EASA PPL exam papers.

[JAKL]

Has anybody received the EASA PPL theoretical knowledge exam paper set yet?
New communications papers came a while ago, but no sign of any others!

Are the CAA delaying?

[S-Works]

Got mine. Now need to track down some out of date maps as be tight buggers don't provide them with the papers.

[2close]

Bose-X,

I presume they refer to UK 1/2 Mil - what area(s) and edition do you need?

I may be able to help.

2close

[Whopity]

I heard there were no questions that require a map!

[S-Works]

Thanks 2Close, I believe its a southern 1/2 mil either ed 38 or 39. I need to check when I get home.

[BigGrecian]

On the email sent from the CAA on the 25th February which was terms and conditions for CEPs.

The terms and conditions stated :

I also acknowledge that :

Charts for use of student examinations are not now included as part of the material supplied by the CAA......Chart (South West of England Wales, Edition 39) will need to be supplied or sourced and laminated for multi-use by the CEP>

Not like you miss something like that Bose-X ;)

[S-Works]

Erm, I didn't miss it, thats why I need to track down the charts... ;)

[2close]

bose-x.

Check PM's

[JAKL]

We received the RT papers months ago, but no others!
Now we have a letter from the CAA to say the papers have changed to a version 2, but still only had the RT papers sent through.

Should we be concerned?

[ifitaintboeing]

Yes, you should be.

I assume you're also an RT Examiner which is probably why the RT papers arrived. Suggest you drop the CAA an e-mail and check you are listed as a CEP.

ifitaint...

[BigEndBob]

Flight planning and ops req. Edn 39, but not the Nav. paper.
Been told that new papers coming out, probably won't meet the 1st Sept deadline, anyone know whats going on?

[JAKL]

Thanks ifitaint...

A phone call to Gatwick and now waiting for the lass that's dealing with it to come back off holiday!

[BigEndBob]

Ray Elgy CAA | EASA's PPL Revolution across Europe: PPL written exams changes 2013 - YouTube
Interesting.

[Whopity]

Mr Elgy talks about Standardisation and its importance; each State has a different set of exams with different numbers of questions; the syllabus is largely unquantified and unqualified so where is the Standardisation? The learning objectives seem a little elusive, I can't find them in the AMC!
All this extra ground-school won't increase costs, how does that work?

For someone who wants to see people getting on with their aviation career he is setting about putting an awful lot out of business!

If this guy is in charge it explains a lot!

[BigEndBob]

I think the title should say "Evolution", but i think Revolution might be the outcome!

[flying_god]

I heard that the new papers "are riddled with errors" so the deadline has been put back? Gives me another few days to pass the old papers before they get shredded...

[Mickey Kaye]

The bit I like is it will not increase the costs to the student.

How's that going to work then? Am I expected to do it for free?

[BigEndBob]

The problem is we are not always dealing with highly motivated students.
Some want careers, others its a past time, a hobby that stretches over 2-3 years, fitted in with work, family and holidays. I have one student that has dipped in and out over 10 years! Every 3 years he has had a go at some exams only for them to expire.
How many students drop out of flying having done one or two exams, that now see the exams as a chore, which is a shame.
Remember when the Air Law study book was about 20 pages long from the HMSO and cost 5/-. I passed that exam in 1978 and that was bad enough.
More stuff to learn doesn't make safer pilots, otherwise the medical profession wouldn't have specialists.

[Whopity]

The original JAA concept envisaged a FAA style system, 120 questions or thereabout with one or two papers. EASA has copied that and the syllabus, which is by and large the AOPA syllabus borrowed from the RAF in the 1950s. If EASA had had any gumption they would have commissioned a set of practical questions that would have standardised the whole process, preventing individual NAAs from doing there own disjointed thing. There is a good case for Industry to produce such a question bank, administered on line, and to present it to EASA as an NPA! The CAAs job is now to administer the regulation they no longer have the ability to produce any sensible material and realistically, its not their job to do so. Its time for industry to take the initiative.

[proudprivate]

"The need for Standardization" is nowadays an often abused argument to get your way as a individual Civil Aviation Authority.

This is how nonsense like ATO's and 100-hrs of structured learning creep into regulations effectively decimating the number of interested amateurs who would like to pursue aviation as a hobby and - once into a more advanced stage - as a means of private transport.

