April Performance exam !!!

[icepilot]

Very hard I think, think I made it though.

Many new graph questions, almost no graph questions from the feedback. Also 2 new MEP graph question, both 3 markers !!!

Anyone had experience from this same exam? Any anwsers to the MEP-graph questions, (I put 2000ft. and 3540ft.)

Also, when approaching you should :

B) Make a "positive" landing, full reverse thrust, brakes AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

or...

D) Full reverse thrust, brake only BELOW HYDROPLANING SPEED

Bristol says B), but many others say D)


Hope I made it...:(

[moo]

Have to agree with you there. Was a very difficult exam indeed. I think the CAA are taking the p*ss a bit though.....6 GRAPHICAL QUESTIONS and 28 theory in an hour????!!!!

[FlyUK]

Feedback here says B for the wet runway question. :ok:

[Finchy]

I would definitley go with B too. Had one of the best performance instructors.

[TubularBells]

Not that it makes much difference, but I noted that the answer said "as QUICKLY as possible".

I don't think it changes it, but if we're gonna talk about it!

;)

It was in my estimtation a very unfair exam. I mean come on..nearly 50% of it was weighted in graph questions. Now for an exam that takes 1 hour to complete to do 34 questions. So if 7 of those (3 SNG, 2 Multi and 2 MRJT was the amount I believe) are graph questions and weighted with 2/3 marks. Each question has approx. 1min45secs to work on, which when considering that three of them required whizz wheel work and climb gradient formula transposition and calculation, we're already pushing it. So ok, let's make the answers REALLY close together and then we can make them do it again to check. That then becomes more time. It's unreasonable. There is no time left to think about the theory questions. In the exam room I was in, practically everyone was in there until the finish.

The problem with this exam is TIME. It doesn't matter how good you are. Unless you know feedback for this, your completely lost, as there is no time available to answer anything thoughtfully!!!

What is it that is being tested here exactly???? :rolleyes:

Oh well, onwards and upwards!!

Good luck everyone!

TB.:ok:

[moo]

Totally agree with you tubular bells. I mean come on, considering past AP exams have had 1 graphical question for you to do. The national average will have plummeted, as it did for the February AP exam.....

[kibbi-what?]

I sat all four exams on Monday at Gatwick and was amazed at how many people were there for the 'Performance' paper (re-sits I can only imagine). The room was packed and no-one left before the hour was up.

My brain was pretty fried by then any way so am sure I'll be back in May to do that little baby again. Another 55 quid of my money going towards the rent of that nice shiney building at Gatwick!! :ok:

[727Man]

Totally agree with what has already been said here, I was one of those also at Gatwick on Monday, Doing a resit!!, If I new as much as I did this time the last perf exam (December)would of past in December, but as it stands there is no way I could of pased it this time with all those graphs.

I fly in the real world and these graphs are useless, should just be theory. can't change it now whats done is done!
Good Luck Everyone!

[Send Clowns]

I don't teach Performance, but I was wondering if anyone had considered a formal complaint to the CAA about the nature of the exam? It would be hard to do through the schools, as the instructors do not see the exam, they can't complain by direct experience, and there is a fairly strict procedure that only allows restricted grounds for complaint. It can be brought up at the next CGIs' meeting, but I as a humble subject instructor don't know if anything else can be done.

On the other hand you guys paid £55 each to be in that exam hall. You are the customer, and the CAA examiners are very clearly not doing the job they should be doing. You have been ill-served, and for some it may cost you a fair amount of money - a couple of months living without earning in some cases, i.e. thousands of pounds in delays to career. The CAA should be made to understand this, as some of them have never been in the situation and tend not to understand the reality of flight training from the student's point of view.

Who knows, maybe even the sale of goods act applies, as you have paid for a service.

[Send Clowns]

The CAA have been made aware of the problem. As soon as I know anything else that can be put in the public domain I will post here.

[pugzi]

The battles in the heavens over this point continue to rage aloft. The Ground Schools as ever are fighting on the students side I'm sure, albiet they are the under dogs. Together they must stand firm against the dark forces of Sauramon.


A genuine but humourous post

[TubularBells]

Thanks Sends Clowns, your help is greatly appreciated. It's such a pain when something like this happens. I've been getting top grades through all my exams and then something happens like this!? Doesn't the CAA actually look at the results and say "Hmmm, there must be something wrong here..."? I worked really hard at PF and put extra study time into it as a result of hearing about what had happened in the Feb exams, look where it got me?!

