Serious help with CPL?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: upminster
Age: 32
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Serious help with CPL?
My PPL course has almost come to an end and im looking forward to be able to just hire out an aeroplane whenever and go wherever, but in the future I intended to gain a CPL, do some instructing and see what else comes along.
The problem is that I dont seem to be able to get a positive answer about the CPL course. I mean what are the course entry requirements as they seem to be different at every flying club + school I have checked with, also what is on the CPL syllibus and how many exams etc. are there to take and what are they called? I also hear that there may be many changes comming along in 2012 associated with EASA, does anybody have any information for me?
Greatly appreciated
Mr Cessna
The problem is that I dont seem to be able to get a positive answer about the CPL course. I mean what are the course entry requirements as they seem to be different at every flying club + school I have checked with, also what is on the CPL syllibus and how many exams etc. are there to take and what are they called? I also hear that there may be many changes comming along in 2012 associated with EASA, does anybody have any information for me?
Greatly appreciated
Mr Cessna
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: 7nm N of LARCK
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LASORS ?
Although not the world's best bed time reading, LASORS may be of assistance:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_lts...Bookmarked.pdf
Section D1 refers.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_lts...Bookmarked.pdf
Section D1 refers.
and these requirements are also being adopted by EASA so there should not be any major changes in the pipeline except that the JAA exams are being redplaced by EASA exams. Same old crap in a different packet!
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I mean what are the course entry requirements as they seem to be different at every flying club + school I have checked with
I believe it's 150 TT for fixed wing to start the CPL flying course (155 for rotary).
The flying syllabus isn't much different to PPL in essence but it's just to a much higher standard with more judgement required. For example, with helicopters, a PPL examiner would call the engine-off landing to land at a particular spot whereas at CPL you call it yourself and judge yourself whether you are committed and close the throttle.
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cranfield UK
Age: 70
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in the future (future) I intended (past tense) to gain a CPL, do some instructing and see what else comes along
What do you expect to come along?
For someone who cannot even be bothered to look up the references from readily available sources I would suspect very little to "come along".
I know that some of the youth of today expect to be able to seek instant gratification as a right and I hope that as a PPL you would not fall into this category but FFS!
Surely when you are at the flying club or whatever you can at least speak to a CPL/FI who has obviously already got the knowledge you seek?
Life is tough and getting a licence can be very expensive and quite tough.
Good luck in your quest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: upminster
Age: 32
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SkyCamMK
Well quite often I expect ignorant men in their late 50s like yourself who stereotype ''the youth of today'' just because of what they read in the paper, when the truth is; there are decent young people around (infact many) who just wish to work hard for a career and better themselves.
And yes that is exactly what I meant SkyCamMK ''intended'' as in past tense because I was uncertain of requirements etc. as I said many websites show slighty different information and EASA changes in 2012, also im not sure the industry would be for me if I thought that it was full of nit pickers like yourself.
Also:
Did I lower myself and swear at you SkyCamMK? or in any other of my posts? That is usually the sign of an inadequate individual.
many thanks for all of your replies
What do you expect to come along?
in the future (future) I intended (past tense) to gain a CPL, do some instructing and see what else comes along
Also:
I hope that as a PPL you would not fall into this category but FFS!
many thanks for all of your replies
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kent
Age: 61
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr C,
I did precisely what you are intending a few years back.
As previously mentioned the first thing is to decide if you are going to do the ATPL (14) or CPL (9) papers. If you are not going to complete an IR withing 3 years of your "final pass" in the exams then don't bother with the ATPLs - do the CPL exams. (See J1.7 Theoretical Knowledge Examination Acceptance Period in LASORS). If you do intend to get an IR, within 3 years, do the ATPLs - it means 5 fewer exams in the long run.
Get a night rating!!! If you don't have one you'll have to do 5 extra hours training - possibly at "commercial" (as opposed to "PPL") rates.
Next get a Class 1 medical - there's no point in even starting the ground school if you can't pass that.
Before you can start the flying part of the CPL you will need: "...at least 150 hours flight time as a pilot..." LASORS D.1.2(d)
By the time you have completed the flying training you must have :
I think that's about it.
OC619
I did precisely what you are intending a few years back.
As previously mentioned the first thing is to decide if you are going to do the ATPL (14) or CPL (9) papers. If you are not going to complete an IR withing 3 years of your "final pass" in the exams then don't bother with the ATPLs - do the CPL exams. (See J1.7 Theoretical Knowledge Examination Acceptance Period in LASORS). If you do intend to get an IR, within 3 years, do the ATPLs - it means 5 fewer exams in the long run.
