Tricky one!!!!

[VFR Transit]

Afternoon all,

Assume I have a collection of ATPL theory books from OAA, and am looking to read over and study Air Law. Can anyone tell me where to start??

The common answer could be at the start of the book, but seriously, were do you start in terms of finding what is relevant and what is not? Will you need to read every page or can you go for a specific section?

Any help and advice would be great.

VFR

[hollingworthp]

Forget the book if you don't have a highlighted copy.

Just cough up for Bristol and you will be fine.

[lc_aerobatics]

what I used to do is to give myself a week to read the book and after than focus on question bank for few days , 2 or 3 and start another subject adding previous QB to existing one. :ok:

Worked really well, starting July i finished all exams end of January working 9-17 Mon-Fri.

[bajadj]

air law is ALL q bank, and there's not that many questions either.

Go with what Hollingworthp says.

[RTN11]

It really depends on what you want to get out of your ATPLs.

If you just want 14 passes at 75%, and then to move on, then skimming through the books and hitting the online question banks might get you through.

If you really want to understand the subjects, then hard study of the books is the only option. Particularly the more relevant subjects such as Instruments, and Airframe/systems.

There's a few pointless and fairly easy subjects in there, like Air Law, both comms papers and HPL. The databases alone should get you through these.

Most people need to work pretty hard at subjects like Gen Nav, lots of formula to learn and plenty of example calculations to go through. Really get to grips with your CRP-5.

[wobble2plank]

Once you've done that and inwardly digested 4000 pages of nebulous rubbish you get a real job, learn the SOP's and get on with flying! :ok:

Welcome to the real world of flying :-)


Things you never want to hear in the cockpit:

What does this switch do?

Oi, watch this!

:E:E:E:E

[bajadj]

i kind of understand both sides of the arguement, lots of people seem to think that just learning the q banks is cheating, and once you've learnt "answer c" and passed the exam your knowledge will be pretty much zero. Fair comment, but what is the reason for learning the crp 5 inside out, because as far as i can tell you will never ever use the outdated piece of crap again once you've passed the exams so isn't it almost the same thing as just "bristoling"? wih the exception of with the crp 5 you actually have a little bit of knowledge, albeit completely useless after exams???

imo it's what you need to know after the exams NOT what you actually do know, and i'm sorry, again, imo the crp5 is obsolete for any purpose except the jaa exams.

[hollingworthp]

Definetely certain subjects are far better 'understood' than learnt for the exams.

However, Air Law is a cracking example of next to useless information on the whole. It is unlikely in the real world that you need to know which convention deals with damaged caused to persons or property on the ground by foreign aircraft. However, knowing who has right of way when overtaking or which is the standard direction you both turn if you meet oncoming traffic is useful. To that end, I am going back over Air Law at the moment while sitting on my hands waiting for initial Type Rating.

Systems is an important subject which would be useful for airline interviews & type rating I imagine. Although again, you can be much more selective on practical knowledge when going back through them after your exams.

PH.

[bajadj]

agreed again. Right of way and such like is basic PPL stuff though.