In addition, I've made a formal complaint through my school. They've agreed there's a problem and are taking it to the CAA. Looking at the response here, it's going to be very hard to ignore this, considering that students are from a variety of different schools, it's going to be difficult blaming it on bad instruction or lack of knowledge.

I guess we'll have to see what happens....

Thanks again,

TB.

[Alex Whittingham]

To my knowledge representations have been made by OAT, BCFT, London Metropoliton, PGT and us. The comments from all the schools are similar and the examiners have certainly got the message. They ask you to bear with them and have promised a full review of the paper.

[TubularBells]

Thanks Alex, that's news most welcome.

[IWANTWINGS]

Is this all being done in the hope that something can be resolved over our actual exam, or just the furture perf. exams to come? Its so disheartening when you literally put everything you have into studyin, then to feel that you probably wont achieve what you deserve. I even think its affected my performance in my other exams. Although you can try to tell yourself to forget about it until the results come out, it doesnt work like that. Its constantly in the back of my mind and you so dont need that wen you shud be cracking on with other revision :(

[thebeast]

i did februarys perf exam and although i did pass, it was one of my lower marks. we had two graphs and after doing both 4 times i still got bang in the middle of two answers for the second one.

My only advice is to hammer the feedback so you are not reliant on the lottery of the graphs and if you can rip through the regular questions it will free up more time to attempt the graphs.

anyway... goodluck to all those sitting perf.

[Craggenmore]

I would say the answer is 'B' also. Answer 'D' mentions nothing about landing - you need to land in order to be able to use reverse thrust, (If you are quoting directly from the paper that is.)

[Send Clowns]

The CAA is taking this seriously - not sure of likely outcome, but it is being looked at.

[wessexairways]

Having sat the exam in Feb and got 74% I resat in April. As everyone has found out it was an unachieveable paper and therefore after taking some advice from a 3rd party legal representitive I have made a formal complaint to the CAA.

In a reply they have acknowledged the problem areas in the paper and this is currently under hot debate at the belgrano. Actual words were 'we have launced an in depth investigation'.

I have also broached the topic of the new runway at Esbjerg of which the CAA seem to think exists 36. This too is being investigated. (Planning Paper mis print)

In conclusion there is a suspicious lack in audit and quality control on the exam papers and I have asked the CAA for details on their quality control procedures. If anyone is not happy with the paper in Feb or April I think you should make formal complaints. Safety in numbers........unless you all have lots of time and £55's to waste.

Will keep you up to date.

[Mosspigs]

Send Clowns

The CAA is taking this seriously - not sure of likely outcome, but it is being looked at.

With respect to your occupation, links in the training business and not wishing to be rude; what is the substance behind such a statement and what does it mean in simple terms?

I only ask as I am one of the ones in the exam.

I don't want to read such things and get my hopes up, only to have them dashed later, because of a pep talk.

[IWANTWINGS]

wessexairways, how is it best to go about complaining directly to the CAA? I'd be more than happy to do so seein as i sat the exam, and purely based on those 2 ridiculous graph questions think i could have easily failed.

[Patty O'Doors]

Wessex

You don't know how pleased I am to see your post. For far too long now, the CAA have been delivering a shoddy if not misleading product in the form of JAR exams.

The JAR FCL clearly states that questions should be in English with correct grammar and spelling, christ, how many questions, especially from the French database have actually had French words in them!!

It also states that questions should be unambiguous with only 1 right answer. What a joke.

If you do a JAA PPL you get a reading list, so you know what to read and hopefully will be able to answer the questions, if you know your subject.

When you do ATPL what do you get? The relevant schools notes which generally will be a mix of various books such as Pallet and the AP3456 Air Force Bible, and they're all different, trust me they are. The CAA won't give you references to read, why not? Don't they want professional pilots? Do they just want robots who learn feedback questions until luckily on the 4th attempt (several thousands of pounds later) they pass?

We've all come across the questions which say one thing, then when you read the answers obviously meant another.

Okay rant mode off, CAA get your fingersd out, this is 2005 and people WILL take you to court and WIN!!

Have a nice day

[wessexairways]

I made my complaint via my CGI. Having looked at the facts I compiled an email and sent it directly to the school, whom confirmed the information as correct and passed it to the CAA.

