|
Post by stu on May 29, 2008 21:23:11 GMT 12
Today I learned all about the English language proficiency assessment credit when my PPL application papers arrived back from the CAA with a cover sheet saying they could not be processed because the aforementioned credit was missing. I had briefly read something about the English proficiency requirement but was under the (obvious) misunderstanding that it only applied only to those for whom English was a second language etc... I'm not trying to be part of the current "it wasn't my fault" craze and maybe it was up to me to find out more about this before applying but regardless, I'm still a bit peeved as nowhere in the checklist on the CAA licence application form is it mentioned. Nor was it mentioned by anyone the entire time I was training and sitting exams. Surely it would be good practice for somebody somewhere along the chain to make sure a student is aware of ALL the required paperwork before an application is sent in case, as has happened in my case, something is overlooked. The end result of all of this is that in just over 2 weeks time (earliest available slot) I get to head out to the NSAC, speak over the phone - under supervision - to a computer for 10 minutes and pay $99.00 for the privilege, not to mention the extra month this has probably added to the arrival of my licence . I suppose the moral of the story is read and UNDERSTAND relevant advisory circulars. Here endeth my grumble. I guess I can survive an extra month just flying around the training area before taking my first passenger Cheers, Stu.
|
|
|
Post by Radialicious on May 29, 2008 21:38:18 GMT 12
Stu, here beginnith my grumble. NZCAA should take one look at your post and realise that your english is in one sock. NZ Clowns Against Aviation have outdone themselves here. Case in point, the retired B747-400 Captain who buys an R22 to go and chase trout on a river. Before he goes for his rotary licence, he has to sit and pass this ridiculous and costly exam. The bloke might be NZ born, NZ resident and with 20000 hours but still has to do a stupid meaningless exam.
Get a grip CAA
|
|
|
Post by sniff on May 29, 2008 21:54:22 GMT 12
Sounds like you were trapped in the transition, Stu. You started, in good faith, toward your PPL, then the Luftgestapo changed the rules.
Seems like you have a good case to argue that you dont need to prove you can speak Kiwi when you are born and bred here AND, more importantly, commenced your PPL before the rules changed (I would assume).
Which should be the Norm for ALL B & B Kiwis!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 29, 2008 22:35:20 GMT 12
Why do they make everyone undergo the test when the vast majority of people speak English in this country (apart from it being an obvious way to scam another tax off people).
How do these instructors teach people who don't speak English anyway?!! I have taught foreigners in the safe and sedate environment of just a university classroom and it can be utterly frustrating, and you know that despite your best efforts to get the message across and their best willingness to learn, some of them are simply just not getting it, and not learning due to the massive language barrier. Add that to the dangerous environs of the sky, and I cringe. Surely English should be assessed to be at a proficent standard BEFORE the instruction is commenced, not at the end? And only then if an instructor is worried they should alert CAA that they need to conduct this test. Does that not sound logical?
|
|
|
Post by FlyingKiwi on May 29, 2008 23:01:03 GMT 12
I have to take the test sometime soon as part of the issue of a CPL, it really is a joke - I wouldn't complain as much if it were free, but as you said, it's nearly $100, which when you're spending your money on flying is a big dent in the wallet! Completely ludicrous.
Leo P.
|
|
|
Post by stu on May 29, 2008 23:03:48 GMT 12
Logical and a government department .... not a likely combination I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on May 29, 2008 23:56:41 GMT 12
Is this for any licence upgrade? What a shocker.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 30, 2008 8:20:00 GMT 12
I understand the feelings however the requirement in general is actually understandable, and I support the CAA position. When deciding if you are a "fit and Proper" person to hold an aviation document they can only go on the information placed before them. They do not have access to immigration dept data to determine your history in this country, and after a number of fraudulent applications from flying schools training international students, they cannot rely on official declarations. They must apply a consistent standard, and cannot make assumptions "Rajiv Mulhandarai" may be a 4th Generation NZer and speak perfect english, however "Jack McKenzie" may be from Glasgow or Australia and be completely incomprehensible (apologies to any Glaswegians...). The cost of the test does seem steep, and there must be a more convenient way of doing it, but it is a new requirement and this may be tidied up later if enough feedback is received to warrant a review. CAA are not monsters - they are real, decent people who have to work within a certain framework to ensure standards are met. I would have to say the Aero Club must share some responsibility for this fiasco, as part of their approval requires procedures to ensure that all forms and processes relect the current legislation. Maybe they can credit $99.00 or so towards a CT4 rating !
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 30, 2008 9:19:03 GMT 12
I understand the fact that it is an international requirement in aviation to be able to speak competent English as a pilot. But why does it have to be enforced upon everyone. Almost everyone in this country speaks perfect English and there's no need for those who do to spend $99 to prove it imho. It's just another tax.
