How limiting is it to do Maths, Further Maths and Physics only for A levels?

Yes, Bath uni is the same.
But as you say the degree will take longer to accommodate this, hence my recommendation to talk to the HOP to understand how this will impact your degree.
The reality is facilities are booked and coaching sessions held at times that can clash with lectures. With the best will in the world it’s impossible not to have some clashes.
Plus once we start the run up to the Olympics, training and international comp commitments can mean pausing the degree for a year. These all need to be understood.

I know someone at Loughborough studying engineering who competes internationally in her sport, and being Loughborough, they’ve incorporated all that and hence her degree will take more years to achieve, but can be worked around the sport. This is one of the major advantages of being there, or in another place that accommodates serious external commitments.

If your DD will be targeting specific uni/s to maximise her sporting ability, it’s worth talking to the Head of Performance /Head of Pathway for her sport to understand the training schedule should she be selected as a Pathway athlete.
Engineering has a heavy workload and there will likely be clashes between her training schedule and her uni workload. It’s a tricky balancing act.

DS1 did Maths, FM, Physics and Chemistry. At the end of the first year he took his Maths A level
and at the end of the second, he took FM. So he wasn’t studying for all 4 at the same time IYSWIM.
He went on to study Chem Eng.

EPQ is done in year 12 at my DC's school and I think it's a valuable thing to do, though as others have said, a useful thing in it's own right rather than as a "get into University" tool. It can be useful in that context as some Universities will consider the grade, or it's a good opportunity to demonstrate some deeper interest or skill in the subject you want to study at University which can be a talking point at interviews and in the personal statement, but it's not guaranteed. My DC, especially my elder son, learned a lot from doing an EPQ and I don't think it was a waste of time at all, but it's not a massive help getting into University for most people. And it does take time if you do it well.
I think time is of the essence as far as your DD is concerned. She already has a massive pull on her time that most people don't. One of my DSs was on his sport's national governing body's talent programme though didn't get as far as your DD and that was hard enough to juggle with A levels. I can't imagine how much extra time it takes to play at an international level. I think some posters may be unaware of quite how demanding training and competing at a high level is for a talented young athlete. I think you need to be really careful that she doesn't become overloaded - she's not going to be a "normal" 6th former if her sporting career continues to blossom.
She will be learning a lot of transferable skills from her sport and that is something she'll be able to use to her advantage in her personal statement /interviews etc. I don't think she'll need much by the way of "extras" to sell herself - 3 good A levels and an international sporting career is impressive as it is! However, if she really wants to do something extra can she access a DiSE programme? Again, it takes up time, but is likely to cover quite a bit of stuff that she is already doing so may be an option. But personally, I'd probably encourage her to focus on getting strong grades in her 3 core A levels.

DS also dropped his EPQ. Having previously dropped the 4th A-level this seemed a step too far. But when he said he was one of three left in the class still doing them it seemed more reasonable. It seems to be more doable to complete an EPQ in year 12. If it goes over into year 13 it risks not happening.

EPQs were done in Y13 in my DCs' school and not well supported; as a consequence, the drop out rate was high, grades secured often disappointingly low and Y13 distractedly pressured.

I see, on these threads, that schools focusing on EPQs in Y12 appear to have a better track record. Given your DD is considering FM, and that should generally be started as one of four A levels in Y12, it will be important not to overload as she gets used to the step up required at A level across the board in Y12, all at a time when she is keen to progress at her chosen sport.

My DC did FM as one of four A levels as well as full commitments involving paid and voluntary work and, in Y12, learning to drive. They found they had to hone their time management skills to make it all work and became adept at judging when to deploy 'good enough' rather 'stretch' mode. If your DD is the sort to write 20,000 words where 10,000 will do / is required (appreciate this was said partly in jest / figuratively), then that will be an aspect to work on during the A levels years.

My DC were late developers as mathematicians and had to work at their FM but they thoroughly enjoyed the experience and they use their skills and learning in unexpected and very positive ways in their careers.

IMO, EPQs can be valuable - as an end in themselves but not as a means to an end. If the student is doing it as a tickbox exercise, or in the hope of it making much of a difference to uni admissions, don’t bother. A bit like DofE, perhaps. But if it’s something they’ll enjoy doing and really learn with then yes. My DD did an ‘artefact’ EPQ rather than an essay based one, the project planning aspect was quite useful discipline I think, and the design and practical skills involved were definitely worth developing. But it wouldn’t have been worth doing at the expense of her A levels.

I started my career in university admissions, and although it was more than a decade ago, gained good insight. I don’t recommend FM if it comes with only two others from the outset. There is a really big jump from GCSE to A Level in maths and students who are strong sometimes struggle. Colleges teach it differently which also makes a difference - some do M and FM in parallel and some do sequentially, and some do different mixes of modules.

I started with five: chem, bio, physics, maths and further maths. I had a terrible maths teacher, did ok at maths, but tanked FM and ultimately dropped both into my second year. (I had 8 A* and one A at GCSE, with A *in maths and science). I might have done better at maths with a better teacher, but I also had a massive crush on the boy next to me, so, was distracted.

