Ground School Exam Questions & Question Banks

[gphillips134]

an aircraft must clear an obstacle at 2000ft elevation by 1000ft. Regional QNH is correctly set at 998mb, the OAT at 3000ft indicated is -10C. At what indicated altitude will the 1000ft clearance be achieved?

Explaination please

[Send Clowns]

This is a straightforward indicated to true altitude. Use your CRP-5 by preference. Otherwise, 4 feet per 1000 feet amsl per degree off ISA. 3000 amsl, 998 HPa is roughly 3500' (3400', but that is too precise) Pressure Altitude so ISA is 8 degrees. The temperature is therefore 18 degrees cold, so the correction is 4 x 18 x 3 = 216 feet. The weather is cold so altimeter is over-reading, so you are clear at 3216 feet indicated.

Send Clowns
Gen Nav
BCFT

[Foz2]

By what percentage does VA (EAS) alter when the aeroplanes weight decreases by 19%?

a)4.36% lower
b)No change
c)19% lower
d)10% lower

Answer is d. how is this worked out?

Thanks in advance

Foz

[High Wing Drifter]

If old weight were 1000 then new weight would be 1190.

SQRT(1190/1000) = 1.091 (or approx 10%)

Think about the classic PPL exam question of the stall speed at 60 deg bank in level flight. The force would be 2g or, in other words the weight doubles. SQRT(2) = 1.41...stall speed increases by 41%.

[Foz2]

So it would actually be sqrt 810/1000 as the weight is being decreased. Comes out at 0.9 (90%) which is 10% lower! Perfect.

Cheers

Foz

[Dick Whittingham]

It is a quirk of the mathematics that for small changes of weight - less than about 20% - the percentage change of speed is about half the percentage change in weight.

Dick W

[Keith.Williams.]

VA is the stalling speed at the limiting load factor. So this question concerns the way in which stalling speed changes with changes in weight.

The general solution for finding the change of stalling speed for any given change in weight is,

Vs at new wt = Vs at old wt x sguare root (new wt/old wt)

As Dick said, for small weight changes the % change in Vs is about half the % change in weight.

Even for a 50% increase in weight this approximation gives 25% increase whereas the actual figure is 22.47%, so it is still reasonably close.

[High Wing Drifter]

as the weight is being decreased
Yeah, that's what I meant :O

[subsidence]

Hy

can anyone help me with this one?

For a class B a/c landing on wet grass the minimum acceptable LDA is..... times the LD?

a. 1.67
b. 1.77
c. 1.87
d. 1.97

official answer: d

my answer c.

Class B a/c means 70% -> 1.428
Wet Rwy: -> 1.15
grass: -> 1.15

This should give a Factor of 1.88!
Obviously I did something wrong, and therefore need some assistance!
Thanks a lot.

[High Wing Drifter]

I think it should be 1.89. But 1.87 is the nearest best answer. So I would have chosen that in an exam.

[PropstoMAX]

Would agree with High Wing Drifter!!

LDA >or= LDR * Wet factor * Surface factor * 1.43
LDA >or= LDR * 1.15 * 1.15 * 1.43
LDA >or= LDR * 1.89

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

The selection of 'd' may be based on the following somewhat odd logic.

The calculated minimum is LDR * 1.15 * 1.15 * 1.43 = LDR*1.891175.

Of the four choices presented, the only one which meets the required minimum is (d). So if you had to choose one of those four multipliers, you'd have to go with 1.97, because 1.87 is below the required minimum.

I think it's a stupid logic trap if they intended that, because the question is poorly worded also. But that might be thought process involved....

[High Wing Drifter]

Spot on Mad. Serves me right for jumping to a rash conclusion :\

[oceanicclarence]

Hi Guys. im studying for the ATPL by distance learning (just started). and im tearing my hair out on a particular question. Its been a long day and maybe im being a doofus, but maybe you guys can point me in the right direction. I dont expect you to give the answer, id only be cheating myself!

a 10,000 foot mountain has a 5,000 foot cloudbase to windward and a 7,000 cloudbase to the lee. if the windward temp is +20 degrees C what would be the likely temp to the lee?

now my working was, assuming temp decrease @ DALR to 5,000, then decrease @ SALR to 10,000, then increase @ salr to 7000, then increase @ DALR back to surface, you come up with+23 degrees C !
the options for answers are
a-22.4
b-16.8
c-20.4
d-25.6 !!!!!
where the smeg am I going wrong ?!
of the possible answers 22.4 is the closest, do they add a little for the temp drop over the top of the mountain? however much that may be? or have I got some basic thing wrong? is there anything in the word 'likely' temp? that doesnt sound too specific !!!

am really enjoying my study by the way!!!

[Fellow Aviator]

Hi,

Just a guess: If you use 1.8 for SALR and 3 for DALR, it gives you answer A. Bristol ground school uses these values. Hope this helps.

edit: sorry, I didn't read your post carefully, you didn't wan't the answer :O

[oceanicclarence]

thanks guys. the company im with says 3 degrees C for DALR and 1.5 degrees SALR. also, Pressman.....how??? I did that and got 23 degrees.
temp at 5000 feet windward 5 degrees, decreasing to minus 2.5 at 10,000. then back to plus 2 at 7000 feet on the lee and increasing at DALR (3degrees per 1000 feet) back to surface. i just cant get the point something or other, can you show how ? many thanks once again.

[paco]

Exam technique - You have to select the most correct answer, or the least wrong one! Otherwise it's possible to get the right answer without doing the working.

Phil

[Pack2]

Your working should look something like this.

20-(5x3)=5-(5x1.8)=-4+(3x1.8)=1.4+(7x3)=22.4

It is important to remember that the SALR is not constant as we gain altitude. Latent heat is released as condensation occurs and the SALR value actually increases and eventually could equal the DALR

We can debate this till the cows come home but at the end of the day the CAA say that the SALR is 1.8 degrees per thousand feet.

Your thinking was perfectly correct. 1.8 is the number to remember.

[gemini76]

This is easier!

Warming temperature =

1.5 times the difference in cloud bases ( in thousands of feet),

7000 - 5000 = 2 x 1.5 = 3

Add to the temperature on the windward side, 3 + 20 = 23.

You'll never get closer than that without wasting valuable exam time!

All donations gratefully received.........

[pugzi]

This type of question for JAA ATPL is a waste of time, so trying to do it quicker is a waste of time too. If JAA ever ask this type of question, I'll eat my hat!.
All you need to know about Foehn for the JAA is this.
Warmer on ther lee side, higher cloud on the lee side, possible turbulence on lee side (from possible mountain waves) and you need to know the other names for the Foehn, e.g Santa Ana and Chinook.
Now for some lovely spuriouis info. The Foehn translated actually means "Hair dryer" in some European languages, so remember it as a warm dry descending wind, or a warm katabatic.

One more thing, if your School is using 1.5°C per 1000ft for the SALR in their ATPL notes they need shooting and they need to be reminded of the JAA METEOROLOGY OBJECTIVES.

Good luck anyway, met can be a nightmare unless your taught right, wait till you get to winds!!!

Have fun

[oceanicclarence]

thanks once again guys, very much appreciated. I can see now that if id used 1.8 instead of the 1.5 that is EVERYWHERE in my manuals (its even in Trevor Thom for gawds sake!) then id have got the answer. will be more wary in future.
take care and fly safe.

[Dick Whittingham]

The SALR is not a fixed number. Its value depends on the amount of water vapour in the air. Where the air is very dry it gets near to the DALR value. We all used to use the approximate temperate zone sea level value of 1.5, but the JAA changed the exam value to 1.8.

I don't know why they changed, but as it is an approximation the choice is not critical as long as we all use the same value.

Dick W

[subsidence]

Send Clowns, I think your temperature correction is wrong. It's not allowed to correct the elevation of your obstacle.

You should only correct for 1000feet, which gives us 72feet and thus 3072feet.

I stand to be corrected.

[pugzi]

To be very accurate it's 3258ft
4x19x3.405=258. You need to have a true altitude of 3000ft so, your indicated on QNH needs to be 3258ft.
When cold, True is less than Indicated.

I don't stand to be corrected.

;-)

[Pub User]

The Regional QNH gives a lowest forecast QNH for a specified area. It is, therefore, impossible to accurately calculate an altitude above a specific obstacle; the answer above will give at least 1000' clearance, but probably more (just in case none of the exam answers fit).

[pipertommy]

Just flicking through and came across this interesting question.Would someone mind breaking it up to explain the how the answer was achieved,as there are three possible outcomes shown? Just interested the method of working it out :O Thanks!

[PGT]

I've been going on about pictures for ages when it comes to these questions, so I'm gonna make you draw a picture.

Draw a horizontal line and label it "QNH sea level 998hpa"
Draw another above it and label that, "height of obstacle". Label the distance between these two lines as 2000ft.
Draw another line above the "height of obstacle" line and label the distance from the "height of abstacle" line to this new line as 1000ft.
Your true distance must be 3000ft above the sea for you to clear the obstacle by 1000ft. This is obvious to see. The ditance from the bottom line, to the top line.
What we need to work out is the indicated distance (why they are different is gonna take an essay, or 2 secs with an instructor)
Use this formulae.
For every 1°C ISA deviation your altimeter will be in error from the true altitude by 4ft in every 1000ft of pressure altitude.
Lets work out pressure altitude (the height above 1013.2hpa) so that we can start to use this formulae.
Draw another line under the "QNH sea level 998" line and label this as "1013.2hpa". The distance between this line and the QNH line is 405ft (27ft x 15 hpa). So the pressure altitude of an aircraft that needs to clear the obstacle is 3405ft. Please don't look at the diagram again cos it'll start to mess with your head. We have all we need now from it.
OK, we have 19°C ISA deviation in the example and we have 3.405 thousands of feet pressure altitude. Now we can use that formulae.
So, 19°C deviation x 4ft gives an error per 1000ft of 76ft. But, we have 3.405 thousands of feet.
So, 76 x 3.405 gives a total error of 258ft.
When it's cold the true altitude (in our case 3000ft) is always less than the indicated altitude, so indicated altitude on QNH must be 3000ft plus 258ft.

