The CAA answer book is intended for use by the ground examiners only and should never be shown to candidates. The references for each answer are intended to tell the ground examiner where the author of the question got the answer. In effect the CAA is saying “If you disagree with this answer please look at this source of reference before bothering us with a complaint”. They are not saying “Please ensure that your students/candidates purchase and read all of these books”.
In constructing the new exams, the CAA examiners appear to have gone back to the existing syllabus (detailed in PART-FCL) and attempted to provide questions for each element of the syllabus. But the content of the existing PPL Study books has been biased towards the areas that have previously been examined, rather than the full syllabus. This meant that reference sources for new questions on the areas of the syllabus that have not previously be examined could not be found within the existing PPL study books. To overcome this problem the CAA examiners have been forced to look further afield.
The fact that an ATPL manual has been used as a reference for a PPL question is not in itself inherently wrong. The PPLsyllabus is simply a subset of the ATPL syllabus. In POF for example, both would cover Lift &Drag, but the PPL syllabus would be limited to the simple end of the spectrum. But the ATPL manual would probably cover the entire spectrum in detail. The fact that the ATPL manual chosen was a NORDIAN version is probably simply because that was the first one that the CAA examiner picked up. (Yes it really can be as arbitrary as that)
If the new exams are permitted to remain largely unchanged for a reasonable period oftime, the authors of the PPL study books will eventually update their books to match wider range of material being examined. In the immediate term, course providers will undoubtedly be keen to ensure that their customers receive adequate preparation for the new exams.
I am not arguing that the current situation is a good one, It most certainly is not. But there is little to be gained from getting excited about non-existent problems.
Last edited by keith williams; 11th Oct 2013 at 13:51.