I'll admit it. Figuring out degrees to parallel and degrees to converge got me everytime. Seems like i'd always have to pull out that little blue book.I think you should be able to use it without having to read the manual.
well, if you had both it's definitely fair game for the examiner to see if you can teach it.I just took my initial CFI ride last week. The examiner asked me to calculate an endurance/fuel burn calculation with an old school E6B. I had both the E6B and the electronic E6B and he asked me to use the old school one. It's obviously a simple task but nonetheless, I had to demonstrate it.
Your mileage may vary...
I have yet to use an old school E6B. Never used it in training, never taught it. I know a lot of pilots disagree, but I think it's one of the most pointless "staples" of flight training still in use today.
It's like using an abacus when there is a pocket calculator on the desk. Sure, one *could* use an abacus, but the fact is, it's a tool of the dinosaurs. Same with whizwheels.
Fair enough. If a person prefers to use the whiz wheel, I don't see anything wrong with that. I just disagree with the notion that a "true" pilot *has* to learn the whiz wheel, it should be tested over on a CFI checkride, etc.I used to think that way too, and never used one until I started instructing, but I prefer the whiz wheel. Much faster than the CX2 or Electronic version.
I think a CFI should know how to use it, simply because they may be required to teach it at some point. I wish I would have learned how earlier. Anyone other than a CFI, I agree, it doesn't matter.Fair enough. If a person prefers to use the whiz wheel, I don't see anything wrong with that. I just disagree with the notion that a "true" pilot *has* to learn the whiz wheel, it should be tested over on a CFI checkride, etc.
Not trying to be argumentative, but I still totally disagree.I think a CFI should know how to use it, simply because they may be required to teach it at some point.
I took my initial CFI in an Arrow, and the examiner made me explain a jackscrew trim system. His reasoning was that it's in the PHAK.Not trying to be argumentative, but I still totally disagree.
Having to learn something that "may be required...at some point" is overkill.
Using that line of logic every CFI should know how to explain the systems for every piston single out there, because they might have to teach them at some point in their CFI career. Could you go on a checkride and explain the nuances of a Cessna 120, 140, 150, 152, 170, 172, 180, 182, 206, Piper Cadet, Warrior, Archer, Dakota, Arrow, Six, Lance, Saratoga, Cirrus SR-20, SR-22, Diamond Katana, etc.? I sure couldn't.
For a CFI checkride, just learn what applies universally (how a piston engine works, how wings produce lift, left turning tendencies, etc.), along with what applies specifically to the current situation (the fuel system of a C-172RG model, for instance), and call it good.
Knowledge of a whiz wheel doesn't fit in to either of those categories. Obviously being able to teach cross country planning is a critical (universal) element, but the tools used to go about doing so are irrelevant.