Hope this helps.


I did try

Steve Francis

[Send Clowns]

Errmmmm, PGT (and pugzi), you must only correct for the depth of indicated altitude, not for the pressure altitude, so that's 3,000 feet not 3,405. You are correcting for 405 feet of sea! The PA is only used for finding the temperature deviation.

ISA is closer to 8° than 9° at 3400 feet! ISA deviation is -18°. Sorry to be pedantic, but to avoid confusion. I suspect you got your two altitudes the wrong way round in the calculation, as that would account for both errors.

Subsidence

If this was using a real QNH measured at the top of the obstacle you would be right. As it is this question uses the horrible (and incorrect) term "Regional QNH". Regional pressure setting is not a QNH at all, nor based on them, hence the military do not allow their pilots to use the term "Regional QNH"! It is calculated from QFFs*, which are corrected for off-ISA temperature. It is also probably calculated from measurements well below the elevation of the obstruction, so even using a QNH you must account for temperature between where the QNH is measured and the aircraft, not the obstruction height and the aircraft.

Hope this clarifies!

Send Clowns

*Regional pressure setting is the lowest QFF forecast in the region over the following 2 hours, and is valid for 1 hour.

[PGT]

"you must only correct for the depth of indicated altitude" i kinda agree, but we dont know the indicated altitude on QNH, thats what the question is asking for. The only indicated altitude we can know is PA. So we have to work with pressure altitude. Well thats my opinion.
Anyway, it s a bad question, but more importantly I think we lost the student though.

;-)

[Dynamic Apathy]

Sorry to be a bit blunt here, but why don't you approach your training providers with these questions?

I have done a search through your previous posts asking for help, and it appears you have been doing these studies for quite a while now!!!

Surely your school instructors are the most appropriate people to ask.

[Send Clowns]

PGT

I suppose you have a point, in that we are trying to find indicated altitude from true and this calculation actually corrects indicated altitude to true, and agree it's a bad question and that he therefore may not be able to follow. However the only way more accurate than what I am suggesting is to use iteration, using the new calculation of indicated altitude to recalculate the correction.

I don't think pressure altitude is a good way of looking at this, because it has a weaker relationship with indicated altitude than true altitude does, QNH having a greater effect than temperature change. If the PA had been, for example 2,500 feet instead of 3,500 feet this would have been even further out than any of the answers yet suggested, and in the low sense.

How about 18 x 4 x 3.233 = 233 feet as the correction, giving 3,233 feet as the answer from the formula to the nearest foot! :p

DA

Well PGT and I are training providers, so should be as good as any, and in my humble opinion we are better than most ;) !

[Dick Whittingham]

Calculations of altimeter error due to temperature deviations from ISA, are, as has been made abundantly clear(?), full of approximations and assumptions. First off, the "rule of thumb" is itself an approximation. Secondly, the appropriate CAA document uses (pace Send Clowns) the words "latest forecast QNH (Regional Pressure Setting) for each hour". Of course, this is a QNH datumed at msl, so ought to be the same as the QFF, except that a QFF is calculated differently, on the assumption that the air mass is isothermal at station temperature all the way down, or up, to be pedantic, to msl, and may be different from an amsl QNH.

For the JAA exams we assume that if we are flying on the Regional Pressure Setting we calculate temperature corrections on the height amsl that we want to achieve. For a 3000ft obstacle, which may or may not be solid, with a 1000ft clearance, we calculate the error over 4000ft. Of course, as Send Clowns points out, that gives a new number for indicated height, so for perfect accuracy we might re-calculate on this figure, and so on ad infinitum. However, there is no point in doing this, for the assumption we made in the Rule of Thumb that ISA deviation was the same at all heights may have already introduced significantly larger errors.

And there is the perfectly valid point that if the first 3000ft is filled with rock, the actual conditions may be sigificantly different from the case of overflying a 3000ft TV mast.

So let us apply the KISS principle. Use the given Rule of Thumb with all its approximations and base your corrections on height amsl if the Regional Pressure Setting is in use, whatever the ground in between.

In real life, the procedure for calculating safety altitude introduces enough factoring to take care of the small errors.

Dick W

[Send Clowns]

Ah, I learn from the RAF and RN, and they tend to ignore what the CAA says when they think they know better!

Agree with all you say about approximations, Dick, and apologise for students for getting into too much detail. However I am (sadly) quite interested in the intellectual challenge of solving problems like this in discussion with the other instructors here. We have gone beyond what a student must understand!

[Fergal20]

Hi people, this may seem like a stupid question to post but could somebody just take a look at it and tell me what you think is the correct answer:

The primary flying controls are:
a. the roll and pitch controls
b. the flaps, ailerons, and elevators
c. the ailerons and rudder
d. those which provide control about the primary axes

It comes from POF.

Thanks in advance:ok:

[The Greaser]

Primary flight controls control roll, pitch and yaw. So a) b) and c) are not quite correct. D seems the correct answer.

[High Wing Drifter]

Hmmm. I would have throught primary must mean under direct control of the pilot (i.e. not A/P) and directly affects the attitude of the a/c. D is interesting because of the word "about". I would have throught that the throttle is a primary control along the longitudinal axis, as that is not mentioned then it is strictly incorrect. I wouldn't consider flaps a primary control because they are intended to change the flight characteristic for very specific reasons. Faced with Roll and Pitch or Ailerons and Rudder I would say that Rudder is least important so I would answer A or D. Being somewhat concerned that I am reading too much into D I may settle on D after flipping a coin.

:\

[Keith.Williams.]

By definition the primary flying controls are those which control rotations about the primary (longitudinal, lateral and vertical) axes.

Options a and c are true but incomplete. Option b is untrue because it includes the flaps. Only option d is correct.

[Fergal20]

Okay....very interesting. First of all thanks a million for all the quick responses.

Well this question came up in a recent assessment and I chose D, but I was told by my school that it was wrong, they informed me that answer C was the "most" correct answer. The reason? They said that answer D could include trim tabs, balance tabs, servo tabs, etc.

Now I dont know whether this is a question they made up or is an actual feedback question, what I do know is that if this was a feedback question and the JAA said that answer C was correct I would be very :mad:

[High Wing Drifter]

It makes sense now you mention it Fergal. The beep beeeeeep beep. How beep beeeeeeeep beep beeep beeeeeep?

I just asked my mate who has never flown a plane or even knew what an ATPL exam is. He immediately logically broke the problem down and nailed the correct answer :uhoh:

[Keith.Williams.]

If the question had asked what ailerons and rudder are then the answer would have been primary flying controls. But saying that the ailerons and rudder are primary flying controls is not the same as saying that primary flying controls are the ailerons and rudder.

The question asked what primary flying controls are. They are by definition, those flying controls which control rotations of an aircraft about its three axes.

This does not mean that everything which is able to control motions about the three axes must be a primary flying control. In most aircraft with underslung engines, any changes in thrust produce pitching motions. But this does not make the throttle a primary flying control.

Trim tabs, balance tabs, and servo tabs are all forms of aerodynamic balance. Their function is to control or modify the control hinge moments. These tabs are not intended to control the rotation of the aircraft about its three axes. They are intended to assist the pilot to move the primary flying controls to do so.

[Piltdown Man]

RTFQ, Answer D - Primary controls are those which you use to control the aircraft in the THREE primary axes: Lateral, Vertical and Horizontal.

[High Wing Drifter]

Piltdown Man,

With reference to Fergal's explanation above, how do you reason D when there are a number of secondary controls that move the aircraft around the axis? Out of the choice available D would require you to consider flaps, trim, etc.

[Mosspigs]

Perhaps this is a classic example of translation from one of the JAA member states which is the root of the confusion.

When viewed like that one would be inclined to choose the most correct answer which would be as KW mentioned above - d.

Dunno, just think aloud.

[PD210]

Bonjourno,

Just a quick question regarding various ATPL question banks for exam preparation. As far as I am aware, accessing my

groundschool provider's question bank will entail me staying online whist answering questions. Seeing as I usually give quite a lot

of thought time in to the questions I am looking at racking up a hell of a phone bill this quarter. And BT get enough of my money

anyway. So, short of getting broadband, are there any other options? Have looked at buying Oxford's 2000question CD-ROM at

£35 scoobies as an alternative/addition.

Cheers

PD210.

PS ATPL Theory..it's just sooo much fun.:{ :{

[maxwell4065]

AOL dial up. Fixed monthly fee. Unlimited access. Can't say fairer than that. They will even give you the first month free.

[rons22]

I had a look at OATs CD, some questions are ok but 2000 is nothing for 14 exams, you need much bigger bank then that. Also some questions are repeated for different sections??

[PD210]

Thanks for your advice/help,

Might try AOL but I aint no fan of huge giants like them. Have found a way though. BGS question bank - save the first question page as an archive file and don't delete your temporary internet files. That way, you can scroll through and answer them all whilst staying offline. I think it's gonna work..?

PD210;)

[Perra]

I am using the Bristol online question bank and for that one you just need to be online until the set of questions you have selected has been retrived (cached).

