Most challenging ATPL exams (Country)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2023
Location: AU
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most challenging ATPL exams (Country)
Hi all,
I wanted to start a thread discussing the differences between each country's ATPL theory exams to see which one would be the most challenging as there is a lot of conflicting information on the internet and nothing that really answers the question (of course if there is something that I haven't found yet, please post it below). The main countries/authorities that spark interest are the difference between EASA, CAA, CASA and the FAA.
Happy flying.
I wanted to start a thread discussing the differences between each country's ATPL theory exams to see which one would be the most challenging as there is a lot of conflicting information on the internet and nothing that really answers the question (of course if there is something that I haven't found yet, please post it below). The main countries/authorities that spark interest are the difference between EASA, CAA, CASA and the FAA.
Happy flying.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Don't get me started 
EASA is an international joke, being overly technical and badly managed. About 40% of the syllabus would, in any other country, be used for a Flight Engineer's licence. What's left is riddled with bad English and punctuation, misspellings, multiple correct answers, multiple wrong answers (20% of the total database, according to the Swedish authorities years ago), some in the middle - in short, it's a major screw-up. There is often a very loose connection between the questions and the Learning Objectives they are supposed to belong to. In fact, they are textbook examples of the types of question to avoid, according to the FAA Fundamentals of Instruction course.
Many questions in Human Factors, for example, have come from pop psychology books rather than accepted sources, and others are just there to prove how clever the examiners are, rather than to ensure that you have the knowledge to fly safely. Essentially, EASA writes the Learning Objectives and leaves it to the schools to write their own syllabuses. Most other authorities have an internal department to create their own questions, but EASA farms it out and pays 90 Euros per question, so there is a huge incentive just to go for the money rather than quality. The only depth of knowledge indication (and source of references in case of challenges) is in the questions themselves which, naturally, nobody is allowed to see. The FAA and Transport Canada, on the other hand, issue publications from which their questions are taken. As a result, you will need access to a commercial question database - you will not pass the EASA exams without it.
The UK CAA use EASA questions with some modified for common sense, CASA seems to be OK, with the possible exception of the law exam, because they keep changing the rules, and the FAA ones are easier, but they supplement them with the check ride (you won't get flying for some hours due to the grilling you get during the briefing). NZ exams seem to be broadly similar to Canadian ones, which I believe are the best all round, and they also have a serious session before getting airborne. Indian ones are the most intellectually rigorous. South Africa bought an old copy of the EASA exams years ago.
EASA is an international joke, being overly technical and badly managed. About 40% of the syllabus would, in any other country, be used for a Flight Engineer's licence. What's left is riddled with bad English and punctuation, misspellings, multiple correct answers, multiple wrong answers (20% of the total database, according to the Swedish authorities years ago), some in the middle - in short, it's a major screw-up. There is often a very loose connection between the questions and the Learning Objectives they are supposed to belong to. In fact, they are textbook examples of the types of question to avoid, according to the FAA Fundamentals of Instruction course.Many questions in Human Factors, for example, have come from pop psychology books rather than accepted sources, and others are just there to prove how clever the examiners are, rather than to ensure that you have the knowledge to fly safely. Essentially, EASA writes the Learning Objectives and leaves it to the schools to write their own syllabuses. Most other authorities have an internal department to create their own questions, but EASA farms it out and pays 90 Euros per question, so there is a huge incentive just to go for the money rather than quality. The only depth of knowledge indication (and source of references in case of challenges) is in the questions themselves which, naturally, nobody is allowed to see. The FAA and Transport Canada, on the other hand, issue publications from which their questions are taken. As a result, you will need access to a commercial question database - you will not pass the EASA exams without it.
The UK CAA use EASA questions with some modified for common sense, CASA seems to be OK, with the possible exception of the law exam, because they keep changing the rules, and the FAA ones are easier, but they supplement them with the check ride (you won't get flying for some hours due to the grilling you get during the briefing). NZ exams seem to be broadly similar to Canadian ones, which I believe are the best all round, and they also have a serious session before getting airborne. Indian ones are the most intellectually rigorous. South Africa bought an old copy of the EASA exams years ago.
Last edited by paco; 24th Nov 2023 at 06:37.
Ground instructor
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Paco said!
