Human factors exam - example tests

[Guest eland2705]

Seasonal Greeting to One and All.

 

I am getting very close to writing the exams for my RA Cert. I was wondering if there were any trial/example Human Factors exams out there I could download to test my knowledge and get a feel for the exam.

 

I received and completed the CASA HF workshop documentation and DVD, I have read the chapter on HF in the BAK book, but am still not sure that is sufficient. (I have seen and heard some scary things about the exam on this forum)

 

I have found, downloaded and "sat" several BAK exams, and am confident that I am all good in that department. I just need to confirm that I am OK on HF before putting money on the line and finding myself "not yet competent".

 

Can anyone point me in the right direction?

 

Regards

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

The biggest hint anyone could give you is to get hold of the Generic Pilot Proficiency Program (GPPP) book from the RA-Aus online shop. The exam is based on that book (it was a year ago anyway). There are two HF exam papers - if you pass the first, you don't need to take the second one (it's a backup if you fail the first).

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

I'll second that - the exam is based on that book and some scenarios are taken directly from it. It is multi choice. There are also some concepts that are only mentioned in that book eg Which one of the following is an example of "human factors type" system. There are many theories out there and not all make it to a text book, so it is important that you read the one the exam is based on. It is not well written and the exam does not sing the same song as Govt health messages. Somethings are subjective - is food poisoning more of a threat than a condition that can cause unconsciousness? You will see I, and others, have done a rant about it in earlier posts.

 

I would like to see an exam that reinforces good personal fitness to fly rather than remembering obscure names and the author's take on an accident scenario. One hint I can give you - if they pose an accident scenario the cause will be Human Factors - don't try to analyse it (which I find counter productive, no accident is down to one cause).

 

I was hoping that RAA would redo the whole thing. Initially it was to be on-line with promises in the magazine October 2008 that it would be there by the time the mag hit the letterbox. I looked in vain.

 

One thing that did come out of the discussions is that people who did an instructor led class got more out of it than those who read the text. That is they have a better understanding of HF and probably got some strong hints on the exam. Having the whole membership do the exam over 2 years has put some old dogs back to school and not all of them have found the experience beneficial. We have friends who have decided not to do the HF exam which has put them at odds with RAA because you now need it to fly.

 

I was working on some quizzes for this site to cover HF, but I did not base them on the text & exam that RAA uses. Two reasons - one that I didn't want to be the one giving away the answers (and I didn't agree with them all) - two, I wanted to demystify HF and show people that it is life, not jargon.

 

Sue

 

 

[rdarby]

There are example papers in the Dyson-Holland Human Factors book. But after taking it I understand what is being said above, the exam seems to have been based on another book. It's actually not that hard an exam, just don't overthink it and listen to what Sue said in her second line above. Ryan

 

 

[Spin]

All good advice Steph, I took the approach of "tell them what you think they want to hear" and got 100% with minimal preparation - I know of one youngster who sat the exam without opening a book, merely reading the questions and possible answers very carefully and who also passed, so it certainly isn't rocket science.

 

I'll second the opinions re the content; it isn't my field at all, but is poorly compiled imo. That said it is probably still an advance on nothing at all and even if it pushes people into reading a book or attending a course, then thinking a bit about the subject, it has achieved its objective.

 

 

[Yenn]

I found the exam a doddle, but then I was brought up on a dairy farm, so was fully conversant with bovine manure.

 

 

[Guest eland2705]

Many, many thanks for all your replies, lots of good info there.

 

I liked the reference to bovine excreta, point taken. As mentioned above, some ass... erm, body, has decreed that it is a must, so we do!

 

I understand that there are times you should be aware that you are tired, and that you are not thinking clearly and I understand that there is a need to know what the symptoms of anoxia are. What I don't understand is the requirement for RA to pass an exam, but can find no requirement to do so in GA other than be aware of it. (I may be wrong, and would stand corrected in an instant if someone were to indicate different)

 

With regards, and the very best of flying to one and all during the New Year

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

I think under Lee Ungermann's rule, there was a push to prove to CASA that with RA, "we can do anything better than you (GA)". It was probably a way of showing that RA pilots can be just as professional and knowledgeable as GA pilots, so we went a bit further with our own requirements. Probably the same thinking that led Lee to aim for a commercial pilot licence standard when proposing our CTA endorsement. Only what I surmise.

 

 

[eightyknots]

Generic Pilot Proficiency Program

 

The biggest hint anyone could give you is to get hold of the Generic Pilot Proficiency Program (GPPP) book from the RA-Aus online shop. The exam is based on that book (it was a year ago anyway). There are two HF exam papers - if you pass the first, you don't need to take the second one (it's a backup if you fail the first).

Good hint, thanks Burbles. I think I will try to get this book too.

 

 

[Guest burbles1]

eighty, only get it if you need to study for the RA-Aus HF exam. As others have said, it is a badly written book full of conceptual guff on psychology, heuristics and decision-making that bear little resemblance to practical human factors.

 

 

[facthunter]

HF. What it could be...

 

Potentially one of the most effective things to promote safety. Now before you turn off, I said potentially.

 

It is a great shame that we are where we are at the moment with this. When the first series of courses were announced, I made it my business to go to Fyshwick and do the first available course and ended up in the second course.

 

I knew the person running the course and as it progressed I became convinced that it was a bit over the top for our people. Several other experienced instructors on the course seemed to agree with me and we pushed for a modified course outcome. This to some extent seemed to have happened but I must express my disappointment at the results so far. The way it is done seems to discredit the concept and pass on little of value . The box is however ticked. It is not good enough.

 

World-wide, this is regarded as a good move and DONE PROPERLY will reduce accidents/incidents. Plenty of "Old warriors" think it is unnecessary and just common sense. Trouble is, common sense is not that common.

 

The Airlines ran CRM/ human factors courses over full-time (4 days) back in the 80's and some of the "smart" types did not do too well. There was a view amongst the troops that the ones that NEEDED it the most were the ones most AGAINST it .

 

I have actually done 3 in total and the course days total 10, so they were not afternoon courses. Incidently I do not think that I know everything about it, but I know enough to know it could be a lot better. Someone should make it their business to "fix" this. Nev

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Sounds like someone just put their hand up..;)... I would certainly welcome some sort of relevant text and exam into the syllabus... Get typing Nev..

 

 

[facthunter]

Sounds like someone just put their hand up..;)... I would certainly welcome some sort of relevant text and exam into the syllabus... Get typing Nev..

Way beyond my abilities, Andy. I believe this should be done digitally (interactive) and as an ongoing thing. A lot of people huff and puff getting these things on the books but there is no assessment or follow-up. Could be fun doing them really and you would be educating yourself at the same time.. Funny being done by RAA and not in GA. The obvious question is "what is different"? Being somewhat of a cynic, I can only conclude it is a "tick the square" thing, unfortunately. Nev