CASA Flight Instructor’s Exam

[deckchair]

Hi, advice please, am spending hours going through the FI Handbook, absorbing nothing as it is so confusing and boring. Have thought i’d try and actually absorb the text before looking for practice exams but i’m not getting there!
any advice? Best source for practice exams? I’m guessing as the exam is multiple choice there is no point getting bogged down into a deep learning? HELP PLEASE! Thanks.

[Ascend Charlie]

I’m guessing as the exam is multiple choice there is no point getting bogged down into a deep learning?

So, you would prefer your instructor to have multi-guessed his way through the theory instead of actually knowing his stuff???

Get a life. And read the book you slack-@rse.

[deckchair]

Ascend Charlie, you are the very reason I steer away from Pprune. I note you describe yourself as ‘ tired and retired’.
So motivating, so motivated yourself. I am motivated and after years in this industry survival is working out priorities and what you need to know. There is a lot of info thrown at us that we don’t need to know. The ATPL 727 flight planning experience a case in point. So go away. If anyone has some genuine advice to give I thank you in advance because i’m not tired, nor retired!

[ersa]

The FAA instructors handbook, is basically what the information is taken from

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/media/faa-h-8083-9a.pdf


Otherwise a shortcut

https://www.practicecyberexams.com/pricing.php

50 questions , last 2 hours.....

[drpixie]

Deckchair - Charlie might be a bit abrupt but he has a point - understand the material (mind-numbing as it is) because some of it is important, vital even. This applies doubly to being an instructor - it will be very obvious to your students and your CFI/HOO when you don't understand stuff ... quick route to a short-term job.

An much as I have plenty of complaints about CASA exams (especially where they don't understand tolerances) almost all of the material matters. Even the B727 stuff. Planning for an A320 or a B727 or a Citation is the same as planning for the B727. The actual fuel burns vary, but the method of calculating climb/cruise/descent still applies, and the various reserves definitely apply. Yes, most planning is done by a computer. But you must always understand it in ultimate detail. And Yes, there will always come a day when you must plan it or justify the planning manually. If you can't do that, don't ask me for a job!

[mikewil]

An much as I have plenty of complaints about CASA exams (especially where they don't understand tolerances) almost all of the material matters.

I disagree, of all the exams set by CASA, the current flying instructor exam is pointless and ambiguous, and I would bet that everyone who has sat it will agree.

For starters, there are many questions that are poorly worded that contradict what is written in the 'prescribed test' being the FAA handbook https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/media/FAA-H-8083-9A.pdf
or at very least ambiguous with 3 out of the 4 options being potentially correct.

The prescribed text also provides no sample progress questions like offered for every other CASA subject from PPL to IREX to ATPL.

OP: I suggest you view this page:
https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/pilot-instructor-rating-common-examination-pirc
And be fully aware of every item on the PIRC syllabus as listed in CASR Part 61 Manual of Standards, Schedule 3. Then make sure you absorb those topics from the FAA book.

I am a firm believer in knowing your stuff, especially when you are an instructor but the CASA exam is bollocks, once passing the CASA exam just make sure you know all your stuff from the 7 CPL subjects as that is what counts.

The only half decent PIRC sample exams I know of are these, a bit pricy and don't fully resemble the CASA ones but I would say they are a valuable tool for at least coming close to passing the exam: https://www.practicecyberexams.com/

Good luck!

[George Glass]

Just do the work and pass the exam like everybody else. If you don’t want to do the “deep learning” you are just going to make an arse of yourself sometime in the not too distant future. Suck it up princess.

[das Uber Soldat]

Is this some kind of misdirected troll? Why are you posting in the Airline section?

The F.I exam was one of the simplest, quickest exams I ever sat. It requires about 2 hours of actual study. If you're finding this a bit tricky then maybe food delivery would be a more suitable field.

[thisishardtochoose]

It requires about 2 hours of actual study.
Give me your tips for this so called 2hours of actual study please

[The name is Porter]

So, you would prefer your instructor to have multi-guessed his way through the theory instead of actually knowing his stuff???

Get a life. And read the book you slack-@rse.

Riiiiigght............ So, It was good enough for every instructor candidate pre-PIRC to obtain an instructor rating without it but all of a sudden it's a pre-requisite? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for upping the standard to ensure teachers are teachers. But when you pluck **** out of your arse and steal IP (FAA material) even if it is with their approval, f@rk off. No guidance material, present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating? Half arsed bull****.

I actually tried to book the exam through PEXO but it wouldn't let me, grandfathered.

You know how people say, 'I'm not a gambling man, but.......' well, I am, and I'll bet, and I'll take even money, that you, Ascend Charlie, didn't have to do the exam? $100 to you're choice of charity (so long as it's not some wanka charity) if I lose.

deckchair, gimme a coupla days, I'll find out what the kids are choosing to pass this turd pile.

[Judd]

Talking to a mate who has 20,000 hours the majority in command on a widebody but included 737 and some earlier turboprops. Much of that as a check captain until the last ten years teaching Asian cadets with only Cessna 172 CPL time in their log books. So their initial twin was a 767. His job entailed both simulator instructing and instructing (line training) these youngsters on the real aircraft..
None of this instructional experience means anything to Australian or NZ regulators who require him to undergo from scratch a full junior grade three instructor rating course (Cessna 152 single) in order to qualify as a junior instructor at a flying school. Mind you, it has ever been thus. Experience counts for zilch.

[roundsounds]

Hi, advice please, am spending hours going through the FI Handbook, absorbing nothing as it is so confusing and boring. Have thought i’d try and actually absorb the text before looking for practice exams but i’m not getting there!
any advice? Best source for practice exams? I’m guessing as the exam is multiple choice there is no point getting bogged down into a deep learning? HELP PLEASE! Thanks.
if you’re training to be an instructor look up the MOS and see what the knowledge requirements are. The exam will be much easier to study for if you know what it covers.

[engine out]

Riiiiigght............ So, It was good enough for every instructor candidate pre-PIRC to obtain an instructor rating without it but all of a sudden it's a pre-requisite?

Im not up to date with current terminology, but is this the same as the PMI exam (Principles and Methods of Instruction) that was done 25+ years ago when I did my rating? If so it’s nothing new. Back then though there was two days of class room instruction first. It was also a cut and paste from the FAA Handbook. Know the stuff and pass the test easy. Saw a few guys try and guess their way through it and fail several times.

[BigPapi]

Ironic that you're copping crap from self confessed old tired and retired instructors on this topic deckchair...in my experience it's generally these guys who have the least understanding of HF/NTS/PMI.