This is where closet communists from Brussels and Cologne (who hate private aviation out of envy or whatever reason - some even think they can save CO2 emmissions by killing private GA) and the "advising" flight school / examiners brigade have found a common goal : lets drive up costs and hurdles for the individuals and eliminate competition in the training industry.

A few have toyed with the idea of an "industry wide" relevant (that means tuned down) test bank per subject and making it publicly available (or at least making sufficient sample test questions available to allow candidates to see what is typically expected of them). But then you realise that in order to achieve this, you have to spend an enormous amount of your time with closet communists that don't really care and face opposition from the training industry that wants to monetize its grip on technical knowledge databases.

[Whopity]

The "Q" factor of many of the current questions is below 20% or put simply there is an 80% chance they fail to measure anything essential, desirable or relevant! They are just another hurdle.

[JAKL]

If a uk citizen wishes to bimble around the countryside from field to field for a cup o' tea and a bacon sandwich they have to pass exams akin to some of the stuff I did with commercial exams at Gatwick! Even for the LAPL!

I have to admit that after looking at the papers my face is left 'intentionally blank'!

[fireflybob]

If a uk citizen wishes to bimble around the countryside from field to field for a cup o' tea and a bacon sandwich they have to pass exams akin to some of the stuff I did with commercial exams at Gatwick! Even for the LAPL!


Does a PPL Holder really need to know how to work out the Local Mean Time in Moscow?

But wait....they don't have EASA there do they?

Lunatics running asylums come to mind.

[Whopity]

When the Head of Licencing and Training Standards makes a video where he opens his mouth and puts both feet into it, what more can you expect!

[JAKL]

I think we can expect more people to train as microlight pilots!
Cheaper, easier route and probably more fun!

[JAKL]

This is crazy! Meridians of latitude?

[BillieBob]

When the Head of Licencing and Training Standards makes a video where he opens his mouth and puts both feet into it....
Probably why he's no longer Head of L&TS.

[pembroke]

All of the above, and more. Just heard from a colleague that the Nav exam is ridiculous. I will have a close look on Sunday (as FE/GR, not CEP), but are there any comments on the other exams and is it a rumour that the CAA are already rewriting these papers? PS, I may recognise the odd question if they are pitched at PPL-ATPL, re some time teaching ground subjects at ATPL level!

[Whopity]

I have seen one set of papers where the number of questions has been reduced, the questions are mostly the same, but where there are new questions they are largely irrelevant. An overall drop in quality!

[Esperanza]

I've been doing a lot of ground school recently to help to prepare my chaps for their exams. I'm getting a bit tired of them asking me why we need to keep on converting distances to kilometers. Seeing as we work in nautical miles I don't have a good answer. Today's surprise was discovering questions based on Jeppesen airport charts. Not really a problem, although it took a while for my eyes to adjust to the format as I get my chaps to use the info from the IAIP, for free, online.
Having said the above, I don't think that the new exams are going to be a problem. However I fail to see the reasoning behind the six sittings rule. With the proper preparation it shouldn't be a problem to comply, but it would be nice to know the reasoning.

[airwave45]

Absolutely furious today, sat (and failed) the new Nav exam.
Precisely why do I need to know how to get UTC from a local time in New Dehli FFS ! (local time in Dehli 15:00, correct answer 10:00, which it won't be, given the Indian habit of a 30 min offset)

My ground school instructor was pretty open that the Ground school work didn't prepare me for 20% of the questions (and he's not allowed to alter it)

Which leaves me a maximum of 80% possible and as a normal bloggs I bloopered a few and failed.

I intend having a word with the head of training about why the ground school didn't prep me for the new exam.

What a load of e**ing B***cks . . . .

ATPL/CPL level stuff so that I can get permission to fire up the engine in my glider . . . . .

Who, seriously, can I have a go at about this?
Proper, formal, complaint time.

[BigEndBob]

So, this is what happens now.
Rather than learning practical knowledge that is sufficient to operate light GA aircraft, students will be taught to just pass the exam.

Rubbish about time zones, various scales to keep the Eurometrics happy and asking Brits when will they see the Sun!. ( I think the Sun set at 17:30 this evening it seemed so dark).

[airwave45]

Getting a bounce from your email addy, person who sent me a message.

[keith williams]

Sorry about that.

My private message options have now been adjusted so the problem should be solved. If not my email address is [email protected]

[JAKL]

I'm sure we are not alone, well I presume the exams for France, Spain, Germany and all the other members of EASA will be the same. With the single European sky and all that standardisation!

