CASA Flight Examiner Professional Development Program

[barleyhi]

An example of professional writing from CASA (my bolding):

"Welcome to the flight Examiner Professional Development Program (PDP) series 2019.

The fundamental objectives of PDP are three-fold, to develop, to enhance and to update flight examiners within a relevant safety theme, these three objectives then of course to define the structure of the framework for the program.

Firstly, PDPs will always have an overarching safety theme. A core practical safety-related message that we are asking our flight Examiner community to focus on as they perform their critical gatekeeper role.

Secondly PDP looks to develop Examiner competencies to higher more advanced levels overtime to move beyond competence if you'd like to the art form to the highly advanced application of the flight examiners knowledge, skills and attitudes.

Thirdly PDP seeks to enhance The National flight-testing scheme through improved inter-rater reliability amongst flight examiners, now that's quite a challenge when you think about the complexity of our environment and finally PDP will update you on key information which is likely to be relevant to you and help you in your role."

Can anyone out there translate this gobbledegook? Can CASA explain the functions of full stops and commas?

Thanks

BH

[ramble on]

Just pretend its written by a Chinese lawyer in Mandarin and translated with Google and you will get it.
in fact, thats a point.....they shouldn’t hold ICAO Level 6 with that tripe.

Who ever wrote this obviously had some input on the new CAO 48.1 - their fingerprints are all over it.

[Global Aviator]

DAMP testing before writing proposals metinks!

I think they may have been playing with PCP* while writing PDP’s.......

*Phencyclidine (PCP), also known as angel dust among other names, is a drug used for its mind-altering effects.[5] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phencyclidine#cite_note-Jus2003-5) PCP may cause hallucinations (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinations), distorted perceptions of sounds, and violent behavior (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_behavior).

[ramble on]

Breaking news today.........Cannabis legalised for personal use in Canberra.

There it is....Dude...

[Runaway Gun]

So do we need to hire a lawyer, or a tea leaf reader, to interpret anything that CASA releases?

[NOSIGN]

It’s difficult to play follow the leader when the leaders’ credibility is so damaged.

The wording of the PDP is shameful.

[Sunfish]

Probably written by a millennial whose knowledge of English is gained from texting. U OK WIT THAT?

Whats sadder is the students taking the program won’t be any better.

These twerps can’t write good English but they can spot a sexist comment from thirty paces across a noisy room.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Question for the panel:

To be considered for an IFR examiner rating, CASA requires Flight Examiners to have:
- 500 hours of IFR Instruction
- 100 hour of logged IFR, of which a significant portion can be in a Synthetic trainer.

Personally I believe this is a very low level of REAL WORLD experience, balanced by "fairy land" experience inside a flying school environment.

Several very experienced Chief Pilots/CFIs with FE Ratings have been knocked back on IFR examiner endorsements lately because they don't have the IFR training experience.
They do, however, significantly exceed the REAL WORLD experience requirements and already have years of experience training pilots to operate IFR, assessing their skills and then unleashing them on the unsuspecting public.

CASA will not consider this experience as a valid equivalent.

Is 500 hours of teaching Bloggs how to fly ADF holds relevant to holding IF testing privileges?

Discuss.

[barleyhi]

More of the same:

Module 1 develops your skills as a flight Examiner in assessing NTS 2.3 or recognise and manage undesired aircraft States, not you performing NTS 2.3 but how do we assess that element and it's performance criteria in a structured way that ensures the reliable and validity of our assessments.

Whilst we know many competencies are interconnected in this area with a focus or an interest by flight examiners on the assessment of NTS 2.3 we can assure ourselves that our assessments robustly ensure pilots are able to recognise, prioritise and apply their actions appropriately.

Module 2 enhances the national scheme by looking to improve inter-rater reliability, in this series our interest is quite foundational in this regard it's simply a series of questions, we find examiners are frequently asking so for PDP series 2019 we are covering the basics with these FAQs.

In Module 3, you get to choose your own adventure empowering you to be responsible for what you'd be like to be updated on, New information, new ideas, advanced techniques.

Model 3 updates you on information and knowledge that's relevant to you it's about choosing your own adventure, here you select what's relevant to you and what you would like to explore giving your operating environment and experience.

In PDP series 2019 there are five components of which you need to complete two, of course you're welcome to complete all of them.

[compressor stall]

Horatio - It's cr@p as you suggest, but I did hear a whisper that those requirements have or were about to change. I haven't had a chance to check it yet.

[Global Aviator]

Seriously choose your own adventure!!!

Is it a teenagers adventure series of books?

What next? Platform Hogwarts...

[Sunfish]

Seriously choose your own adventure!!!

Is it a teenagers adventure series of books?

What next? Platform Hogwarts...

A Boeing B777 1/2

[Horatio Leafblower]

Comp Stall
I did hear a whisper that those requirements have or were about to change.

With the new edition of the FEH the previous provisions for considering "alternate experience" were re-worded to make it clear that the really won't be considering "Alternate experience".

That's the only change I have seen although there is a push in the ASAP to change it as you say.

[The name is Porter]

Horatio - It's cr@p as you suggest, but I did hear a whisper that those requirements have or were about to change. I haven't had a chance to check it yet.

It hadn't changed as of two weeks ago, at least.

Out of all of them I think the most stringent is Instructor Rating Testing Approval?

The CPL requirements make a bit of sense (extensive RPL, PPL testing experience).

The NVFR Testing Approval is a bit odd though.

[Ascend Charlie]

Back in the Bad Old Days of CAA Examiners of Airmen, there was an EoA who transferred to our CAA from PNG CAA for the helicopter world, based in Sinny.

He was straight into testing chopper pilots for commercial licences, instrument ratings, and instructor ratings. Quite a few people were given a hard time by him, and many failed their initial instructor rating or renewals.

Some research was done, and it was found he didn't even hold an instructor rating himself. A stink was created, and CAA reluctantly agreed that he needed to hold the rating. The local schools rubbed their hands together with glee, anticipating giving this d1ck some of his own medicine back, but he slunk up to the Brisbane area, where people hadn't yet heard of him, and did the rating.

But he was still a d1ck.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

AAHH..... Re 'New information, new ideas, advanced techniques.'

Is it still - 'Pull back and the houses get smaller.....Push forward and they get BIG again..??

I just dunno no more.....

[mustafagander]

Keep pulling Griffo and they get bigger again but seem to move around a lot!! :O

[roundsounds]

This CASA FER training has zero to do with safety. Safety is apparently the sole purpose of the existence of the dept’. It would appear the development of the FER is being built around the personal opinion(s) of individual(s) within CASA. It would be great to have an industry organisation challenge the onerous processes developed by CASA.

[LeadSled]

Back in the Bad Old Days of CAA Examiners of Airmen, there was an EoA who transferred to our CAA from PNG CAA for the helicopter world, based in Sinny.

He was straight into testing chopper pilots for commercial licences, instrument ratings, and instructor ratings. Quite a few people were given a hard time by him, and many failed their initial instructor rating or renewals.

Some research was done, and it was found he didn't even hold an instructor rating himself. A stink was created, and CAA reluctantly agreed that he needed to hold the rating. The local schools rubbed their hands together with glee, anticipating giving this d1ck some of his own medicine back, but he slunk up to the Brisbane area, where people hadn't yet heard of him, and did the rating.

But he was still a d1ck.
AC,
That rings a bell or a loud gong really, I had forgotten that one, the Brisbane end was hand picked, as well.
Tootle pip!!