[das Uber Soldat]

pre-PIRC we had to do the PMI exam to attain Grade I. Literally the same exam, with the same reference material. So, boohoo, now you have to do it as a Jnr Grade 3. Frankly, good. The average Jnr G3 is about as useful as tits on a bull so having a better understanding of your actual job is in no way a bad thing. You'd do the same exam in the US to become an Instructor, or Europe. Get over it.


But when you pluck **** out of your arse and steal IP (FAA material) even if it is with their approval, f@rk off
Oh lord.. You can't 'steal IP' when its given with approval. Further, what exactly has been 'plucked out of the arse'. The exam has been around for decades. The only change is that you sit it a year or two earlier.

No guidance material
You sure about that?

Suggested study material
The following references are useful study material for the PIRC.



Aviation Instructor's Handbook (FAA-H-8083-9A) (https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/media/FAA-H-8083-9A.pdf)
This is the principal reference text
A suitable management book on 'motivation'
A candidate is expected to have basic understanding of the theories of motivation proposed by:While FAA-H-8083-9A provides some short paragraphs on the first two (but mainly on Maslow), most management books provide satisfactory information on the 3 theories

Abraham Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs'
Douglas McGregor 'X & Y' Theory
Frederick Herzberg '2-Factor' Theory.
Human Factors in Flight by Frank Hawkins or any human factors book on 'memory', 'motivation', 'stress', etc
Optional - to supplement information in the above
Preparing Instructional Objectives by Robert F Mager
Optional - a useful text on 'behavioural objectives' to compliment FAA-H-8083-9A
Measuring Instructional Results by Robert F Mager
Optional - additional useful text on 'behavioural objectives'


present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating? Half arsed bull****.
If its a Grade I doing the teaching, then yes they have.

well, I am, and I'll bet, and I'll take even money, that you, Ascend Charlie, didn't have to do the exam? $100 to you're choice of charity
This car accident of a sentence neatly sums up your attitude.

[Ascend Charlie]

The exams and tests I passed in 1976 to do my fixed-wing instructor rating and again in 1980 for the rotary-wing rating were pretty darn comprehensive.

No multi-guess questions, it was all written answers, so you had to know your stuff, not "pluck it out of your @rse".

I have interviewed applicants for instructional jobs in the 90s, and it saddened me that some of them had never learned the material, they had answered from copied answer sheets from their "school". No depth of knowledge, it was more "Ah, the question about inflow roll, the answer is C". One had even simply paid the cost of the course, flown half the hours, and never finished the PMI section, and was given a PASS by the school at Bankstown.

Never had the joy of dealing with Grade 3's, and if Dickchair is an example of the applicants, I am glad to be out of it.

[The name is Porter]

OK, lost the bet, name the charity, I'll post the receipt.

Now for a more articulate response. The average Grade 3 being as useful as tits on a bull is more a reflection of the (Part 61) watered down Instructor Rating. No fault of the candidate in this regard. The exam is as per usual, ad-hoc, given little thought in it's implementation and is generic and in no way specific to the CASA Part 61 Instructor Rating. If you can't do something properly, don't do it, stop adding unnecessary cost and yet another rote learn exam to syllabus.

Generational thing? I'm older than you, have been instructing longer than you and have done more than enough courses in TEM, PMI & HF. I've been around the industry long enough to know there are some Grade 3's that run rings around some Grade 2's and even the odd Grade 1. The relative worth or usefulness of any instructor, regardless of the grade, in my opinion is more a function of their attitude. You will never learn everything you need to know in a CAR 5 Instructor Rating, let alone a Part 61.

As Ascend Charlie him or herself states: No multi-guess questions, it was all written answers, so you had to know your stuff, not "pluck it out of your @rse" Well, this exam is multi guess and it gets the respect from candidates it deserves.

Oh lord.. You can't 'steal IP' when its given with approval. Further, what exactly has been 'plucked out of the arse'. The exam has been around for decades.

Semantics. If you want a more accurate description, too lazy or under resourced to develop an exam that actually tests knowledge content. Instead of, 'that book looks ok, lets grab it, knock up a multi guess exam, Bob's your mother's brother' There is no way that exam can be multi guess, ridiculous.

This car accident of a sentence neatly sums up your attitude. I honestly do not care one bit what judgement you make of me ;-)

I tell you, I do not miss the days of supervising junior instructors. Luckily by the time they're senior 2's, most of this has been hammered out of them.

I don't mind it at all, enjoy it actually.

I have interviewed applicants for instructional jobs in the 90s

I have interviewed and employed mainly through the noughties, very hit and miss. The hit and miss part wasn't knowledge of PMI, very much attitude, being able to work with people and students mainly.

[das Uber Soldat]

Now for a more articulate response. The average Grade 3 being as useful as tits on a bull is more a reflection of the (Part 61) watered down Instructor Rating. No fault of the candidate in this regard. The exam is as per usual, ad-hoc, given little thought in it's implementation and is generic and in no way specific to the CASA Part 61 Instructor Rating. If you can't do something properly, don't do it, stop adding unnecessary cost and yet another rote learn exam to syllabus.
What part of this exam has been around for 25 years do you not understand? Its the PMI exam, with the same reference material. This is not new. The only change is the timing of the exam. You do it at G3 level now, instead of G1. And as I explained, that's not a bad thing.

Generational thing? I'm older than you, have been instructing longer than you and have done more than enough courses in TEM, PMI & HF.
Given that you have no idea how old I am, and how long I instructed, that's an interesting comment.

I've been around the industry long enough to know there are some Grade 3's that run rings around some Grade 2's and even the odd Grade 1. The relative worth or usefulness of any instructor, regardless of the grade, in my opinion is more a function of their attitude. You will never learn everything you need to know in a CAR 5 Instructor Rating, let alone a Part 61.
If you're been around this long, you should know that a Junior G3 is a licence to learn. You are developing skills and operate directly under strict supervision from a Grade 1 instructor. That there exists some woeful G2/1 instructors is irrelevant to my comment.

Semantics. If you want a more accurate description, too lazy or under resourced to develop an exam that actually tests knowledge content. Instead of, 'that book looks ok, lets grab it, knock up a multi guess exam, Bob's your mother's brother' There is no way that exam can be multi guess, ridiculous.
Or maybe they felt they didn't need to reinvent the wheel. As to multiple choice, it has been the method of examination of Australian pilots since 2003, so a rather pointless complaint.

Further, you've cherry picked around a few points.