As a precaution I also took legal advice protecting any further developments of which I may make depending on the results of the inquiry.

This is a very serious situation and I can say from contact with the CAA post email, they are treating it with the up most of importance and professionality.

My advice is be very careful in what you write, I made a point of compiling statistics from recent Perf exams and keeping facts exact and concise.

However, advice is act fast and carefully but remember to stay on the right side of politics, we all have a common goal and the CAA are actually here to help of which I can confirm they are.

The more people that act the more effective the out come will be.

WA

[Tango49]

I also scored 74% in February’s Performance exam and since I knew that April’s sitting would be my fifth and penultimate sitting, I slogged away relentlessly for a further two month’s study on this one subject (13 passed to date) and thought my average 87% on feedback papers and 95% on on-line tests was going to be good enough.

At 15:14 on Monday I was feeling well prepared. At 15:15 my heart stopped because it was in my mouth. The combined sharp intake of candidates’ breaths caused a pressure drop in the room and thumping heartbeats was the only sound breaking the stunned silence. Had I/we been studying a different subject?

Surely the purpose of exams is to establish the degree of students’ understanding of the subject and their application of that understanding to solving realistic problems. When do CAP 698 style graphs ever occur in the real world? Why does any student need to know the arcane workings of such trivia in improving their piloting skills?

In my opinion the CAA should be brought to answer some very serious questions properly and in a manner that results in palpable satisfaction from us, its customers.

Such as:

1. What is the CAA’s training delivery and examination objective, i.e. what are they trying to achieve?
2. Apart from exam results, how does the CAA measure the effectiveness of pilot theory training?
3. How are exam questions tested and process-audited for suitability, difficulty and relevance?
4. What is the purpose of imposing maximums of 4 attempts and 6 sittings and what demonstrable evidence is there that these constraints have improved learning in the past?
5. Why can’t candidates walk away from each exam with instantaneous (computer-marked) results?
6. Why can’t applications be made for the same exam immediately afterwards when candidates suspect they screwed up?
7. Why isn’t there an informal face-to-face forum with the CAA available so that the interests of individual candidates can be represented on a proper basis?
8. What other best-practice examining bodies does the CAA benchmark itself against?
9. Why is the CAA guarded by an impenetrable and frustrating telephone system when their customers actually want to talk to live human beings?

Having left a well-paid senior management position in an unrelated industry to take up professional flying, I don’t take kindly to being messed about by such profound indifference that underpins the ATPL theory examination process. Perhaps the exam setters would like to pay my mortgage for me while I comply with their time-wasting strategies?

If anybody’s forming a delegation to the big grey building then count me in.

(wessexairways - what's a CGI?)

[IWANTWINGS]

CGI = Chief Ground Instructor of the FTO he attends

[wessexairways]

Tango 49

Your comments over the situation are very interested and surely are compounded by many students in the industry.

To me at present, the main concern is not with the organisation in general, but the April and Feb Performance Exams.

A possibility of three decisions could be made by the CAA in my view.

Option 1 - Cancel and credit the sitting (s)

Option 2 - Credit certain questions on one or both exams

Option 3 - No Action.

I am sure option 1 or 2 will be made however option 2 is of great concern.

Should a candidate have concerntrated on the general knowledge questions first could fail because they did not have enough time for the graphical questions which weighted higher marks. The oppsite could be said for a candidate who started with the graphical questions and ran out of time for the general knowledge questions.

In my opinion it is impossible to fairly remove any one question, or add a percentage to every paper.

Someone is going to have to make a very difficult deceision with regard to the problem, and until that happens we will all have to sit tight.

I imagine they are express marking the papers at Gatwick today before any decisions are made.

Personally this is a very serious situation and candidates affected should be prepared to take further action depending on the outcome.

WA

[Tango49]

Hi Wessex,

Sorry for the late reply - my ISP's server has been down...again.

I agree with you wholeheartedly in that the February and April Performance exams were the actual problem here since these were also what I was so deflated by. However, the reason they went awry in the first place must be due to pockets of organisational incompetence and a total indifference towards customer (students’ and training organisations’) satisfaction. My approach was get to the underlying reasons for the CAA’s failure to produce a fair exam in the first place so that the current situation could be rectified and then any future reoccurrence prevented.

