Well I spoke to CASA and apparently they say that the exam content/syllabus/requirements/rounding figures have not changed and they are investigating why people are failing all of a sudden :ugh:

On another note I hear that all the main lecturers for the ATPL subjects have demanded a meeting with CASA late next week. :D

Phelan hears your pain!
 

Hot off the press article on this subject, well done PP:ok::Testing to destruction – aviationadvertiser.com.au

Sarcs
 

Sarcs can you tell me which document your relating too ?

Reply I got from CASA after my complaint about the 94% failure rate of the new FP exam:


On behalf of the Director of Aviation Safety, thank you for your feedback.* The Director has asked me to respond to you.
*
To maintain the integrity and quality of the flight crew licensing system, CASA recently made minor adjustments to the numeric parameters of the ATPL flight planning examination.* In other words, the figures used in some of the questions have been changed, without changing the substance of the question.* For example, a question that included a wind speed of X knots now has the wind speed value set at Y knots.* The question is otherwise the same.
*
Such variations are consistent with real-world flight planning requirements. Airline pilots are expected to be competent in basic mathematics, as well as the principles and methods of planning a flight in an air transport environment. A well- prepared candidate who has thoroughly studied the training syllabi should possess the necessary skills and knowledge to pass the flight planning examination.
*
CASA has not substantively re-written any exam questions. *The syllabi, form of the questions, thread, context or narrative within the questions has not been changed.
*
Historically, flight planning has always demanded a high level of skill and knowledge in flight planning principles, as well as competence in technique. *These are the minimum competencies that CASA would expect from a pilot wishing to undertake the duties of an air transport pilot.
*
CASA is mindful of recent increases in ATPL exam failure rates, and is looking into the basis of that.
*
*

What a great article!

It sums it up very well, I have sent the link to the article to CASA, see what they have to say

From the CASA response in the article they seem to believe the exam is fine and that previously everyone must have been cheating

Something to answer for AFT??
 

That just goes to prove how ridiculous their logic is that it's the candidates and not the exam.

Come on Guys
We all have to put the hard yards in, A good tradesman never blames his tools ! I failed FP twice then nailed it on my third attempt 94% , but after review found the simple mistakes that I had made.
Personally when I failed for the second time I spent a minimum of 3-4 hours daily whilst working full time and studied most weekends for approx 8 plus hours to get myself up to speed with the subject, I know it's not easy but if you put the effort in you will achieve results.
I also attended AFT and can only highly recommend them and Nathan.

Good luck to all.

I have never understood the time pressure applied to the ATPL(A) flight planning exam. It has been this way at least as far back as I can remember. Sure, you don't have unlimited time for planning in the real world but the same applies to navigation, met et al.

It has always struck me as more of a 'right of passage' than a meaningful assessment of a pilot's ability to do actual flight planning.

The argument that the average candidate finishes in less the allocated time is non-sequetur. Candidates will work to the rules. If they have to rush the whole exam they will do that and finish in about the the allocated time. This does not mean that they would not be more accurate if they had the time to be be careful.

I fully support the need for pilots to have detailed knowledge in this area but this particular exam has not been doing that for a long time. Likewise the systems exams that ask detailed questions about a certain model of 767 are rubbish as well. There are some types of systems that are representative but asking colors of specific parts of displays on the EADI... utter nonsense.:ugh:

Livin the dream: The people in the course put in the hard yards, I was there with them during and after class studying our asses off. We are not blaming our 'tools', rather the exam we were tested on. There were some super smart and dedicated students in the class. It wasn't just AFT, from what I hear the Melbourne exam had a 100% fail rate (again, from what I hear). If you are a maths wizz I'll explain it in maths terms.

A + B + C = D

A= students ( pretty much a constant)
B= the ASL exam system ( again, pretty much a constant)
C= the exam questions ( which have recently been updated/ re jigged/ etc= new variable, which CASA has claimed has not changed)
D= exam result ( which has also changed dramatically!!!!)

Since D has changed so much, either A, B or C must have changed significantly. A hasn't changed (from personal experience), and from what I know B hasn't either, which leaves C. So CASA, what has changed? A? B? C? Join the dots...

You have to admit that with a failure rate like 93% something has gone pear shaped on CASA's end.