You claimed the exam has been 'plucked out of the ass'. Its been around for decades. What is your response to this?
You claimed there is no guidance material. The CASA website provides a metric tone of it. What is your response to this?
You claimed an instructor rating candidate is being taught the course by someone who hasn't passed the exam. Given that it'll be a Grade 1 instructor doing the teaching, and to hold that rating he/she would have passed the PMI exam, which is literally the exact same thing, this statement is patently false. What is your response to this?
If you're desperate to moan about CASA, you're not wanting for avenues of complaint. The PIRC exam however, is not one of them.

The hit and miss part wasn't knowledge of PMI, very much attitude, being able to work with people and students mainly.
Brilliant. It wasn't knowledge of the Principles and Methods of Instruction that got a job with you, but an instructors ability to work with students....

I wonder how an instructor could improve their ability to work with students...

[The name is Porter]

There are Grade 1 instructors who were not required to do the PIRC exam.

Remember when you were distributing your excel spreadsheet on pprune all those years ago? You sent me a copy, thanks. I established you were a young bloke starting out in instructor land. Younger than me. It's not hard to deduct over the passage of time and from posts. Now, you're in an Australian Airline, flying, I'd guess, an A320?

It has NOT been the same exam for the last 25 years.

You are either cherry picking my comments or interpreting them the way you want to hear (or read) them. Your perogative I spose.

'Didn't feel the need to re-invent the wheel'..............let's ponder that shall we, nothing changes in 25 years you're suggesting. WOW, if that's the case let's go back to un-just culture.

You claimed the exam has been 'plucked out of the ass'. Its been around for decades. What is your response to this?
You claimed there is no guidance material. The CASA website provides a metric tone of it. What is your response to this?
You claimed an instructor rating candidate is being taught the course by someone who hasn't passed the exam. Given that it'll be a Grade 1 instructor doing the teaching, and to hold that rating he/she would have passed the PMI exam, which is literally the exact same thing, this statement is patently false. What is your response to this?

Point 1. The PIRC exam in it's current format has been around for decades has it? Don't think so, oldmate Ascend Charlie pointed that out.
Point 2. I did NOT say there was no guidance material, someone else said that.
Point 3. You are wrong.

I wonder how an instructor could improve their ability to work with students...

Well, gees, going out and doing it? Not before you've passed PIRC of course.

[Sunfish]

point of order; there is no evidence that Maslows hierarchy exists.

[The name is Porter]

But Sunny, it's been the same for 25 years, it must exist.

[deja vu]

Hi, advice please, am spending hours going through the FI Handbook, absorbing nothing as it is so confusing and boring. Have thought i’d try and actually absorb the text before looking for practice exams but i’m not getting there!
any advice? Best source for practice exams? I’m guessing as the exam is multiple choice there is no point getting bogged down into a deep learning? HELP PLEASE! Thanks.
How about giving instructing a miss. With your attitude you've got no right to take money or time of those wanting to learn to fly properly.

[das Uber Soldat]

Point 1. The PIRC exam in it's current format has been around for decades has it? Don't think so, oldmate Ascend Charlie pointed that out.
1976 is a little more than the 25 years ago that I specified. Regardless, in its current form it is as near as makes no difference the same as the PMI exam, certainly the one that I did back in 2007. The central point is, this is not a new exam. Not even remotely.

Point 2. I did NOT say there was no guidance material, someone else said that.
Someone broke into your house and took over your computer did they?


"But when you pluck **** out of your arse and steal IP (FAA material) even if it is with their approval, f@rk off. No guidance material, present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating? Half arsed bull****."
Want to give that one another go mate?

Point 3. You are wrong.
Again, show me a Grade 1 who hasn't passed the PMI exam. Or show me how the PMI exam of the last 15 years is in any material way different to the PIRC exam.

Well, gees, going out and doing it? Not before you've passed PIRC of course.

0 for 3.

And Doing it? And what is 'it' exactly, other than delivering a syllabus using the principles and methods of instruction! Kinda helps if you know them, which is why everywhere else in the world you're required to do the exam. You had to do it here too, but not until G1 for some reason. Now its aligned, and for the better.

[The name is Porter]

Give me a bit of time, I'll get back to you on the 3 for 3.

[mikewil]

point of order; there is no evidence that Maslows hierarchy exists.

An interesting question in the exam relating to this one was something along the lines of "after reaching which level of Maslows hierarchy, will a student be most receptive to flight instruction?". I recall getting this one wrong and I would argue that a student would be increasingly receptive as he 'climbs the hierarchy' but of course there was one specific level that the exam wanted to hear and I don't think that level is specified in the FAA book. I did pass the exam on my first go but there were a number of stupid questions like the above.

[VH DSJ]

An interesting question in the exam relating to this one was something along the lines of "after reaching which level of Maslows hierarchy, will a student be most receptive to flight instruction?". I recall getting this one wrong and I would argue that a student would be increasingly receptive as he 'climbs the hierarchy' but of course there was one specific level that the exam wanted to hear and I don't think that level is specified in the FAA book. I did pass the exam on my first go but there were a number of stupid questions like the above.

That's just typical CASA exam mentality. They write the questions to trick you; not to test your knowledge.

[deckchair]

Well i’m back having left the thread due to obvious reasons and good news! I studied hard, absorbed the text and got 98%.
so the biggest learning is that the likes of Ascend Charlie, George Glass, Das Uber Soldat, and Déjà Vu are the worst possible personality types, according to the Handbook, for not just aviation but even more so as Instructors. Again-according to the clear guidelines of the Instructor’s Handbook. So to the rest of the posters who were pleasant and approachable in their responses, thank you. To the above mentioned hypocrites who need to read the Handbook - might be wise to get out of Instructing!

[Runaway Gun]

Decky, I suggest your manner of 'teaching a lesson' to those named, is less than ideal. I wouldn't like to be your student.

[deja vu]

Well i’m back having left the thread due to obvious reasons and good news! I studied hard, absorbed the text and got 98%.
so the biggest learning is that the likes of Ascend Charlie, George Glass, Das Uber Soldat, and Déjà Vu are the worst possible personality types, according to the Handbook, for not just aviation but even more so as Instructors. Again-according to the clear guidelines of the Instructor’s Handbook. So to the rest of the posters who were pleasant and approachable in their responses, thank you. To the above mentioned hypocrites who need to read the Handbook - might be wise to get out of Instructing!

So we go from "confusing and boring" six days ago to "I studied hard" and got 98%". And now there are "clear guidelines" in the Instructor's Handbook", the previously confusing and boring Instructors Handbook. I doubt there wasn't too much "deep learning" involved for you. Now those who advised you to pull your finger out and do a bit of work have personality problems?, go figure that!