Looking at the actual exams, in my experience, dispute resolution always lies in some kind of compromise for each side, i.e. satisfying the overall “price of peace”. So, considering your options, I think:

Option 1 – If the CAA convinced itself that the Performance exam was sub-standard, however they may judge that, the only honourable thing for them to do would be, as you say, cancel the exam and credit the sitting/s for those who would otherwise have failed (no point in wasting the time of those who had already passed). If the February exam were credited, I would look forward to a refund for April’s.

Option 2 – The CAA could not credit only some of the questions; it would be an impossible task to do fairly.

Option 3 – Having considered all the facts, the CAA might choose to do nothing and suffer the consequences, perhaps believing that there wouldn’t be any!

If candidates’ failures this time were down to the irregular type of questions needing more time than the allotted 1-hour limit, then another option would be to extend the Performance exam time period for the following re-sit. Anyway, all of the exam time limits should be reconsidered since they are woefully imbalanced with their content and difficulty.

I shall certainly be pursuing this matter further if the outcome is unsatisfactory. I wait with baited letterbox.

[Nereus]

Devils advocate!

What is a satisfactory outcome?

WRT Februarys exam, very nearly half of those sitting it passed it. I have to be honest & say that the questions & the traps therein, had all been pointed out to us by our groundschool, even the graph questions.

An examiners prerogative is to ask whatever they like whenever they like, restricted to the confines of the syllabus & learning objectives. We can only ever prepare as best as we can & hope for a bit of luck. Of course that luck may never come our way.

I do accept the ambiguities of the 698 & reading answers from it, particularly when they comprise a substantial part of the available marks.

But was anything that was asked outside of the syllabus or learning objectives?

A great many people have already passed through these exams The CAA have the benefit of analysing those results over time, & if the pass rate is increasing why shouldn't they make it tougher.

With increasing feedback from the efforts of our predecessors & peers, if the exams are apparently becoming easier what is a satisfactory outcome on the part of the CAA?

remember..............devils advocate!

[Tango49]

A satisfactory outcome for me would be a first-time pass in exchange for my applied study time and effort, plus £55, achieved through answering a fair, reasonable and well-balanced range of questions within the scope of the syllabus. I can’t help wondering who actually sets the exams and what motivates them to develop particularly difficult, obscure or biased questions to trip up the candidate rather than test their understanding and application of it. Admittedly, if one’s not up to the mark then fair enough – a fail it is. I certainly wouldn’t want any charity.

I would suggest that a satisfactory outcome for the CAA would be one of positive, measurable and genuine feedback showing that candidates were achieving a consistently good standard in each subject. So, if more people were passing the exams due to a genuine increase in competence then the training effort would have achieved its objective. In that case then, why should the questions be made even more devious and obscure to change the standard?

If every candidate had, say, a 100% understanding and recall of every single facet and detail of a subject, and all of them were passing every exam with a 100% score, what would happen then? The CAA could palpably demonstrate the learning object was well and truly delivered. Or they could choose to introduce ridiculously arcane and out-of-control exam processes that ensured fewer and fewer people could ever pass them, thereby guaranteeing worsening success rates!

In turn, this would just encourage development and learning of a wider range of exam-taking techniques to combat devious questions, which at best would be a distraction and at worst an academic candidate-filter, deviating from the original learning objective and creating resentment amongst those who would have to jump through ever tightening and irrelevant hoops.

Did “very nearly half” of February’s candidates only have “very nearly half” the understanding of the Performance subject? I certainly felt I had sufficient knowledge then, and even better preparation for April’s exam. But perhaps I’m just deluding myself.

[wessexairways]

Hi Gator,

Interesting comments and stats about your schools performance and it seems the mentioned establishment is doing quite well.

The main point in highlighting Febs paper is to use trends and facts in helping to argue the matter and diagnose the problem. Personally I ran out of time on that paper as well, and from opinions observed so did many other people.

Its difficult to speculate on this matter until results are published for April, however there appears to be a growing trend in problematic sittings in perf, and knowing there has been a great deal of pressure put upon the CAA in the last few days I am assured the problem is to be resolved very soon.

I would rather highlight the problem to the CAA and assist where possible in getting this situation resolved, rather than just saying Perf has always been eratic.

Remember, there are generations of fellow students below us of whom don't want to be wasting £55 a shot just because of a simple bug in the question selection software, of which the Authority could have fixed easily had they known.

To me what is emerging from this is the fact that the CAA question bank database has only the ability to pick 34 questions, and not 1 hours worth of questions, which is possibly how the erratic pass rates have become evident for this subject.

