Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1742326
PaulB wrote:
marioair wrote:Does the FAA do things differently? (I think it does.... not that this helps Marioair)


The FAA require an FAA CPL/IR as a pre-requisite before being able to obtain a CFI, CFII or MEI. In saying this the theory exams are a lot simpler with only one exam for each for the CPL & IR. But the oral exam for each "checkride" will sort the wheat from the chaff.
User avatar
By PaulB
#1742335
Many people say that the FAA system is what should be aspired to but isn't an oral exam (unless tightly structured and regulated) open to variations in application and pass standards?
marioair liked this
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
#1742337
My FAA CPL anf IR orals were massively more demanding than my FAA writtens, and some ways than my EASA CPL writtens - although by no means all.

My experience was of broadly similar overall difficulty in each, but the emphasis in very different places.

Anecdotally, some examiners may be much less tough than the one I had.

G
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer on Tue Jan 21, 2020 9:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By marioair
#1742339
I’m happy doing exams and I’m happy doing 13 of them because they’re on different subjects and you can’t throughly tests Someone’s knowledge any other way - whether it’s for a PPL, CPL, GCSE or whatever. But it’s still the the issue of have having relevant knowledge. If the FAA system addresses this then great. But doing it through an oral exam is not a good idea Imho
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
#1742340
PaulB wrote:Does the FAA do things differently? (I think it does.... not that this helps Marioair)


The FAA CPL is just an advanced PPL in effect. It has one exam (um, I think) and just takes the PPL knowledge a bit higher. I believe this is the sort of CPL which ICAO had in mind when they made it a requirement to be able to teach.

In Europe we've taken the ATPL and found a few bits to cut out to make a CPL, rather than working from the bottom up.
PaulB, WelshRichy liked this
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1742347
Genghis the Engineer wrote:My FAA CPL anf IR orals were massively more demanding than my FAA writtens, and some ways than my EASA CPL writtens - although by no means all.

My experience was of broadly similar overall difficulty in each, but the emphasis in very different places


Same here experience here although my FAA experiences were seventeen years ago and my EASA exams last year. Overall I did find the FAA written(s) and oral(s) a lot more relevant than some of the EASA theory material for the privileges of the licence (certificate) even though I really did enjoy learning how jet engines operate. :D

When I have my EASA FI (booked for the summer) and some real instructing experience under my belt I am very tempted for a trip to our friends in USA for the purpose of obtaining an FAA CFI but if I do I'm certainly not relishing at the thought of the the 6-8 hour oral I keep hearing about for initial CFI applicants!
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
#1742353
I'm the other way around as it happens - EASA CPL 10 years ago, FAA CPL and IR last year. [EASA IR hopefully this year, UK IMCR / IR(R) I skipped any exams as CPL holders are exempt.]

marioair wrote:I’m happy doing exams and I’m happy doing 13 of them because they’re on different subjects and you can’t throughly tests Someone’s knowledge any other way - whether it’s for a PPL, CPL, GCSE or whatever. But it’s still the the issue of have having relevant knowledge. If the FAA system addresses this then great. But doing it through an oral exam is not a good idea Imho


With two CPLs, a PhD and a black belt I've hopefully not a lot to prove in in exam passing. The toughest oral exams were the FAA IR (3hrs), and my PhD (4½hrs). In my opinion they are much more valid as an assessment of somebody's abilities in a role, than any number of written exams. A competent oral examiner can pick a scenario, develop it, and develop it further. My PhD supervisor, an incredibly experienced academic described it as finding a piece of loose wool, pulling on it, then pulling on the next bit, and carrying on until you see what's left. By comparison written exams - especially the multiple choice once mostly favoured both sides of the Atlantic favour teaching for the test far more than deep subject knowledge.

By comparison, a shodan grading is again very like the FAA checkride - lots of oral, lots of active delivery of skills in simulated real-world scenarios - although unlike the FAA checkride very much mixed up - fight off half a dozen ninjas, answer some tough theory questions, demonstrate your ability to do something fiddly, few more ninjas, teach something - you get the idea. But again, the black belt is regarded everywhere as a high and impressive standard. Whilst a few systems do use written exams in it, that aspects is seldom seen as important.


So, basically, I disagree. From my experience, oral exams, well conducted, are the toughest and most rigorous type of tests you can conduct. But, they do require enormous faith in the examiner, standardisation processes, etc. - which is much more expensive and hard to quality assure than a computer managed multiple choice or numeric answer questionbank.

G
WelshRichy liked this
User avatar
By MichaelP
#1742384
Talked to a friend here this afternoon.
He did the Hong Kong ATPL exams including flight planning for the Boeing 707.
Came back to Canada and Transport Canada duly put his 747 type rating on his TC CPL... Then he had to take the two Transport Canada ATPL exams to get the TC ATPL.

Relevance, is taking exams for the performance ‘ratings’ of the aircraft you fly.
So you don’t have to do the performance planning for a jet if you are flying a Navajo, or teaching in a Cessna 152.

Would you do a HGV test to teach someone to drive a Mini?
By chrisbl
#1742958
Has anyone with an FAA Commercial pilot certificate tried using that as evidence of CPL TK for the purpose of instructing, especially as the requirement for CPL TK is from the ICAO and the FAA Commercial certificate is ICAO compliant?
User avatar
By SteveC
#1742962
A very ling line of people have tried and failed. There is a link on the CAA website that gives guidance. The TK requirement for an EASA rating is EASA TK.
User avatar
By Sir Morley Steven
#1743212
Back to the OP why not self study for the TK and self train for the CPL skill test. It’s all a piece of phish after all.
User avatar
By MichaelP
#1743367
It’s impossible to find anything more definitive than the twelve months between being signed off by an FTO to do the exams, and their completion.
I have been all over the CAA website looking for this information.

Here in Canada it’s two years for written exams; unlike Euroland the information is easier to find.
I suppose one is safe with twelve months.

I have students flying for airlines here in Canada, in Hong Kong, and elsewhere around this planet. They don’t seem to have any trouble with the apparent non conformance of Transport Canada, FAA, and CAAC CPL TK with the EASA ruled ICAO standards.
I suppose we should be able to teach the Index CG method, and how to do a flex performance takeoff in a jet (just in case they forget to put the carb heat in).
User avatar
By WelshRichy
#1743517
NDB_hold wrote:Is there a validity period for CPL TK if going for a FI rating?


Nope not at all, they are valid indefinitely for the purpose of obtaining an FI rating.

The only validity requirement is if you were using them to obtain a CPL in which case it is three years from the date of the last exam pass.