There is no fundamental reason why there should be only one additional exam centre. Provided suggestions are made to be attractive enough, the CAA have no reason to refuse.
I suspect that they have three basic concerns:
a. To minimise venue rental costs.
b. To minimise additional staff costs.
c. To protect the security of the system.
The specification issued to the Bournemouth schools did not include any requirement that the venue be provided free of charge. Because I am particulary keen to see a centre established at Bournemouth I suggested that EPTA provide a room for free, and my boss agreed.
The CAA looked at my list of possible venues and discusssed availability with some of them. The main stumbling block was not the price, but the fact that none were available for September when the CAA wanted to conduct their trial. The only remaining venue was the EPTA classroom which was accepted by GTS, but rejected by BCFT.
If schools are sufficiently keen to have an exam centre in their area they need to consider the option of paying the additional staff costs. In the case of Bournemouth, with three schools on a single airfield, these costs are unliklely to be excessive.
All colleges and universities carry out examinations on a regular basis. In many cases the invigilators are not full time staff, but simply invigilate exams on a part time basis. It is entirely possible that these people will be available at very little cost to supervise the CAA exams.
While there appears to be a logical argument for any new venue to be in the north, this idea requires further examination. The majority of students undertaking full time courses come from areas far removed from their schools. They therefore take up lodgings in the proximity of their school. This obviously adds to the overall cost of their training, but as their course progresses they at least become accustomed to their surroundings. These students then face further cost when taking up additional temporary accommodation close to the exam centres.
But for many, the greatest single problem is not the cost, but the the stress caused by the need to move to temporary lodgings. At a time when they are attempting to focus all of their energies on preparing for the exams they are forced to move into unfamiliar surroundings. This problem can best be overcome by having an examination centre within easy daily travel distance of each of the schools. In the case of Bournemouth with three schools in one location the case for an exam centre is particularly strong.
Students undertaking distance learning have the advantage that most of their study is done at home. They are however required to relocate temporarilly in order to carry out the residental element of their course. If such students were able to use an examination centre close to their school, the need for additional travel costs and stress would be minimsed.
The existing centres provide a reasonable solution for some of the schools. Gatwick for the LGU, Silsoe for the Cranfield/Coventry area, and Glasgow for Glasgow. One additional centre at Bournemouth could serve the three schools in the area, while a further centre in or around Bristol could serve BGS and Kemble.
The question of the capacity requirements of any new centre also needs to be examined. September was a particularly busy month for ATPL exams with a little over 150 students taking part. Even allowing for a surge capacity of 200, there is no conceivable reason why any new centre should require a capacity greater than 40 or 50. The figure of 70 previously suggested in this thread is far too high and is probably unachievable.