website. And this makes sense. The FI-course you did is much more extensive than a CRI-course, and the training objectives have all been covered. Have you tried to apply for the CRI based on the training documents of your FI course? European regulations still seem to be a mess.
I confess confusion!
Are the CPL TK exams to be eliminated for FI?
If the CPL TK exams are eliminated as a requirement to become a FI, what written exams would be required? (Looked at from the position of a non-IR PPL)
The goal would be to do the IR with a view toward later becoming a CFI or CFII.
For me the issue is not a red herring. The time commitment required to pass a bunch of written exams is discouraging—and I am someone who has taken and passed many difficult exams for professional qualifications over the decades. I just have many enjoyable ways to spend my time. I’ve “paid my dues” in other spheres, and don’t want to feel like a 20 year old kid undergoing a hazing process to select out the people who “don’t want it enough”.
Be aware that CFI/CFII are US instructor types.