[Piltdown Man]

IMHO I'm assuming that the question is related to aviation and not English. If it is a trick question, then you have to bust the question apart. The question uses the definite article, therefore D is correct. If the word "The" is removed, then C is correct. The question is "What is the exact wording of the question?"

Piltdown.

[VFE]

Another fine example of a JAR question testing an applicants ability to answer a question rather than test their knowledge of aviation. Do they think this type of questioning saves lives in a crisis?

VFE.

[Vee One...Rotate]

AOL takes over your computer and annoys the hel out of me - basic broadband is so cheap now it's well worth it. £15 a month is about the going rate I think...

V1R

[dwshimoda]

AOL Unlimted dial up is £15.99 a month. Wanadoo Broadband is £17.99 a month, so isn't it worth an extra 50p a week for the speed?

Also makes browsing PPrune a lot quicker!

[Jinkster]

AOL dial up. Fixed monthly fee. Unlimited access. Can't say fairer than that. They will even give you the first month free.

Yep and then cancel it after a month! :p

[WLM]

I have to sit 4 exams to convert my ICAO licence to a DCA one. The exams are based on UK International CAA. I have a complete set of study books ie FCL CAA, albeit the anwers to the progress tests. It looks like this set of study papers was Version 4. If anybody has the answers it would be much appreciated. Alternatively where could I go online to sit some practice exams? Its for a CPL (H) but have to sit the (A) version; need HPL, Radio Aids, Flight Planning and Loading
Thanks

[subsidence]

Found this question:

You're flying with 1.4 x Vs. What is the maximum bank angle before stall occurs?
a) 60°
b) 30°
c) 32°
d) 44°


I keep getting answer a) 60° but my feedback marks d) as the right one. Can anyone help me?

[Dnathan]

By memory I believe that the stall speed increases with load factor according to these key numbers:

30° bank about 7%
45° bank about 19%
60° bank about 41%
75° bank about 100%

And at 60° bank the load factor is 2 (2G), so i would also go with your conclusion.

[ATP_Al]

To answer the question you need to know two things:

(1) Stall speed increases by the square root of the load factor

(2) In a turn, load factor can be calculated using the formula:

load factor = 1/(cos angle of bank)

Firstly we work out what load factor we would need to stall at 1.4 Vs: 1.4 x 1.4 = 2. Now we know that the load factor required is 2, we can work out the angle of bank that would achieve that load factor. If we rearrange the formula we get: cos angle of bank = 1/load factor; 1/2 = 0.5. Cos-1 0.5 = 60, so (a) is the correct answer.

If you you forget that stall speed increases by the square root of the load factor, rather than the load factor itself, then you get answer (d).

Hope that helps

Al

[escobar]

When do you use a non-radar separation of 5nm?

When do you use a radar separation of 5nm?

Can't remember which one the question asked, i think it was non radar separation

a)heavy heavy, think its 4nm
b)medium heavy
c)light heavy
d)light medium

[WX Man]

Better answered probably on the air tragic forum.

However from memory:

Radar sep. normally 5nm, but can be less if the radar system is approved and the a/c is within 50nm of the radar head. Also sep. on final approach will generally be less than 5nm, but this is wake vortex sep. not lateral sep.

[TolTol]

Hi, could I have peoples opinions on the following question:

An aircraft is descending from FL410 to FL270 at the cruise Mach number. It then continues to descend from FL270 to FL100 at the IAS reached at FL270. Assume that the engines are idling, the configuration is clean and ignore any compressibility effect.
How does the angle of descent change in those two height bands respectivily:

a) increases, decreases
b) increases, remains constant
c) decreases, increases
d) remains constant, decreases

Any ideas? Thanks alot:ok:

[G SXTY]

(b) increases, remains constant.

Descent at constant mach # means increasing IAS, thus decreasing CL and increasing descent angle. Switching to constant IAS means constant CL, and constant descent angle.

Do I win £5? :)

[kalibarr]

Yep, I'd go for B.

Think this question is attempting to confuse you with angle of descent and angle of attack.

Descending with a constant Mach no. will see an increase in EAS, which will result in the need for a lower angle of attack. If you lower the angle of attack in a descent the nose will go down, and if the a/c nose goes down then it goes without saying that the angle of descent will increase.

[ATP_Al]

I concur - B is the answer to go for. A quick(!) explanation off the top of my head:

Mach Number is the ratio of true airspeed to the local speed of sound. Local speed of sound is solely dependent on temperature, which decreases with increasing altitude. So as you descend, the air temperature is increasing and therefore the local speed of sound is increasing. To maintain the same mach no the indicated (and therefore true) airspeed will have to increase, which means you lower the nose and increase the descent angle.

As you descend further you will reach an altitude where the mach number you are descending are coincides with the indicated airspeed you want to descend at. If you keep on lowering the nose after this point you will exceed this airspeed and so the descent angle is held constant.

Hope that helps!

Al

[Reverand Lovejoy]

Please don't grill me as I've tried to fid the details in GETMET and other sources but what does the AUTO and NDV mean in this METAR as I haven't seen this before.

EGPU 231450Z AUTO 20003KT 9999NDV // BKN022 SCT044 10/04 Q1004

Thanks for your help

The Reverand

[2Donkeys]

AUTO (surprise surprise), this METAR was produced by a machine, rather than by a person.


NDV means "No Directional Variations" available. Ordinarily, in conditions of restricted visibility, an observer may indicate the direction in which the visibility is either best or worst. In this case, no such distinction is available. 9999 in all directions.

2D

[G-SP0T]

At CAS 250kts, FL390, JSA +8*C what is the TAS?

A)439
B)482
C)458
D)464

The ans is given as 464kts, but I keep getting 482... the only way to get to 464 is to use ISA values for the temp, am i right in thinking the temp in this question is
-55? or have i messed up because its the JSA???

Confussed???!!!

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[oxford blue]

I suspect that you are not applying the correction for compressibility.

JSA +8 @ FL390 is -55ºC, as you say. That gives 482 knots before correction for compressibility (with a CRP-5 - you may find that an ARC2 gives a slightly different answer).

With compressibility corrected,the answer comes to about 463 or 464.

If your FTO has not shown you how to correct for compressibility, read the little booklet that comes with the flight computer.

[G-SP0T]

thanks for that!

I think I got carried away applying ram rise corrections as well, which was bring me back to too high a ans...

[G-SP0T]

the interception of a ILS beam by the auto pilot takes place :
A)according to a interception verces range and angle
B)at a constant heading

The white arc of the EGT gauge is:
A)special op range
b)normal op range

[Gillespie]

Hi there,

1. a

2. a

Been a while since I studied for the Instruments exam, but I do remember these questions and I'm fairly confident in my answers.

Please correct me if I'm wrong

[Charlie Zulu]

The first one is (a).

Think of the special operating range of an ASI. That'd be the Flap operating range... what colour is it? White. Apply this concept to the EGT guage. (That is how I remember this one anyway).

The second is also (a).

[spaceman1000]

a and a...
when you intercept the ILS, your plane is using a sinusoidal signal and calculate the angle to intercept the ILS .angle are different for any distance.So it can not be at straight angle.

[aerosteve]

anyone answer this for me ? and why?

for a jet cruising at 1.32 vimd a 5% decrease in weight would give a change of fuel flow by approx:

10% decrease
5% decrease
5% increase
2.5% decrease

cheers..

[fullrich]

Fuel flow at 1.32 vmd will decrease at the square root of the change in weight or (for small changes half the change.)

hense 2.5%


At VMD the change would be equal

At VMP the change would be squared(doubled for small change)



Fullrich

[Aim High]

Thats very interesting Fullrich and makes sense when you consider the shape of the drag curve
I have read much debate on similar questions and your reply has clarity
Have you a reference for it?

[zssp]

hey guys and gals ...


I faild instruments becasue of this question. Does anyone know how 2 answer it, because my father and i and a few other guys have no clue!!


here it goes ...

An aircraft flies a mesured course of 5NM between two pylons at 7000ft palt ., temp 15deg celcisus in 2min45sec. flying the revers in 2min19sec

if the asi was 100kts the asi error was

(A) 1kts under read
(B) 3kts over read
(C) 3kts under read


thanx hope sumone can help

sean

[Rainboe]

Are you certain you have made no typographical errors in the numbers?

I think it is begging for this:
Total track miles......... 10 miles.
Total time...................2.45 + 2.15=5.00
Therefore TAS 120kts ->

A circular slide rule should make this easy- it's not to hand, so I have had to resort to complicated corrections below.
From "Mathematically increase your indicated airspeed (IAS) by 2% per thousand feet of altitude to obtain the true airspeed (TAS)." and to allow for temperature error, "when changing IAS to TAS you need to add one knot to your Indicated airspeed (IAS) for each five or six degrees the temp is above standard day, at altitudes from 5,000 to 15,000 ft"(http://www.csgnetwork.com/tasinfocalc.html) and (http://www.sonic.net/~pjkelly/tswinds.html)
So, TAS is higher than IAS by 14% for Pressure Altitude correction, or Pressure corrected IAS=106 kts(106+14%=120), then subtract 3 kts for temperature error (because ISA at 7000' is +1 deg C, ie we are flying at ISA+14deg C), ie IAS should be 103kts, but it is actually 100kts, so it is underreading by 3.


Now PLEASE can we have a look at your grammar?

[zssp]

thanx .. thats how i was asked the question in the paper and ive found the same one in 2 question books thanx for the help .. i looked all over for a way to work it out and you way seems to make more sense ... i do appologise i shuld type slower and read over what ive writen

[Rainboe]

(Head in hands....crying)

It's actually 34 years since I did this sort of calculation, so any confirmation from anybody would be very welcome (but do start sentences with capitals and don't forget punctuation!).