As far as giving up instructing goes, I did that 46 years ago. I met my fair share of slackers and complete twerps then and during the 35 year airline career that followed, so I recognise it. My sympathy goes to anyone who thinks they are going to get value for money with their flying lesson. I guess this all started when parents stopped disciplining their children

[Flaming galah]

Well i’m back having left the thread due to obvious reasons and good news! I studied hard, absorbed the text and got 98%.
so the biggest learning is that the likes of Ascend Charlie, George Glass, Das Uber Soldat, and Déjà Vu are the worst possible personality types, according to the Handbook, for not just aviation but even more so as Instructors. Again-according to the clear guidelines of the Instructor’s Handbook. So to the rest of the posters who were pleasant and approachable in their responses, thank you. To the above mentioned hypocrites who need to read the Handbook - might be wise to get out of Instructing!

Congrats, well done.

This forum appears populated by a lot of people who know everything, or recently spoke to someone who was ‘high up’ in an airline/government agency etc who just happened to share the poster’s sentiments on any issue. And you bore the brunt.

Again, congrats on an awesome mark!

[IFEZ]

Hahahaha, deja vu, you don't post very often but when you do....absolute gold..! :D

deckchair - good luck with your instructing (sincerely). Perhaps a more magnanimous attitude would be advisable. You can learn a lot from some of the seasoned professionals on this site. Even if the delivery of their advice can at times be a bit more abrasive than what the younger generation seems to be able to tolerate these days, it is worth taking on board. Instructing can be a tough gig at times (as can other flying jobs). Develop a thicker skin, roll with the punches, you'll be fine.

[Ascend Charlie]

I studied hard, absorbed the text and got 98%.

Deckchair, that is exactly what we told you to do. You did what the Old heads said was the thing to do, and you got the desired result.

So, who is the bad instructor??

[George Glass]

Gee, thanks for the advise Deckchair. I’ll really try hard to live up to your expectations. But then again, after 20,000 hours on Boeings, maybe not. If you think your new age attitude is going to get you very far in the real world, good luck. But I think you’re in for a surprise.

[BigPapi]

20,000 hours on Boeings is guaranteed to make someone a good flight instructor, especially ab-initio! :rolleyes:

[George Glass]

Well, BigPapi, maybe its just me, but any student who turns up to ab-initio training expressing an aversion to “deep learning” is going to need attitude adjustment at some stage and is going to be spotted very early on in any pilot selection process for any job worth having. No airline is going to spend much time on a candidate that turns up underprepared. The world hasn’t changed that much since I was an instructor.

[The name is Porter]

Well i’m back having left the thread due to obvious reasons and good news! I studied hard, absorbed the text and got 98%.
so the biggest learning is that the likes of Ascend Charlie, George Glass, Das Uber Soldat, and Déjà Vu are the worst possible personality types, according to the Handbook, for not just aviation but even more so as Instructors. Again-according to the clear guidelines of the Instructor’s Handbook. So to the rest of the posters who were pleasant and approachable in their responses, thank you. To the above mentioned hypocrites who need to read the Handbook - might be wise to get out of Instructing!

Deckchair, good comeback, I like your work :-)

Better add Runaway Gun to your **** list!

You'll come across these types repeatedly in your aviation career, they forget their time in GA once they migrate to the shiny jet.

Good luck.

[The name is Porter]

Das, I'm still working on the 3 for 3, bear with me.

[das Uber Soldat]

I'm losing interest Collins, Biggins & Paisley, pick up the pace.

As for Deckchair, this has to be a windup. No way a real person has an attitude anything like this kid.

[The name is Porter]

Edited. For obvious reasons.

[The name is Porter]

Edited for obvious reasons.

[das Uber Soldat]

Who, or what exactly, is a "Pearson" ?

Still, at least you have picked up the pace. So to continue, I'm interested as to how a Grade 1 was awarded without passing the PMI. It has been a CASA requirement for a long time.

Point 2. How does 'paraphrasing' explain away what you said? You said "No guidance material". Then you said, "I did NOT say there was no guidance material". Seems rather contradictory to me.

What happened to point 3?

[kjvmw]

Prior to Part 61 the exam was needed in order to get the Grade 1 issued. However, now that the exam is required prior to being issued with a Grade 3, CASA said that everyone who was already an instructor after part 61 came into force, they were given 'credit' for it. So I ended up with a Grade 1 without ever sitting it.

[The name is Porter]

That is not possible kjvmw, old mate above you said that every single Grade 1 has done the exam. Hand your Grade 1 back, you're obviously not competent to instruct.

Sooooooo, das, gunna pick up the pace? Your whole argument shot out of the water.

Want me to go through the 3 points again? or are you just going to settle for Point 3: 'You are wrong'

[das Uber Soldat]

Want me to go through the 3 points again?
Again? What "again" ? You haven't addressed the 3 points since I rebutted them in post #23, instead entertaining us all with one of the better tantrums I think I've ever seen on pprune in more than a decade. But hey, lets get on the merry-go-round again. Why not.

"Point 1. The PIRC exam in it's current format has been around for decades has it? Don't think so"
The exam has remain largely unchanged for a long time. Certainly the last 15 years, if not longer.

Point 2. I did NOT say there was no guidance material, someone else said that.
You - "But when you pluck **** out of your arse and steal IP (FAA material) even if it is with their approval, f@rk off. No guidance material, present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating? Half arsed bull****."

No other person in the entire thread has even used the words "guidance material". Comfortably the most bizarre of your claims.

Point 3?

Actually fair enough. I see there exists a mechanism that in certain limited circumstances, G1's can attain the rating under part 61 without having done PMI or equivalent exam. I'll concede on that point.

This has divulged into little more than point scoring. The reality is that Australia has simply been brought into line other developed nations. For those who do the exam, they may just show up to the first day at work with half an idea of how to do their job.

If you're unhappy with the new rules, write your local representative. I'm sure it'll sit top of their agenda. If you want an exam that actually merits criticism, the ATPL flight test provides ample opportunity.

[The name is Porter]

Actually fair enough. I see there exists a mechanism that in certain limited circumstances, G1's can attain the rating under part 61 without having done PMI or equivalent exam. I'll concede on that point.

What's that? You were..........wr..wr..wrong?

And it wasn't limited circumstances. How many Grade 3 and 2 instructors do you reckon there were at the transition to Part 61? A hundred? A couple of hundred? A thousand? None of them have done or will do PIRC as part of their upgrade. Google is not your friend in this case.

