Oh man, I'd gotten this one before. a long time ago. Something about sun/moon illumination from the north or northwest-ish, and how that would appear shade/shadow-wise. So map is made the same way.
The Instrument Trivia Thread
- Thread starter Ian_J
- Start date
Oh man, I'd gotten this one before. a long time ago. Something about sun/moon illumination from the north or northwest-ish, and how that would appear shade/shadow-wise. So map is made the same way.
The most important trivia item about this course is it is super easy (not so much for the 64 guys), I work like 4 hours a day doing it, and they're paying me lots of extra money while I'm here.
CFIT99
I'm probably commenting ironically...
Here's a few interesting ones I put to my students years ago.
Why do some US airports DO NOT have a 'K' designation?
- Why are there some airports that have Letters and Numbers?
- What is the difference in identification between these two? KORD (ohare) and 1C5 (clow)
BONUS:
When is the FAA going(or at least thinking about) to change the runway orientation number from Magnetic to True? Why?
Why do some US airports DO NOT have a 'K' designation?
- Why are there some airports that have Letters and Numbers?
- What is the difference in identification between these two? KORD (ohare) and 1C5 (clow)
BONUS:
When is the FAA going(or at least thinking about) to change the runway orientation number from Magnetic to True? Why?
NewYorkophile
Fly Casual
This thread makes me feel retarded, but I think the answer to the latter is so they don't have to keep re-painting runway numbers as the Mag Var changes.
Still, don't necessarily agree. At crazy mag var values, that could be a crapload off your mag heading, and disorienting as hell (especially on a circle to land).
The Fez
Analog Millennial
It's stuff like this that really irks me when it comes to "aeronautical knowledge" questions during checkrides. As if Class A and RVSM airspace is even within the periphery of 99.999999% of helicopter flying!
How has so much airplane-centric crap leaked over to the helo side? Examiners are doing their examinees a great disservice if they are placing emphasis on such non-important issues. I'd much rather an examiner ask me things actually related to my ability to plan, fly, and land a helicopter in all weather conditions.
Let's assume, for a moment, that your helicopter is actually IFR approved...
If you were to fly from XYZ to ABC on an IFR flight-plan, which route/altitude would you fly? Why?
For multi-engine helicopters, what is your single engine service ceiling and how would that affect your routing/altitude plan?
Sounds pretty simple, right? And it should be. Helicopter pilots should be proficient in instrument flight, but if they don't know anything about service volumes or center weather advisories, I don't see a problem. IFR in helicopters is much more of a "if the mission requires it" than a normal everyday procedure.
CFIT99
I'm probably commenting ironically...
The second part is correct...the variation is growing faster then we thought and the Magnetic North Pole is expected to be over northern Russia with in the century, leading to a well over 45 degree correction from True North.
First, I know you weren't quoting me, but I really hope that any of the trivial things I've posted here have been construed as serious or need to know. I joke about this stuff, but thankfully in my small neck of the woods, the focus is on need to know helo items and the trivia is simply depth of knowledge stuff.
As an instructor I focus on how to accomplish the mission, fly proficiently, and how to handle abnormals. My systems questions focus on how not to get yourself into trouble and problem solving. Sometimes it may seem too in depth, but it's usually a depth of knowledge thing that takes rote to correlation. (Example - the A/S capsule on the failure advisory limits us to 70 KIAS. Why?)
Now as an Instrument Examiner, I'll focus on need to know as well. Mike's OH-6 examples are well, taken, but we fly a perfectly IFR capable aircraft capable of near Baron speeds. Mine is /G and is well-enough equipped. There are a bazillion need-to-know instrument questions at my disposal given that set-up.
I've seen tons of academic evals and I've seen plenty of BS trivia questions - but after the real questions were out of the way and I've never seen anyone fail due to BS questions. I wouldn't fail a guy for not knowing what Class A airspace was but I'd like him to know it exists if that makes sense.