[zssp]

Well it was really good i must say. I really do think thats an ATPL question. I know my problem is i just try get things done in to much of a rush. But i will try more in future but thanx so much for helping me out.

hey a guy on avcom wrote this

i would choose B - 3 knots over-read. A calibrated airspeed of 100Kts at 15 C at a Palt of 7000 feet equates to 113 Kts TAS. As the different times taken to fly the route indicates a wind correction of 10 Kts needs to be applied (129 Kts one way and 109 kts returning) Hence the TAS -Wind correction equals 103 knots - hence 3 knot over-read


b is the answer in the book

[Ibanez]

Uuuhh??? :hmm: Correct me if I'm wrong, but applying wind to TAS gives you ground speed, not a different IAS. I can't see that your Avcom man's reasoning is correct - but then again, I might be wrong. Rainboe's reasoning makes more sense.

Using your Aristo, you can see that at that height, and temp with 100 IAS, your TAS should be 113kts (as shown by your Avcom man). However, your real TAS is 120kts (109kts out and 130kts back with 11kts wind component). Therefor, using your Aristo, 120Kts TAS equates to a CAS of 105Kts. This gives you a 5kt under read. That would be my reasoning, but it seems as though my answer is incorrect.

CHEERS!!!
I

[Old Smokey]

zssp, Sean,

If indeed you did fail instruments because of this question, then you have a good case to protest - none of the answers are correct.

Please forgive the degree of decimal places, included so that this can be proven conclusively.

The basic mathematics indicate that the said time intervals may only be achieved at a TAS of 119.293656 Kt, and a Wind Component of -10.20274691 Kt on the first leg, and conversly +10.20274691 Kt on the second, i.e. a Groundspeed outbound of 109.0909091 Kt, and 129.4964029 on return. Apply these Ground Speeds to the 5 nm between pylons without ANY rounding off of the results -

5 nm at G/S 109.0909091 = 2:45 EXACTLY

5 nm at G/S 129.4964029 = 2:19 EXACTLY

OK, a TAS of 119.293656 Kt is proven. At 7000 feet Pressure Height and a Static Air Temperature of +15°C. To achieve the quoted TAS in these conditions requires EAS 104.79, Mach No. 0.1803, or, importantly for you, a CAS of 104.8868949.

Thus, if the flight is conducted at 100 KIAS, the ASI is UNDER-READING by 4.8868949 Kt, 5 Kt between friends.

NONE of the answers are correct. Protest the result Sean, protest!

Regards,

Old Smokey

[helicopter-redeye]

Or you could do it my way... If in doubt, guess 'C'!!

Personally, I find that the monkey usually points me towards B, especially around polar stereo charts (and he's usually right ...)

h-r:)

[NZLeardriver]

Sean, did they ask you which answer is correct, or which is most correct?

[zssp]

:D :D :D u knw thats a good question knowing the sacaa thats what they wanted lol but thanx guys for the help tho i passed today 75% on the dot yey

[Cron]

10nm in 5.08m, speed = 10/0.0846 = 118.11, 7000 against 15deg in air speed window of ARC 2 gives 103.5?

Could be wrong - been wrong before.

[Old Smokey]

zssp , Congratulations on your pass.

Cron, unfortunately it cannot be done that way, because as a percentage penalty or gain, the same Wind Component has a greater effect upon time as a Headwind than when a Tailwind. Thus, the solution can not be found by taking the total distance against the total time, the TAS will always come out on the low side.

Consider a 100 Kt TAS over a 100 mile course. In nil wind, it comes out at 60 minutes both directions, so far so good, but now insert a 20 Kt Headwind outbound, which becomes 20 Kt Tailwind for the reverse direction –

100 nm at G/S 80 Kt = 75 minutes (EXACTLY)
100 nm at G/S 120 Kt = 50 minutes (EXACTLY)

Now, if we use your technique of total distance against total time, that’s –

200 nm in 125 minutes = 96 Knots – Wrong, we knew in advance that the TAS = 100 Kt.

Now, if instead we calculated the G/S in both directions, and found the mean, we would have the answer –

100 nm in 75 minutes = G/S 80
100 nm in 50 minutes = G/S 120

Mean G/S = (80 + 120) / 2 = 100 Kts – Correct!

(All of the above assumes of course, that there was no drift, because any drift will effectively increase the Headwind and decrease the Tailwind).

It’s because of this type of reasoning that we need to use a more complex formula in calculating PNRs, than simply taking half of the useable endurance to be used on the outward leg.

Regards,

Old Smokey

[Cron]

OS, of course you are right, T = Ex(H)/(O+H) and all that.
The figures came out right and so I thought the method was applicable. Fool that I am.

[Old Smokey]

I wouldn't call yourself a fool Cron. The "Powers that be" that set the exam obviously made the same mistake - Gottem!:ok:
Regards,

Old Smokey

[-IBLB-]

aren't there usually four answers that go with these questions? :confused:

[Home James!]

Friends

This is a simple question. 109kts against the wind, 129 knots with the wind therefore 119ktas still air. Drift is not relevant because the reverse is flown not the reciprocal i.e. the paper pilot flies back to the start point. I can't quite see why we need to know Mach No but under ISA conditions at 7000ft the temp should be 1 deg C but we are told "today" it is 15 deg C. That makes local speed of sound 1118.64ft/sec so M0.18 it is. Now using an electronic calculator rather than the whirly wheel I obtain CAS of 105kts. Thus agreeing with old Smokey. So the IAS under-reads by 5kts. So either a) the examiner got it wrong or b) we are supposed to second guess what the examiner wants or c) we have not been given the question in full. If on the other hand we had to give evidence of our working some credit could be gained and the exam would be a continuation of the learning process.

[head_girl]

Dear Sirs

I refer you to the recent exam paper in which students are expected to deduce an IAS error. From the data given that an aircraft is at 7000ft pressure altitude, an air temperature of 15 deg C and accomplishes 5 nautical mile outbound and inbound legs in 2min 45secs and 2min 19secs respectively it can be deduced that true airspeed is 119 knots. If the IAS calibration is correct it should therefore read 105knots but it reads 100kts instead. This is under-reading by 5 knots but no such option is given in the multiple-choice selection. Even if the erroneous assumption is made that true airspeed is total distance divided by total time (it is of course deduced from outbound and inbound speeds calculated separately) it is not possible to mistakenly select a value from the range offered. As the aircraft is supposed to reverse its route and not fly a reciprocal bearing (which in wind would not take it back to its starting point) drift is not an issue. I am therefore at a loss as to how the examiner who drafted the question expects it to be answered. I await your reply with interest.

[smithgd]

Can anyone help me to differenciate between the following?

Absolute Pressure
Gauge Pressure

Now I think they are related by:

Absolute Pressure = Gauge Pressure + Atmospheric Pressure

So at 30,000ft the pressure is 300mb...which pressure are we talking about??

Cheers
smithgd

[Old Smokey]

I think that the "bottom line" here lies not so much in nit-picking over 2 knots difference between the correct answer and the "nearest correct answer". 2 knots variation is definately within the "green band" for practical day to day operations.

In sitting for exams, the candidate will typically do his / her working to the highest degree of precision possible, and considerable stress can be caused in an exam situation where the correct answer fits none of the answer choices available.

BTW, drift WILL complicate the issue!

Regards,

Old Smokey

[George Koumis]

Dear Pprune,

I am writing for the first time and I would like to get some opinions on the following query.

Which On-Line JAA Question Bank is best to prepare someone for the ATPL(A) Exams?

I am aware of two Question Banks.
The one belongs to a company named Aerosolutions and the other is the Bristol Ground School.

Thank you very much,

Geoge KOUMIS

[YYZ]

I used BGS and found it to be great and cheap, got me through.

YYZ

[G-SP0T]

AERO SOLUTION
ATPL(A) - Full feature license – 10 months 290.00 €
ATPL(A) - Full feature license – 5 months 190.00 €

BRISTOL
30EUROS!

[helicopter-redeye]

Then add the OAT CD for another £20 to BGS and Bob's Your Uncle, the business case wuz writ...

[George Koumis]

Does the BGS cost 30 euros for all 14 subjects or 30 euros/subject?

[Kanu]

€30 for 3 months but well worth it. I agree that the OATs cd is also a useful tool

[A320sRcool]

GNav PET Q.
1.pls help am re sitting my Gnav after takin in July 05 had about 5 lengthy PSR questions all with CRP 5 wind velocity calculations necessary .
In school notes never had to work out headwind/tailwind - from a given wind velcity.
In exam this was asked many times.
If CRP5 calculation creates for example a 50knot headwd- is this simply the opposite for the opposite direction. This had me flummexed(spell chk) in exam room as got confused abt TAS on return . Can anyone help. Hope I explained ok .

2.brush Up -which school?Also am thinking of going to Oxford for 2week brush up after having done full course from another school - any comments / feedback appreciated

[Hobgoblin]

Hi A320sRcool

Firstly what I did is always work out the head and tailwind. Easy enough because all you have to do is turn the wind wheel around so you see the reciprocal of your outbound heading. Of course taking into account drift angle, variation and deviation if need be (it seems that usually you get given the true heading, at least in my exam it was always true heading so no worries.)

Remember that there are only so many ways they can ask the same thing, they can change the numbers to try and confuse you but that's about it. If you make it a habit to always check head- and tailwind then that makes one less opportunity for the examiner to catch you napping.

Secondly sign up for Bristol Groundschool's online database. Excellent value for money and it will really help you practise those kind of questions.

Good luck!