Been a TKI over 25 years on and off and yes, the learning objectives are a joke. The worst thing is the “CTRL+H” search and replace they did to change most of the LOs to 2020 syllabus. State became Explain and list became Describe, with no other changes to the sentence in a lot of cases. Dangerously inept.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sunny Solihull
Age: 67
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
100% agree with PACO & PFD, the EASA exams are a disgrace considering they are supposed to be for a professional qualification. One of the reasons I with some regret retired from instructing utter rubbish a few years ago.
Did instruct the NZ ATPLs back in 2007/8 when if I remember correctly they threw FP, PERF & M&B into one 3 hour exam, gave you a couple of B777 type manuals and told to plan a flight from Auckland to LA. Had to work out almost everything with re-starts along the way (bit like the old CAA FP/GN before JAA/EASA) a far more testing and relevant exam than EASA.
Did instruct the NZ ATPLs back in 2007/8 when if I remember correctly they threw FP, PERF & M&B into one 3 hour exam, gave you a couple of B777 type manuals and told to plan a flight from Auckland to LA. Had to work out almost everything with re-starts along the way (bit like the old CAA FP/GN before JAA/EASA) a far more testing and relevant exam than EASA.
Last edited by RichardH; 24th Nov 2023 at 11:50.
13 years ago I did the UK JAA ATPLs and passed them all with an average of 94% with BGS by gaining about half knowledge and half bank. The syllabus was fairly stable with most daft questions removed and the remaining silly questions highlighted - as I had a thirst for learning about aviation it wasn't all that bad.
Due to circumstances I'm currently redoing them but with the introduction of the 2020 syllabus and Covid meaning all the banks had some lag as no one had sat them they are FAR harder as you have to interpret the questions very carefully and as alluded to above some questions are plain wrong or have 2 equally correct answers. Add to this the CAA quadrant style answer entries and the type in boxes without multiple choice means they are something of a nightmare. Current average pass has gone from 94% to 81% so far.
From my perspective the CAA EASA questions don't really educate you as to your future career - why do I need to go into such detail as the conventions and dates of certain agreements?
Slowly they seem to be getting better but it's very much a learn / bank / brain dump situation - for example in instruments the CBT syllabus about autothrottle was limited to maybe a page on how a mode control panel operates. Either you or the AP demands something and it works it out and passes that to the FADECS, job done. In my instrument exam I had 3 questions on it that required basically general knowledge from programs, random books and articles or how a FADEC really operates from David Hill's book Their Greatest Disgrace about the Chinhook ZD576 crash on the Mull of Kintyre - the whole situation can be demoralising.
In fact forwarded a few screenshots to friends who are current Aircrew on B737 and A320 and just got back blank faces as they can be so utterly irrelevant to real life - 45* AoB at near max service ceiling with a 1.3 buffet margin and max weight? Why would you be there? Good job I've read Ben RIch's book Skunk Works about early U2s in exactly such a coffin corner.
It's no criticism of TK providers both you and them have to play them game but without the banks you're getting nowhere.
Due to circumstances I'm currently redoing them but with the introduction of the 2020 syllabus and Covid meaning all the banks had some lag as no one had sat them they are FAR harder as you have to interpret the questions very carefully and as alluded to above some questions are plain wrong or have 2 equally correct answers. Add to this the CAA quadrant style answer entries and the type in boxes without multiple choice means they are something of a nightmare. Current average pass has gone from 94% to 81% so far.
From my perspective the CAA EASA questions don't really educate you as to your future career - why do I need to go into such detail as the conventions and dates of certain agreements?
Slowly they seem to be getting better but it's very much a learn / bank / brain dump situation - for example in instruments the CBT syllabus about autothrottle was limited to maybe a page on how a mode control panel operates. Either you or the AP demands something and it works it out and passes that to the FADECS, job done. In my instrument exam I had 3 questions on it that required basically general knowledge from programs, random books and articles or how a FADEC really operates from David Hill's book Their Greatest Disgrace about the Chinhook ZD576 crash on the Mull of Kintyre - the whole situation can be demoralising.
In fact forwarded a few screenshots to friends who are current Aircrew on B737 and A320 and just got back blank faces as they can be so utterly irrelevant to real life - 45* AoB at near max service ceiling with a 1.3 buffet margin and max weight? Why would you be there? Good job I've read Ben RIch's book Skunk Works about early U2s in exactly such a coffin corner.
It's no criticism of TK providers both you and them have to play them game but without the banks you're getting nowhere.