So I definitely agree with you regarding BS focuses and am not trying to say I'm instructor of the year - my point is simply, and hopefully this gives you hope, that at least in my tiny part of the sand box we do focus on what actually matters.
It's just a matter of what applies where, as you say.
In the -60, it's IFR capable. Not Class A or RVSM stuff, sure, but otherwise yes. The OH-6 and AStar.....even if the guy is instrument/Helicopter rated.......there's some baseline instrument stuff I'd expect him to know that would be applicable, with the knowledge that at the end of the day, he won't be employing any of it for real in those helos. But if he's holding an instrument rating, he ought to know something generally applicable.
So the extremes are indeed there. The "nice to know" stuff, I like to ask; but mostly as extra credit at the end of an exam, just to see what the guy may know. If he knows it cool, if not, whatever. Things like how an approach is TERPS'd in it's creation....nice to know, not need to know. Mostly interesting stuff is all.
But yes, seriously asking an OH-6 guy about RVSM, is as stupid as asking a UH-60 or CH-47 guy about Cat III ILS requirements. Sure....they all have to do with instrument flying, but are nice to know at best.
I agree with you.
Examples:
99.9% of the time we fly (well below) 10,000 feet. A lot of people think it's BS to ask about O2 requirements because of that. But once in a while, we do have to fly that high (particularly in Afghanistan).
We're based on the east coast. Some people think it's BS to be asked about differing floors of Class E airspace found out west. But once in a great while, we have to ferry an aircraft out that way.
In both those cases, the pilots under me may never do those things during my tenure. But those guys are the future instructor pilots and I'd hate for them to eff something up because they didn't even have a clue it existed. And that's really a good point to many trivial questions - it's an opportunity to let another pilot know something exists. I remember someone asking me about over-water requirements long ago. Whatever - I don't fly over water. Then, years later I got a mission to do so and thankfully I knew I needed to look something up. Mike's OH-6 pilot may transition to a /I aircraft one day, and just knowing a VORTAC exists might help him out.
As for RVSM - yeah... that better have been an "you did really well and I'm out of questions" question.
99.9% of the time we fly (well below) 10,000 feet. A lot of people think it's BS to ask about O2 requirements because of that. But once in a while, we do have to fly that high (particularly in Afghanistan).
We're based on the east coast. Some people think it's BS to be asked about differing floors of Class E airspace found out west. But once in a great while, we have to ferry an aircraft out that way.
In both those cases, the pilots under me may never do those things during my tenure. But those guys are the future instructor pilots and I'd hate for them to eff something up because they didn't even have a clue it existed. And that's really a good point to many trivial questions - it's an opportunity to let another pilot know something exists. I remember someone asking me about over-water requirements long ago. Whatever - I don't fly over water. Then, years later I got a mission to do so and thankfully I knew I needed to look something up. Mike's OH-6 pilot may transition to a /I aircraft one day, and just knowing a VORTAC exists might help him out.
As for RVSM - yeah... that better have been an "you did really well and I'm out of questions" question.
It's just a matter of what applies where, as you say.
In the -60, it's IFR capable. Not Class A or RVSM stuff, sure, but otherwise yes. The OH-6 and AStar.....even if the guy is instrument/Helicopter rated.......there's some baseline instrument stuff I'd expect him to know that would be applicable, with the knowledge that at the end of the day, he won't be employing any of it for real in those helos. But if he's holding an instrument rating, he ought to know something generally applicable.
So the extremes are indeed there. The "nice to know" stuff, I like to ask; but mostly as extra credit at the end of an exam, just to see what the guy may know. If he knows it cool, if not, whatever. Things like how an approach is TERPS'd in it's creation....nice to know, not need to know. Mostly interesting stuff is all.
But yes, seriously asking an OH-6 guy about RVSM, is as stupid as asking a UH-60 or CH-47 guy about Cat III ILS requirements. Sure....they all have to do with instrument flying, but are nice to know at best.
