I see from IN 2012/123 out today that PPL examiners are now going to have to do a refresher seminar at an ATO as well as an instructor refresher seminar to renew, wonder how much that will cost?

Well certainly no less than an instructor seminar, probably considerably more as they're going to be mandatory.:*
Also, I'm wondering which category of the specific requirements we'll have to comply with if we want to continue doing IMCr flight tests? Will an IR(R)E authorisation, or whatever they end up giving to those of us who are FE(PPL) holders, come under the third or fourth option?
We may also find that the frequency and location of said seminars is unlikely to be convenient for many.

All I can say is thank :mad:

There is utterly no point trying to standidise the instructors if the examinors are all playing to thier own hym sheet.

Hopefully it will be two days of being told how to do the standard exercises.

I am pleased to see the CAA web site is as good as ever
Sorry, your search for IN 2012/123 returned no results.When found, the document appears to be another one that is poorly produced and hasn't been checked with any degree of precision.

It states that the CAA has identified 4 Categories of Examiner, but fails to say what they are. It then goes on to list 5 different types of Examiner in one title.

Reference is made to PPL and LAPL Examiners "only" but fails to address Class Ratings which form the basis of PPL revalidation tests! It is not clear if a PPL Examiner will require a different Authority to examine for Class Ratings on a professional licence, or will need to hold two separate Authorities to do the same job, with two courses to attend, or will simply loose privileges currently held.

In the past, FIEs have run PPL Examiner courses and were told by the CAA that they would be able to continue, but with a £1000 approval fee, are any likely to want to bother? In any case, this is the first notification they have received and lacks the clarity needed to generate an application. Are we headed for a shortage of Examiners from September?

Hopefully it will be two days of being told how to do the standard exercises.Well, there's one hope dashed. The content of the refresher seminar is supposed to be the same as the initial standardisation course, included in AMC FCL.1015:The training should comprise:
(1) Theoretical training covering at least:
(i) the contents of AMC2 FCL.1015 and the FEM;
(ii) Part-FCL and related AMCs and GM relevant to their duties;
(iii) operational requirements and related AMCs and GM relevant to their duties;
(iv) national requirements relevant to their examination duties;
(v) fundamentals of human performance and limitations relevant to flight examination;
(vi) fundamentals of evaluation relevant to applicant’s performance;
(vii) management system of ATOs;
(viii) MCC, human performance and limitations, if applicable.
(2) Examiners should also be briefed on the protection requirements for personal data, liability, accident insurance and fees, as applicable in the member state concerned.
(3) All items above are the core knowledge requirements for an examiner and are recommended as the core course material. This core course may be studied before recommended examiner training is commenced. The core course may utilise any suitable training format.
(4) Practical training consisting of at least:
(i) knowledge and management of the test for which the certificate is to be sought. These are described in the relevant modules in the FEM;
(ii) knowledge of the administrative procedures pertaining to that test or check.Nothing about standard exercises there.

Yes, i can already see ex CAA staff already lining up to support any new requirements, where theres a buck....?

What a crock of crap.
15 years ago with about 5000 hrs instructional experience i phoned the CAA and said i want to be an examiner, there was a pause while the person looked up the records, yes no problem send us a cheque and the paperwork is in the post. Two weeks later i was an examiner, i read the little book on test standards and began testing my own and others students, usually at a moments notice when the weather decided to play ball.
we had a mature test system, nft and gft.

All those candidates went on to be hobby ppls or airline pilots. Non have ever killed themselves and some have recently come back into the fold after long lay offs.

I passed or failed as many then as i do now, the standard hasn't changed much, people are as varied as clouds in the sky, so what as changed?

But i have got to admit when some of my students return from test, the examiners seems to have missunderstood what is required on the nav section, like treating the 2nd leg from point 'B' as a diversion?

the standard hasn't changed much, people are as varied as clouds in the sky, so what as changed?When the JAA PPL skill test came in, we all universally said it was too long, the old nft/gst was a well proven and better format. Despite universal agreement on the test, nothing has changed in 12 years apart from a divergence in method. That is probably not surprising as the last attempt at standardisation was back in 1999 when a CAA Flight Examiner stood up and told the assembled company how it should be done. Most of the current examiners weren't around then and have all been taught different methods. It differs further from one State to another, so there really is no such thing as an EASA PPL because they haven't produced one, and are never likely too. The volume of bureaucratic requirements simply demonstrates the appalling ignorance and incompetence of those involved; that is all that has changed!

ORS4-927 (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=5138) has now deferred this requirement until 16 November 2012 because there aren't enough Seminars (aren't any might be more accurate) Are there really likely to be any by November either?There will not be sufficient seminars available by the 17 September 2012 (the date of
implementation of Part-FCL in the UK) to enable UK examiners to comply with this requirement
and so maintain their examining privileges. This exemption has been issued so that the
requirement will not apply to renewals and revalidations completed between 17 September 2012
and 16 November 2012.A good business opportunity here as EASA does not specify any particular qualification to run or teach on such a Seminar!

Therefore the CAA must know of someone who is going to conduct seminars from 16 November 2012.
Interesting to read the last few lines of Official record sheet statement;
"There is no effect on the level of safety compared with the standards
that have been in place in the UK since JAR-FCL was adopted in 2000."

Thank goodness for that, the last 12 years haven't been a waste of time or money.
So whats the point of the seminars...££'s.

My thoughts entirely.

EASA does not specify any particular qualification to run or teach on such a Seminar!


Except that they have to be delivered at an ATO.....:\

I'm sure most ATOs will relish such a disruption to their routine training activities....:(

A good business opportunity here as EASA does not specify any particular qualification to run or teach on such a Seminar!EASA may not but the UK CAA does here (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_lts_Examinar%20Refresher%20Seminars%20IN2012_123.pdf). According to this, only people who hold the relevant examiner certificate may give presentations at a seminar (e.g. an AME may not give a presentation on aviation medicine to an FE seminar unless he is also an FE). Where does the CAA find the idiots to write this garbage?

Rumour has it that the Authority has received a number of applications for approval of seminars (and has banked the application fees) but has no one competent to recommend approval.

Its interesting to note that two months ago, the CAA FEs had no idea what was going to be required regarding examiners and stated that they could not be more stringent than the basic regulation. But of course they are no longer in the same dept as the man producing all the INs!