Human Factors study or training guide?

[Guest Brett Campany]

Hey all, a question for anyone really, what study guide have you guys used to complete your human factors training? I've just been told that my exam is on the 12th along with my flight test but I've got no idea as to what study guide to use?

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Ring up RAAus and ask them for the HF text. It's called the Generic Pilot Proficiency Programme and costs $16 plus $10 pp.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest Brett Campany]

Ring up RAAus and ask them for the HF text. It's called the Generic Pilot Proficiency Programme and costs $16 plus $10 pp.Regards

 

Mike

Cheers Mike, I'll do that first thing Monday

 

 

[trevorp]

And a dictionary would be handy to take for the exam from what i here [ i have not done exam], as i was told its more of a english test than a flying test.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

I failed my first attempt miserably. And here I thought just studying the HF stuff in my PPL book would do the trick. Then they spring things like "heuristic decision making" and "risk assessment of 1" on you. Not to mention that doing something completely wrong (like operating the wrong switch) is a "slip", not a mistake. Huh? One would think forgetting to do something is a slip, doing that other thing is a huge freakin' mistake! I guess the have different definitions than normal people do...

 

And then there are classics like "out of these four things that will likely make you lose consciousness, which one is the *most* likely?". (again, the answer is completely the opposite of what you'd expect; both me and the instructor where flabbergasted.)

 

So good thing I found this thread. Just called RA-Aus and my GPPP guide should be on its way.

 

I'll have another go soon!

 

 

[Guest bateo]

If you think the RA-Aus Human Factors exam is tough. You should try the CPL CHUF exam.. there are 3 right answers in some!

 

 

[Guest drizzt1978]

I failed my first attempt miserably. And here I thought just studying the HF stuff in my PPL book would do the trick. Then they spring things like "heuristic decision making" and "risk assessment of 1" on you. Not to mention that doing something completely wrong (like raise landing gear instead of flaps) is a "slip", not a mistake. Huh? One would think not changing frequency is a slip, doing that other thing is a huge freakin' mistake! I guess the have different definitions than normal people do...And then there are classics like "out of these four things that will likely make you lose consciousness, which one is the *most* likely?". (again, the answer is completely the opposite of what you'd expect; last time I experienced it, the correct answer just made me barf, but not pass out)

 

So good thing I found this thread. Just called RA-Aus and my GPPP guide should be on its way.

 

I'll have another go soon!

Bass!! Thats exactly what happened to me!! I got like 90% in all my other stuff, read my PPL chapter of human factors and was like armmmm Are these people for real!!!

 

Its like they have invented there own language...

 

Was my failure a Slip?? or Did i not grade the risk assesement coreectly at not getting the correct study guide!!:hittinghead:

 

 

[Guest Brett Campany]

I had a dismal attempt then the second attempt just made it! What a horrible exam though. What the hell is a slip?!?!?! I took a stab in the dark with that one and got it right!

 

Very silly exam, I felt like it was there to fail you and not teach you anything.

 

Just study up and read the questions....two or three times!

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

I haven't sat mine yet...and I have a bigger problem than you guys.

 

My daughter has sat it and scored 80%+ on her first attempt. I have to do better than that. Guess what my bedtime reading is?

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

I have to wonder also about these cram-sessions followed by exam the same day that are being organized around the country. Do they really give people an understanding, or just teach them to answer the questions correctly? (but only if they do the exam straight away?)

 

 

[Simonflyer]

The RA human factors exam had the worst wording, and flat out wrong and misleading things in it that i have come across in any of the aviation tests done to date.Some of the medical information is wrong, and the wording can be misleading.

 

I dont want to knock the RA thing, but they need to get that test checked both medically and grammatically so that there's no mistakes and so it is concise clear and accurate.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

I can only comment on the HF course we run but it most certainly is NOT a "cram-session" just to pass the exam ! Passing the exam is the incentive for people to do the course but I believe it can have a lot more value than just that.

 

I admit that there is content covered specifically because there are exam questions relating to it. Personally I probably wouldn't have included some of this otherwise but there aren't going to be too many takers for a HF course which didn't cover everything you need to know to pass the exam.

 

Simply reading the book might scrape you through the exam but just getting a tick in that particular box isn't of itself going to prevent accidents. A well thought out course (which I hope ours is) is a great opportunity to share information which might reduce accident numbers. Surely that is the real objective.

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

I have editted my original post as some suggested in PM than I was giving away too much of the answers. So I have made it more generic. (though drizzt1978 still quotes all of my original post)

 

Here's some info on the definition of slips, lapses and mistakes: Psychology of Medical Error Including Slips, Lapses, Mistakes and Role of Attention

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Simply reading the book might scrape you through the exam but just getting a tick in that particular box isn't of itself going to prevent accidents. A well thought out course (which I hope ours is) is a great opportunity to share information which might reduce accident numbers which surely is the real objective.