WA

[kalibarr]

A candidate should be able to expect, at the very least, an exam system which tests and reflects their ability against a benchmark. The passmark needs to be set with reference to the required level of ability and a control system needs to be put in place to ensure that the exams test for a similar standard.
Someone who achieves 75% one month should be confident that their level of understanding would earn them a similar mark in any other month. If this is not the case, if a common level of required knowledge is not maintained then the exam system is clearly unfair.

It appears the vast majority of those i have spoken to, and those whos comments I have read believe both febs and Aprils exams were unfair in the use of graph questions due to the time pressures, as well as narrowing the margin for error due to the value of the graph questions .

Shortterm lets hope the CAA apply some kind of allowance in the marking of the April exam and longterm ensure this kind of thing does not happen!

[High Wing Drifter]

Kalibarr,

I suspect the real reason for the poor performance (pardon the pun) is that the schools were not expecting so many graph questions and so didn't spend much time on them during the crammer courses. If there is a problem, then it is that the CAA needs to find ways of combating the feedback system that, I imagine, has made the process of completeing the exams so much easier. The CAA probably feels the need to find new ways to test if candidates really do know how to answer the questions.

I think the solution lies in not trying to fail candidates, but in trying to ensure that they really do know the material. This probably means fairer questions from the CAA in combination with some way of reducing the reliance on feedback that the multiple choice format so encourages.

[wessexairways]

High Wing,

Again some interesting comments about this situation.

Not sure if you were at these exams, but what we seem to be dealing with here is a time scale problem, and not the fact that this was a difficult exam.

My ground school instructor had prepared us for well for each question, the only thing he did not advise us of was that we would require Twin Turbo's fitted to our CRP 5's. This brings us back to the fact the CAA computer is picking 34 questions and not 60 minutes worth of questions.

You are quite right in the fact they are getting tough on feedback and rightly so, and I have it on good auth that there is several hundred new questions, and reformatted questions that have very recently been added to the databases various subject areas.

A strict standard does need to be maintained however, a 120 minute exam performed in 60 minutes is not really a just way to measure the intellect levels of student pilots, which is the common complaint echoed by several different voices from the training side of the industry to the CAA last week with regard to Performance.

WA

[High Wing Drifter]

No I didn't sit those exams, I managed to get mine out of the way a few months ago. The Gen Nav exam was the only exam I recall where I was worried that I might not finish, never mind check the answers. I think my CRP even lost a fusable plug an hour or so after the exam, such was speed of twizzling :}

[Icarusthesecond]

Have read with great interest lots of schools are contesting this exam. Have also read the CAA are taking it seriously.

So......

Any news??

Have the CAA ever before credited people?

Actually come to mention it, apart from the time aspect, were any of the questions outside of the syllabus.

Mr impatient!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[High Wing Drifter]

Have the CAA ever before credited people?

Yes. We had a very strange drift-down question in our Performance exam last year that was credited to everyone.

[TubularBells]

Hi all,

I can't comment on the February exam, as I wasn't there sitting it. I can however, assure anyone who wasn't in the April exam that the sitting was very unfair. To re-iterate an earlier point - There was nothing in this exam which was not in the syllabus or learning objectives. The problem is a simple one. Lack of time. There is simply no way, in the time alloted I could have completed the exam to a satisfactory standard.

The CAP manual is easy enough to navigate, but when answers are close together, one needs enough time to check the data extrapolated 3 times (twice gives a 50/50 chance!). With 7 questions from the CAP, making allowances for winds, TAS and TGS and with transposition of the climb gradient formula to get results all included it simply gets ridiculous. It was possible to fail this exam on graph questions alone, as they were all 2/3 markers. This obviously means more time is going to be spent on them anyway. How can one then go on to answer lots of theoretical questions (the remaining 25 questions) designed to trip you up at every step, unless you read EVERYTHING in the questions and answers and then pause for thought. And all this in an Hour!? Please....

There was nothing in that exam that I couldn't have done, but in the time alloted I simply couldn't do it. If I pass great? Then my average that I have absolutely worked my butt off to acheive, gets dragged down because of this. It's simply not right.

Off the top of my head, I can see only one outcome which is acceptable, which is to allot a percentage to eveyone's marks. What that needs to be I don't know. The whole thing is a mess. I think it's all very sad to be honest, it can't be undone now:( . I just hope the outcome is reasonable.