[Charlie Zulu]

Hi,

If, from a W/V problem you obtain a 50kt headwind component, this will *not* automatically turn into a 50kt tailwind component.

Let me do an example.

TAS 400 Knots
HDG 090 (T)
W/V 060 / 40 Knots
Safe Endurance: 7 Hours

What would the distance to the Point of Safe Return (PSR) be?

So: PSR = ( Ground Speed Home * Safe Endurance ) / ( Ground Speed Home + Ground Speed Out )

Firstly we will need to find out the Groundspeed Out and Groundspeed Home. We'll need the CRP-5 for this.

Put the central blue dot over the TAS of 400 knots. Then under the Index put 060. Mark 40 knots down from 400, so that'll be a mark on 360 knots. This is the W/V done.

Now rotate the wheel so that 090 is under the Index. This will give you the drift so we should have 3 degree starboard drift, the heading will thus be 087 degrees and the groundspeed will be 365 knots.

To obtain the groundspeed home:

The track home would be 270, this will give us 3 degrees of port drift and thus the heading will be 273 degrees. The groundspeed will be 433 (not much of a difference in this example).

Groundspeed Out: 365
Groundspeed Home: 433

PSR = ( 433 * 7 ) / ( 365 + 433 ) = 3031 / 798 = 3.798245614

For the distance would be 3.798245614 hours * 365 Knots GS

PSR = 1386.36nm

I would second subscribing to the Bristol Online Quesiton bank. Fantastic value for money.

Best wishes,

Charlie Zulu.

[Martin1234]

"Now rotate the wheel so that 090 is under the Index. This will give you the drift so we should have 3 degree starboard drift, the heading will thus be 087 degrees and the groundspeed will be 365 knots."

I assume that you mean true track?

If you already know the true track you can use your calculator to solve the problem. It's very convenient for some other type of questions as well, as below.

Take the angle difference between the wind direction and your tail/headwind (take the one they ask for). Use cos on that angle and multiply the value you get by the actual wind. Voila!

Example:

You are to land on runway 22 and your wind is 290/20 (magnetic). What is your headwind component?

290 - 220 = 70 degrees
cos(70) = 0,34202
20 knots * 0,34202 = 6.84 knots

[Charlie Zulu]

Yup I kept it all true tracks / headings in the example above to keep it simple.

Of course when dealing with runway crosswinds / headwinds one can use a calculator (I did in the exam and its MUCH quicker).

Headwind is a function of cos (cos 0 degrees is 1).
Crosswind is a function of sin (sin 90 degrees is 1).

eg.

Crosswind = Wind speed * sin 70 degrees difference
Headwind = Wind speed * cos 70 degrees difference

[ossie_lation]

I'm currently doing the CPL(A) distance learning course. From my notes it seems most of it is similar to the ATPL but with various parts of subjects removed. I wondered therefore if subscribing to the BGS question bank would be useful or are different questions banks supplied for the CPL?
Any assistance would be much appreciated
Ossie

[VC10L1011]

Yes without a doubt make very full use of it!!!! Although I did not complete my exams with Bristol, I used there databank and gained all 14 first time no probs...

Don't use it as a sole source for learning though, use it to check your knowledge and understanding and to get used to the style of question..

Snuggsy

[Charlie Zulu]

Each time you log onto the BGS Online Question Bank a menu appears with the following options:

ATPL(A)
ATPL(H)
CPL(A)
CPL(H)
ATPL(H) to ATPL(A)

So yes it probably is worth while for the CPL(A) question bank. However I am unsure of its suitability as I've only used the ATPL(A) databank.

In regards to the quesiton bank in terms of ATPL(A) questions, it seems to be pretty good, especially for Meteorology, General Navigation and Instruments.

However as the previous poster states, do not use it as sole reference to study. Study from your books and use the question bank only as a guide and also to get used to the style of questions that the JAA give you.

One thing to note though is that all questions in the databank are 1 mark each. In the real exams some questions will be weighted to 2 or even 3 marks per question (I noticed one 3 marker in Met this month), the weighted ones will probably happen to be the more difficult or time consuming questions as well.

[Send Clowns]

A320

I think you need to think more about what you are trying to achieve, rather than mechanically following the steps you have been shown.

I suspect you have been shown many examples in school, all of which have given you a wind component. You seem to have forgotten that you don't, in fact, need to calculate the wind component at all. You are using it to find the groundspeed, but if you are given a wind, a TAS and a track then you find the groundspeed directly from the CRP-5. The groundspeeds out and home need to be found for PSR, but as pointed out above the track home is the reciprocal of the outbound track.

Considering winds, remember that wind components on reciprocal tracks are never the same magnitude unless the wind is straight down the track. You will always lay off drift by turning into wind, increasing any headwind component, reducing any tailwind component. If the wind is at right angles to track the wind component is headwind either way!

[Send Clowns]

You are used to the question giving the difference between TAS and G/S as a wind component. This wind component is simply added to or subtracted from the TAS to find the groundspeed. This is rather a simplification of the issue, to reduce the complexity of the question.

In this example the wind component is not given. Instead you are given wind direction and speed and the desired track to fly outbound. Obviously for a PSR the return track must be the reciprocal of the outbound track.

In this case to calculate the groundspeed, instead of just adding or subtracting a given component you need to work on the CRP-5, the vector-calculator side. All instructions assume you use the wind-down method.

1. Place a wind mark (turn the wind direction to the "True Heading" arrow, count down from the centre bug by the wind speed and place a small cross)
2. Place the centre bug on the TAS
3. Turn the outbound track to the "True Heading" arrow - note this is only an approximate heading as it is the required track.
4. Find the drift under the wind cross.
5. Turn the track (towards the wind cross for the first turn) until the track sits against the drift on the drift ark at the top corresponding to the drift under the wind cross.
6. Check the drift under the wind cross, and repeat step 5 and this step if required.
7. Read the groundspeed under the wind cross

Note this groundspeed as "O", the outbound G/S.
Repeat steps 3 to 7 using the return track, note the groundspeed as "H", the homebound groundspeed.

Use O and H in the PSR formula.

Notice that with any crosswind component the difference between groundspeed and TAS is not the same on reciprocal tracks, i.e. the wind components are not the same but negative as they so often are on exam questions.

For example, imagine a tailwind, not a direct tailwind but a tailwind from the left, on the outbound leg. The aircraft would be heading left of track to account for drift, reducing the tailwind component. Reversing track the wind is a headwind from the right. The aircraft would be turned a little right to account for drift, increasing the headwind component. Therefore any headwind component will always be greater than the tailwind component on a reciprocal track, unless the wind is straight down the track when they are equal.

Try this example (from the JAA question bank):

Wind 045º/50kts
Track 090º out (so 270º home)
TAS 180 kts
How far can you go out and return within 1 hour?

Find groundspeeds, use the PSR formula with an endurance of 1 hour.

You should find groundspeeds of about 141 kts out, 212 kts home (within 1 kt) and a distance of 85 nm (within 1 nm).

Send Clowns
Gen Nav
BCFT

P.S. Although we can offer the brush up too, I can recommend Steve as a good bloke to get help through.

[berserker]

I am currently reading up on aircraft icing and I want to clearify one thing. If asked to hold, would you rather hold over water or would you hold over land to avoid icing? I have been given very weak answers from my friends so far. Can anyone help me with this?

[High Wing Drifter]

You will only get icing (with the exception of hoar) in visible moisture. Essentially, you will get the most serious icing in cumuliform clouds, so you are looking at staying out of convecting air. Will it convect over water or land? Depends where in the World you are and what time of year and day it is.

If you include orographic convection in the equation then I suppose you would want to stay away from hills and hence the land, but that seems a tad tenuous to me.

If you consider what actions you would need to take if you experience heavy icing, then I suppose over sea is better because you can descend lower to warmer air.

If you are thinking of warm front icing then it makes no difference, because the theoretically best action is to climb into the warm air.

If the choice is the mid Atlantic or the Central Asia then there would obviously be less moisture over the huge land mass. But that seems to me to be a stupid comparison.

Like you say, seems very weak to me.

Any body else with any ideas?

[powdermonkey]

Hi Folks,
Really need some urgent advice on the best question bank for atpl prep. Which one out there gives a fair representation of the weird type of questions that may come up. I have tons of feedback papers and have been on Abacus and Bristol online, any other suggestions. Will be sitting atpls in Ireland and have some indication that an Italian set of qs is the source for our exams this time. Any comments or advice. Apart from the classic standard questions that come up regularly, I am always surprised by some of the things that come up, and I wonder why I have never seen them before!! It upsets me.... A LOT! I can handle one or two surprises in the exam, but don't want to be faced with an entire paper alien to me.
Help, give me some clues?
Cheers PowderMonkey:uhoh:

[YYZ]

I just used the BGS QB, answered everything I needed, and was only 30 Euros for three months!

However, I am sure you already know this & it is not an intended dig at you, but a good understanding of the material will eradicate most surprises the CAA will put in?
Good luck..

YYZ

[thebeast]

the old chestnut of feedback.

I used the Italian stuff and found it to be excellent although i have heard it is now starting to get a little old as some new questions have been introduced. I also used Abacus initially but found it to be lacking and stopped using it, so its not worth the money.

Friends who used the Bristol feedback said it had all the questions including the new ones (how they managed the get them is an interesting question).

Soo basically most of the feedback is very very good. The Bristol options seems like a good deal but i got the Italian feedback for free.

