Air Law
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: London
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wessex boy and sleeve wing - please re-read what i have said...
I am compairing the examination to the likeness of an old o'level exam - you know the ones which only require you to read and regurgitate facts and not actually understand or comprehend the information given to you.
I have passed my airlaw - and yes there are important fact to remember in there - but the majority of the facts have no direct relevance on the safety of you or your passengers.
Just having a piece of paper saying you have passed airlaw does not make you a safe flyer - it is the training you undertake which does that.
I suspect that the Airlaw exam is deliberately set in the way in which it is so that you learn to learn by repetition - and that it teaches you to learn in a very prescribed way (learning by repetition...) - very different to what other exams / qualifications do.
An example of this is the VMC minima - you get to learn it so you could almost say it in your sleep! - it is very useful later on for when you are deciding wether to fly or not....
Anyhow - safe flying all
- and yes the exams are deffo more interesting after airlaw!
I am compairing the examination to the likeness of an old o'level exam - you know the ones which only require you to read and regurgitate facts and not actually understand or comprehend the information given to you.
I have passed my airlaw - and yes there are important fact to remember in there - but the majority of the facts have no direct relevance on the safety of you or your passengers.
Just having a piece of paper saying you have passed airlaw does not make you a safe flyer - it is the training you undertake which does that.
I suspect that the Airlaw exam is deliberately set in the way in which it is so that you learn to learn by repetition - and that it teaches you to learn in a very prescribed way (learning by repetition...) - very different to what other exams / qualifications do.
An example of this is the VMC minima - you get to learn it so you could almost say it in your sleep! - it is very useful later on for when you are deciding wether to fly or not....
Anyhow - safe flying all
- and yes the exams are deffo more interesting after airlaw!
Last edited by pchappo; 5th Mar 2007 at 20:13. Reason: spelling and stuff!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Warboys
Age: 55
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do agree that a large chunk of it is unnecessary for a PPL to learn, but then again I had to take an exam in in-flight catering before I could crew a Wessex!
I didn't very often serve ICAO Schedule 28 to my Passengers (continental breakfast) Why do useless facts like that stick in my head for 20-odd years, but trying to remember the VMC minima for different classes of airspace just passes in one ear and out the other....?(tonight's train subject - airspace)
I didn't very often serve ICAO Schedule 28 to my Passengers (continental breakfast) Why do useless facts like that stick in my head for 20-odd years, but trying to remember the VMC minima for different classes of airspace just passes in one ear and out the other....?(tonight's train subject - airspace)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably because nobody gives a damn about visibility minima, in most realistic scenarios.
When flying, one isn't trailed by another plane containing CAA employees, filming whether you enter the occassional (or the not so occassional) cloud, and measuring the in-flight visibility as they fly behind you. And checking you don't exceed 140kt below 3000ft or whatever it is. And checking you are 1000ft vert and 1 mile horizontally spaced from the nearest cloud, etc etc.
When flying, one isn't trailed by another plane containing CAA employees, filming whether you enter the occassional (or the not so occassional) cloud, and measuring the in-flight visibility as they fly behind you. And checking you don't exceed 140kt below 3000ft or whatever it is. And checking you are 1000ft vert and 1 mile horizontally spaced from the nearest cloud, etc etc.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aaah but perhaps only if the forecast minima when you set off was below minima as opposed to the actual minima when you arrived - and you would be pretty stupid to set off if the forecast minima was below your ratings - wouldnt you .
.
I dont think it particularly matters that some of the questions asked right across the ppl syllabus are of no practical use for flying. The point is they demonstrate an ability to learn and reason. Useful attributes for any pilot IMHO.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Niether can I, however my point is, I learn't it, as per the book, stored it in short time memory just in case an exam question asked for it, which It didn't, so I wasted, a lot of time / energy, learning totally irrelavant info
tv
tv
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think it particularly matters that some of the questions asked right across the ppl syllabus are of no practical use for flying. The point is they demonstrate an ability to learn and reason. Useful attributes for any pilot IMHO
On that basis, why not memorise sections of the bible? There is, as we are regularly informed, a great deal of wisdom in there.
This is very much the "olde English" mindset... how to separate the real men from the sheep. It would be more productive to focus on how to turn out pilots who know how to plan a flight from A to B and do so safely.
How come the FAA has managed to cut out most of the cr*p, yet there is no evidence of more accidents in FAA-land, where incidentally the great majority of GA in the known universe operates.
