As some will know, I’m going through the CBM IR TK at the moment. I have passed 5 out of the 7 exams up to now with no fails. I am using two QB’s. ATPL online and Aviation Exam. I think as this is a relatively new syllabus, in terms of the learning objectives being reduced, there are some questions in the CBM IR QB’s that really shouldn’t be there. For example, in Instruments “On an EFIS display what colour is associated with Armed mode ?” answer……White. Maybe relevant if flying a 737? But I would rather be prepared for these types of question if they are to find their way into an exam rather than try to fight with the CAA and ask for a review if a failure was due to one of these questions being in the exam.
The other really annoying element of the QB’s is that the same questions are repeated over and over again…..
Example……
“The alternate static source of a non-pressurized aircraft is located in the flight deck; as the alternate static source is opened……”
This question appears 7 times in each QB.
On the whole, I found the exams to be fairly representative of the questions in the QB, with the odd 1 or 2 questions coming up in the exams that I had never seen before in the QB’s. When cross referenced to the study material, the answer to the question is in there. My personal experience is that the Questions in the QB’s are of good quality and representative of what you will find in the exams, to some extent they over qualify you in preparation, some “pruning” needs doing though.
I used both, but in the end my school recommended ATPL online, so that’s what I used in the end. It was good and sufficiently representative. I didn’t really see any questions that were a complete surprise, and I’d say they had all been covered in form even if I didn’t remember having seen the exact question.
I suspect, if you go through either focussing on what you get wrong then you’ll be fine. I found them useful for learning to recognise the tricky questions as much as for focussing my learning.
Ed
Roger,
I singed up to both Aviation Exam and ATPL on line to “cover” all the bases as it were. They both contain some content that didn’t appear in the exams. ATPL On line more representative. But take for example the Instruments exam, I only saw 12 questions in the exam out of 600 that is in the ATPL online question bank. There is no harm in running through both. All the best.
Just passed all 7.
Aviation Exam was in many case a direct copy of the questions – same wording same answers.
Outside the exam room I learned that some of the ATPL student had studied the QB so hard that they didn’t bother with calculations. They know the answer already !
Human performance was a bit different than Aviation Exam, but I think it was mainly a question of different wording.
Air Law very close to the QB.
Instruments was difficult because there is only 12 questions.
IFR Com is quite easy.
MET I found difficult and this was the one exam requiring the most study.
All in all I think I have spend more than the 80 hours to study. Most of the time I have spend on the QB. I used the QB to scan for errors and used both Aviation Exam, but also books and google to learn more about these points.
Reading only the material I had would not had prepared me sufficiently for a pass.
Many thanks for the report, PMH.
Those 12-question exams are a real bugger because you can fail them so easily just by bad luck, and then if you had to travel a long way to do the exams you have a load more hassle. I did my 7 in 2011 and the smallest ones were 24 questions (HP&L & IFR comms).
Met is always hard. Air Law needs the QB because there is no sense to most of it.
The ATPL students live and eat and sleep the stuff, living together for 6 months or whatever. They also do each others’ homework (in the hotel in the evenings) which makes the classroom study part much easier.
Reading only the material I had would not had prepared me sufficiently for a pass.
10x more work, IMHO. The QBs are a lifesaver.
Thanks everyone for your help!
I will probably end up going for the ATPL online just to be sure; at £68 per exam I don’t want to be taking any chances…
First batch in the beginning of July, so will report back.
The historical JAA IR (non ATPL route) data from the UK CAA was in the region of 10-30 a year, and that included a number of pilots who were really doing the airline pilot process but just happened to not yet have the CPL done when they for included in the stats.
Is there any evidence the CB IR has a bigger take-up?
Also does anyone have any idea of the take-up on the FAA IR to CB IR conversion?
Peter,
I’m doing my IR flight training with Jim Thorpe at Rate One in Gloucester at the moment. He did mention that he had expected more people “through the door” at this stage of the CBM IR introduction, I think he was a little disappointed at the current take up. I think its still early days.
Comparing the European process with the US process, the biggest issue, for the typical customer who is in his/hers 40s or 50s and has a life of some sort, is the ATO process which usually mandates a hotel stay.
Even just doing the CPL theory (required for a full FI to teach the EASA PPL) involves three one-week hotel stays (CATS, Cranfield) plus around three hotel stays of a few days each to sit the CAA exams. That far exceeds the average person’s annual holiday etitlement. But it’s not a holiday; it’s sitting in some hellhole B&B with a laptop, or with a bottle down the pub, eating some crap.
I did a few days of that in Bournemouth, in 2011…
The average “senior customer” (full disclosure: I am nearly 58 
) is not going to be mixing well with the 20+ year old ATPL students who form their own crowd.
Plus I think the April 2016 deadline is still too far away, psychologically.
Jim specialises in the CB IR but in theory a lot of other ATOs can do it. There is at least one at Shoreham (Omega) where I did the FAA to JAA IR conversion. The other one would not want me, IIRC because I wanted to do it in my own plane.
