If you are already an FI, 200 hrs is enough. I think it is fair.
But of no relevance whatsoever. 200 hours flying IFR possibly in VMC, possibly on autopilot has no relevance to teachiing instrument skills!
The UK has demonstrated that teaching instrument instruction as part of the FI qualification (It was originally called the upgrade course from AFI to FI) works perfectly well with 30-40 hours of Instrument time (not IFR time). For that reason the UK introduced a 4:1 ratio throughout the JAA period to circumnavigate the half baked 200 hour requirement which came back to haunt us when Part FCL became law.
Another piece of Eurononsense was that a FI restricted could teach basic PPL skills on an Integrated ATPL Course, yet they would actually have been better equipped to teach Instrument skills that they had just learned, than basic skills of which they had mininal experience. Another example of rules produced by committees!
I could go on about this for hours but another disastrous pace of euro carp that done nothing to help the industry.
As said by Tumbleweed the old UK AFI to FI system worked well. Fortunately the CAA now allow an instructor with 10 hours flight time by sole reference to instruments in an aeroplane to teach for the IMC rating. But its still a long slog for FI who wants to teach for the IR to get to 200 hours IFR.
As for a shortage of IRI then I agree there is one. However the above change by the CAA has certainly helped. When this regulation first came out there was also the double wammy of the IMC rating getting scrapped so the uptake went collapsed. In fact I went about 4 years without doing a single IMC rating. Yet now its represents about 50% of all the instructing I do.
Other problems are financially its not worth doing an IRI. At a school close to me they pay 3 quid an hour more than bog standard PPL training and as most of their instructors are airline wannabes (not that I have anything against that) then there is no reason for them to do it.
I would also think that an IMC rating should count as a BIFM (more regulatory crap). As CPL students have to do 10 hours on instruments as part of their CPL course. But for those with an IMC rating it largely a waste of time. But then under the old CAA system you had to hold an IMC rating before you could start a CPL course.
Sounds like a job opportunity if you already have an IRI… as I do… :)
Tumbleweed wrote:
Not sure how you could log 50 hours instrument ground time as there is no course with that level of credit!
My understanding is that these do not need to be flown in a course. You can use any FNPT/FTD/FFS-instrument time you have (recurrent training, revalidation…).
Tobias
Hi Tobias!