I've done the standalone JAA and FAA PPLs, have clocked up about 700hrs since, done the IR, and flown as far in Europe as there is avgas to be found, and I reckon there is more really relevant stuff in the single FAA PPL exam than in the 7 JAA ones. The exam is not a pushover, even if you did the JAA stuff recently it takes a while to get through it. And then you have the FAA oral, to make sure you know it, which can be 1-2 hours.
The FAA PPL also contains some instrument nav stuff missing in the JAA PPL, so beware.
The FAA stuff is not a perfect solution for flight in Europe (because one has to dedicate a significant portion of one's swatting time to learn US airspace rules and VFR chart interpretations which are quite different to Europe) but it is still a lot more meaningful than JAA.
On that basis, why not memorise sections of the bible? There is, as we are regularly informed, a great deal of wisdom in there.
This is very much the "olde English" mindset... how to separate the real men from the sheep. It would be more productive to focus on how to turn out pilots who know how to plan a flight from A to B and do so safely.
How come the FAA has managed to cut out most of the cr*p, yet there is no evidence of more accidents in FAA-land, where incidentally the great majority of GA in the known universe operates.
I've done the standalone JAA and FAA PPLs, have clocked up about 700hrs since, done the IR, and flown as far in Europe as there is avgas to be found, and I reckon there is more really relevant stuff in the single FAA PPL exam than in the 7 JAA ones. The exam is not a pushover, even if you did the JAA stuff recently it takes a while to get through it. And then you have the FAA oral, to make sure you know it, which can be 1-2 hours.
The FAA PPL also contains some instrument nav stuff missing in the JAA PPL, so beware.
The FAA stuff is not a perfect solution for flight in Europe (because one has to dedicate a significant portion of one's swatting time to learn US airspace rules and VFR chart interpretations which are quite different to Europe) but it is still a lot more meaningful than JAA.
I suspect IO that given the choice, most people would opt for 7 written exams rather than a single exam on the entire syllabus followed by a 1-2 hour oral, where presumably (I haven't taken an FAA test so I don't know) you couldn't just get away with guessing the answer. I would have thought that the FAA system separates the real men from the sheep even more effectively that the JAA system 
Don't disagree with you that the JAA syllabus could be modernised either. However, at the moment, it hasn't been, so if someone wants a JAA ppl they just have to knuckle down and learn the stuff.
Don't disagree with you that the JAA syllabus could be modernised either. However, at the moment, it hasn't been, so if someone wants a JAA ppl they just have to knuckle down and learn the stuff.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
most people would opt for 7 written exams rather than a single exam on the entire syllabus followed by a 1-2 hour oral, where presumably (I haven't taken an FAA test so I don't know) you couldn't just get away with guessing the answer
I think that's true, because it breaks up the revision. In terms of total swatting time there probably isn't much to choose between the two.
I know that myself, as a pilot who "should know the basic stuff from flying around" would now find it much harder to pass the JAA exams than passing the FAA one. The FAA PPL written is largely what most pilots would call common sense.
In fact a clever FAA PPL/IR N-reg owner with a lot of hours, a good tech brain and an interest in tech flying matters should pass the FAA CPL exam without any revision.
The FAA manages to deliver a solid ICAO compliant license (PPL or CPL - or indeed the ATPL which is still one book about 40mm thick, compared with ~ 700mm of paper thickness with JAA) in this way. Why doesn't the JAA do the same? I have never seen an objective analysis on this, and everybody I've met - airline pilots included - flying in the system just laughs when they recall what they had to learn.
I think that's true, because it breaks up the revision. In terms of total swatting time there probably isn't much to choose between the two.
I know that myself, as a pilot who "should know the basic stuff from flying around" would now find it much harder to pass the JAA exams than passing the FAA one. The FAA PPL written is largely what most pilots would call common sense.
In fact a clever FAA PPL/IR N-reg owner with a lot of hours, a good tech brain and an interest in tech flying matters should pass the FAA CPL exam without any revision.
The FAA manages to deliver a solid ICAO compliant license (PPL or CPL - or indeed the ATPL which is still one book about 40mm thick, compared with ~ 700mm of paper thickness with JAA) in this way. Why doesn't the JAA do the same? I have never seen an objective analysis on this, and everybody I've met - airline pilots included - flying in the system just laughs when they recall what they had to learn.
