Peter wrote:
If you ever thought about becoming an FI, what factors stopped you doing it?
I’m constantly thinking about it! As an associate professor at a university I spend much of my professional life teaching. I like it and I’m pretty good at it.
What’s stopping me is basically time. Not time to take the FI course, but time to instruct after getting the FI rating. Maybe when I step down as chairman of my club and/or when I retire. I see the CPL TK thing as a substantial annoyance but not a showstopper. Getting the CRI rating is more likely to happen soon.
First of all, with just about 250 hrs I don’t consider myself an expert in aviation to feel confident enough to instruct. However, having said that, I think becoming an instructor is something that would help both me and the student develop as pilots.
The reason I do not become an instructor is mostly financial. It is a big expense that you essentially have to “donate” to the cause of teaching aviation to others. A second reason is time. With having a full-time job I would essentially only be able to instruct on weekends, and having done sightseeing flights on weekends in the past (and now) I can see how one could easily get tired. It is important to have at least one day per week to rest your mind.
What about full-time instructor instead of having a second job? Well, that doesn’t pay the bills.
Timothy wrote:
The way the IR is taught and examined in EASA is a disgrace.
Not everywhere. In fact, I have seen one case of a transition from “disgrace” to “grace” here in Czechia: I let my IR lapse by 3 years and went for remedial training to the same school where I got it initially. The entire training process had been overhauled in the meantime, with a lot more emphasis on briefing and much more serious SOPs. The examiner also checked my briefing very thoroughly. The exam included no NDB navigation, either, just ILS and GNSS, but there was a minor in-flight impromptu replanning: as I was about to start an RNAV arrival, the examiner called the ATC and quickly negotiated a non-standard shortcut to a VOR that was referenced on the ILS approach chart but was not on any approach track. On the picture, the RNAV arrival would have taken me to SULOV and the shortcut was direct NER.
Timothy wrote:
It is much more a question of education than teaching. And it is better suited to grizzled, experienced practitioners who can call on a wealth of real world experience.
Very well put. I can put a Cub into a 10’ wide strip and 300’ long, trees either end. And survive. It is not to boast, but it is real world experience that is then used to show others that with stick and rudder skills there is another world out there. But you need to have done it. That’s what I hope they pay for.
Schools would baulk at that, as would their FI’s who probably could not do it. Horses for courses. The 5 mile final down the needles is great, if that is what you require, but slipping down a 15 foot gap in the trees to stop in 100 feet is also what some want.
Timothy made another point. During my IMC training no one ever mentioned how to file a flight plan, on the ground or in the air, or how to fly airways. Partial panel appeared to be the mantra. When I asked, they did not know…… 
Timothy wrote:
So FIs and CRIs/IRIs should respect each others’ capabilities and knowledge and use each other to turn out functioning pilots.
Yes, the distinction is mainly “teaching” (teaching basic knowledge) vs “learning” (from shared random knowledge), CRI/TRI works well for the second
The latter does not have to be structured or even defined and you can get it even from an experienced PPL holder but as a student you need to navigate it yourself
The former you need to find someone who help you grasp “a fixed syllabus content” and pass “a fixed set of exams”, I have seen two experienced mil pilots failing their PPL check rides as in their elementary training they learned to fly with “non-FI/FE pilots”: so they simply had no clue on what they were tested and what to expect on the exam…
As I just completed my CBIR, and none of the theory that is the same as the CPL’s can be carried over to the CPL, I am not looking forward to sitting countless week-end hours at the ATO, spending evening upon evening of reading and test exams, and passing all these exams (plus the 6 extra) all over again. For me at this time the CPL TK kills it.
Are there no exam credits from the IR to the CPL?
There should be at least HP&L (Human Perf) and possibly Met and Air Law.
Peter wrote:
Are there no exam credits from the IR to the CPL?Nope, I checked.
Hmmm that must be another little-known side effect of the CB IR reduced QB… another political quid pro quo. With the previous one (the 7-exam JAA/EASA IR) you got the 1 credit.
Hmmm that must be another little-known side effect of the CB IR reduced QB
I don’t think so. There was no credit from the IR when I did the CPL ten years ago.
Arne wrote:
Nope, I checked.
Yes. Communications and Human Factors. At least for the traditional IR. I don’t know if it is different for the CB-IR, but I can’t see why.
