Outlaw, you are comparing apples with peaches.
That is what I am trying to get at.
Its like trying to tell a guy who plays field hockey to play ice hockey. Or vice versa.
And yes, I have flown in -45. Was -55 with the windchill. I wish I was flying into YYZ.
PiuYi, I am a very practical person so I don't think that a lot of the theory is worth it. I don't really want to know the forces acting on a plane in a spin, I would rather know how to get out of it, or how to avoid it in the first place.
When I was studying for the licences, I found that pretty much both are using the same material, same techniques and same theory. (Except for met because everything spins the other way!)
The difference I found here was that the Canadian stuff was easier to study because the reference guides are a lot more specific and point to exactly what you need to know. There is then only 1 test.
Where as in NZ there are a lot more questions and can be chosen from a broad range of topics, and 1 test per subject.
The only difference I can see with the knowledge base is how lazy the Canadian pilot wants to be. Either you study to pass the test, or study to know the information.
Does the extra knowledge help? To a point.
To respond to PBY's quote. I think its better to be able to get from point A to point B and be able to understand and avoid what made the european pilot crash at C.
Last edited by lilflyboy262...2; 27th Nov 2012 at 21:06.