[powdermonkey]

Hi,
I'm already on Bristol one, it's just that from the feedback I get in Ireland from the few students doing the ATPLs, is that it's not quite the same as the UK exams, and that the questions are being pooled from a very European source. I believe the Bristol questions to be extreemly close to the UK exams, but a few before me used only Bristol and found quite a few differences in the styling of the questions. So I wondered if there was a different source of qs out there. I think Bristol are brilliant by the way, just want to be PREPARED! Maybe I'm completely wrong, we'll know in a few weeks:uhoh:
Cheers

PS what's the Italian site, as I said, I think the IAA are pooling
from there,
TF

[YYZ]

If I remember correctly the Italian QB was.... acquired by someone and sold to anyone with enough cash, or if you were lucky you would get one emailed free by someone?

It was not a site but was a genuine QB run by the Italian CAA, each country runs it's own bank of questions which are then pooled together, and then a mix is offered on exam day.
(I think this is how it works?)

This was a while back now and some of the questions are out dated but generally still useful.

YYZ

[powdermonkey]

You reckon Bristol is enough and more up to date?
I found many errors and conflicting opinions on Abacus, which led to a wee bit of confusion, but the site was easier to navigate as you could really select a very specific topic, ie anything on fms, and only get fms questions, so this really helped on concentrating on just one sticky topic.

Am I lucky? Thanks for the replies
PM

[YYZ]

BGS will be more than adequate, They keep (or try to) everything as up to date as possible, they get allot of feedback from students who sit the exams, therefore, most new questions are on the QB quite quickly.

Good luck
YYZ

[metar]

I got first-time passes averaging 89% using the Bristol GS online feedback. Few questions i didn´t recognise though you are obviously on your own for subjects like Gen Nav.

My result says more about the feedback than it does about my intrinsic knowledge of 14 ATPL subjects which is not to say I didn´t work damn hard!

METAR

[helicopter-redeye]

I just used the BGS QB, answered everything I needed, and was only 30 Euros for three months!

Thanks to all the supporters of the Bristol QB. Its just gone up to €72 (£50) for 3 months (Glad I bought it at €30).

Thats quite a jump. 145% give or take. Market forces, no doubt.

:rolleyes:

[Alex Whittingham]

Not so much market forces as the cost of maintaining it. I had to take a stab in the dark at costs when I set it up and I underestimated, sorry. I'm trying to keep it down.

[YYZ]

When I started using the BGS QB back in May 2004, it stated then that the 30 euros was whilst it established itself & worked out the bugs in the system, so a price rise has been coming for a while.

Anyway, at £50 for three months, it is still the best value around.

YYZ

[heinzmanm]

I agree!
I have only been using it for around 2 weeks but already I feel like I've had my £20 worth.
I'd rather pay double now for this, than possibly pay for resits if I fail any of the exams!
£20 well spent in my view.

Matt

[smith]

72 Euro for the on-line feedback is an utter disgrace ............. IT'S FAR TOO LOW!!!!! I'd willingly sell my house and all its contents to use the BGS feedback.:ok:

[flat-tire]

Could someone tell me what an ATPL exam certificate is and how one goes about getting one?

I have taken and passed all my exams and was issued a CPL(A). The CAA never gave me an ATPL exam certificate.

[needajob01]

you will get a full ATPL when you have passed the 14 JAA exams.and
1500h tt, and 500h on a 2 pilots plane (over 12500lbs).

http://www.geocities.com/ineedajob01/]job for me?[/URL]

[flat-tire]

Thanks needajob01

I know what the ATPL exam requirements are but what is an ATPL exam certificate? I think they might be asking for my ATPL exam results document. Now only if I could find the CAA application for a duplicate copy. I thought I handed my last copy in when I had my CPL issued. Any ideas?

[Mercenary Pilot]

I just noticed that there are now at least 3 ATPL ground schools offering an online question bank for a small fee, there are also a number of schools who hand out the question bank on CD to their students.

Now what I find interesting is, after a conversation with one of the head men from the CAA, the fact that they said that they would prosecute (Through JAA/EASA) anybody found to be distributing the question bank. However, they blatantly don’t seem to be doing this:confused:

Now, I do think that the ATPL's have become a total joke, however I don’t have a problem with these online question banks because it puts all students on an equal footing.

Getting to the point... If the exam system is turning into an FAA style memory quiz, why should students be forced to pay for 14 exams? The FAA ATPL written costs approx £50 the JAA £750+!

Another interesting point, the CAA now make it a mandatory requirement for applicants for the CPL & IR skill tests to be given a small verbal exam before the FT can take place. Why? because CAAFU examiners were complaining that applicants lacked sound theoretical knowledge:oh:

[Capt. Vilo]

I have to agree...
There are some people who study their arsses off to pass these exams because they are actually intrested in learning and gaining new knowledge about the aircraft and aircraft systems that they will be using in their future careers, then there are some that just "do the feedback", where these people will pass the exams and get 14 good grades what do they actualy know????

If the system is going the "FAA way" then let everyone have an equal chance "all for one and one for all" (and all that s@*t).

If it IS or IS'NT the actual question bank that is being dished out I think these exams are turning into a joke, why bother is it worth it, or is it just another way for the caa to earn more £££ I have just finished my mcc on a 737-200 and found stuff from my ATPL's popping up all over the place..

Thanks for letting me rant

vilo

[Mercenary Pilot]

I have seen some of these CD's and I can tell you that they are word for word and included the appendices too. Also they include the country who issued the question! From my understanding they have been leaked from Italy and Portugal. They seem to be turning up all over the place.

As for the Online Question Banks, They seem to be mostly the same but sometimes with a small change in wording and the answers swapped around.

[Hobgoblin]

Whether these are the actual question banks or not is immaterial. Anyone who thinks that he can just cram these question banks and expect to pass all 14 subjects is in for a rude awakening. I studied my backside off for Meteorology and did all the feedback questions I could find.

Did I receive one single question I had ever seen? Did I f£$%^*!

The question banks did help in showing me the areas that needed work and after brushing those up I nailed the sucker.

Also, I have seen a guy show up for a Comm flight test all kitted up and ready to go fly with the aeroplane parked out front. Examiner shows up with a face like someone just stole his lunch money, doesn't even say good morning (very bad form in my opinion) and then proceeds to grill the poor little guy for two hours on everything he could think of. When the unfortunate guy walked out of the office he was in tears.

Never even got into the aircraft:( .

Imagine how good he would have felt had he shown that examiner up for the small minded little person that he is by acing every single question this guy could ask. Instead he had to go through it all again. (For his sake I hope with a a different examiner)

Make sure you know what you are talking about. Any interview board will ask you questions and while they will not try to shoot you down in flames, they will try to find out whether you are worth the bother or if you are one of those that they have to retrain every Monday morning!

[TolTol]

Hi,

Could somebody please tell me, what is the humidity in a pressurized cockpit? Some feedback questions are saying 30-60% and others are saying its 5-10%.

Cheers.
:ok:

[High Wing Drifter]

I think the right answer is 30-60% However, in reality I think it is much lower because water is heavy. Unmodified (no added moisture), the pressurised air would have about 3% humidity.

[Dotun]

The ideal humidity should be about 40% - 60%. This is however not the case in the real world. The answer you are looking for is the 5% - 10%. Recommendation says operators should fit humidifiers to get this level up, but they don’t. That’s why its great to drink loads of liquid to stop you from dehydrating.

Regards
DMan

[ask26]

I'm going to be going to Jerez hopefully in the next few months and am trying to get a head start by borrowing some OAT books and getting a bit of reading done in advance.

However whilst looking on eBay and searching for "ATPL" I found three Question Bank CD's that are being advertised for about a tenner.

Wiljam Flight Training Software
JAR-FCL ATPL Question Bank
JAA ATPL/CPL(A) Questions for ALL 14 SUBJECTS - CD

I'm quite PC literate and so think something like this would help me in my pre exam revision instead of just learning it from books and instruction.

Has anyone used any of these and if so which is the most useful?

[A320sRcool]

ATPL MET Exam Question

Flying East to West North Hemis.
@500hPa??

Correct Ans:
If wind is from North you are gaining altitude.


What is the method to come to this answer if dealing with this ofeten used question but in difeerent scenarios.
It is to do with direction of Low Press wind direction which moving anti clockwise ? Or Anti Cyclone -c lockwise. Does the hPa have anything to do with answer ?

[taxitoalpha]

Using Buy Ballots Law, if in N/H you stand with your back to the wind the low pressure is on your left. Therefore if blowing from North you are flying away from a low pressure system to a high pressure system and your altitude is increasing.
Hope thats right as got my met exam in 55 mins!

[TolTol]

This is a prime example of how ambiguous these exams are. In reality its around 5% but according to the JAA its between 30% and 60%.:{

Anyways, thanks for the help guys.:ok:

[A320sRcool]

but if the flt is east to west isnt the north wind going to stay the same direction throughtout whole flight????

[Number Cruncher]

It is to do with direction of Low Press wind direction which moving anti clockwise

Yes.

So, imagine you are flying from east to west from the centre of a low through to the centre of the high. As you are going away from the centre of the low, the winds will rotate anticlockwise (as you’re in the northern hemisphere), hence you will be experiencing a crosswind from the North. As you approach the high, the winds will be rotating clockwise (as you are in the northern hems), so the first effect you will get is again a northerly crosswind. All the time your true altitude will be increasing.

If you continue to fly through the high to the other side of it, you will eventually start experiencing a crosswind from the south and your true altitude will start decreasing!

It’s much easier to understand if you draw a diagram resembling what I said above.

You can use the Ballots law but I didn’t bother with it.

Good luck

[Turkish777]

I agree with Dotun, I thought in a real world its meant to be 40-60% but in a pressurised aircraft its only 5-10% hence cabin crew rehydrating passengers with drinks all the time....