Get a night rating!!! If you don't have one you'll have to do 5 extra hours training - possibly at "commercial" (as opposed to "PPL") rates.
Next get a Class 1 medical - there's no point in even starting the ground school if you can't pass that.
Before you can start the flying part of the CPL you will need: "...at least 150 hours flight time as a pilot..." LASORS D.1.2(d)
By the time you have completed the flying training you must have :
- 100 hours PIC
- 20 hours VFR Cross Country as PIC - including a "...cross-country Flight totalling at least 540 km (300 nm) in the course of which full-stop landings at two aerodromes different from the aerodrome of departure..."
- 10 hours instrument dual instruction (covered in the CPL course)
- 5 hours night
I think that's about it.
OC619
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the CPL alone is 9 exams.
I am just working through the 7 IR exams and have never seen so much bull***t in my life. The relevance to flying is much less than 5%, where the material was once relevant it is obsolete by at least a decade, and the questions are often ambiguously phrased (poor use of English). A lot of the answers are simply wrong, or so highly type- or context-dependent they are meaningless. I don't understand how, 10+ years after JAA came in, this appalling situation has been allowed to continue.
So I don't envy anybody doing the CPL exams.
I am just working through the 7 IR exams and have never seen so much bull***t in my life. The relevance to flying is much less than 5%, where the material was once relevant it is obsolete by at least a decade, and the questions are often ambiguously phrased (poor use of English). A lot of the answers are simply wrong, or so highly type- or context-dependent they are meaningless. I don't understand how, 10+ years after JAA came in, this appalling situation has been allowed to continue.
So I don't envy anybody doing the CPL exams.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kent
Age: 61
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
The relevance to flying is much less than 5%
I would joke about the benefits of the "extra safety" provided by knowing how to use a bubble sextant - but some jobsworth will probably think it's a good idea and mandate they be carried.
OC619
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the "Euro problem".
Somebody proposes a core question bank.
Then Herr Doktor (Germany) insists on putting in stuff about the flow rate in some vein in the brain of a hamster (very important stuff) into HP&L. So it goes in.
By the time it has done the rounds of the committee, you have 5000 questions, which then have to be translated to English and that is also done badly.
At least 90% and probably 99% of these people have never flown in a plane of any sort (in the cockpit) so they have no idea of the relevance to aviation, let alone relevance to present-day aviation at any level.
I have the happy time now of learning about some airliner variant of a KNS-80 which is a GA product they stopped making even before JAA arrived in 1999, AFAIK. Today, it remains in the panel only because it would leave a big hole if you took it out, and the W&B schedule would need to be re-done which will cost a few hundred quid. Nobody can fly with a KNS-80 because for a lot more years than I've been flying IFR, ATC issue VORs as virtual waypoints; to hell with the DOC.
I gather that in the goode olde days, when stewardesses were proper women in short skirts, you dialed up the local VOR, dialed up the virtual waypoint, and then when the real VOR/DME went out of range (not many minutes later, at 500kt) you flew the heading for the next 500nm or whatever. No wonder airways were 10nm wide. But how long ago was big jet nav this sloppy? Must be 20 years, possibly 30 or 40.
It is staggering how this has continued since 1999.
I guess because people are just very compliant, get on with it, and once done they get on with the next project. Very very few rock the boat, and exactly zero ATPL wannabees will want to rock any sort of boat (except totally anonymously via some forum).
Somebody proposes a core question bank.
Then Herr Doktor (Germany) insists on putting in stuff about the flow rate in some vein in the brain of a hamster (very important stuff) into HP&L. So it goes in.
By the time it has done the rounds of the committee, you have 5000 questions, which then have to be translated to English and that is also done badly.
At least 90% and probably 99% of these people have never flown in a plane of any sort (in the cockpit) so they have no idea of the relevance to aviation, let alone relevance to present-day aviation at any level.
I have the happy time now of learning about some airliner variant of a KNS-80 which is a GA product they stopped making even before JAA arrived in 1999, AFAIK. Today, it remains in the panel only because it would leave a big hole if you took it out, and the W&B schedule would need to be re-done which will cost a few hundred quid. Nobody can fly with a KNS-80 because for a lot more years than I've been flying IFR, ATC issue VORs as virtual waypoints; to hell with the DOC.
I gather that in the goode olde days, when stewardesses were proper women in short skirts, you dialed up the local VOR, dialed up the virtual waypoint, and then when the real VOR/DME went out of range (not many minutes later, at 500kt) you flew the heading for the next 500nm or whatever. No wonder airways were 10nm wide. But how long ago was big jet nav this sloppy? Must be 20 years, possibly 30 or 40.
It is staggering how this has continued since 1999.
