This is the "Euro problem".
Somebody proposes a core question bank.
Then Herr Doktor (Germany) insists on putting in stuff about the flow rate in some vein in the brain of a hamster (very important stuff) into HP&L. So it goes in.
By the time it has done the rounds of the committee, you have 5000 questions, which then have to be translated to English and that is also done badly.
At least 90% and probably 99% of these people have never flown in a plane of any sort (in the cockpit) so they have no idea of the relevance to aviation, let alone relevance to present-day aviation at any level.
I have the happy time now of learning about some airliner variant of a
KNS-80 which is a GA product they stopped making even before JAA arrived in 1999,
AFAIK. Today, it remains in the panel only because it would leave a big hole if you took it out, and the W&B schedule would need to be re-done which will cost a few hundred quid. Nobody can fly with a KNS-80 because for a lot more years than I've been flying IFR, ATC issue VORs as virtual waypoints; to hell with the DOC.
I gather that in the goode olde days, when stewardesses were proper women in short skirts, you dialed up the local VOR, dialed up the virtual waypoint, and then when the real VOR/DME went out of range (not many minutes later, at 500kt) you flew the
heading for the next 500nm or whatever. No wonder airways were 10nm wide. But how long ago was big jet nav this sloppy? Must be 20 years, possibly 30 or 40.
It is staggering how this has continued since 1999.
I guess because people are just very compliant, get on with it, and once done they get on with the next project. Very very few rock the boat, and exactly zero ATPL wannabees will want to rock any sort of boat (except totally anonymously via some forum).