Farmer Dan

My reply to CASA:

I do understand CASA has these requirements for an ATPL candidate but surely more than 6% of the potential candidates can meet them. I currently hold a Commercial Pilots Licence and had a mid 90% average for all my CASA CPL exam subjects. I also hold a Bachelors degree in Aviation and never in all my studies I have come upon an exam this difficult to pass and I'm sure a lot of people are with me on this one.*

Like I said earlier if only 6% of candidates can pass this exam than there will be a significant shortage of ATPL qualified pilots in the near future which would be highly detrimental to not only Australian aviation but also World aviation which I believe is against CASA's interests.*

I do understand CASA needs to uphold a minimum requirement for their ATPL holders but surely a minimum requirement that only 6% of it's candidates can achieve is unreasonable and unsustainable.*

The Aviation Advertiser has now come out with this article, please take time to read it as I believe it sums up the situation pretty well*

Testing to destruction – aviationadvertiser.com.au

The reply you did send me and obviously the author of this article and I'm sure many others, to me sounds like you are assuming the majority of the candiadates were cheating. I find it hard to believe that of the hundreds of people who sit this exam that the most of them would be cheating. For one I ask where would ALL these candidates get their cheat notes? If its assumed from a training school what about all the candidates that self study? And are all the training schools of this subject supplying cheat notes? And if this did happen why has only one person been caught? If cheating did occur frequently I'm sure it would have been picked up a lot earlier and by a lot more people. Don't let one person's actions reflect on the rest of the honest pilot community who use their annual leave and thousands of dollars of their own money to study extremely hard to pass this exam.

I believe it's only a matter of time until the wider public and politicians are aware of this issue so I hope a prompt and reasonable resolution can be made.

If there's one good thing to come out of this, it's that those who have already passed their ATPL subjects will have a better chance of getting a job in the next couple of years if there are less applicants.:}

(it's a joke people):E

New update (sort of) at the bottom of this article:

Testing to destruction – updated – aviationadvertiser.com.au

Might be of interest.

Don't hold your breath, friends...

The emails I have sent to CASA has been met with the same stonewall response everyone else has received - "there is nothing wrong with the exam."

Disappointingly, I received the same "standardised" response as others have posted on here and elsewhere (same response that aviation advertiser received) and none of my queries/questions were even hinted at being addressed.

I'm not sure what the next move is? Does anyone know if the theory trainers/providers had their meeting with CASA yet?

JFW.
Have you via email AND phone:

Contacted CLARC?
Contacted G.S.?
Made a official complaint to CASA!!!!?
Contacted AFAP (if you are not a member, why not?)
Contacted G.S. boss (M.T.) Ill give you a clue, his name is common with a awesome cricketer from about ten years ago).
Contacted your local federal member?
Make another official complaint!!

If you got to the end with no luck, start from the top again. It's like a dog with a bone.

I made a complaint...heave heard nothing back...I will follow-up though.

@coolridge. I have sat before and after the suspension and disagree with you (though I don't mean that to sound confrontational)...Unless they have changed things back (quietly)... Hopefully.

Any news on when the aforementioned meeting bwtween theory training providers and CASA is to take place? Or if it has, to what outcome?

I don't suppose anyone here has contacts at The Australian that would be interested in helping the cause. The article on aviationadvertiser.com.au is a good starting point.

Keep plugging away...

I sat the exam today! Would have had better luck just picking the answers with a blind fold on I think! :ugh:

It was a first attempted for me and I was a little nervous going into it after reading the posts and listing to others who recently failed.

My working's got me to within 20kg of some answers. I was even more careful to not average and add extra legs. I really thought it was in the bag until I hit submit... (Maybe I was within 20kg of the wrong answer) never the less, that was the hardest exam I have ever sat (based on the ****ty time limit).

17 questions. 3 x 5marks
4 x 4marks
4 x 3marks
3 x 2marks
1 x 1marks

No KDR:yuk:

Whilst I enjoy a good whinge here or in the bar as much as the next person, for those who have a genuine grievance contact the CASA Industry Complaints Commisioner on 02 6217 1717. And write to your local member and/or one of the senators currently taking a close look at CASA.

Heard 1st hand of someone who got a phone call from casa today, was tol that they were wrong and he had passed and his paperwork would be sent out today.

He sat late November and originally was awarded a score in the low 60s

I've heard the "gentleman" in charge at CASA is, or shortly will be, on leave to go to his annual religious retreat, so nothing will happen (including the meeting between theory providers and CASA) until the new year.:ugh: