Electric theory.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: I wish I knew sometimes
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Electric theory.....
A quick question for all you ATPL prep or graduates. Which exam has the electrical theory on it. I was under the assumption it is Instruments/Electronics. Or am I wrong and it is on Systems and Powerplants?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: I wish I knew sometimes
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your responses gentlemen. Yes I am doing the JAA (conversion). Transport Canada would not dare ask questions along the lines of Electrical Theory. It would make getting a licence in this country too difficult!!! In other words, if our transport authority maybe brought their standards even to within a few miles of the JAA, I would not have to do as much of this work to fly in Europe. Thanks again.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: I wish I knew sometimes
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The JAA standards are a little on the rigid side but it is better than the lax system here. You can get a full blown ATPL in Canada with 1500 hours of teaching others how to fly in a 150. There are people with 2500 hours all multi-turbine who still can only hold a CPL because their co-pilot time is only counted as half......Figure that one out. Who would you rather see in the left seat if you were in the back? Anyways all systems have their quirks......
Another question. The JAA lists for the ASP final exam at least 8 questions on emergency equipment. My course (distant learning) does not relay this. I am not writing Regs/Ops till next round. Where can I find this information?
Thanks.....
Another question. The JAA lists for the ASP final exam at least 8 questions on emergency equipment. My course (distant learning) does not relay this. I am not writing Regs/Ops till next round. Where can I find this information?
Thanks.....
You say that the rigidity under JAR is better because you perceive the Canadian system as "lax". I presume you associate this with safety, since that is usually the underlying purpose to regulation.
How do you justify this? Comparing like-for-like operations does Canada have a worse incident/accident/injury/death rate?
How do you justify this? Comparing like-for-like operations does Canada have a worse incident/accident/injury/death rate?
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,806
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Emergency Equipment learning objectives are listed on the CAA website here . You will see a large chunk of them relate to JAR OPS requirements available in an irritatingly large PDF file here . If you have public transport experience old SEP course material will help you with lifejackets, doors, sliderafts, smoke hoods etc. and questions relating to fire extinguishing systems tend to be asking about and using diagrams of B737 systems. You might get some B737 information on the 737 Pilots website
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: I wish I knew sometimes
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alex:
Thanks for the information. Very much appreciated.
Tinstaafl:
Your points and question seem valid. I am not basing my assesment of the Cananadian versus JAA method on safety as I should. I am actually confident in saying that Canada has one of the safest aviation industry's in the world. My point is in regards to the level of training that is given here as compared to other Western nations. The philosiphy here in Canada is in my mind the apprentice type system. We have a ton of aircraft in the is country and many of which operate in some very remote and harsh environments. This is where many young pilots get their start. The learning curve in the Arctic/North is very steep. Young Canadian pilots develop excellent hands and feet plus unusally good decision making skills very quickly. That is because we simply have to. In Europe many young pliots find their first job in a large turbo prop or a jet. In this scenerio their superior knowledge from their initial trainng comes into play. The transition to this job is a big step and is made easier by more rigid training. That being said they are for the most part not given the responsibility as early on as we would be. What you get is 2 pilots at say 1500 hours who are very different (Instructors not included). Their abilities are very different. All I am trying to say is that Canadian standards are a little behind the times. JAA standards are a little excessive but in my mind the better way to be headed into the future. Transport Canada is aware of this and things are changing.......slowly. I hope this maybe clears up my point a little. It seems at times to be a little contradictory but it is how I feel. Our system needs to be tightened up. The times are changing and so should we.
Thanks for the information. Very much appreciated.
Tinstaafl:
Your points and question seem valid. I am not basing my assesment of the Cananadian versus JAA method on safety as I should. I am actually confident in saying that Canada has one of the safest aviation industry's in the world. My point is in regards to the level of training that is given here as compared to other Western nations. The philosiphy here in Canada is in my mind the apprentice type system. We have a ton of aircraft in the is country and many of which operate in some very remote and harsh environments. This is where many young pilots get their start. The learning curve in the Arctic/North is very steep. Young Canadian pilots develop excellent hands and feet plus unusally good decision making skills very quickly. That is because we simply have to. In Europe many young pliots find their first job in a large turbo prop or a jet. In this scenerio their superior knowledge from their initial trainng comes into play. The transition to this job is a big step and is made easier by more rigid training. That being said they are for the most part not given the responsibility as early on as we would be. What you get is 2 pilots at say 1500 hours who are very different (Instructors not included). Their abilities are very different. All I am trying to say is that Canadian standards are a little behind the times. JAA standards are a little excessive but in my mind the better way to be headed into the future. Transport Canada is aware of this and things are changing.......slowly. I hope this maybe clears up my point a little. It seems at times to be a little contradictory but it is how I feel. Our system needs to be tightened up. The times are changing and so should we.
Thanks Canadiankid,
It was not my intention to seem harsh with you, but on re-reading I feel I have. Please accept my apologies.
I must disagree with you about the JAR system being an advancement. To my mind it is needlessly overly bureaucratic, over regulated and results in excess cost for all participants. It does not necessarily improve safety (anyone seen any accident statistics that can show it has?).
Whilst the overall goal of harmonising disparate States systems is laudable the resulting mess is hardly an improvement.
Each State seems to have refused to relax their most cherished restrictive practice so the result is a conglomeration of each State's worst practice.
When there are less severely regulated systems that work with equal or equivalent levels of safety how does one justify imposing more restrictive rules to no benefit?
It was not my intention to seem harsh with you, but on re-reading I feel I have. Please accept my apologies.
I must disagree with you about the JAR system being an advancement. To my mind it is needlessly overly bureaucratic, over regulated and results in excess cost for all participants. It does not necessarily improve safety (anyone seen any accident statistics that can show it has?).
Whilst the overall goal of harmonising disparate States systems is laudable the resulting mess is hardly an improvement.
Each State seems to have refused to relax their most cherished restrictive practice so the result is a conglomeration of each State's worst practice.
When there are less severely regulated systems that work with equal or equivalent levels of safety how does one justify imposing more restrictive rules to no benefit?