Point 2. You've bolded two words, are you going to consider the whole sentence? Probably not, because it suits you not to address the points made. Not my finest moment when you consider grammar, language and sentence construction. The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it, however, some of the material is dated. Your point that the exam hasn't changed in 15 years in itself is a problem. The 'no guidance' remark was the thread starter commenting that there was.........no guidance material.

This has divulged into little more than point scoring. The reality is that Australia has simply been brought into line other developed nations. For those who do the exam, they may just show up to the first day at work with half an idea of how to do their job

You can't be serious suggesting the PIRC exam prepares a Grade 3 for instructing? Name one Instructor who will say 'The PIRC course was awesome, it really set me straight on instructing'

Better advice from you would be advising all instructors that have airline pilot ambitions how you got accepted into all the 'majors?' That's no mean feat, probably hasn't been achieved by any Australian pilot? You're awesome.

[drpixie]

Prior to Part 61 the exam was needed in order to get the Grade 1 issued. However, now that the exam is required prior to being issued with a Grade 3, CASA said that everyone who was already an instructor after part 61 came into force, they were given 'credit' for it. So I ended up with a Grade 1 without ever sitting it.

Don't tell CASA, or when you next do anything, they'll notice and insist you do the PMI. I know a few people who "skipped" PMI but most couldn't stay skipped for long!

[das Uber Soldat]

What's that? You were..........wr..wr..wrong?
Yes. I'm always happy to put my hand up when I'm wrong. Are you? Lets investigate.

Point 2. You've bolded two words, are you going to consider the whole sentence? Probably not, because it suits you not to address the points made.
I did, but seeing as its clear you wish to argue black is white, lets go over it again. The whole sentence is ;

"No guidance material, present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating?"

Explain to me where in that sentence any context nullifies your declarative statement of there being no guidance material? The greater paragraph itself is simply a shopping list of criticisms of the exam, nothing more substantive than that.

Further, you claimed "someone else said that". Who ?

Not my finest moment when you consider grammar, language and sentence construction.
Oh the irony of claiming that the PMI exam is a waste of time, then entirely failing to communicate a simple idea. If only there existed some kind of text that would have assisted you with communicating your meaning? .......

https://i.imgur.com/WqM6hL5.png

heh.

The 'no guidance' remark was the thread starter commenting that there was.........no guidance material.
So you were rebutting the original poster? You decided that the best way to contradict his claim that there exists no guidance material, was to include your assertion in a wider paragraph that serves to do nothing but attack the validity of the exam, and within a sentence that makes absolutely no further reference to the existence of said guidance material. You simply
​write 'no guidance material' and expect a reasonable person to believe that this is somehow you disagreeing with the tone of the entirety of the remainder of your paragraph!?

Missing PMI certainly seems to have come at a cost, wouldn't you agree?

Your point that the exam hasn't changed in 15 years in itself is a problem.
Whoa there sunshine! Did you think you can just turn 90 degrees to the argument and I simply wouldn't notice? Whats point 1?

"Point 1. The PIRC exam in it's current format has been around for decades has it? Don't think so, oldmate Ascend Charlie pointed that out."

That the lack of change is a problem or not is irrelevant to your claim. I put it to you that the exam has not changed in any material way in 15 years at least.

This is not a new exam CASA is foisting upon new instructors. Its the same old thing that has been around for yonks.


You can't be serious suggesting the PIRC exam prepares a Grade 3 for instructing? Name one Instructor who will say 'The PIRC course was awesome, it really set me straight on instructing'
As a sole preparatory aid? Of course not. But its certainly useful when used in conjunction with the rest of the syllabus for the preparation and training of new instructors. The FAA handbook and other texts provide valuable information on the principles and methods of the job of an instructor. Some of its not useful, but a lot is. There is no harm in reading and learning from the book. Some will be helped more than others, but to suggest its entirely useless, or a hindrance, is ignorant.


Better advice from you would be advising all instructors that have airline pilot ambitions how you got accepted into all the 'majors?' That's no mean feat, probably hasn't been achieved by any Australian pilot? You're awesome.
Any prospective instructor is more than welcome to PM me for advise on their airline application. I'm always happy to invest time helping other pilots. Its why over 1,800 people use the Pilot logbook I created and gave out for free, yourself included.

And though the malice in your last paragraph is boorishly transparent, ill still reply. Airline application processes are a game. No more. Don't crash the sim, don't be a ******** in the waiting room or interview, understand what SAR really means and wear a good suit. Simple stuff.

[The name is Porter]

Gees, for a topgun pilot with a 'major' YOU chose to fly with, you have a lot of spare time?

Your Statement:

Explain to me where in that sentence any context nullifies your declarative statement of there being no guidance material? The greater paragraph itself is simply a shopping list of criticisms of the exam, nothing more substantive than that.


My statement:

"No guidance material, present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating?"

Another peeps statement:

The prescribed text also provides no sample progress questions like offered for every other CASA subject from PPL to IREX to ATPL.

mmmmm, let me think............. Put that in your thesaurus, everything else has gone in it, proving how, oh so intellectually superior you are.

Whoa there sunshine! Did you think you can just turn 90 degrees to the argument and I simply wouldn't notice? Whats point 1?

You're a nitpicking semantic, read the argument, sorry it's not eloquent enough for you.

Your quote:

​​​​​​​Some will be helped more than others, but to suggest its entirely useless, or a hindrance, is ignorant.

My Quote:

​​​​​​​The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it, however, some of the material is dated.

Having a dense moment are we?

Bravo, it was useful while it lasted, since moved onto Excel Pilot Logbook, nothing personal.

And though the malice in your last paragraph is boorishly transparent,

No malice, A little bit of vomit came out when you stated you were accepted to 'all four majors,' When you then stated how proud you were to tell Virgin to eff off, I thought to myself, what a boorish little ingrate. I've got a few mates at Virgin, they would have sorted out a spoilt little prat like yourself quick-smart.

[das Uber Soldat]

Gees, for a topgun pilot with a 'major' YOU chose to fly with, you have a lot of spare time?
If i desired an arduous workload whilst being paid peanuts, I would have stayed in GA.

mmmmm, let me think............. Put that in your thesaurus, everything else has gone in it, proving how, oh so intellectually superior you are.
Non sequitur. Address my point and answer the question.

"So you were rebutting the original poster? You decided that the best way to contradict his claim that there exists no guidance material, was to include your assertion in a wider paragraph that serves to do nothing but attack the validity of the exam, and within a sentence that makes absolutely no further reference to the existence of said guidance material. You simply ​write 'no guidance material' and expect a reasonable person to believe that this is somehow you disagreeing with the tone of the entirety of the remainder of your paragraph!?"

