Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Tick test

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: Tick test
From: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 11:28:03 +0100
References: <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
It does not alter the facts as I specified before.
A person with no knowledge about the subject could be lucky and tick the right boxes. Like the lottery numbers selection, whereas a question paper and a pen and a blank sheet of paper for the answers leaves nothing to chance.
RAF senario
1 Do I bale out
2 crash land
3 pray and take pot luck
4 do nothing
5 climb on to wing and restart engine
6 call for help
Like you mention operating procedures and Q/Z codes are as important as the tecnical info. From an international point of view CW and a good knowledge of Q codes is a big bonus, it overcomes all the language difficulties.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: LF: Tick test

In a message dated 06/08/2008 23:12:39 GMT Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
mal hamilton wrote:
> I suppose the students cannot be blamed, since 1979 its their only
> option, no alternative.
The RAF technical examining board used objective multiple choice
question method in the early 1950s.
Hi all.
For general info from a tick test marker.
The pass mark of the basic UK foundation level exam is 72% which is much higher than the old RAE.
In an exam I invigilated last night we had six candidates with 4 passing.  Of the remaining two who were not successful, the reason was one that I see on too many occasions. Both candidates did very well on the technical side of the exam. ( TX RX antennas EMC theory) but scored poorly (30%) on the license conditions section.
Even for those people with a technical background, work is required and study on areas of the syllabus you are not familiar with is essential.
They'll be back!
David  G0MRF
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>