I think it's down to three things:

1) Economics. Instructors are very badly paid. Most schools will not pay for groundschool, the instructor has to earn a living, and he needs to get the engine started.

2) The syllabus. Like the ATPL nonsense we have to learn, the stuff a PPL has to learn is largely irrevelent. I always felt it was much more important to teach my students some good inflight decision making than the finer points of flapback/specific gravity calculations/maritime air masses.

3) The students. Most PPL students are 'cash-rich-time-poor' types. They treat their helicopter lessons like a round of golf. They turn up on the hour for their 1 hour of helicopter flying, then they shoot off to their meeting/home/office, and forget about flying (and any studying you have asked them to do) until their next lesson.

I have forgotten the number of students who are only interested in flying and I have gone blue in the face trying to get them to study. Then they are ready for their PPL test and have only passed two exams. Very frustrating. But I guess it's their money.

Of course you do also get keen students who study loads (probably like the people who attend the safety evenings), but they are in the minority.

Also - most PPL students, when they get their licence, stick it in a draw and never fly again, or they fly once every 3 months in the local area. All ground knowledge has been forgotten, all that remains are the basic (probably rusty) flying skills. No confidence to go on any trips and no confidence on the radio.

I agree with 2 of your points, but not this bit:

2) The syllabus. Like the ATPL nonsense we have to learn, the stuff a PPL has to learn is largely irrevelent.

No it isn't. if you are going to occupy airspace with people who have a certain level of knowledge, you should have it as well, within obvious limits. I certainly think that POF should be the same for PPL(H) and ATPL(H). Indeed, that's what we teach.

I hear this all the time about the syllabuses - most of the ATPL(H) syllabus will be used at some time in your career - it's just that the authorities like you to know it before they sign you off to fly anywhere in the world. Some of it is slightly irrelevant (like the inner workings of a CRT). None of it is largely irrelevant!

Now, when it comes to the questions, don't get me started! The JAA questions are a collective national disgrace when compared to say, the straightforward nature of the Canadian ones (I hesitate to include FAA one questions as there are lots of mistakes there as well).

Phil

"will be used at some time in your career"
 

Mmm... how many people here had ever had to navigate using a polar stereographic chart, draw the inner workings of a turn co-ordinator, or calculate the appropriate flight level according to the static air temp and headwind component?

I could go on...

Polar Stereographic? It's on the exams in Canada, as is Grid nav. Yes, for helicopters.

Inner workings of instruments? You need to know their limitations so you can get the best information from them.

Appropriate flight levels. Good for performance!

HF radio? They use it there.

Change of Longitude? Handy for calculating lat & long in your head.

Knowledge is knowledge and when you're up against it you need it in your head, not in an exam you skipped ages ago.

Phil

Yes, but how many CPL/ATPL holders would be able to pass the exams now? Not many. The knowledge is just not there. Because the exams are just an expensive question-spotting memory game.

:ok:Geof Day, you wont be disappointed. Geof very accomodating. I did cpl H and instructor with him. 07703284144

Tim Walker at CCAT is very good but that would mean Cabair so bring your lawyer along.

Leon at heli services is a great bloke when you get used to him.

Jerry lanchbury at Whizzard is also very good.

Phil Speechley at central is again a top fellor.

Marcus at London Helicopter Centres, Redhill.

CPL Training
 

Geoff Day IS the Man!, Leon Smith is an acquired taste! Sour!!. Dan.