'all the time' well depends which airline your on I guess lol...

[Turkish777]

I thought Bristol gs online was quite accurate, although it does seem that the CAA are changing the wording and questions more and more...

Check your PM, Ive sent you my ID and password as Ive finished ATPL's now..and thats the sort of nice fella I am.

:ok:

[Dick Whittingham]

At low level it would be correct to say that you would be flying into an area of surface high pressure, and baro error would be in the safe sense, altimiter underreading, height increasing.

This is a slightly deeper question, as it says you are flying on the 500hpa level, i.e. about 18,000ft. Up high you have to take into account temp error as well. You are flying on the 500hpa contour, and if the wind is from the right it means you are flying into an area where the contours are higher amsl, so your height is increasing. You do not know whether this is because surface pressure is increasing or because the air mass temp below you is increasing. Either or both could be the answer.

Dick W

[A320sRcool]

if you could draw, and send to my email I think thatis only option will make easier for me to underdtand .
Also another q.
airlfield 200m above msl QNH 1009. The air temp is 10deg lower than standard. What is QFF

How do I get to correct answer of more than 1009
What is simplest way of differentiating QFF with QFE - or can one say that both are same

[A320sRcool]

How come in my feed back question s on fire extinguishers an AC with 10 max config
the correct ans for amount of fire extingishers to be equipped is
1 in cockpit
3 in cabin
IS it not between 7- 30 1exting uisher

please help v confusing

[TenAndie]

I can 100% guarentee that an a/c with 10 SEATS does not need 3 in the cabin !!!

[A320sRcool]

lol yes - do you know what i mean-- what kind of answer was that feedback giving out- must be a typo .. I mean 3 exting in 10 seater AC . I dont think so LOL Thanks for the reassurance. ZDefinately 1 then
7-30 ac
31 -60 2
61-200 3
201- 300 4
etc ....
601 or more 7

[A320sRcool]

I found this question in Feedback

During a flight at FL135
true alt is 13500 Local QNH 1019

Air mass is colder than ISA ... how come- should it not be warmer than ISA if QNH is 1019 at FL135

[Charlie Zulu]

Hi A320',

As 1019 is higher than 1013, we shall need to add 27' * 6hPa = 162' onto 13,500 to give us our altitude above sea level. This gives us 13,662' above sea level.

However the question states that our "true" altitude is 13,500'.

As the true altitude is less than our altitude above sea level (true altitude of 13,500 as opposed to 13,662), the temperature must be colder than ISA.

Remember, if the column of air below you is colder than ISA then you are lower than the altitude above sea level. If the air is warmer than ISA then your true altitude will be higher than that indicated.

Best wishes,

Charlie Zulu.

[A320sRcool]

thanks but a bit confused about the 1st paragraph of ur explanation.
Im ok with the rule high to low look out below - but is it not the higher you go the less hpA there is ?? so why do you say 1019 is higher than 1013 . 1019 would be lower in height but higher in hPa - so it would be less in height? Please help

[Dick Whittingham]

Easy tiger! The question does not say it is 1019 at FL135. It says you are at FL135 and the local QNH is 1019. It also adds that air mass temp is less than ISA

QNH is a theoretical pressure at sea level, calculated as though ISA temps apply and so that your altimeter will read correctly at your datum height. In this case datum height is msl, but if QNH were given as an airfield QNH the datum height would be the airfield elvation.

So, point one. Your altimeter is measuring height from the 1013 pressure level when it should be measuring from the sea level 1019 pressure level, so you have a baro error to take out, as already explained

Point two. Even with the baro error corrected your altimeter will still be overreading if the air mass temp is below ISA, so there is a further error that brings your true height down to 13,500ft. Or, put it the other way, if you true height is down to 13,500ft the air must be colder.

The pressure at 13,500ish will be well below 1013 or 1019, more in the 600hpa region.

I have re-read this and recognise it as a long winded versio of what Charlie Zuylu has already said

Dick Whittingham

[A320sRcool]

Flying FL 160
OAT +27c
sea level pres 1003(is this QNH?)
What is tru e Alt?

Must I 16000/27 to get 590

and - from 16000??

how come the ans is 15090 in the feedback
.. What am I doing wrong

[RVR800]

Check your post - is it accurate?

[A320sRcool]

yes -- its def the answer- why what do u make it-- u can tell me the way u work it out- i will get back to school if u make it the same

[Number Cruncher]

mmm don't think it gets that hot up there?

Does it really say +27c @ 16,000ft?

[RVR800]

.................well yes Global Warming indeed Number Cruncher !

many deaths at the surface that day due to 'pollution...'

--------------------------

Relationship of true and calibrated (indicated) altitude:

TA= CA + (CA-FE)*(ISADEV)/(273+OAT)
where

TA= True Altitude above sea-level
FE= Field Elevation of station providing the altimeter setting
CA= Calibrated altitude= Altitude indicated by altimeter when set to the
altimeter setting, corrected for calibration error.

ISADEV= Average deviation from standard temperature from standard in the air
column between the station and the aircraft (in C)

OAT= Outside air temperature (at altitude)

[A320sRcool]

sorry its - 27c

RVR 800 --- thats is definition of all codes but not method for working out this type of question but thanks for your help

RVR I didnt read ur reply properly sorry ,, just realised ur method- ta will try

RVR - what if the question doesnt give me FE what do I do then........

[Number Cruncher]

OK

The equation is as such:

16,000 - (16*4*-10) - ((1013-1003)*27) = 15,090

16,000 is the altitude

(16*4*-10) (16) is the flight level abbreviated to the first 1 or 2 digits. Multiply this by (4c). (4c for every 1,000ft). Multiply it by the ISA temp dev'n (-10), in this case at 16,000 the temp should be -10, but its -27.

Second part of the equation is 1013 as used for FL's, then adjust it for the actual QNH, 1003, and multiply it by the standard 27.

Use this formula for all these types of Q's.

Good luck

[Send Clowns]

Use yer CRP-5! It's a damned sight easier and a damned sight quicker than the formula, and that is what a CRP-5 is for. Easing your way and speeding you up. Having said that, even as a Nav instructor I find myself embarrassed for a CRP-5 at the moment, so cannot give you the exact figure it will get. If you want an explanation of how I am happy to oblige.

You need some attention to your brackets, Number Cruncher!

[Number Cruncher]

Yeah they don't call me NC for nothing you know ;)

Funny you say that about the CRP, Clowns. Most people in my ATPL class, myself included, much preferred a calculator to the WW. I think the WW is an excellent piece of kit, but there are so many figures and words on it I just wanted that extra bit of security and I know my calculator pretty well funnily enough.

[A320sRcool]

Can anyone tell me formula for getting true alt from
FL 160
OAT -27c
QNH 1003


thanks

[Frolic]

Hi,

first you have to do pressure correction with: 27ft / 1 hPa

So Pressure at FL160 is 1013,25. Pressure difference is 10 hPa. So difference is 270ft.

16000ft - 270ft = 15730ft

After that you have to do temperature correction. ISA Temperature in FL160 would be -17°C. OAT is -27°C. Difference is 10°C.
Formula for temperature correction is 0,4% per 1°C: 0,4% * 10°C = 4% of 15730ft = 629ft which have to be substracted from 15730ft because it's colder than ISA.

So result must be 15101ft.

Hopefully. If not please correct me.

Oh now I see that your qquestion was answered in a previous thread? so why dou you ask again? :-)

[A320sRcool]

Frolic
answer is 15090 in the feedback sheet

[A320sRcool]

Number cruncher I have just looke dat my school notes and seen the connection with 4 per 1000 - u must think im an idiot sorry- justbeen inundated with loads of formulaes and overlooked this one ...many thanks for your help

[Frolic]

yes I know but my result (15101) is quite near to the result in the feedback sheet.

So we were told that we have to do pressure correction first and afterwards the temp correction. JAR probably first temp corrects and pressure corrects afterwards. If you do it in this manner you'll get 15090.



But why do you aks this question again? It has been answered in a prevouis thread.

[powdermonkey]

Hi all, anyone figure this one out for me?

A route is being plotted on a Lamberts Chart using a grid aligned with the Greenwich meridian. The aircraft is at 49 S 100 E tracking 100 G. The convergence factor for the chart is 0.75, variation is 10 E, deviation is 4 E and drift is 7 right. The aircraft s true track is:


(a) 011
(b) 008
(c) 018
(d) 025

Ans is 25, but is my working out of it correct.

If the convergence factor is .75 and the chlong between datum and 100E is 100dgs, then the convergency between datum and 100E is 75dgs.
Diff between grid and true track is the convergency between the datum meridian and that point, ie 75dgs, therefore 100 -75 is 25?
So all the deviation, drift and variation is to confuse you?

Be nice to have this clarified, thanks for any comments
Powdermonkey

My exams are next week....... and this one I simply can't get.
Would be thankfull if someone could show me how to approach this one.
Cheers

[Send Clowns]

Cadbury's Dairy Milk Very Tasty Creamy and Good

C D M V T C G

You have been asked to convert from grid to true heading. From the standard table above, remembered by mnemonics similar to the one I have given, the difference is (grid) convergence, which is 75°E.

Variation would then give you magnetic heading, deviation subsequently compass heading. But you have not been asked for either! Drift would tell you heading, but you've not been asked for that either. Read the question and answer it, don't try to go any further! Those three pieces of information are complete red herrings, they are of no use in answering the question. They give you such infoirmation o fool you in many exam questions, especially those concerning different bearings like this one.

Good luck!

