Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies)A forum for those on the steep path to that coveted professional licence. Whether studying for the written exams, training for the flight tests or building experience here's where you can hang out.
First up, get a rough estimate of the number you're expecting before touching the damn thing.
i.e. square route of 16. We're going to take a risk with 4 as our rough guess...
On the outer scale you'll need to locate the original number (16) and your rough guestimate, 4 (using 40 as the inner unit index is a 10... 40/10 = 4))
Put the inner unit index (the 10 in a black circle) on your rough estimate, 4, on the outer scale.
The original number, 16, should be opposite 4 (40 again) on the inner scale.
Obviously an easy example. For more complex numbers, home in with the rough guestimate and then slide the inner cirlce until the number opposite the inner unit index equals the number opposite the original number on the outer scale.
i.e. square route of 18.
guestimate 4
put the inner unit index on 4 (40 on the scale)
find 16 on the outer scale and you'll see that your guestimate on the inner scale is just past it.
Slide the inner scale back a touch until the number under the 16 is equal to the number opposite the inner unit marker.
Sorry for the lousy explanation! I find this method fastest in exams. Obviously spending a few nights messing around gets things a lot smoother...
I'll let someone else give you a better explanation now!
Hi,
as I am planning to enroll in one of the JAA ATP ground courses in the near future I already found out that electronic flight computers are no good. After that I hoped at least to be able to use my conventional E6B, but according to the ground school providers, the CAA would not allow that either. So do I really have to get a plastic CRP5 for 75 GBP? That's 5 conventional E6Bs made out of aluminum, or 2 electronic E6Bs. What functions justify that price that the E6B does not have? Are there any less expensive alternatives good enough but still accepted by the CAA? And where can I get those or, if not, where can I get a CRP5 in the USA to at least avoid the high shipping costs?
And one more question - what is the resale value of those things over ebay. Because I know that if I am finished with that exams, I will use my electronic one again.
I'm sorry that I can't answer your question regarding alternatives to the CRP-5 but I can say that it is highly unlikely that you will find one in the USA. Unless you have someone coming to visit you over there who could bring one out for you, I'm afraid you'll probably have to pay the shipping from the UK.
As for re-selling on EBay, I've seen them on there for over £50. They actually have pretty good resale value as if you need one for studies, paying anything less than £72 for a new one is a bonus!
The CAA will accept any slide rule type of flight computer, even ones that don't do high speed/mach No. computations. Of course you would then have to use temp. ratio tables but that's allowed.
You can use a Jepp CR type if you wish. That's what I & a number of others have used with very good success. We were all converting our non-UK licences to the UK flavour. The only catch is that UK instuctors are ignorant about them so entertain the notion that only CRPs are acceptable. No worries if you already know how to use one - or can learn from the instruction book.
Use a CRP-5. The price is equivalent to 15 minutes flying on an MEIR course, to make your exams somewhat easier and less stressful! On the other hand if you buy on e-bay or from someone in the school who has finished exams and doesn't need it for the flying, and then resell it afterwards, it can be very little cost at all.
The CRP-5 has 2 advantages: it is one of the 2 best-made flight computers I have come across, and I have had many including an alluminium E6B, and most importantly the exam answers are found on it by the examiners! There are slight differneces between the calibration of different instruments, so this is a real advantage in the exam. I believe that the new ARC-2 from AFE is more accurate (and cheaper, also the other of the 2 best-made) but that is irrelevant; you don't want the right answer, you want the answer the examiner got!
The best made flight computer I've ever come across is an electronic Jeppesen one.
Why can't the CAA get their heads out of their a*ses and move into the 20th Century? And when they've done that, they can think about moving onto the 21st Century.
Try NAC or EFT in Florida. They sell CRP 5s. Or look on ebay for a second hand one.
They are genuinely not as good. Used correctly, as I taught you, the CRP-5 is quicker and you are less likely to make a silly error. Visual representation prevents much of the finger trouble that gets the wrong answer on an electronic calculator.