I fully agree and can't comment on your course. But I have heard of evening sessions (which we all know is the best time of day to learn something new!) with the exam immediately afterwards and the vast majority passing. That is getting you through the exam, but how much did you learn?

Much of what I found in the exam is common sense. Except that common sense is being described using fancy terms and "which of these bad things you should avoid is the worst" type questions, which just turns the whole subject into a game of trivia.

 

Unlike the other exams which cover actual rules, regulations and skills, maybe this type of questioning is the only thing you can do for HF? It shows you would have read the book, but in no way proves (or disproves) you understand the subject matter. Let alone give any insight into how you would react in an actual situation!

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

We run our course on a Sunday arvo for exactly this reason ! Most evenings I'd not be in a state to do it never mind the brain fade of the attendees ;-)

 

I'm not sure how any multi-choice exam really proves an understanding of the subject but its an incentive to keep awake during the course.

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[BLA82]

I will vouch for the course Crezzi does. Very well laid out and I walked away feeling as if I actually learnt somthing. Mind you Crezzi is nowhere near as good looking as the female english teacher I had but it was all pretty easy to decipher. No misleading words or the like and certainlt not incorrect.

 

 

[Yenn]

A couple of comments.

 

A friend of mine was considering travelling several hundred km to do the course with an instructor he knew. He asked how he would go as he didn't want to travel that far and then fail the exam. He was told that he would pass, no problems. Sounds a bit like the health and safety tests I did when I was working. I failed one on purpose, twice and was still given the card to allow me onto construction sites. I refused to answer questions at one industrial site on the grounds that the question was stupid and irrelevant. Again I was given a pass.

 

The other thing that concerns me is the use of Jargon as quoted above "heuristic decision making" and "risk assessment of 1"I don't know how you interpret that, but maybe it is decision making by the clock, and only God knows the other bit.

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

I just passed the exam. I did study with the GPPP book, which gives some more of the jargon you need to know (to translate common sense) and that dragged me over the line with 88%. Still, it doesn't touch on the much of the medical stuff that BAK and PPL books' HF chapters also do not touch on.

 

Luckily I knew the answers to those questions from when we reviewed the previous exam. ;)

 

 

[Guest basscheffers]

Uhm, just to clarify, I did do a different exam! (1/2 instead of 2/2) It's just that inevitably, some of the questions are going to be the same.

 

(in the RA-Aus nav/met exam I did, the same question was even asked twice in the same exam!)

 

 

[Thruster87]

I was told by our CFI that you can also just do the course and no exam required. If you meet the required competencies as per Section 3.09 of the Operations Manual,by

 

Attending an RA-Aus Human Factors course.

 

 

 

[Guest Kevin the Penniless]

google CAP 720. There's a PDF file on human factors. Look at CAP 721 as well.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

I was told by our CFI that you can also just do the course and no exam required. If you meet the required competencies as per Section 3.09 of the Operations Manual,by

Attending an RA-Aus Human Factors course.

 

I believe it has to be the approved RAAus course like the 2-day one run in various locations for the instructors. I would guess that the courses run by the schools don't meet this criteria therefore attendees do need to sit the exam. Hopefully the course content should make the exam pretty straight forward though

 

John

 

 

[Yenn]

I have just got hold of the book "Generic Pilot Proficiency Program" and first look all through it leaves me wondering what education the writer had.

 

There is mention of the need to use good English and then the book goes on in very poor English. Some paragraphs have to be read twice to get at what the author is intending to say.

 

Jargon is everywhere and if you don't use the jargon no doubt you will fail the exam, even though you understand safety and have an excellent command of the English language.

 

One glaring example of the deficiency is the fact that nowhere is the most important situational awareness requirement mentioned directly and in only one place is it mentioned indirectly.

 

I will go through it in more detail in the next few days but my present opinion is that it is a waste of paper, and having sat through several similar studies while I was working in industry I consider it par for the course.

 

Just in case anyone is wondering what my background in safety is, just think of what the 5 most dangerous jobs are and you will probably have what I did for years with no serious injuries on the job. Only 2 injury claims and both of them were for blokes hurting themselves on the way home from work.

 

 

[Tomo]

Yenn: Obviously you haven't done the HF exam yet?

 

It's not really a "make sense" exam, so the text books are probably just like it, or rather, the exam is like the text books!! If you get my drift!

 

Also, there's a few things in the exam that I wouldn't really call HF at all........!

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Yenn, don't leave us hangin mate...what did you do??...intrigued i am...;)