Principles of flight - ATPL

[Straighten Up]

I've just started working my way through this book and got as far as static longitudinal stability and pitching moment coefficient and my head hurts.

For those that have done it recently, where would you say this fits in the scheme of hardest to simplest parts of the ATPL ground school.

As an aside anyone who did this 10+years ago still remember it or require it whilst flying (assuming you are not an engineer or FI). I did my dissertation on driving theory knowledge in drivers of various ages and experience levels and only about half would pass if they sat the theory now.

[OhNoCB]

I found it one of the more interesting ones personally. For what it's worth, the exam I did for it in particular was probably the one which required the most thought put into it. I did it within the last couple of years and I have to say some of the questions were quite tricky, requiring numerous steps before arriving at the right answer. That's not to say it was difficult, just that it required a bit more thought.

As far as using it goes, I have used parts of it. Maybe not in "day to day" operations but sometimes if things start to go funny it is good to think about why it might be happening, and often it is more than just a comforting thing to know. I have had occasions were I(we) were able to identify malfunctioning systems by analyzing the problem which could sometimes relate to a basic PoF phenomena.

There are of course parts of it which just are not useful for 99% of the time.

I don't know if there's anything more I can add, other than try to enjoy it. I enjoyed it because I saw it as a challenge to understand how the aircraft worked. Why doing this made that happen and why that bit was on the aircraft there.

[chrisbl]

I find it very relevant especially with an aircraft that can easily have a C of G that is very much towards the forward limit and a T tail that has less authority at slower speeds ie when landing.

[RTN11]

PoF is definitely one of the more relevant ones. A good understanding of it will certainly help you further down the line, and you begin to notice little design differences in aircraft and think how that affects the handling, and usually you're right.

The subject I struggled with is met, so many different factors at play, and so much theory that really doesn't work in the real world, just read a typical UK TAF and you see that even the experts have no idea when it's always full of PROB30 TEMPO.

[OhNoCB]

Just want to add that I also found Met the most difficult for the same reasons. It also really bugged me to be questioned like "It is Jan 14th at midday in Darwin. Jane Smith has the day off work today. From which direction would you expect the wind to be blowing from?" (Sadly, I think that is more or less bang on a real question if you take away the 2nd sentence).

[Piltdown Man]

After 22 years of flying I can say that knowing very little about P of F has not harmed my progression, nor anyone elses. And with the exception Met. Practical and rather surprisingly Human Perversion the rest of the subjects were total pugwash as well. The only reason they exist is because no one has the guts or gumption to remove them. More worthwhile subjects would be Home Decorating, Cooking, Gardening and "writing pointless numbers in small boxes."

[BEagle]

Personally I found that knowledge of the dimensions of streamers to be flown beneath a tethered kite and the correct system of lights required for tethered balloons to be really essential ATPL knowledge.....:ugh:

Thankfully I only needed to sit that one exam....

[CTC_Cadet]

Hey bud,

I really struggled with POF, and my biggest advice to you is to get a good QB like BGS or Aviation Exam, realise your weak points (Stability was most definitely one of mine) and answer every single question on the subject regularly to get it stuck in your head. I now find stability one of the easiest subjects in POF, just think of the basic facts - Fwd CG, Stable - less manoeuvrable. High wing - positive lateral stability, Static stability - tendency to return to equilibrium.. you get the idea. Just make yourself some flash cards you can refer to when you're challenged in an online mock exam. Hope that helps!

[Genghis the Engineer]

CPL rather than ATPL, but I thought it was a doddle - I turned up late after having been stuck in traffic, did it in about 60% of the alloted time, and got 88%. The biggest issue is that where there's quite a lot of incorrect theory in there, you just need to get yourself into the head of the examiner's incorrect understanding of the theory a lot of the time. But for anybody who takes an active interest in how flying machines work, it's not a difficult subject.

The law exams on the other hand were truly horrible. No basis in understanding or common sense - just huge amounts of memorisation. As I always have done with law exams, I used the full time, had steam coming out of my ears, and scraped a pass with a 1% margin.

[Exiled Martian]

POF was my kryptonite /achilles heel in the whole ATPL subject syllabus (just finished 2 months ago & me and my social life are trying to rekindle our relationship back again:))....the theoretical aspect of differentiating between Lateral Vs Longitudinal had me baffled for quite some time mate along with the +/- moments & their influence etc.

Despite being a distant learner + holding down full time employment, I thankfully had sometime on my hands to immerse myself in some productive 'leisurely' reading. If you have a moment look up a book called Stick & Rudder by Wolfgang Langewiesche. Its a really insightful piece of literature, well written & simplified. Personally that book has helped me 'translate' & actually understand most of the convoluted ATPL theory & jargon that I faced POF (& many other topics). On that note goodluck with the big 14:ok:

[Straighten Up]

Thanks EM much appreciate the advice. I'll take a look at that book.

[Genghis the Engineer]

The best introductory book we use in universities now is "Introduction to Flight" by Anderson.

Before that favourite was "Flight without Formulae", by Kermode but Anderson in my opinion is a marked improvement.

But, there really is no substitute for a good teacher. Because it's based on understanding rather than memory, it really doesn't lend itself to self-teach.