Its ok to be wrong kiddo, happens to the best of us. I was wrong earlier, I put my hand up and wear it. We all move on.

You're a nitpicking semantic, read the argument, sorry it's not eloquent enough for you.
Your eloquence isn't of concern to me, your coherence however, is.

Having a dense moment are we?
We aren't. You may be however. Nowhere in my sentence did I assert that you claimed the FAA handbook specifically is entirely useless, or a hindrance. Only that the position is ignorant, regardless of who holds it. Subtle but important difference

Bravo, it was useful while it lasted, since moved onto Excel Pilot Logbook, nothing personal.
No offense taken, glad to have helped.

No malice, A little bit of vomit came out when you stated you were accepted to 'all four majors,' When you then stated how proud you were to tell Virgin to eff off, I thought to myself, what a boorish little ingrate. I've got a few mates at Virgin, they would have sorted out a spoilt little prat like yourself quick-smart.
Seems a rather abstract threat, but ok?


So do you acknowledge that the PIRC exam is not a 'new' exam, and that it has existed roughly unchanged in 15 years or more? It is hardly a burden on new instructors, and having them read the FAA book by your own admission would be a good thing. "The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it".

So well done CASA I say.

[The name is Porter]

We can go at this for as long as you want. One thing, the longer it goes, the more 'big words' you use. Must be running out of/losing the argument.

What it comes down to; The FAA Handbook does NOT prepare a future instructor for teaching a person to fly. Placing this obstacle in a Grade 3's path has no worth whatsoever. If you truly want to have 'teachers' teaching people how to fly (and I wouldn't object to this) then set tertiary education as the start and a DipEd as the Grade 1 standard.

But no, we'll just do an arse pluck, we won't look at contemporary learning methods, we'll take the lazy way out, we'll use a text that we had no input to (after all, Australian Aviators are the world's greatest) and we'll peddle it as a cure all for declining instructor standards.

Best of all, we'll have 'flow through' instructors, people who have no intention of making a career out of instruction, running off to the shiny jet, becoming experts in Flight Instruction. Whingers who couldn't give a fat rats clacker about the student, so long as the 500 hours ME Command hits the log book. Making comments like this:

If i desired an arduous workload whilst being paid peanuts, I would have stayed in GA.

There are instructors making good money in GA now. You must not have met the standard, that doesn't surprise me.

[das Uber Soldat]

One thing, the longer it goes, the more 'big words' you use. Must be running out of/losing the argument.
Brilliant. Its not your dogged and deliberate avoidance of answering the questions posed to you, or remaining on topic. Its my use of words up to and including three entire syllables! You know, the same number as that found within the word "Po-ta-to".

Give yourself a clap.

I'm fairly sure sesame street has a forum you can join, no doubt Elmo would employ prose more appropriate to your level.

What it comes down to; The FAA Handbook does NOT prepare a future instructor for teaching a person to fly.
Well hold on. Does it have some good stuff in it or not?
The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it
If its not handy for helping prepare an instructor for teaching, then what did you mean when you said the above?

Placing this obstacle in a Grade 3's path has no worth whatsoever.
Nothing more than an assertion. Whom to believe? The system employed by not just our regulator but dozens around the world, including the place that invented aviation in the first place? Or you, who thinks 'potato' is too complicated?


If you truly want to have 'teachers' teaching people how to fly (and I wouldn't object to this) then set tertiary education as the start and a DipEd as the Grade 1 standard.
Ok. Write your local member.

But no, we'll just do an arse pluck, we won't look at contemporary learning methods, we'll take the lazy way out, we'll use a text that we had no input to (after all, Australian Aviators are the world's greatest) and we'll peddle it as a cure all for declining instructor standards.
If Australian aviators are the best in the world, wouldn't it follow that they would then wish to modify the US text, as we have ICAO standards to the Nth degree x infinity? Regardless, I see no claim by CASA or anyone else that the PIRC exam is intended to serve as a 'cure-all' for anything. Simply a part of the process, a building block no different to any other.

Best of all, we'll have 'flow through' instructors, people who have no intention of making a career out of instruction, running off to the shiny jet, becoming experts in Flight Instruction. Whingers who couldn't give a fat rats clacker about the student, so long as the 500 hours ME Command hits the log book.
Pretty sure we've had those for as long as there has been instructing. Indeed, I put it to you that the vast majority of pilots who become instructors do so as a stepping stone into other operations. Nothing has changed here. If you wished to limit the field to career instructors only, you'd have about 5 people left in the country. Hyperbole (Definition https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/hyperbole here) obviously, but the point stands.


There are instructors making good money in GA now. You must not have met the standard, that doesn't surprise me.
Well you've certainly cut to the heart of the matter. The Airlines are simply awash with GA dropouts who just couldn't cut the mustard. I still have nightmares about effects of controls now, decades later.. The secondary effect of roll?! How will I ever understand?!

[BigPapi]

The CASA PIRC exam, like all exams, is worthless as a tool to impart knowledge. It'll assess you the same whether you've rote learnt or developed understanding or correlation.

It's a great motivator however to actually READ the FAA Handbook which is an awesome tool and educational resource for anyone teaching and assessing.

[das Uber Soldat]

The CASA PIRC exam, like all exams, is worthless as a tool to impart knowledge. It'll assess you the same whether you've rote learnt or developed understanding or correlation.

It's a great motivator however to actually READ the FAA Handbook which is an awesome tool and educational resource for anyone teaching and assessing.
Edit : Disregard, not enough time to write a proper reply. Back in a bit.

[The name is Porter]

I've answered all your ridiculous questions. You can't handle that you've conceded you were wr...wr.....wrong, and that I won't concede.

I've pointed out to you one punter who said there was no guidance material.

I've made my point that there are many factors that make a great instructor, you are free to disagree but I WILL NOT CONCEDE THAT I WAS WRONG when it's a firmly held belief that reading a book won't give you all the tools you need to teach someone how to fly.

Keep going, the longer this goes on, the more of your character, or lack of it, you show.

[das Uber Soldat]

I've answered all your ridiculous questions.
Hahaha. Who do you think you're fooling exactly? Seeing how much you like complaining about 'fancy' words (potato! :E), go look up 'faulty syllogism'. More on this later.

