Transport Ca stats on pass/fail for written/flight tests

[paokara]

Is there a site where they keep stats on how many times a pilot has attempted to write a test of flight test?

I am trying to determine whether a pilot that has written their commercial written test 3 times makes him a worse pilot than a pilot that passed the test the first time.

I am debating this with another high level pilot

thanks

paokara

[shamrock104]

Yes, most definitely. A pilot who has written a exam more than 4 times normally is a far worse
pilot that a first time pass guy/ girl.

[square]

How would you determine if someone who failed a test twice is worse than someone who passed the first time?

Please don't tell me it's gauged on how many times it takes you to pass the test.

[JigglyBus]

Did you just refer to yourself as a 'high level pilot' ???????

I think I just figured out which one of you wrote the test 3 times.

[Ralliart]

Written exams, especially TC ones, are a very poor way to judge a pilot's ability, knowledge and skill level in the aircraft.

[C23flyer]

Is this a real question????

One's ability to memorize material for a high stakes test, in no way, shape or form is an indication of ability of anything other than memorization.

It worries me that this is even a subject for debate. But it does further Cat Driver's point that it doesn't take much to be a pilot (paraphrasing of course).

[trey kule]

Transport Canada published, in the Aviation Safety Letter, some time ago , I think, a list prepared by the FAA as indicators of future accident potential.


And yes, the failure to pass written/flight tests was shown as an indicator.

While it is customary to poo-poo the value of the written exam, with the exception of the exams that are taught in weekend courses, my personal feeling is they, in most cases, do give an indiction of pilot ability. Just my opinion.

[Hedley]

indicators of future accident potential

Really? Oddly enough, there seems to be precious little
interest in whether or not pilots have accidents. The focus
instead is heavily on regulatory compliance and social
skills.

I know a flight instructor, he bends up airplanes all the time.
Probably aces his written tests, too. One year, he wrecked
at least 3 airplanes that I know of.

[sameasyou]

I don't see how anyone can fail any one of the exams. The questions (most often verbatim) and answers are all out there. How many out there have taken an Aerocourse just prior to writing, say your SAMRA, SARON, or instrument exam. It makes it pretty simple when all you have to do is memorize answers. I don't believe a pilot passing or failing a written makes you better or worse. The bulk of learning begins when you actually begin a job in the industry and apprentice under more experienced pilots.

[TG]

I know a flight instructor, he bends up airplanes all the time.
Probably aces his written tests, too. One year, he wrecked
at least 3 airplanes that I know of.

Could have been his student who failed couple of written tests before.



It's a joke!

[Hedley]

I don't see how anyone can fail any one of the exams

I don't see how anyone can have a problem with a surface
level outside loop, either. But for some odd reason, I don't
see many people doing them in Canada. Heck, you don't
even see many vanilla inside loops at the surface, either.

**** NEWS FLASH ****

People are different.

Re-read the above three word sentence. As many
times as it takes for it to sink in.

[Koizie1]

The purpose of a written test is not to determine wether a person is a good or bad pilot. We've all done the exams and know a well trained monkey could do it! The purpose is to prove you have the ability, interest and motivation to learn something. Even just memorizing the answers proves you have at least some mental ability and motivation.

Having said all that, if someone fails 3 times you have to question their judgement. Not knowing you are going to fail something 3 times is a pretty worrying indicator of judgement and understanding of your own abilities.

[Cat Driver]

If I were to go and write say the Canadian flight instructor exam tomorrow it is quite possible I would fail the exam.

Does that mean that I am probably accident prone and more important does that mean I do not know how to teach people how to fly?

[jetflightinstructor]

passing or failing a TC (or FAA) written exam doesn' t make any difference. The level is so low, and most of the time the question makes sense to only the ones who have memorized the answers. Failing A TC exam doesn' t mean you are different from your colleague who passed it. It doesn' t mean that you are better pilot neither

Again, the level is incredibly low. a 12 years old kid could pass it. the same kid couldn' t pass a lawyer exam though....

Europe is doing some effort though. There, the pilot knowledge it taken a bit more seriously.

A better written exam, and a higher level concerning the flight test would mean less pilot, so better salary, no?
OOoops sorry, the subject is sensitive for some....

[Cat Driver]

When I first started writing exams for pilot licenses the answers were hand written and the exam was marked for your score in knowing the answers to the questions by a D.O.T. (TC) inspector who was trained to determine if you knew the subject.

Today you could give a monkey a multiple choice exam and have the monkey pick the answers, the law of averages would dictate that some of the monkeys would pass.

[fantome]

Koizie1

The purpose of a written test is not to determine whether a person is a good or bad pilot. We've all done the exams and know a well trained monkey could do it! The purpose is to prove you have the ability, interest and motivation to learn something. Even just memorizing the answers proves you have at least some mental ability and motivation.

There was an Examiner of Airmen in Western Australia once, the late John Bally, from Hungary originally, and an incredibly emphatic speaker, heavily accented . He was my boss at a time when he was a CFI in Perth. I can hear him still. "There is no two way about it. You do it this way." Anyway, 'The Hairy Hound', as one of the other blokes used to call him, said time and again, "You must pass ATPL exam even thought the content of some paper is no earthly good to you or others who go for this ticket. If nothing else it shows Department you know how to study, how to be logical and how you are serious". Waste of time I thought then. And do today. Relevance, please. 'Need to know', first. 'Nice to know', should you have the time and inclination. And all the rest, 'Who gives a rat's?'