Cheers,

TB.:ok:

[wessexairways]

TB,

Have you considdered ringing your tubularbell in the direction of the Belgrano?

Remember there have been many complaints about this situation, but everyone concerened by it should make their thoughts known. As said before - Safety in Numbers, never know they may offer you a free resit if you are that concerened about your average. Remember you are the customer.

No goss yet on the outcome, I have however been made aware that there are Met, Perf and Planning queries from different Schools. Several people are unhappy with the TAF and Metar Questions, and don't mention the new runway at Esbjerg reserved for CAA use only!

All this aside I am sure the results will be out on time!!!!!!!!!!

WA

[Nereus]

comments on the February exam?

nothing in it had not been seen before, questions were of a type and nature similar to those used in groundschool (including 698 interpretations). There was more use of the 698 than "expected", & more marks attributed to questions concerning it. It was possible to fail Febs exam if you got the all c698 questions wrong.

[escapedATCO]

Atlantic Flight Training students nervous as well!! Best gound school results in the country here in performance 100% pass rate in the last year!! Most results have been in the 90s surely the instructors here need credit. Maybe the results here may give a guide line.

Anyway I heard the CAA may be considering binning the paper!!

[cumulus]

I sat performance and Mass and Balance at Silsoe during the week of November 4th last year. On each paper there was a typographical error that effectively rendered two questions unanswerable. The worst was on M & B; it was a very tight exam, time-wise, and this one question had a digit missing off the correct answer. I could see what had happened, but it still created enough doubt to make me spend another couple of minutes on the question than I had time for. After the exam, the invigilators were surrounded by a lynch mob, so it wasn't just me.:D
If you do get a dodgy question, do your best to memorise it's number and as much as you can of it, and tell your ground school ASAp, so they can query it. Questions are quite regularly disallowed, and everyone who sat the paper credited with the marks for that question

[wessexairways]

Interesting post Cumulus,

How did you find out the marks had been credited, did you get a letter with your results?

Did you get any extra credit for time wasted?

Interesting comments also about the timing issues. In Aprils Planning exam I spent 6 minutes checking a typo which the CAA are currently investigating. This was a 1 mark question, but how do you credit such a mistake which required so much time to check.

WA

[PGT]

Wessex,

Every month, about 2 weeks after the results are published the groundschools get a list of the questions that were queried and credited for each and every exam. It's usefull to see this as you can imagine, but i suspect this time the number of credited questions will be large, or else the results are going to be very shocking to most people.
I suspect the CAA will shortly advise us as to the outcome of this months paper very very shortly.
We have a CGI meeting with CAA next month, and I can assure you, as with most of these meetings, issues like this are at the top of the agenda.

Regards,

Steve Francis
CGI

[Icarusthesecond]

Have just written to the CAA referring them to this very link.

Doubt it will do any good but, don't think it will do amy harm.

[PGT]

Oh they have been reading it I can assure you!! probably with mixed emotions.

[Icarusthesecond]

Well f**k my old boots!!

As one of the Muppets that sat the exam, I voiced my concerns to the CAA at 11:43 today. By 3pm I had a response. This is a back brief:

As they say in those documentaries, the names of the characters have been changed to protect their identity.

CAA (we’ll call Julie). The CAA are hot footing about this exam. They have sent it to the performance honcho at the JAA. We work it out on a % exam time to answer questions and a % exam time. There seems to be an issue with this exam that there was not enough time to do the questions, let alone to check the answers. We are also looking at the spread of the answers to see if they are a contributing factor to the time issue. (i.e. as some were slap bang in the middle and required extra working out).

Once the review is complete, if there is credits to be given, we will either remove the questions before marking, e.g. 31 questions instead of 34. Or we will individually credit people accordingly.

We normally get the results to the candidates before the 10 days (not with my mange-ridden postman) but we expect due to this issue, we will take the full ten days.

Once the outcome has been decided, we will send letters to the ground schools informing them of the decision and also a letter to each candidate that sat the exam.

Disclaimer:

Don’t get your hopes up, but the strong tone of the conversation was one of resignation that an error had occurred and that they were going to make good!! Whether anything comes of this we await and see, but full marks to the CAA for a quick response and now I genuinely believe that they are taking this extremely seriously.

