When should I start hitting the question banks

[Rainbows]

I’ve literally just started my atpl studies, I have access to two questions banks, but the thing is I’m constantly being told by other members of my class not to use them while people in classes much further on in the course are saying to start getting into them.
The question is when should I being using them? Like is it productive for me to use it while still learning or wait for sub topics to be completed before trying out the questions? Any advice would be great on this, thank you 😄

[hoduka]

Hi,

It really depends on the individual, whatever suits you best. I would certainly wait till the topic is covered during ground school, then revise, do the questions of that part - note the thing which were not clear, or you answered wrong, look it up and understand why. I know, the last part is not easy sometimes:D

Altough we all know you can pass by just hammering the QB

h

[Jurow]

Hi,

As an integrated stud (currently 7/14), I would highly recommend that you start the QBs asap.
My advice is that you follow the lecture during the day and you work on the part you covered each on the QB.
Take as much tips as you can from the "old" studs.

[Pa28tojet]

Agree with most here. Read the subject, don't go mad on making notes or anything, look in the question bank and use their sub topics, work through them and make notes on the kind of things they are testing on, then go back and re read. Address any topics you are not sure on by further research.

The knowledge is important but half the ATPL battle are the garbled nonsense that pass as questions. Good luck.

[rudestuff]

I agree. QBs are a great tool and dare I say it - a necessity. But you HAVE to use them properly. I did all my ATPLs from the QB, Google and YouTube - I didn't open a single book.

QBs are great for rote learning of arbitrary facts: frequency ranges, light signals, how many satellites etc. They aren't so good for questions which require understanding or technique - so of you just learn the answers you'll probably fail.

For example, speed limit below FL100 is 250kts - it's arbitrary and you can't ask that question any other way. In GNav the answer to a question might be 357° true - just learning that is a waste of time. At this point you need to understand WHY it's 357° - so get into Google and YouTube and find out for yourself. (Tell me and I'll forget, show me and I'll remember, let me do it/find it for myself and I'll understand.)
​​​​​​I had trouble with polar stereographic charts. No amount of reading answers or explainations was helping - until i watched a 5 minute clip on YouTube.

The trick with question banks is to recognise what requires knowledge, what requires understanding and what requires technique: Smash the bank, but make sure you do all the working out, even when you know the answer.

[youngretired]

When you complete reading Airlaw GS book for the third time.

[paco]

"ATPL study is a box ticking exercise nothing more, later down the road you will study completely differently for interviews"

So why study twice? Most of you will get multiple licences eventually - if you learn the stuff properly from the start that's a few sets of dodgy questions you don't have to learn.

Granted, you can't pass the EASA exams without the banks, but it is unprofessional not to study properly either. One reason why I don't fly any more unless either I'm in the front seat or it's one of my students :)

[paco]

They could certainly do that - need to know only. The only problem with that is that there are some schools who simply wouldn't teach the nice to know.

[Pa28tojet]

If you haven't touched material in 12+ months it's all forgotten

There is too much volume on the ATPL that it becomes counter productive with learning a lot of unnecessary stuff that really has no relevance to a pilot

I've studied my ass off for all the subjects but if I revisited them I wouldn't get more than 50% on the ones I passed in my first sitting

ATPL could cut the volume by 50% and focus on more relevant areas in my opinion

In my atol weeks there was Air NZ pilot with over 20,000 hours.

He thought the exams were ludicrous and failed GNav.

What does that tell you?

[paco]

Ops is very relevant because it will all appear again in your company ops manual. Come 2020 we will have the new syllabuses in, stuff that myself and several colleagues spent several months in Cologne rewriting - a lot of stuff has gone but a lot of new stuff is in, covering just what you are mentioning (you can blame JAA for the original dog's breakfast). People on the EASA rulemaking task were all pilots, pretty much, or at least very experienced instructors. I couldn't quite get Microwave Landing Systems out, though - there are still two available for use around the world, though aerodrome reference codes for helicopters will have disappeared.

[Stanley Eevil]

Ops is very relevant because it will all appear again in your company ops manual. Come 2020 we will have the new syllabuses in, stuff that myself and several colleagues spent several months in Cologne rewriting - a lot of stuff has gone but a lot of new stuff is in, covering just what you are mentioning (you can blame JAA for the original dog's breakfast). People on the EASA rulemaking task were all pilots, pretty much, or at least very experienced instructors. I couldn't quite get Microwave Landing Systems out, though - there are still two available for use around the world, though aerodrome reference codes for helicopters will have disappeared.

Could you also please confirm that ATPL students will no longer be required to know the diameter of a drizzle droplet, or how many full time employees would define an airline operation as being `complex`?

[paco]

Stan - I wasn't involved on all subjects, mainly the helicopter stuff, so I can't answer those, but in principle, yes. I must say it was pleasing to note that the other subjects got loads of comments from industry, whereas the heli stuff got only three and one of those was to point out a spelling mistake.

It's worth pointing out that it is useful to know in vague terms how a company is run and organised so you don't get shafted if you are asked to do something you shouldn't.....

