Retribution?

No. I do not want to sound like it, and certainly not wish it on anyone – regardless of their method of study. Without sounding pedantic about an aviation regulation examination, my intention is to highlight how and why short cuts, even in increasingly competitive and difficult times, never lead to an ultimate goal. Cliché though it might be, in aviation, short cuts lead to disaster.

From both Case # 1 and Case # 2, it’s clear that Failure is an end result. But, perhaps more important, and the cause of prime concern, is that someone avidly interested & passionate about aviation can quite easily venture down this path of frustration & disgruntlement & mediocrity - “All my friends are studying from question banks! What a fool I’ll look like when they pass and I fail!!”

There is one big assumption I have made in the last post - that a person gets through all examinations and tests, right to the edge (and beyond) of being granted the privilege to certify an aircraft for flight. In the real world, such people never really get that far. In most countries there are enough built-in provisions in their licensing systems to ‘weed out’ those who are basically incompetent not only in terms of knowledge & skills, but also in terms of decision making of the magnitude explained earlier.

Yet students venture down this question-bank-study-method approach. Maybe because it tends to give a sense of a shorter, quicker, easier path to achieving and experiencing their ‘dream’ - A somewhat hazy yet distinct and undeniable picture of standing by, watching their aircraft slide silently off the runway into the sky.
Unfortunately, it is a sad ending to a Dream, a Passion, a Drive that brought them out to AME school every morning all perked up and bushy tailed.

Retribution? I think not, again. A drive to churn out better, happier and more successful careers whilst making our skies safer? Just about right!