Good luck one and all.
:ok:

[Alex Whittingham]

From the CAA to all CGIs:

1. Following the input from candidates and FTOs about the recent ATPL(A) Performance examinations, particularly February and April this year, we have reviewed the papers and come to the following conclusions:

a) Although the examinations were produced in accordance with the JAA profile, as published in JAA AGM, Section 5, Part 2, Chapter 10, the introduction of the latest version of the CQB meant that the work load in February and April was higher than in previous Performance examinations.

b) There were some questions in the February and April examinations based on CAP 698 graphs for which the choice of answers was too close.

c) The workload in the examinations for January and March was no higher than previous examinations and is considered to have been reasonable.

2. After an extensive internal review and consultation with both the 030 SET Chair at the German Authority, LBA, and the JAA we have decided to take the following actions:

a) Credit the questions referred to in 1(b) above for both February and April.
b) Re-assess the examination profile for Performance, with immediate effect.
c) Conduct a review of the examination profile for all other examinations.
d) Conduct a review of all CAP 698 graph questions.

3. The crediting referred to in 2(a) above has resulted in a retrospective PASS being awarded to twenty candidates from the February sitting; each of these will be contacted individually and a revised results sheet will be issued. The subsequent examination history for these candidates will be reviewed and some will now have a resit voided from our records and the examination fee refunded. The crediting for April will be taken into account as part of the normal review procedure.

4. A letter to candidates will be prepared in the near future and included with examination results.

5. The 030 SET will review all questions based on CAP 698 graphs and the JAA will form a Working Group (WG) to review all examination profiles.

At first sight it seems very satisfactory, except no general credit is given for running out of time. Well done the CAA. I'm sure the correspondence will continue.

(030 is the code for Performance, SET means Subject Expert Team, the LBA are the German CAA)

[sdryh]

nice one Alex :ok:

I took the exam in Feb and ran out of time and totally messed up as a result, resitting in May, fingers crossed it will be easier.

Just a point to note, will you be upgrading the online data base with more graph questions to help with the current trend of the CAA?

regards

Richard

[nickphuk]

To be fair.
I sat the exam in April.

I ran out of time, and like most was horrified at the ammount of graph questions purely for the time sucking nature of them.
Generally I like them, but they were all very hurried so could have made no end of errors, due to time panic.

Regardless of my result, good to see that the CAA are holding their hands up as accountable in this case.
Good work on the part of the groundschools aswell.

Nick

[pugzi]

It seems that the dark forces of Sauramon have repented, said sorry and made ammends, peace will once more reign across Middle Earth.

[TubularBells]

Fantastic News. I don't know what to say. Thanks to everyone and all, including the CAA for taking the corrective action and all the schools for supporting their students above and beyond the call of duty.

Three cheers!:D

TB.:ok:

[wessexairways]

Would like to complement the CAA for providing a fast and reasonable soloution to this problem.

As already said by TB, I would also like to complement the schools and students for their united approach in raising this issue.

It will be interesting to monitor the situation as the CAA appear to be looking further into this problem to prevent this happening again, which can anly be a good thing. The out come of the next CGI meet should be interesting.

WA

[Crispy-wing]

Wessex, well done with your communication with the CAA.

I had the same experience with Performance in February. This was my last subject and I was on my fourth attempt – so slightly SH*ttin it abit was an understatement.
After months of hard graft I managed to pass it (but only with 76%) I thought it was quite a tough paper, and even though well prepared knew I had mucked up a few questions when I walked away.

One question from February’s performance was as follows:
SEP (I think), you are looking to calculate a horizontal distance travelled during a climb to a given altitude.
You need to consider the screen height you are climbing from, then using the CAP chart that gives both a Rate of Climb (fpm) and a Gradient of climb %age (I think), arrive at a figure. Then you need to get a TAS from the CRP5 using temp and altitude given, apply the wind to get a Ground speed, then apply the gradient or ROC to the speed to calculate the horizontal distance.

The trouble is you arrive at 2 different figures with either the ROC figure or the Gradient of climb. Which one are you supposed to use?
Unfortunately I can’t remember the figures used in the exam but I re-calculated this question 4 times in the exam and could not match any of the answers given.

I have been told this question has been disputed before. However I would like to know which part of the chart should be used as you can arrive at 2 different answers!

It won’t benefit me, but might assist with others in the future – especially when more CAP questions are introduced into the exam – as is allegedly happening in the future.

Crispy.