I've pointed out to you one punter who said there was no guidance material.
Straw man. YOU wrote 'no guidance material'. You then backpedaled furiously with some hilarious claim that, in the middle of a paragraph slamming the exam, your criticism of 'no guidance material' was meant to be taken by us as the exact opposite of what you said.

Just because it was so entertaining, lets see it again.

No guidance material
I did NOT say there was no guidance material

Haha! I love this guy.

I've made my point that there are many factors that make a great instructor, you are free to disagree but I WILL NOT CONCEDE THAT I WAS WRONG
You don't have to convince anyone here that you'll never concede when you're wrong, you've more than ably demonstrated that. Fabulous quality in a pilot.

reading a book won't give you all the tools you need to teach someone how to fly.
Ladies and gentleman, the straw man is wheeled out yet again. Do you see anyone in this thread making that argument?
As a sole preparatory aid? Of course not. But its certainly useful when used in conjunction with the rest of the syllabus for the preparation and training of new instructors.
Given you yourself have stated "The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it", it appears you agree!

Keep going, the longer this goes on, the more of your character, or lack of it, you show.
Why would I ever stop when you're so entertaining?

So, back to the topic, and because I like watching you squirm.

Point 1. So do you acknowledge that the PIRC exam is not a 'new' exam, and that it has existed roughly unchanged in 15 years or more?
Point 2. Are you now changing your position that there is no guidance material for the PIRC? Is there guidance material or not?

:)

[deja vu]

Instructors don't teach people to fly, they teach themselves. Instructors are only there to meet insurance requirements. How can it be that at 242 hrs TT I was a C grade instructor? it's laughable.

[Runaway Gun]

Oooh I got a mention ;)

[The name is Porter]

So, back to the topic, and because I like watching you squirm.

You're kidding right? You don't know me at all well.

Keep going with the verbal diarrhea, I'm loving it, you're awesome.

More big words (and faulty syllogisms) please!

Point 1. NO
Point 2. NO & NO

Please make me squirm, pleeeeaase,

Did I mention you're awesome?

[The name is Porter]

I have to admit, I pretended to know what 'faulty syllogism' mean't. I kinda felt a little inadequate. I had to ask my girlfriend what it mean't cos I couldn't understand the google references. She said 'who used the 'faulty syllogism' reference?' I said 'some toss on prune.' She said, 'no, he can't be a toss, he must be very intelligent, using big words like that.' I said, 'nah, he's only a pilot.' She said, 'no, can't be a pilot, doctor, scientist maybe?' I said, 'well, he WAS accepted by all 4 majors in Australia', she said, 'what's a major?' I said 'I don't know, I think it's an American thing?' I said, 'he was a bit rude to one of those majors though' she said, 'highly intelligent people behave like that at times' it was about this time I started to squirm.............

Please stop with the big words, I was using the 'Briar Patch' bluff, I'm sorry.

not.

Oh yeah,

Point 1. NO
Point 2. NO & NO

[Ascend Charlie]

This thread has lost all meaning, with Porter and Soldat jerking off on each other's posts.

Give it up, girls.

[das Uber Soldat]

This thread has lost all meaning, with Porter and Soldat jerking off on each other's posts.

Give it up, girls.
This thread ever had any meaning? Its little better than a jetblast thread, and I'm treating it as such. Its not every day you meet someone as entertaining as Ranga, why spoil the fun?

So, back to it.

"Point 1. So do you acknowledge that the PIRC exam is not a 'new' exam, and that it has existed roughly unchanged in 15 years or more?"
Porter : No.

Strange, given previously you have said

The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it, however, some of the material is dated. Your point that the exam hasn't changed in 15 years in itself is a problem.
Why the flip flop?

Do you just flip a coin or something with each reply?

"Point 2. Are you now changing your position that there is no guidance material for the PIRC?"
Porter : "No"

You're not changing your position. Fascinating.

Point 2 " Is there guidance material or not?"
Porter "No"

And yet..

I did NOT say there was no guidance material
Heh, this just keeps getting better and better.

Regardless, there is a mountain of guidance material for the PIRC. As posted earlier
Suggested study material
The following references are useful study material for the PIRC.



Aviation Instructor's Handbook (FAA-H-8083-9A) (https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/aviation_instructors_handbook/media/FAA-H-8083-9A.pdf)
This is the principal reference text
A suitable management book on 'motivation'
A candidate is expected to have basic understanding of the theories of motivation proposed by:While FAA-H-8083-9A provides some short paragraphs on the first two (but mainly on Maslow), most management books provide satisfactory information on the 3 theories

Abraham Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs'
Douglas McGregor 'X & Y' Theory
Frederick Herzberg '2-Factor' Theory.
Human Factors in Flight by Frank Hawkins or any human factors book on 'memory', 'motivation', 'stress', etc
Optional - to supplement information in the above
Preparing Instructional Objectives by Robert F Mager
Optional - a useful text on 'behavioural objectives' to compliment FAA-H-8083-9A
Measuring Instructional Results by Robert F Mager
Optional - additional useful text on 'behavioural objectives'




If you can't pass the exam with that enormous collection of reference texts then you maybe food delivery is better suited to your skill set.


Please stop with the big words
How far into the Sesame Street forum signup did you get before you ran into a 3 syllable word and gave up? Be honest, we're all friends here.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/500x500/3faa7ef82cd5403b95650136d8427b7elg_2895df4237156f0d7fb068ac7 9d4c1dfb2c85d72.jpg

[The name is Porter]

Should you want to have the last word, again.........

Point 1. NO

Point 2. NO & NO

Keep going Captain SFB, love your work.

This thread has lost all meaning, with Porter and Soldat jerking off on each other's posts.

PS, One of these identities is a pedant, juvenile. The other is Porter.

If you can't pass the exam with that enormous collection of reference texts then you maybe food delivery is better suited to your skill set.

Please, if you're going to lecture on a public forum, perhaps you can attempt correct grammar? Although, I guess not much is expected from an airbus pilot?

Sorry, where is the Sesame Street sign-up? I tend not to source all my info from google, especially my three syllable words.

[desert goat]

Wow.....upwards of sixty posts arguing over a multple choice quiz that can easily be studied for and knocked off over a weekend or two. You guys are funny.

[das Uber Soldat]

Should you want to have the last word, again.........
Er.. Should I? "Please, if you're going to lecture on a public forum, perhaps you can attempt correct grammar? "

heh.

Although, I guess not much is expected from an airbus pilot?
Rather abstract I guess, but ok? Are Airbus pilots lesser than other pilots? What if that pilot has flown Boeing and other types also? What happens then? Fascinating!

