Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

PPL FI without CPL theory

I get asked about this periodically…

Such an FI can train only towards the LAPL, or add-on ratings. He/she cannot train towards the full EASA PPL.

However there is a way: if the student trains towards the LAPL, gets the LAPL, then all the training can be used as a full credit towards the PPL.

So there is no apparent additional cost. Just some paperwork hassle.

One question mark is whether the candidate actually needs to pass the LAPL skills test, or merely be put forward for the test but not actually do it. The latter option should be OK because he/she must have met the requirements…?

The CPL theory is very tedious. It used to be 9 exams but is now 13 exams. To what extent are these a subset of the 14 ATPL exams?

Can the FAA CPL be used? I don’t think so…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Such an FI can train only towards the LAPL, [ or add-on ratings.} He/she cannot train towards the full EASA PPL.

agree

or add-on ratings.

The LAPL doesn’t have ratings it has privileges therefore a FI with TK cannot teach for an SEP, or TMG rating. However a CRI can.

However there is a way: if the student trains towards the LAPL, gets the LAPL, then all the training can be used as a full credit towards the PPL. So there is no apparent additional cost. Just some paperwork hassle.

The hours towards the LAPL count towards the LAPL. To upgrade to a PPL you have to do a 10 hours course which cannot be taught by an FI without CPL TK. So this way actually works out more expensive as both a LAPL and PPL skills test are required.

One question mark is whether the candidate actually needs to pass the LAPL skills test, or merely be put forward for the test but not actually do it. The latter option should be OK because he/she must have met the requirements…?

I don’t think I understand this. To upgrade to a PPL a LAPL holder has to hold a LAPL.

Can the FAA CPL be used? I don’t think so…

No. Although apparently the CAA at some time in the past did.

Last Edited by Bathman at 29 Oct 12:08

In this discussion, it is always important to distinguish between pilots who want to become instructors today and those who have been instructors for some time.

Most PPL instructors in Germany for example never had any CPL theory training at all. Those who got the rating before JAR-FCL (May 2003) later had their rating converted to JAR and later to EASA and now have an unrestricted “EASA FI” rating on their license, on which it is indiscernable whether he ever got it with or without doing the CPL theory.

Only pilots who got their FI rating (without CPL theory) after 2003 are now restricted to LAPL instructing.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 30 Oct 05:29
Frankfurt (EDFZ, EDFE), Germany

Only pilots who got their FI rating (without CPL theory) after 2003 are now restricted to LAPL instructing.

The date is actually variable, according to country.

In some countries it was as late as 2012.

In the UK, decades ago, a PPL could train a PPL and get paid for it. Later he got grandfathered into the BCPL, etc. The old “CFI” I used to fly with only ever had a PPL (no instrument qualifications) but used to train PPL and the IMCR. I don’t know what the relevant date is for the UK; it may well be 2003.

The other thing is that up to only a few years ago you had to actually have a valid CPL (not just the exam passes) to train the PPL and get paid for it…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I did my old CAA PPL and IMCR “decades ago” with a PPL/FI and I’m pretty sure he held, and was required to hold, an IMCR himself. They were all grandfathered to BCPLs in about 1987.

Last Edited by flybymike at 30 Oct 16:19
Egnm, United Kingdom

Someone upgrading from an LAPL in addition to doing the extra 10 hrs training also needs to do the PPL qualifying cross country ie at least 150 nm course with two stops en-route and the PPL skills test.

Someone upgrading from an LAPL in addition to doing the extra 10 hrs training also needs to do the PPL qualifying cross country ie at least 150 nm course with two stops en-route and the PPL skills test

Yes you do. Its a bit silly this one as its possible to have done a QXC that is valid for the CPL but not for an NPPL/LAPL to PPL upgrade. You can do a night rating as part of the 10 hours however.

You have to have 15 hours after the LAPL test, 10 of which should be flight training, including 4h solo time (2h x/c minimum) and a 150NM xc alone with two stops. Then you can do the PPL-Test.

mh
Inside the sky.
EDXE, EDXF, Germany

The PPL Qualifying Cross Country ceased to exist in July 1999. Pre JAA the Qualifyer was exactly that, it was completed after the GFT and later the Nav Test and did not form part of the training, hence the need to ensure it was completed under specified conditions which were certified. With the introduction of JAR the 150 nm X-Cty became part of the training and there was no such thing as a Qualifier any more. But, like all vacumn cleaners are Hoovers, the name stuck.

We now have a situation where holders of the MGIR (Motor Glidere Instructor Rating) have been issued with a FI (Limited to TMG) qualification, to remove the limitation the holder only needs a SEP Class rating and they can now act as a PPL FI, having never completed an approved instructor course or passed the CPL exams. So far I have seen three examples of this.

OT: Reminds me of the “flying career” of my father…he used to hold a glider license when he was a student. At the time, for a glider pilot it was possible to get the motorglider license just by doing a few hours in a motorglider and that’s what he did. Now motorgliders can be perfectly fine VFR touring aircraft, especially something like an RF-5. So off he went, touring Europe with no clue about things like navigation or airspace structure. While this has changed by now (he got the PPL-A later in the late seventies and had to all the ground school then), he sure has a few funny stories to tell from the motorglider times… stories that – if it were today – would be hair-rising. But I guess it was a totally different time back then.

Frankfurt (EDFZ, EDFE), Germany
90 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top