I guess because people are just very compliant, get on with it, and once done they get on with the next project. Very very few rock the boat, and exactly zero ATPL wannabees will want to rock any sort of boat (except totally anonymously via some forum).
IO540, now do come on - surely you know how crucial it is to know the system of ground lights to be displayed under tethered balloons, or the dimension of the stripes on the streamers required to be attached to the mooring ropes of tethered kites....
Or the colour of layzer* light used in a RLG?
*wrong spelling due to the net-nanny.
Or the colour of layzer* light used in a RLG?
*wrong spelling due to the net-nanny.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NE England
Age: 53
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am just working through the 7 IR exams
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
I am just working through the 7 IR exams and have never seen so much bull***t in my life. The relevance to flying is much less than 5%, where the material was once relevant it is obsolete by at least a decade, and the questions are often ambiguously phrased (poor use of English). A lot of the answers are simply wrong, or so highly type- or context-dependent they are meaningless. I don't understand how, 10+ years after JAA came in, this appalling situation has been allowed to continue.
I believe anyone's flight safety is considerably higher, if he/she knows the exact year and place each of ICAO annexes was accepted. And draining the fuel tanks before every flight isn't the safest possible method, you have to do it only before first day of flight, to be on the safe side, of course. And the most accurate method of determining aircraft's positions is DME/DME, god forbid GPS - it's satan's work. Also, frequency 135.875 is spelled as "one three five decimal eight seven" - who cares about the last number, you don't see it on your state-of-the art avionics anyway. To be honest, you just have to know all the performance factors by heart, since this could one day save your life - you know, paper copies are so expensive and it is cheaper for an operator to have its crew learn manuals and tables by heart than to print some copies and put it on board the aircraft. Not to mention, that if you put 20 kg in front and 20 kg in back of your present CG, it is absolutely CRITICAL to know that the CG moves for 2 mm or so - being 100% precise is all flying is about. But when calculation navigation data, you have to round out data at every step and apply some of that engineering talent of yours so the end result, such as WCA or ground speed isn't fudged by your calculator's inability to calculate trigonometry correctly.Saracsm off now...
IO540, I agree with everything you pointed out, but the truth is - how can we change it? I don't think EASA actually cares much about the CQB, since most of the questions are created in a way to deceive and I believe the intention of JAA was to fail as many as candidates as they could and create some sort of selection to eliminate the weakest. But then came the internet and CQB (or copies of it, since as far as I know EASA didn't approve any of databases one can purchase on the internet as the official database) were made public and most people now "study" (I can't really describe this as studying), by clicking on the questions again and again until they have memorized the correct questions in their heads. Sadly, it's not just aviation that is going this way...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, I don't know how one could change it. I guess a letter to one's MP, picking up the "this is what airline pilots train with" safety angle would work.
I also think the reason the question bank came out was precisely because the questions were so poorly phrased that simply knowing the subject matter would still not get you there. You might get the 75% - though probably not in HP&L.
I also think the reason the question bank came out was precisely because the questions were so poorly phrased that simply knowing the subject matter would still not get you there. You might get the 75% - though probably not in HP&L.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cranfield UK
Age: 70
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Dear!
Mr Cessna, where did you get "I expect ignorant men in their late 50s like yourself who stereotype ''the youth of today'' just because of what they read in the paper" from?
Perhaps this next comment is more realistic "im not sure the industry would be for me if I thought that it was full of nit pickers like yourself" because if you think that I am nit picking because you cannot be bothered to check the legislation or a reliable source without recourse to a rumour network you are mistaken because there are real nit pickers out there.
I apologise for the "FFS" but you should not take it to heart it is just an expresssion. As for my adequacy or not you may judge as you find but you have little excuse to make a judgement like that yet I believe.
However, the old faithfuls have shared their comments with you as they end to do in a most helpful way, perhaps you could return their kindness by studying air law and reading the current law or speaking to your local CPLs who like me would be happy to share if you gave the imnpression that you cared enough to do some basic research first. Nuff said!
Perhaps this next comment is more realistic "im not sure the industry would be for me if I thought that it was full of nit pickers like yourself" because if you think that I am nit picking because you cannot be bothered to check the legislation or a reliable source without recourse to a rumour network you are mistaken because there are real nit pickers out there.
I apologise for the "FFS" but you should not take it to heart it is just an expresssion. As for my adequacy or not you may judge as you find but you have little excuse to make a judgement like that yet I believe.
However, the old faithfuls have shared their comments with you as they end to do in a most helpful way, perhaps you could return their kindness by studying air law and reading the current law or speaking to your local CPLs who like me would be happy to share if you gave the imnpression that you cared enough to do some basic research first. Nuff said!