PS John Bally flew Hurricanes. Was shot down over France and spent days hiding in a hole in a field with only the odd ancient potato to sustain him before making his way back to England. He did not like to hear anyone complain of discomfort.

PPS There are no more Examiners of Airman over here. They're now Approved Testing Officers. And our TC equivalent has gone through more multiple costly name changes than I've had hot breakfasts.

[trey kule]

After reading some of the thoughtful answers, let me rephrase my previous post

I was unaware, that now in Canada, you could get weekend courses for the ppl and cpl. I agree wholeheartedly with the give them the test question courses...I mentioned that generally but not specifically.

The UK CAA exams I wrote two years ago were not multiple choice. You actually had to write the answers, as Cat mentioned we used to do here also (before my time in the 60's)

What I dont understand is how one, at the early stages is able to determine what they will need to know in the future.
You never know what you are going to need and the flying you are doing at a flight school maybe totally different than what you wil do in the future.

For those of us who are checking out new hires, the level of knowledge varies so much that I can easily agree with the low level the bar is set at. With budgets being what they are, and pressure from the manufacturers to sell aircraft to anyone with a decent credit rating, I dont expect the bar will be raised anytime soon

As to all the loop stuff.. Easy really, unless Hedley meant you were trying to do it on purpose (note: humor)

[SQ]

For those of us who are checking out new hires, the level of knowledge varies so much that I can easily agree with the low level the bar is set at. With budgets being what they are, and pressure from the manufacturers to sell aircraft to anyone with a decent credit rating, I dont expect the bar will be raised anytime soon

the same and old paradox of excellence and ways leading to it.
if you want good pilots and raise the bar where you want it to be, this is all the learning/teaching process that has to be change from the written exams to the ninimum hours required to have the PPL validated.
but in the same time raising the bar means to be more demanding with student's capabilities to read, understand, and then apply in flight what he read and studied.

for instance: an instructor told me today that his students where practicing most of exercices like descending, climbing, straight and level flight in the circuit ; so his method leads them doing circuits after 6 hours of flight in which said hours the student saw all exercices from 1 to15 in around 10 hours.
any thoughts ?

[Ralliart]

an instructor told me today that his students where practicing most of exercices like descending, climbing, straight and level flight in the circuit ; so his method leads them doing circuits after 6 hours of flight in which said hours the student saw all exercices from 1 to15 in around 10 hours.
any thoughts ?

The important question to ask is, what is the end result -- the finished product?

Does this instructors' typical student finish the PPL in less time than average with proficient abilities?

[North Shore]

When I first started writing exams for pilot licenses the answers were hand written and the exam was marked for your score in knowing the answers to the questions by a D.O.T. (TC) inspector who was trained to determine if you knew the subject.

Well that's because there were only three licences in existence then - Orville's, Wilbur's and yours!

/jk!

[Tim]

Flying a plane has nothing to do with how well you do on a test. However, there is more to being a succesful pilot then just flying the plane well.

[Cat Driver]

Well that's because there were only three licences in existence then - Orville's, Wilbur's and yours!

Actually there were a lot of pilots flying when I started.

When I wrote my ALTP exam the airplane they used for all the numbers stuff was the Lockheed L 1049 which was a real complex machine for its day.

I was one of the first to write the helicopter written in Toronto, it was based on the Bell 47 and the exam was a real bitch due to the lack of study material for the exam. And the sucker was not multiple choice answers either.

For whatever it is worth I never got a fail mark on any of the exams I wrote over the decades....I credit that to really studing the material with no real intrest in what questions would be asked.

And for all my instructor friends out there I did all the instructors exams also to the level of todays class 1.

Of all the licenses I held the aerial applicators license is my most treasured, it was n
number 0001 in Ontario.

This getting old thing is something I have no control over but I intend to keep right on getting older.

[Flying Nutcracker]

To me the ability to pass a test is not to prove whether or not you can study, but rather that you have a BASIC understanding of the theoretical aspect of what you are putting in to practise.

The question that I ask myself is if you have failed the exam 3 times, is it always the same subject or is it simply everything???

Flying is not hard, but it can kill you very fast if you don't understand certain aspects of it. Some pilots are good because of solid knowledge put in to practise with sound judgement and common sense, and sometimes also from learning a few lessons along the way that didn't kill them...

The fact that you score 69 instead of 70 on an exam means nothing other than that TC won't let you pass. The thing that matters is that you understand the basics; how, why, and why not and then have enough common sense and respect for flying to put the basics in to practise.

I've seen alot of good stick and rudder guys with a little knowledge about everything, and a few super knowledgeable pilots with awful stick and rudder skills. The odd one that stands out every once in a while is the one with both qualities AND a super personality that tells you that you are dealing with a human being, a mortal! These are the pilots I look up to! But ask them how they did on any exam and you'd be surprised... They're usually not perfect!

[fantome]

Cat, you say -

This getting old thing is something I have no control over but I intend to keep right on getting older

Old lag to judge who has just sentenced him to thirty years: Ahh Gees your honour, I won't live that long.
Judge: Just do the best you can then.

[Cat Driver]

Let me check and see if I missed one or two.....will answer if i have missed them.