Sorry, where is the Sesame Street sign-up?
https://muppetcentral.com/forum/forums/sesame-street/

I got you fam.

Point 2. NO & NO

Specifically, you are standing by your claim that there is no guidance material for the PIRC, despite it being patently and painfully obvious there is a mountain of it. I've seen obstinate before, but this is a whole new thing. I'm not even mad, its impressive.

a multi choice exam that can easily be studied for and knocked off over a weekend
Sure is. I used this brand new thing called the guidance material.

For the record I have no idea why this thread wasn't locked ages ago, but until that time I'm more than happy to entertain myself with elmo over here.

One more time for the punters in the back!

No guidance material
I did NOT say there was no guidance material

10/10, would troll again.

[BigPapi]

Carn mate still waiting for my response (respectfully)

[das Uber Soldat]

The CASA PIRC exam, like all exams, is worthless as a tool to impart knowledge. It'll assess you the same whether you've rote learnt or developed understanding or correlation.

Sorry mate I got all caught up in the excitement and forgot.

Are exams designed to be tools to impart knowledge? I thought the reference material did that. The exam is supposed to test your knowledge and insight of said topic. Do the CASA exams do that well? Up for argument I suppose? From my experience doing CASA exams, it has been my opinion that they generally cover the syllabus. Do I agree with that syllabus? Sometimes yes, often times no.

How do exams distinguish between those who have rote learned and those who have true insight? I think that is a very challenging goal to set any exam. I certainly don't have an answer. If you could design an exam to achieve that goal I'd wager there is a fair reward in it for yourself.

It's a great motivator however to actually READ the FAA Handbook which is an awesome tool and educational resource for anyone teaching and assessing.
Could you not then argue that at least in part the exam has achieved its goal? If we get young instructors reading the handbook, then maybe a few of them learn something about how people learn, how to effectively communicate their meaning (ahem, not mentioning names here..) et al.

Every exam could be better but I never saw a huge issue with the PMI exam. Has some good bits in it, is relatively easy to cover the breadth of the material and provides next to no hurdle for someone looking to attain the grade.

[The name is Porter]

Point 1. NO
Point 2. NO & NO

P.S. You've only found two user names, you disappoint me.

You talk an awful lot of garbage, you sound like a real bore.

[The name is Porter]

Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed, I'm not arguing with you anymore. There is no agreement, no common ground. I'm not interested in an argument based on pedantry. So for the benefit of us all and the display of your pure genius, keep goin' (said in Carl Barron accent), go on, keep goin'

[das Uber Soldat]

P.S. You've only found two user names, you disappoint me.

Oh I found a little more than that kiddo :)

Happy weekend flying.

[deja vu]

Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed, I'm not arguing with you anymore. There is no agreement, no common ground. I'm not interested in an argument based on pedantry. So for the benefit of us all and the display of your pure genius, keep goin' (said in Carl Barron accent), go on, keep goin'

You do realise that if you ever get a real job there isn't going to be time for this garbage.

[The name is Porter]

Oh I found a little more than that kiddo

Go on 'kiddo' post away and you know where you'll find yourself ;-)

you might even see some of the stuff you've sent me via PM.

[The name is Porter]

You do realise that if you ever get a real job there isn't going to be time for this garbage.

I thought it was obvious I'm trying to avoid that possibility.

[B777lover]

Hey all little late here, but im doing my PIRC soon and there is a requirement for CAO 48.1 and CASR am i correct to assume there will be questions on FDP/TOD and previlages and limitations in exam. Also there was under pass rates a statement about "requirements of part 141/142 operators" with regard to knowledge shortfalls. Where do i find this information i looked through the CASR and just found something about exercising FIRC and endorsements with Part 141 142 operators however maybe im missing something?

[evilducky]

Hey anyone know what's happened to https://www.practicecyberexams.com (https://www.practicecyberexams.com/)?

Paid for FIR practice exams, did two last week. Tried to get onto the site this evening, server's IP not found. Tried to email support, got a delivery failure.

[rotor_bird]

Hi Evilducky,

I'm currently studying for the exam and was looking at purchasing some of those practice exams.

Did you have any luck getting back onto the site/contacting them?

I don't want to spend $100 and find out it was a scam..

Also how many practise exams does it have available?

Thanks,

Rotorbird

[rotor_bird]

Hi Deckchair,

Congrats on the pass!

What other material did you study other than the handbook?

I'm currently studying the handbook and was curious as to what other material people have studied/found useful.

My friend recommended an iPhone app that has a whole bunch of practise exam questions on it, which thoroughly helped him.

Any tips would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Rotorbird

[DHC8 Driver]

Deckchair - Charlie might be a bit abrupt but he has a point - understand the material (mind-numbing as it is) because some of it is important, vital even. This applies doubly to being an instructor - it will be very obvious to your students and your CFI/HOO when you don't understand stuff ... quick route to a short-term job.

An much as I have plenty of complaints about CASA exams (especially where they don't understand tolerances) almost all of the material matters. Even the B727 stuff. Planning for an A320 or a B727 or a Citation is the same as planning for the B727. The actual fuel burns vary, but the method of calculating climb/cruise/descent still applies, and the various reserves definitely apply. Yes, most planning is done by a computer. But you must always understand it in ultimate detail. And Yes, there will always come a day when you must plan it or justify the planning manually. If you can't do that, don't ask me for a job!


Sorry to break this to you but almost nobody on the line understands that stuff anymore

[j3pipercub]

Sorry to break this to you but almost nobody on the line understands that stuff anymore

Pretty sure that's what the PD section is for anyway? if all else fails and Ops can't generate a computer based plan.

[beached az]

https://www.pilotpracticeexams.com

Has anyone used these guys for PIRC exam prep?
Wondering what they are like, pricing seems pretty reasonable.

Cheers
BAz :ok:

[beached az]

https://www.pilotpracticeexams.com

Has anyone used these guys for PIRC exam prep?
Wondering what they are like, pricing seems pretty reasonable.

Cheers
BAz :ok:

Anyone at all?

[Bosi72]

Anyone at all?

I did because to my knowledge they are the only in Oz offering practice exams for PIRC, and only after reading FAA Handbook cover to cover. The real exam had some similarities with PPE, but it was quite different, ie. don't expect the same questions like they occasionally appear in CPL exams.

On the side note, I passed Organisational Psychology exam at Uni in early 90's where Maslow and other theoreticians were studied.

In my opinion, they are generally promoting HOTS (high order of thinking skills) vs rote learning, however at the exam you have to rote learn..

Good luck!

[beached az]

Many thanks, time to start reading
BAz :ok: