Live By The Gouge, Die By The Gouge

Hacker15e

Hacker15e

Who am I? Where are my pants?
The saying goes, "Live by the gouge, die by the gouge."

Right now I'm studying for the technical interview at a regional, and have grabbed a bunch of gouge from different sources (including the usual suspects at WFFF and AviationInterviews.com).

One of the lists of technical questions for this carrier's interview has what appear to be thoughtful explanations of the answers, but many of the listed answers are just flat out wrong. That's not a big deal in and of itself -- I've had gouge in my military flying career that was riddled with info that didn't end up being part of tests, that was outdated, etc. Usually, though, there weren't just plain incorrect answers being presented as correct answers.

Even worse, though, on this particular gouge the answers are accompanied by explanations that back up these incorrect answers provided. They're written pretty convincingly...enough so that someone without the background in jet/speed/altitude operations who was using the gouge to guide their studies would be tempted to just buy off on the answer/explanation provided.

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd think that the guy who posted this "gouge" was trying to deliberately throw chaff out at other future applicants cleverly disguised as "help".

Here's an example of the question, incorrect answer, and erroneous explanation:

Which statement is INCORRECT about holding?
A. Use a standard rate turn of 3 degrees per second in IFR conditions
B. You enter holding via parallel, direct or teardrop entries
C. Timing below 14,000' is one minute
D. Timing at or above 14,000' is one and one-half minute
(Answer: B These are recommended entries, NOT mandated)
Click to expand...

Just a warning to folks using this stuff to prepare: you'll die by the gouge if you don't look up the answers for yourself in your studies.
 
I'm going to show my stupidity here but:

What's the answer?

(b) Make all turns during entry and while holding at:

(1) 3 degrees per second; or

(2) 30 degree bank angle; or

(3) 25 degree bank provided a flight director system is used.

NOTE-
Use whichever requires the least bank angle.
Click to expand...
3. Entry Procedures. (See FIG 5-3-4.)



(d) While other entry procedures may enable the aircraft to enter the holding pattern and remain within protected airspace, the parallel, teardrop and direct entries are the procedures for entry and holding recommended by the FAA.
Click to expand...

4. Timing.

(a) Inbound Leg.

(1) At or below 14,000 feet MSL: 1 minute.

(2) Above 14,000 feet MSL: 11/2 minutes.
Click to expand...
 
SpiceWeasel said:
I'm going to show my stupidity here but:

What's the answer?
Click to expand...

D.

It is "at and below 14K" and "above 14K".

This is Gouge, so obviously you can't hang your hat on the wording of the answers...but it sure as heck isn't B, and not for the "reason" listed by our intrepid gouge provider.
 
Hacker15e said:
D.

It is "at and below 14K" and "above 14K".
Click to expand...

Ah I see it now. I was never good at these wordsmith questions. My brain reads the answer the way it wants to see it.

Have to love petty questions that "prove" attention to detail.

In fact the whole question is poorly worded. Answer one isn't how it is written in the AIM.
 
I'm just surprised, though...either to the extent that some pilot has gone through to rationalize the wrong answer to himself, or the ingenuity used to create a good-sounding explanation for a wrong answer.

Guess the civilian world isn't with the "cooperate and graduate" mantra that the military training pipeline is...
 
Hacker15e said:
I'm just surprised, though...either to the extent that some pilot has gone through to rationalize the wrong answer to himself, or the ingenuity used to create a good-sounding explanation for a wrong answer.

Guess the civilian world isn't with the "cooperate and graduate" mantra that the military training pipeline is...
Click to expand...
His reasoning isn't incorrect.
Honestly the question is stupid to begin with. If the point was to see if you'd catch the way they worded it, then it has nothing to do with the question asked. In which case the answer is E) I don't give a...
 
Hacker15e said:
I'm just surprised, though...either to the extent that some pilot has gone through to rationalize the wrong answer to himself, or the ingenuity used to create a good-sounding explanation for a wrong answer.

Guess the civilian world isn't with the "cooperate and graduate" mantra that the military training pipeline is...
Click to expand...
You hear cooperate and graduate. What does a guy being wrong on a gouge have to do with that? Honest question. For instance, at Colgan if you wanted to pass the indoc and sim you pulled up on a stall buffet and threw power at it holding altitude. Any CFI would tell you that's wrong but "this is how we do it in the airlines kid."

Maybe you're used to the best and brightest (top 5% or 10%) teaching the newbies, whereas civilian world it's just not that way.
 
And at 265kts, 3 degree per second turn may lead to excessive back angles, hence many aircraft use 1.5 degrees per second as standard rate in IFR. From AIM 5-3-86 (b):

(b) Make all turns during entry and while holding at:

(1) 3 degrees per second; or

(2) 30 degree bank angle; or

(3) 25 degree bank provided a flight director system is used

In a modern transport category aircraft, everyone of the holds you do or have ever done at 250kts or greater is at 25° bank, and your turn rate around 1.5° - 2.0° per second.

So I would say A is wrong because it implies you must always fly 3° per second turn rate without allowing room for exceptions. And that's why I got it wrong somehow. Not the most wrong I guess. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
If it's test I am thinking about a lot of the questions have answers like this. Thats why studying on your own is imperative to being successful as the OP has pointed out.
 
jynxyjoe said:
You hear cooperate and graduate. What does a guy being wrong on a gouge have to do with that? Honest question. For instance, at Colgan if you wanted to pass the indoc and sim you pulled up on a stall buffet and threw power at it holding altitude. Any CFI would tell you that's wrong but "this is how we do it in the airlines kid."

Maybe you're used to the best and brightest (top 5% or 10%) teaching the newbies, whereas civilian world it's just not that way.
Click to expand...

Good point -- I shouldn't paint with such a broad brush based on one instance. Of course, it is also possible that the author of the gouge just honestly didn't get it and didn't mean anything hostile by it.
 
Hacker15e said:
Good point -- I shouldn't paint with such a broad brush based on one instance. Of course, it is also possible that the author of the gouge just honestly didn't get it and didn't mean anything hostile by it.
Click to expand...

It's great discussing the gouge, and even the "peer-reviewed" sources. I appreciate the lesson in detail myself.
 
SpiceWeasel said:
It's great discussing the gouge, and even the "peer-reviewed" sources. I appreciate the lesson in detail myself.
Click to expand...
"He said on courae so I'm joining up the airway."
"The last clearance we had was to go to XXZ, we can't just join up."
"Are you sure?"
"Lemme ask"
Im right
"Man I've been doing this for a decade and never heard that"

There's a lot of crap going on in aviation, you're not going to be right on everything.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
A technical interview? At a regional? Dude, can you breath? Then you're technically qualified for a job at a regional nowadays.
Click to expand...
Someone should tell PSA that. I don't have personal experience but the last guy who went there had all sorts of stuff like college transcripts and ... well there was other stuff but the transcripts seemed a bit much. Bring a logbook, swear you won't curse in front of the passengers, let training sort out the rest. PSA is trying to turn themselves into Eagle, or maybe that's American's doing. No idea.
 
He's not actually wrong, from the Instrument Flying Handbook:

"While other entry procedures may enable the aircraft to enter the holding pattern and remain within protected airspace, the parallel, teardrop, and direct entries are the procedures for entry and holding recommended by the FAA. Additionally, paragraph 5-3-7 in the AIM should be reviewed. [Figure 10-6]"

It's a horrible question though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top