Examiner Standarisation Meeting

[hugh flung_dung]

I just received a flyer from "The Flight Examiners Association" (in a CAA envelope) for a "standardisation meeting" in October - does anybody know anything about them/it?

HFD

[BEagle]

See http://www.flightexaminers.com/ . ETA is one of the CAA-approved providers for FI re-validation seminars. This standardisation meeting is not mandatory for FE re-authorisation.

[hugh flung_dung]

Thanks Beags, 'any views on the merits of joining FEA or attending the meeting? PM if you prefer.

HFD

[Another_CFI]

I am not a member of FEA but attended their previous examiner seminar and intend to attend this one.

[BEagle]

Did anyone go - and was it worth it?

It seemed rather expensive for what it purported to offer, so I didn't go. I am also intrigued to know why the advertising material came from the CAA. Was it an 'old mates' favour for an ex-CFE? If so, presumably the CAA will offer the same service for all the other seminar providers?

[homeguard]

I went.

The facilities were good and the room was pretty close to full which indicates that many did consider the seminar an important occasion.

The lines were pretty blurred as to whether or not it was an independant association meeting at which the CAA put in an attendance or whether at the least it was a joint venture. FEA are appealing to the CAA for such attendances to count or at least contribute/meet the requirement for the PPL Examiner three yearly renewal requirements.

Was it worthwhile attending for forty quid ( or more if not a member) - Yes! Have you missed anything for not being there - I doubt it!

Yet another Skill Test form is being sent out but apparently it's a cock up. The pads have been printed and may yet be sent out just the same. It would appear that the clerk charged with the new design did so on an A4 sheet but having been reduced to A5 it has become unreadable and unfillable. By attending the seminar we were the first to know this. But it all sounded to me as if the chiefs were blaming the natives.

Why did we need a new form. Well, it would appear that when a split test has been conducted for whatever reason misunderstandings with regard to completing the form correctly have arisen. It struck me in the circumstances that to have a form that was unreadable and unfillable was therefore progress at last!

A Skill Test 'Series' is two attempts, as you know. If a candidate fails on the first attempt but gains a partial on the second attempt he is currently stuffed. He starts a new series with no benefit from the partial passl. The powers have at last seen the light and having observed that they are alone, for no other country saw it the same perverse way - have changed the rule with immediate effect. Should a candidate fail ( ie. not a partial ) the first Test of a series he now continues onto series number two.

Any non brits reading all this and are confused? So you should be. Like the unreadable form - for us Brits nothing is to be simple and clear nor understandable, for it is a way of life! It is a creature that protects us from demons and bureucrats. Out of their shadows of self imposed chaos shines a light of freedom and personal integrity for the rest of us! That is to do just what we want as we always have!