CPL H THEORY COURSE - ONLINE?

[tqmatch]

Hi everyone

I am hoping to get some honest reviews of some of the various online CPL(H) theory courses that are available on tinterweb.

I am now looking at starting my studying whilst I am hour building, my preference is towards a course that is 100% online, as family & work commitments (to fund the CPL) are pretty relentless!

Thanks for any info offered.

[ersa]

You will struggle to find 100% online, However Caledonian Advanced Pilot Training - Quality Training For Safer Pilots (http://www.captonline.com) offers CPL H
Groundschool, all the practise exams and progression tests are online.

[muermel]

Would definately recommend CAPT (Caledonian Advance Pilot Training). I'm sure that 100 % online isn't possible but with them you would need only 2 weeks of classroom revision in the UK. I think Bristol is the same.

You really need to be disciplined to do this as it is A LOT to study and A LOT of useless stuff, which doesn't help motivation :(. I did the revision for the exams while working full time and I tell you it's a pain in the ... .

If you plan on doing the exams in Gatwick at the CAA, make sure to book well in advance as the spots in the exams are limited and they don't offer all exams at all sittings at all the times. I wanted to get it done in 2 sittings (one of 8 and one of 6) but that wasn't possible. Took me 3 in the end (one of 8, one of 2 and another of 4.). But passed all on first attempt :ok:

Contact a guy here called "PACO" he can tell you all about CAPT ;)


Cheers

[paco]

I can confirm we are on line a bit :)

Progress tests are online, we can supply the notes as PDFs, and we are issuing the consolidation stuff as elearning, also on the web. For the first samples, look at the ATPL(H) page on the website (mentioned above) and look for a heading called Consolidation Supplements. Apologies for the voiceover, I can't afford Morgan Freeman :)

It's work in progress, just waiting to set my own server up as it is a LOT of information. That is, in between playing with our new Lear 45 sim :)

Phil

[gwelo shamwari]

I keep on hearing that there is a lot of useless information. If this is the case why is this information still required to be studied when there is now a helicopter specific set of exams?:confused:

[muermel]

@gwelo shamwari

Please do ask the CAA that question. They might be able to tell you why you need to know about most of the content of RNAV, several parts of GNAV, a lot of Airframes/Systems and a lot of things in Human Performance. A lot of the things you have to know for the exams won't help you at all as a pilot and are way too detailed to be of any use for pilots.:ugh:

Oh and the funny thing is that some of the supposedly "correct" answers in the exams are indeed wrong. So if you apply the stuff you study you get the answer wrong. Not that you could expect to have such small issues corrected for only 69 GBP a pop (14 Exams for the ATP!!!). Oh and you only get to know the "general areas where you went wrong" as an evaluation of your exam. :rolleyes:

If it was only the Fixed Wing questions that were still in the QB it would be easy :E


bye

[paco]

Actually, you need to ask EASA or, more properly, JAA that question. To be fair to the CAA, they do block or amend as many questions as they can - all of the CTKIs from the UK schools attended the Belgrano every month for a year a few years ago to help with this. The free lunches were good! :)

As I've said before in other forums (fora?), whoever contributed to the JAA dog's breakfast should hang their collective heads in shame for screwing up what could have been a world class system. It is inexcusable that up to 20% of the questions are wrong, and that some of the graphics are so poor that you cannot read the numbers.

Having said all that, EASA have recognised that the whole system is an international joke, and a series of Learning Objectives have been identified that require amendment, for which no further questions will be written until that happens. The 1500 questions per year that are being written will be filling in gaps for areas that have previously not been addressed, and will be written in a new way - for example, rather than just asking to regurgitate facts, the facts will be regarded as "underpinning" or essential knowledge that are required to be known in order to answer questions at a higher cognitive level, perhaps a realworld scenario. Modern technology will also be taken advantage of - many authorities are using computer based exams so we can ask for specific numbers rather than inviting you to guess 1 out of 4. The LBA is already doing this.

As for useless information - yes, stuff that enables you fix equipment that a pilot can't fix anyway is overkill, but around 90% of it is stuff that a motivated professional would know at the end of a career anyway - all EASA are doing is making sure you know it before you start your career. I have no particular beef with that - my problem is with the abysmal nature and scope of the questions, many of which have no proper references for a school to teach properly so, while an LO may be all well and good, a question writer will have referred to an obscure publication that nobody has ever heard of for a question that comes under it (e.g. the marshmallow psychological stuff like One Minute Manager - by no means accepted doctrine at college level). This is particularly true with Human Factors, which I notice particularly as I am a CRMI. It's OK, for example, to know something about mosquito born infections, but a very rare variation like Dengue Fever? Per-lease!! That's not even mentioned in the LOs! One of our instructors is a heart surgeon and even he had to look it up! It's a bit like asking a car driver questions about trucks just in case one is ever driven.

BTW, loooking at some Australian questions, it looks as if they are not too far behind either :)

Phil

[Max Contingency]

Tqmatch

I don't know your circumstances but I would caution anyone about spending money on commercial helicopter training in today's market, especially as you say that you have family and that you need to keep working to fund it. Over 100 commercial (oil and gas) pilots are being made redundant this year in the UK and the non-offshore helicopter market cannot absorb such high numbers.

Overcast with a 40% prob of a ****storm.

[paco]

On the plus side, not all people with that experience have the personality to do charter/corporate work. But yes, it does look poor. Having said that, you have to think years ahead in this business.

Phil

[tqmatch]

Thanks everyone.

Yes, currently the outlook is bleak - but that being said, the N. Sea is not the be all and end all of the rotary world, a big part, but not the totality. I believe one of the bigger factors to consider, is that good ole Liz is not supplying as many drivers to industry as she has done in the past, so by my rough maths, there will [eventually] come a skills gap, skilled aviation jobs (pilot & engineer) has always had a problem with an aged workforce, but this has usually been offset against the military being a good source.

I currently have my own (aviation related) business, of which I am a director, the long term plan is to get a CPL, take a back seat from the business and leave it to my staff, whilst flying somewhere in the world for an income.

I have been an engineer in the industry for a long time, now I want to take to the skies myself - the industry has gone through these cycles many, many time - yes it will be a ****storm for the next 18mths - 2 years, but the optimist in me says that the sun will come out after that.