Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

PFAW - Training (EuroUSC Vs Heliguy)

Discussion in 'Rules and Regulations' started by Phil_Uk, May 24, 2016.

  1. Phil_Uk

    Joined:
    May 9, 2016
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    London-UK
    Hi there,

    At this point, after the first few flights for personal usage, it's time to start searching around for the qualification/license and insurance to start flying commercially.

    My main question at the moment is: has anyone here had any experience with Heliguy? They are offering a 12 months interest free payment plan, which is interesting.

    On the other side I spoke to EuroUSC. Lower price and closer to where I live.

    What surprises me is the difference at the theory exam structure. At EuroUSC I was told that it's a 60 questions exam and 85% pass mark. At Heliguy 70% pass mark (not sure about number of questions).

    Does anyone here had any experience with any of these companies? Are they offering the same kind of qualification/training to get the PFAW o am I missing something? :neutral:
     
  2. The Editor

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    7
    They will be identical since they have acquired NQE status.
    Their courses must meet the requirements of CAA and cover the requisite subject matters that are mandatory for UK RPAS qualification.
    EuroUSC will try and charge you for everything including any toilet paper you use on the course. They will continue to come out with crap after you leave about how you must renew with them otherwise your qualification will lapse and not be valid.
    This is total rubbish and nothing more than a cash cow they have thought up to fleece people.
    This is the same company that after the CAA issued an amendment to CAP722 stating that additions and/or substitutions to a fleet of UAV' does not require additional flight assessments, continued to go directly against CAA instructions and carried on charging people for a pointless and unnecessary flight assessment for additional aircraft.