The language issue is one that should be and could be easily sorted out on the first lesson, not at the stage where your licence is to be issued as in Stu's case. If you don't speak English competently, the instructor is going to realise and can take action. If you do, then there's no need for this test, is there? Your argument makes no sense Bruce. Not everyone needs to be tested. Surely CAA should trust the instructors in the training system (whom I'm sure they heavily regulate to ensure proficiency and honesty is maintained) to make the judgement of whether the test is needed rather than the current blanket cover.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 30, 2008 9:37:01 GMT 12
Unfortunately this stems from an actual instance where the flight training organisation used foreign instructors to train foreign students, and deliberately failed to notify any problems with the students language, as they were being paid for results. The paperwork trail was squeaky clean, and nothing had shown up on the audits, it was only after complaints were raised by other operators over the quality of radio transmissions that the matter was discovered. CAA got criticised for not having systems in place to prevent it, hence they have now put something in place and are being criticised once again. Cant win... Unfortunately for all concerned, it does indicate that the "Honesty of Instructors" assumption cannot be relied upon. A sad exception to the norms, but CAA is obliged to ensure it doesnt happen.
|
|
|
Post by stu on May 30, 2008 10:49:07 GMT 12
Just to clarify my view in case it's been misconstrued by anyone, yes I do understand the need to ascertain whether a person can speak English and be easily understood over an RT etc. The use of comms is an integral part of my job every day whether it's talking to the control room next door or some remote location on the other side of the planet. Given some of the monosyllabic grunts, gibberish and lack of comms etiquette that occurs on a regular (and increasing) basis, maybe a test such as this wouldn't go astray at work. However, while this is an annoyance or (at worst) causes something to go wrong on air, in aviation the result could be fatal. The fact that it costs almost $100 also doesn't surprise me given a government department is involved - just another entry to add to the numerous "miscellaneous" costs in my flying budget. I'm also not getting on the blame game bandwagon as, ultimately, the responsibility to make sure all my paperwork was in order lay with me. My main gripe is that for dozy buggers like me who've obviously overlooked something rather important along the way, there is no mention in the applicant's check list of the English language requirement while all other things such as exam credits and KDRs, fit and proper person, medical, fee etc are all included. As much I really like the Aero Club and the great bunch of instructors (and others) that I've dealt with there, I have to begrudgingly agree with your comment Bruce. Maybe somebody should have checked I was aware of all the CAA requirements. Assumption can cause all sorts of problems . Not counting the quarter of a century between when I first started flying and my now, I've had a few unexpected delays along the road to my licence (try mentioning you've had cancer on a medical and see what happens including a couple that left me thinking I'd never get there so with everything finally complete - or so I thought - this was really a case of "oh what now!! ". Time to take a deep breath and exercise a bit of patience, almost there now. As for the implementation or workings of the English language proficiency assessment credit, perhaps it should be part of the fit and proper person process? Also, fair enough that it is a requirement for the issue of new licences from X date but to insist that those who already have a licence and are applying for a higher or different one have to take the test- as pointed out by Al - seems a bit like revenue gathering. If, in the case of the latter, it's such an important prerequisite then shouldn't all licence holders be required to have the endorsement added retrospectively? Right, spleen vented ... world set right ;D Cheers, Stu.
|
|
|
Post by stu on May 31, 2008 17:39:35 GMT 12
Murphy's bl**dy Law .... to kill time I was browsing through the PDF versions of Vector on the CAA website from the link I'd added on another post for Dave and noticed there was a recent one I can't recall receiving or reading - www.caa.govt.nz/Publications/Vector/Vector_2007_Issue5_SepOct.pdfGuess what was clearly explained on page 8 !! Now I'll probably get home, have a good search and discover it tidily put away and unread in among my other aviation magazines Got to laugh and as my wife would say - "it only happens to you". ;D
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 1, 2008 13:14:06 GMT 12
Stu, you menshioned th CAA form yoo cent dident haf th Engresh thing on it. Old form or a CAA cock up?
|
|
|
Post by stu on Jun 1, 2008 14:48:38 GMT 12
Stu, you menshioned th CAA form yoo cent dident haf th Engresh thing on it. Old form or a CAA cock up? Hmmmm ...... Just checked ... the form I was given to fill out was CAA 24061/01 Rev.14:Sep 06. The form on the CAA website (http://www.caa.govt.nz/Forms/24061-01.pdf) is CAA 24061/01 Rev.17:May 08. The new form has the English bit added as number 11 on the checklist, the old one that I have doesn't. Next time I'm at the Aero Club I'll mention the difference. Cheers, Stu.
|
|
|
Post by stu on Jun 21, 2008 13:29:03 GMT 12
At long last, a letter from the CAA arrived this morning with my PPL enclosed. ;D After what seemed like ages since passing the flight test (only a month in reality), things suddenly picked up momentum this week. I sat the English exam at 10:00 Tuesday, got the results by 09:30 Wednesday morning and then printed them off and posted all the paperwork back to the CAA that afternoon. I was anticipating a week or so for a reply so I'm very impressed at how quickly they processed it, taking into account a day each way in the post.
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Jun 21, 2008 13:34:00 GMT 12
Congrats then - you can speak English. ;D OOPS & PPL fly at the same time. Cool.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 21, 2008 18:05:24 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 22, 2008 17:28:08 GMT 12
Great news Stu. Being nosey, what mark did you get in the Engrish exam?
|
|
|
Post by stu on Jun 22, 2008 19:44:04 GMT 12
Great news Stu. Being nosey, what mark did you get in the Engrish exam? 6. This do means I do yes speak English gooderer yes no?
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on Jun 23, 2008 16:37:05 GMT 12
6%, vewy gud.
|
|