[Up North Like]

Use the banks but do not 'learn them to pass'. You will be found out later on during your early career either in interview or by a Captain wondering why you aren't picking up on stuff.
Use the bank to learn the question style and technique they are looking for and to identify weaknesses in your knowledge. If you don't know an answer go open the books and understand what the answer is. Don't get me wrong, I strongly encourage you to use the questions just do it properly.

This is utter nonsense.

I've been at an airline for nearly 5 years now and have probably drawn upon one of my ATPL theory subjects in that period of time. Didn't require any of that theory knowledge for my interview, line training, or career. It is outdated rubbish.

You start learning what you need to know when you are flying and when you get your first job.

Do whatever it takes to pass ATPL if that means learning the question bank questions and answers then do that. Whatever suits your style.

[Banana Joe]

Had a job interview at a major European airline two days ago, I was asked quite a few things from ATPL subjects and they wanted to see my ATPL results and sittings. So yes, quite a big chunk of it, from an operational/practical point of view it is very important to know. They are never going to ask how the inner mechanism of a tachometer works, but do expect questions ranging from PoF to Performance, from Ops to Meteorology.

The QBs are only necessary to pass the EASA exams, which at the moment they are pure rubbish.

[TryingToAvoidCBs]

Sorry to sound patronising but perhaps this attitude of "bank it to pass" is generational?
I did my ground school nearly 10 years ago, with most of the students wanting to learn as much as they could about the industry they were investing large amounts of time and money into. I was like an aviation sponge, I couldn't be taught enough to satisfy my interest regardless of what I was being taught. The bank was used by many, including myself, but certainly not relied upon. In more recent times the majority of students seem to want to learn as little as possible and pass to "tick a box".
I admit the syllabus has changed a bit since then, and is now possibly more irrellevant than then. It certainly hasn't changed that much though. Just because there's lots more questions shouldn't mean that the bank has become a requirement. If you understand the subject you should at least give yourself a good chance of passing regardless of whether you've seen the questions before. Anybody who claims you MUST use the bank or fail is totally wrong. Put your social life to one side and concentrate for 6 months, it's far from hard.

Memorising the answers aside, there's a more important point to this.
Having the discipline, patience and ability to sit down for months on end to learn a subject is good practice for theory you'll need when doing your ME/IR, airline interview prep and eventually your type rating. During these latter stages of your training you won't be given a magic wand or question banks to learn the answers. It's hard work, and you need to be able to crack on with it without compalining how relevant or not the process is.
In my (possibly outdated) opinion, we are all professionals working in a generally very professional and well respected industry. Whether the route that takes you from PA28 to 737 is outdated is of little relevance. Having an attitude which effectively says "I can't be bothered to learn, give me the answers" demonstates lazyness and shows a lack of interest and motivation which will not help you down the line.

Use the bank, it's a great tool, but don't become reliant on it (even if it works). Once you've passed your TR, there's an awful lot to learn, get into good habits to start with and it'll make the rest of training/career much easier.

[Officer Kite]

The question is when should I being using them?

Immediately.

[Capt Pit Bull]

For those experienced pilot / instructors commenting on this thread, I'd advise you to save your breath.

The current crop of students have in most cases been utterly poisoned by the useless way that the EASA exams are organised (from syllabus to training requirement to exam).

They simply will not listen to anything that interferes with their opinion that their groundschool training is a waste of time. Worse than that, you can expect to be on the receiving end of abuse for 'deliberately trying to waste their time'. They just don't have the maturity or experience to know any better.

Probably explains why so many of them arrive in the sim knowing SWEET F*** ALL and my time is spent doing remedial groundschool and / or remedial basic instrument flying instruction. And even when I've re-taught them some basic thing (*e.g. given below) they still have the nerve to pitch up here and restate the fact that the groundschool is irrelevant.

EXAMPLE: Conducting an airline assessment. Location on EFIS of IAS, TAS and GS carefully and very specifically covered in briefing. Candidate asked to calculate ETA to a VORDME with nice round numbers. ,e.g. GS 300 kts, range 30 DME. 75% of candidates use IAS instead of GS.

Just think about what a staggering display of ineptitude this is.

But... Oh NO, groundschool is a waste of time.

I don;t trust most of these youngsters to sit the right way round on a toilet, let alone fly an aeroplane.

And I lay the blame for this current disgraceful state of affairs firmly at the feet of EASA.

[paco]

I hear you, PB. It would be interesting to see the results the next time the airline computers go down, or the navaids fail halfway cross Africa.....

[jamesgrainge]

He has unwittingly exposed one of the flaws of the way EASA and the question monkeys present the questions.

A basic of navigation, 30nm to go, what's my GS, or what time do I have to fly that distance. Fine no worries.

EASA ATPL Question.

"An AC is flying 345° from a VOR, the QNH at a station 14 miles below sea level is 1023, if the aircraft has two engines, and the pilot wears Oakley's, what is its ETA at the end of the yellow brick road?"

Facile, but you can see where I'm going with this.

[Officer Kite]

"An AC is flying 345° from a VOR, the QNH at a station 14 miles below sea level is 1023, if the aircraft has two engines, and the pilot wears Oakley's, what is its ETA at the end of the yellow brick road?"



:D :D

On point, brings back memories!