CASA Flight Instructor’s Exam
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?
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?
Last edited by das Uber Soldat; 25th Aug 2019 at 14:21.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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'
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'
Want me to go through the 3 points again?
"Point 1. The PIRC exam in it's current format has been around for decades has it? Don't think so"
Point 2. I did NOT say there was no guidance material, someone else said that.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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
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.
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.
Last edited by drpixie; 30th Aug 2019 at 02:35. Reason: spellin
Yes. I'm always happy to put my hand up when I'm wrong. Are you? Lets investigate.
"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 ?
https://i.imgur.com/WqM6hL5.png
heh.
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?
"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.
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.
Last edited by das Uber Soldat; 30th Aug 2019 at 07:55.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gees, for a topgun pilot with a 'major' YOU chose to fly with, you have a lot of spare time?
Your Statement:
My statement:
Another peeps statement:
mmmmm, let me think............. Put that in your thesaurus, everything else has gone in it, proving how, oh so intellectually superior you are.
You're a nitpicking semantic, read the argument, sorry it's not eloquent enough for you.
Your quote:
My Quote:
.
Having a dense moment are we?
Bravo, it was useful while it lasted, since moved onto Excel Pilot Logbook, nothing personal.
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.
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.
"No guidance material, present instructors who haven't done PIRC teaching it to those who need to pass it for the rating?"
The prescribed text also provides no sample progress questions like offered for every other CASA subject from PPL to IREX to ATPL.
Whoa there sunshine! Did you think you can just turn 90 degrees to the argument and I simply wouldn't notice? Whats point 1?
Your quote:
Some will be helped more than others, but to suggest its entirely useless, or a hindrance, is ignorant.
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,
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?
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 well done CASA I say.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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:
There are instructors making good money in GA now. You must not have met the standard, that doesn't surprise me.
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.
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.
Originally Posted by The name is Porter
The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it
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.
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?!
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Hahaha. Who do you think you're fooling exactly? Seeing how much you like complaining about 'fancy' words (potato! 
), go look up 'faulty syllogism'. More on this later.
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.
Haha! I love this guy.
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.
Ladies and gentleman, the straw man is wheeled out yet again. Do you see anyone in this thread making that argument?
Given you yourself have stated "The FAA handbook is handy, it has some great material in it", it appears you agree!
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?
), go look up 'faulty syllogism'. More on this later.Just because it was so entertaining, lets see it again.
Haha! I love this guy.
Originally Posted by Das 'I love repeating myself' Soldat
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.
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?
Last edited by das Uber Soldat; 1st Sep 2019 at 17:46.
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.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, back to the topic, and because I like watching you squirm.
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?
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
The following users liked this post: