CASA Flight Instructor’s Exam
Thread Starter
CASA Flight Instructor’s Exam
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.
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.
I’m guessing as the exam is multiple choice there is no point getting bogged down into a deep learning?
Get a life. And read the book you slack-@rse.
Thread Starter
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!
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!
The FAA instructors handbook, is basically what the information is taken from
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...-h-8083-9a.pdf
Otherwise a shortcut
https://www.practicecyberexams.com/pricing.php
50 questions , last 2 hours.....
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli...-h-8083-9a.pdf
Otherwise a shortcut
https://www.practicecyberexams.com/pricing.php
50 questions , last 2 hours.....
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!
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!
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_poli...-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-pag...amination-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!
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Get a life. And read the book you slack-@rse.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
You sure about that?
If its a Grade I doing the teaching, then yes they have.
This car accident of a sentence neatly sums up your attitude.
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
Originally Posted by Casa
Suggested study material
The following references are useful study material for the PIRC.
The following references are useful study material for the PIRC.
- Aviation Instructor's Handbook (FAA-H-8083-9A)
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****.
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
Last edited by das Uber Soldat; 25th Aug 2019 at 14:29.
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.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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:
Well, this exam is multi guess and it gets the respect from candidates it deserves.
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.
I honestly do not care one bit what judgement you make of me ;-)
I don't mind it at all, enjoy it actually.
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.
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"
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.
This car accident of a sentence neatly sums up your attitude.
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 have interviewed applicants for instructional jobs in the 90s
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.
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.
- 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?
The hit and miss part wasn't knowledge of PMI, very much attitude, being able to work with people and students mainly.
I wonder how an instructor could improve their ability to work with students...
Last edited by das Uber Soldat; 17th Aug 2019 at 12:51.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Point 2. I did NOT say there was no guidance material, someone else said that.
Point 3. You are wrong.
Well, gees, going out and doing it? Not before you've passed PIRC of course.
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 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...