I took on a student who had failed Gen Nav twice - having taken his electronic calculator in without the invigilators noticing. He had US and Canadian licences, and was converting without bothering to do the whole course so didn't know how to use the CRP-5. I showed him how, covered a few other bits of the syllabus, he took the CRP-5 in instead and passed.
Anyway, your point is lost on the thread as TS has to address reality, where he cannot use an electronic computer legitimately.
I know, I know, I know... it just annoys me that in this day and age Our Friends In Aviation House take such a dim view of electronic ones.
(I have to admit that I can do a TAS/GS/WCA problem quicker using a CRP 5 than with a Jepp FlightStar. However the formula you gave me for Excel in the spreadsheet I made is the quickest way for me to produce Nav Logs)
Thanks for all the replies, especially WX Man for NAC and EFT. I will try them. I only found the CRP5s on the UK ebay, but none of the sellers would send outside the UK.
How do I find KG per NGM
from fuel flow per kg/hr SG and fuel flow per hr , TAS, etc
It is a ATPL Gnav exam question table using CRP5
Having to fill out the blanks. There are more figures available on the table but I m assunimg the above is enough - as there is no distance I m a little confused in this question
Preparing for CPL ground school. Reading some good posts here recently on ATPL study and suggested prep by folks who have been there done that thing. Points made included getting up to speed with the CRP5 wizz wheel and the importance of using the " wind down " method for all tr/hdg/wind calculations. Why is this the best method as oposed to "wind up" - which I got taught? I know the "wind down" method is stressed in several books - but I have never known why? I will get on and relearn this new way! Why the need to use only the Pooleys CRP5 wizz wheel - it is a lovely clear layout I agree - but I compared it side by side to my alloy American ASA B2 and my Aviat 617 - and could not see any reason why all 3 wizz wheels would not suffice. Sounds like I am out to buck the system! I am certainly not and it would be foolish to ignore the experience of other students who have been before and indeed the advice of instructors. I know its been covered recently - but any other suggestions of pre course prep welcomed. Like others I am worried about the demands of Maths and Physics and will get the Keynotes booklet, the OAT Maths/Physics cd roms ( PC only - bugger - OAT promised 2 years ago they would produce all their CD roms for mac computers ) London Met College also produce a pre ATPL course maths/ physics revision booklet. Any other books suggested ? many thanks
Can't remember exact details but the 'wind up' method has some limitations and will produce errors for some calcs you have to do for CPL. As stated, sooner you get to grips with wind down the better. You were taught wind up for PPL because you generally have a known wind and only need to calc drift and groundspeed - wind up is fine for this.
There is no reason why you can't use any wizz wheel to do the exam with, so long as you can do all the calcs required. However, the man who wrote the exams used a CRP5 and therefore the answers you get will be closest to the exam answers if you use one too. Not that the other computers aren't right - but this an exam, not an exercise in producing the right answer...
WInd blows rather than sucks so wind down is a much more intuitive method allowing you to gross error check your answers. If you have a search you'll find that there are limitations with the wind up method. INcidentally, haven't used either method since the CPL GFT!
Location: All over the shop and sometimes BEHIND YOU !
Posts: 211
All the books that I have ever read on the delights of the whizz wheel have always used the wind down method. So apart from anything else you'll get confused if you try and work through an explination.
I would also suggest that the exam questions are written using the wind down method. Sometimes the answers are a bit tight and its amazing how much time you can waste double checking an answer. So do yourself a favour and give yourself the best chance by using the same method yourself.
My last pointer is bin the pencil and get a good quality water based marker pen with a very fine tip. Makes your mark very clear to read and speeds up the process.
I've successfully used the wind up method for my ATPL exams, and despite various claims that the answers obtained this way would be inaccurate, I must have got the correct answers since I passed both flight planning and gen nav with decent scores, so use whatever you're comfortable with.
I wasn't comfortable with wind down and couldn't visualise things, so stuck to wind up and it worked out fine.