I agree with you.
Yeah that to all. TERPS is a great example.
Examples:
99.9% of the time we fly (well below) 10,000 feet. A lot of people think it's BS to ask about O2 requirements because of that. But once in a while, we do have to fly that high (particularly in Afghanistan).
We're based on the east coast. Some people think it's BS to be asked about differing floors of Class E airspace found out west. But once in a great while, we have to ferry an aircraft out that way.
In both those cases, the pilots under me may never do those things during my tenure. But those guys are the future instructor pilots and I'd hate for them to eff something up because they didn't even have a clue it existed. And that's really a good point to many trivial questions - it's an opportunity to let another pilot know something exists. I remember someone asking me about over-water requirements long ago. Whatever - I don't fly over water. Then, years later I got a mission to do so and thankfully I knew I needed to look something up. Mike's OH-6 pilot may transition to a /I aircraft one day, and just knowing a VORTAC exists might help him out.
As for RVSM - yeah... that better have been an "you did really well and I'm out of questions" question.
Completely agree. And even said OH-6 pilot in the example even admitted that the reason he doesn't know the things, is because he doesn't use them; however if he transitioned to a UH-1 or UH-60, he would have some books to hit definitely. The guy can fly an NDB approach like nobody's business, but then again, that's all he has. But ask him about the J-route structure on High enroute charts? He has no clue.....nor should he really have to. He knows they exist, but that they're for the fixed wing guys.
Airspace-wise.......helicopter pilots normally know all about airspace other than Class A. Where it starts, and particularly WX requirements and the like, because they operate VFR so much in those areas. Airspace knowledge of most helo pilots I know is actually very high.....just not with Class A
The Army though, has always struck me as trivia hell when it comes to instruments. Which just amuses me as I look at some of the Apache and Kiowa pilots
On the other hand, I work with -47 pilots who know instruments as well or better than many fixed wing pilots (for both general knowledge, as well as items applicable to helicopters).
The Fez
Analog Millennial
I never take you seriously Ian.
I guess its just that I'm not too far out of the -60 course and UPT, where the off the wall questions came daily and were really ridiculous.That's why I'm so adamant about keeping to the things that are truly important and archiving the rest. Your example of the A/S capsule light is a good one. It keeps systems knowledge up and, as you pointed out, helps to correlate knowledge from one system of the helicopter to another. I'm all about that. I want to learn and maintain knowledge that makes me a better and safer helicopter pilot. To me, wasting valuable brain bytes (and I'm pretty limited as is) on TERPS and the importance of the tropopause detracts from the space I have available to learn something new, something that might save my life and those of my crew one day.
Maybe, when I'm all grown up, I'll get salty enough to start learning some "gotcha's" for the young guys. For now, I'm just trying not to hit the ground...or lead...or birds.
In flying to an airport under IFR where an instrument approach is needed to a non-towered field, there is no altimeter setting reported for the field due to an inop ASOS. There are no remote altimeter minimums listed on the plate. ATC gives you an altimeter setting for the nearest reporting station. What do you do, and what is your reference?
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Can use LP if you have the latest software update, otherwise you're stuck with LNAV. @Capt. Chaos knows more about this though.
Capt. Chaos
Well-Known Member
Off the top of my head the minimum 430W software version is 3.3 and GPS version 3.2, and the approval is in the flight manual supplement.
Cessnaflyer
Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
It tells me in the window what to do.
All correct.
AIM 1-1-20 Explains:
NOTE−
WAAS receivers certified prior to TSO C−145b and TSO
C−146b, even if they have LPV capability, do not contain
LP capability unless the receiver has been upgraded.
Receivers capable of flying LP procedures must contain a
statement in the Flight Manual Supplement or Approved
Supplemental Flight Manual stating that the receiver has
LP capability, as well as the capability for the other WAAS
and GPS approach procedure types.