[chrisbl]

Personally the Air Law and Operational Procedures exams are an improvement.

The Ops procedure exam is more relevant and covers what I think is practical stuff.

at least they have moved away from asking questions about things hanging from masts.

Nav is a disappointment but in EASA places where UTC is some time away from local time I can see the relevance.

If schools have not modified their ground school then they should not be letting students sit the exams until they have done so. Sending someone into an exam with only 80% of the knowledge is neither smart nor fair.

The challenge is about getting the study organised into chunks so small groups of exams are organised into sittings. Maybe trying to get them done in 4 sittings and having a couple of sittings spare just in case.

[BEagle]

The shortcomings of the Nav Exam have now been NB'd by the CAA.

Hopefully the PPL Nav syllabus will be one of the first to be shaken up in the forthcoming CAA review of PPL training.

[Cylinder Head]

Anyone got an idea why the 6 sitting rule has been introduced for PRIVATE Pilot Licence students - that is - people learning to fly for recreational purposes! Explaining that they will now have to study and sit several subjects in one go can only discourage students from learning to fly and what improvement in safety does such an arbitary constraint actually deliver?

I'd love to know which flying schools were consulted before such an idiotic decision was made.

Second - anyone heard when the promised road shows on EASA transition scheduled for October / November are taking place?

[Cobalt]

Anyone got an idea why the 6 sitting rule has been introduced for PRIVATE Pilot Licence students?

The same reason all training has to be under an ATO.

In some countries, including Germany where EASA sits, this is the way it has been done for ages, and PPL exams are all administered by the authority; if they take place at a school an examiner turns up and invigilates them there; and are all bulked up in one or two days. Ground school tends to be formal and on evenings, with formal attendance tracking.

The idea that you could do it otherwise just does not fit their model how "things should work".

[pegasus-9]

I see on the CAA website (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&newstype=n&mode=detail&nid=2283 (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=14&pagetype=65&appid=7&newstype=n&mode=detail&nid=2283) ) that the CAA are wanting to play around with the PPL syllabus (theoretical), are they saying that Europe or ICAO have it wrong?
Have they taken into account such a change may mean that the UK ends up with a non-ICAO compliant licence as far as the rest of the world is concerned, and UK training organisations cannot sell their courses outside the UK. Whilst Europe can be a pain it has started to open the training market in this area.
So now we have cheap courses run in eastern Europe, and now the CAA wants to change the rules again (how much is the consultant getting for paid to take more work away from UK training organisations), we may as well close down. :ugh:

[keith williams]

The CAA document to which you refer includes the following statement:

The CAA will liaise with colleagues in the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and other EU National Aviation Authorities to develop the new syllabus, which will continue to fully meet the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

So it look like youir worries are unfounded.

[pegasus-9]

Yes, but as an RTF trying to get your head around how to become an ATO, you don't need the additional problem of changing the syllabus you teach, plus I can't see Brussels and Cologne agreeing to it but some idiot at the CAA going ahead with it.

[ifitaintboeing]

Pegasus,

Many pilots, instructors, and examiners have complained that the current syllabus is not fit for purpose. What is wrong with trying to provide an alternative syllabus which better fits the needs of a modern PPL by providing them with up-to-date knowledge and skills needed to operate safely?

The old syllabus is unlikely to disappear as it is an Acceptable Means of Compliance. You can carry on with your head in the sand if you wish, teaching to a 1950s syllabus...

ifitaint...

[BigEndBob]

So does that mean come 2014 there will be another set of exam papers?
This is costing someone time and money, where's that going to come from?
I can see another £100 going on examiner applications!
CAA still operating like a department of government.
Nothing changes.

[BEagle]

You can carry on with your head in the sand if you wish, teaching to a 1950s syllabus...


ifitaintboeing(itprobablywontcatchfire :p ), regrettably it seems that some RFs and FIs refuse to move with the times and resolutely refuse to embrace techniques such as 'standard closing angle' for navigation and 'point and power' for visual approaches. Doubtless the same people have a love affaire with the Dalton computer and regard GPS as a tool of Satan?

isthatsmoke...

[Whopity]

The RAF amended its syllabus in the mid 70s, much of what appears in the latest EASA regurgitation appears to be what was thrown out at that time. The current syllabus is unquantified, unqualified and as a result, the exam questions are moving further and further away from reality. It is nice to see an attempt to correct this situation.