I think EPQ is a great thing to do, particularly for preparing for more essay based subjects. It focuses students on broad research skills and also how to form an argument, but it’s largely independent learning and takes a lot of time for students to master (and thinking among my friendship circle, I think those students who do well may have quite a bit of parental support). So it might not be the right thing for your child, unless she picked a topic related to her sport, which she could.

I like the suggestion of PE or maybe human biology - these are good options for sporty kids, and studying sport and exercise science (which is now quite a serious and in demand topic) or engineering with a view to working in sports engineering sound like good career choices.

I’d also recommend caution on the sport being the be all and end all. I knew a lot of talented athletes at uni and few of them compete now - plenty of them competing at national and international levels as teens. I also knew Helen Glover vaguely as a teen, who famously didn’t find rowing until after uni. My recollection of her is that she was an outstanding athlete and it didn’t matter what the school sport was, if she was on that team, they were going to win.

Useful in that they can help a student learn to focus on one topic and develop their skills in research and writing (useful for uni).
If EPQ grade is high, it can lower the uni offer, but only at some unis.

Oversold by schools tho IMHO and definitely not worth doing if effort on the EPQ will take away from work on A levels, as grades there are much more important. Neither of my A level DC did one (DD in particular started thinking about it but realised she needed to focus on A levels) which may colour my view. There are certainly ppl on MN whose DC did one with considerable success. and who value the process (as do I tbh, if it supports the student and they can also give good focus to A levels).

Haven’t read everyone’s responses but both of my DC did Maths, Further Maths, Physics and Chemistry A Levels which was doable because there is a fair bit of overlap.

Like others I’d say start 4 then she can drop one later if necessary.

That's what they say on the website. I emailed and looked at FOI request the vast majority of successful applicants have 4 A levels. For PhysNatSci the vast majority do Maths, FM, Physics Chemistry

For Natural Sciences at Cambridge you need Maths plus 2 sciences/FM (3 A levels total):

https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/college-requirements-natural-sciences-physical-sciences

If OP is trying to keep open as many future options as possible, an essay subject wld be helpful. If focussed exclusively on STEM, M/FM/P will give lots of options and 3 A stars is better than 2 A stars and 2 As.

My DS handled 4 just fine. He did economics at university but found the physics helped with the climate science optional module he took.

Since the OP's DC is stem oriented then Chemistry A-level would be a great addition to have. Opens up chem eng or even natural sciences at Cambridge (where i think they expect 4)

Offer wise doing 4 usually just gives you an extra stab at the grades. Offers normally specify 3 grades whether they are doing 3 or 4, so those doing 4 can get a lower grade in one and still meet the offer. The flipside of course is having to spread themselves thinner over the 2 years.

OP anecdotally we know several students who have dropped down from 4 A levels to 3, and a couple who have dropped from 3 to 2. In all cases the FMaths has stayed and they have dropped something else. So although the drop out rate may look higher for FMaths, that might be partly because these students dropping "NotMaths" are distributed across different subjects. They are really varied - art, music, history, psychology, chemistry off the top of my head.

I think the PE suggestion is worth exploring.

I'll add Psychology into the mix. It counts as a science for some university entrance purposes but there is no practical or coursework, and I think it has potential for being self taught. It is not trivial, it's huge and detailed but I think they are reducing the syllabus imminently. I think for a lot of students, especially the disciplined, it might be easier to self teach than Further Maths.

No idea - here’s the place I got it from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/infographic-a-level-results-2023/infographics-for-a-level-results-2023

And I think it links to this wider report: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/a-level-and-other-16-to-18-results-2023-revised

I wouldn’t think that even if there were additional a levels through private centres, it would shift the balance that much though.

At my son's school, FM was always the 4th and you couldn't do it as part of a 3. That was because they did A level Maths in year 12 and then FM in year 13, with those struggling trying to do A level Maths in one year, not taking the exam and doing "normal" A level Maths in 13 instead of FM, so a kind of "opt out" option for strugglers. Maths and FM weren't taught side by side at all. I think OP needs to talk to the Maths dept to find out "how" they teach Maths and FM as schools seem to vary in their approach.

Does this include extra exams taken via private centers?

Why would how many A levels others take matter, if unis only ever look at three A levels?

Agree with pps @Axczavd , even if they start with four (at some schools) most dc drop one in the first year.

Literally the only ppl in dd and ds2’s A level years at their school (2019 and 2021) who took four were those who did FM - and not even all of them.

There's no benefit to taking four as unis don’t ask for four, and you risk spreading yourself thin and gaining worse grades. AAA is better than ABBC.

Oh

This data is from 2023 - less than 5% take 4 a levels.

For a stem career tack on chemistry. But maths, FM, physics is perfectly fine

Answering because I needed to know the answer to this two years ago and can now reply from experience.

DS has just taken A-levels in maths, physics and FM. He got five offers for an MPhys, including Durham, Manchester and Sheffield, with predicted grades of A star x 2, A x 1.

He did start off doing four A-levels but dropped economics as soon as he was confident he could keep up with further maths. I was worried it was too narrow, but it’s been fine. FM had a heavy workload compared to the others - the upside is that Maths then seems fairly straightforward.

Edited to add that he did need to do the practicals in physics to meet his offers, so maybe ask about that. And that DS was originally looking at engineering but changed his mind during his A-levels.