Send Clowns
Gen Nav, BCFT

[Old Smokey]

First you must find the QNH correction for two purposes -

(1) Establish the Sea Level Pressure Height to ascertain the ISA Temperature there, and

(2) Establish the Indicated Altitude, upon which column of air the Temperature deviation affects in the Indicated to True Altitude conversion.

For a QNH of 1003, the Pressure Height at Sea Level is 281.1 feet. ISA Temperature at 281.1 feet is +14.45°C.

At Pressure Height 16000 feet, ISA temperature is -16.69°C, and for OAT = -27°C, Temperature is ISA-10.31°C.

At Pressure Height 16000 feet, for QNH = 1003, Indicated Altitude = 16000-281.1=15718.9 feet.

The Mean ISA Temperature of the column of air is (+14.45-16.69)/2 =-1.12°C + 273.15 =272.03°K.

The Mean Actual Temperature of the column of air is 272.03°K - 10.31 = 261.72°K.

True Altitude = 15718.9 X 261.72 / 272.03 = 15123.2 feet.

That's very close to the standard answer of 15090 feet.

The results arrived at here were achieved using actual almospheric values in place of the commonly used convenient approximations. The degree of complexity was not intended as a "line shoot", but to make three points -

(1) The practical day to day approximations used (30 ft/hPa, 2° per 1000 feet, etc.), whilst not exact, are good practical figures and may be used with confidence.

(2) For Examiners - Optional answers provided MUST be exact, with allowance for small deviation from the 'absolutely correct' answer. It can be extremely distressing to an examinee who has worked his/her calculation thoroughly, and finds that none of your answers 'fit'.

(3) For Students - It's essential in your learning process that you seek to understand WHY certain processes are involved, instead of the all-too-common approach of simply learning how to do it without any understanding of the factors involved. An understanding of WHY certain phenomena occur will last you for decades, whereas the simple rote learning of how to do it will be receding in your mind the day after the examination.

Regards,

Old Smokey

[powdermonkey]

Hi, the way I saw it was this.
First correct for barometric error, 10 x 27 = 270ft

So your actual alt is 15730ft.

Temp at 15730 should be in ISA -16.5 dgs C

Temp is -27 at 15730ft so at that level its ISA -10.5

.4% for every dg below isa leaves at correction of 4.2%

15730 - (4.2% of 15730) = 15070ft

Is this correct? I am not sure why you guys were working out the ISA temp deviation at FL160, it's not your actual altitude. Is this wrong on my part? Should you first do the temp correction then barometric?

[Old Smokey]

powdermonkey, ISA Temperature (and deviation) MUST be evaluated for the PRESSURE HEIGHT. Having found the Temperature deviation from ISA, the correction is then applied to the ALTITUDE.

Regards,

Old Smokey

[powdermonkey]

Thanks Old Smokey

I won't forget that bit of info, I am surprised that with the amount of such questions I have done, that this particular problem has only come up now!? Still better to find this out a few days before my exams than a few days after................so much still to learn............and I'm not getting any younger...:uhoh:
Still, it's more fun than doing my old job :D
Cheers

[boats]

As number cruncher stated, what you will need to remember for the exam are these two formulas:

1. First two digits of flight level x Isa Deviation x 4

Then to solve the last bit of this particular question as the QNH is not 1013.25:

2. QNH deviation *27 - (Add or subtract depending on whether QNH is Higher or Lower)


These will get you closest to what the JAA deem the correct answer ;)

[A320sRcool]

geez glad i asked this question -- see the response!!
agree with powders point as Met manual does not specify press alt calculation - ie crp5 usage,,, just reg 4per 1000ft rule

[A320sRcool]

A Course Dev Indicator for a VOR selected to 90 deg
From /To indicates ''To''
CDI Needle is deflected halfway to right
What is radial of Aircraft?

a 095
b 275
c085
d 265

I made it 265 as if needle is deflected to right the ac has to follow needle until centred- am i right? so nearest deg is 085deg
radial of 085 is 265 answer (d)
In my notes the feedback ans is 275 ... how come?

[Charlie Zulu]

The VOR OBS on the instrument is set to 090 degrees and has a "To" flag displayed.

All Radials are "FROM" the VOR.

This means that although the instrument in the aeroplane is set to 090 the actual radial set on the instrument is the 270R. You can see this by twisting the OBS to show 270 at the top of the instrument. You will then have a "FROM" flag.

A halfway deflection on the instrument is 5 degrees (2 degrees per dot on the instrument face for VORs).

So as the needle is deflected right you are flying to the left of track. If you are to the left of track that will put you on a radial greater than 270R. 270R plus 5 degree deflection = you are flying on the 275 Radial.

[Send Clowns]

You don't follow needles on a CDI to intercept the inbound track - you go further than the indicated deviation!

The indication is saying that you have to track right of 090° to intercept the 090°M inbound track, and that you are 5 degrees off. Therefore if you track 5° right of 090° you are directly inbound, so you are on a 095°M inbound track, or QDM. As CZ says radials are outbound magnetic bearings (QDRs) so you are on the reciprocal, 275°.

[Send Clowns]

Pressure altitude is required for perfect accuracy. However the difference it makes is really rather small, and you will find it is not given in some questions in some schools' question banks and feedback. Not a major issue - look how close together the PA marks are on the CRP-5, then remember that the QNH is rarely going to make more than 500' difference.

[RoosterBooster]

Hi All,

I'm thinking of paying the dosh for access to the Bristol question bank. First thing, I've noticed they have increased he price quite drastically. Secondly I've been told they have around;

POF - 444 Q's

AGK - 764 Q's

Perf - 361 Q's

Is this this correct?

Cheers.

RB

[YYZ]

Do not know about the amount of questions in the bank, but the cost is still one of the best around

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=189559&highlight=question+bank

See (http://www.jals.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=1937)

YYZ

[tinmouse]

It's very frustrating and confusing when Bristol get answers to questions wrong!! And its happening with increased regularity, if they are going to put up the price so much - wouldn’t you think they’d get the answers correct.

I for one have stopped using the Bristol question bank, as my training school have the same question bank. Most of the students I know have also stopped using it for the same reason. Bristol are getting a bad reputation for this I think.

[RoosterBooster]

Hi ya all,

Firstly thanks to all those who have contributed.

I look at the feedback as a way of practicing and re-learning the exam content and timings. Most uni examination preparation will involve some kind of past paper revision, I see it no differently. It gives you an idea of the type and structure of questions to expect. Of course it also give you an opportunity to gen up on specific topics that you may have just glossed over during you initial study/reading.

The American system seems to work quite well. In fact, if you look closely, you'll find that the JAA have copied some of the FAA methods.

Cheers.

RB

[helicopter-redeye]

some kind of past paper revision, I see it no differently


There is a difference between understanding what the examiner might ask -vs- the great JAR memory test.

Do other professions select members only on the basis of multi-choice exams?

Image the lawyer at the Old Bailey. "M'lud, I can't possibly allow my client to answer that question, there was only one possible answer".

[Alex Whittingham]

You're absolutely right. I think what we would all like to see is a clear syllabus, referenced to authoritative textbooks, and sensible questions with one right answer and three wrong answers. The problem is that the JAA don't work that way and, as long as we get the stupid exam questions we do, we have to teach the exam feedback to get people through the exams.

Incidentally we're all quite worried by tinmouse's statements above. I've PM'd you, tinmouse, to politely ask you to explain what you mean by 'getting answers wrong' but you haven't replied. If you see this please could you PM me and expand on what you have said. If there are incorrect answers we obviously need to get them corrected. If you don't wish to PM you can use the atp forum (http://www.atpforum.gs) to post anonymously.

[tinmouse]

Evening all.

I don’t mean to bash Bristol’s fantastic record by my last post, all I meant was exactly as I said, try this question……

In some configurations, modern aircraft do not respect the regulatory margins between stall and natural buffet. The warning system supplies the corresponding alarm. The required margin related to the stall speed is:

10%
5%
7%
3%


Do please post the answer you get.
ID No. Q4220

Again, I do not in any way wish to bash Bristol’s excellent record, and mean no offence to anyone. I could be wrong with this particular question – as I do now understand that the CAA confuse matters a great deal with regards to the answers to the questions they make up them self’s, and this could be one of them?

[Alex Whittingham]

No offence at all, tinmouse, it's our job to get it right. There is some odd background to this particular question but, because it's not my specialist subject, I can't remember what it is. I'll check with the P of F man and get back to you ASAP.

[Alex Whittingham]

Right, I'm back. This is an odd question. The regulatory minimum is 5% right enough but, despite what he appears to ask in the last sentence the examiner is actually asking about in-use margins that are greater than the regulatory minimum. Better phrased the question would say ....

"In some configurations, modern aircraft do not respect the regulatory margins between stall and natural buffet. The warning system supplies the corresponding alarm. The typical margin related to the stall speed is:"

...and the answer marked correct really is 7%.

[Hobgoblin]

Just saw this thread and thought I would pitch in my 2 cents worth.

Bristol undoubtedly has one of the best question banks out there and I definitely wouldn't like to try the exams without it.

That said I have to say that the above question to me would be worth an appeal if you got it in the exam. Due to the way it is phrased i.e. the required margin above stall, it clearly asks the regualtory margin. This question does not ask for the typical margin. The answer seems to me to be 5% and not 7%. This looks like one of those questions that were translated from some other language into English.

As run across in the Bristol Question Bank: The struggle continues.:p

[wbryce]

Are the ATPL exams now just becoming a feedback basis exams:? alot of people just appear to study feedback and pass?

I dont think you can pass on feedback alone....if you do it would be pretty stupid as your paying all this money to learn the subjects for a very good reason.

Just about every exam i have done (School etc); I have completed past papers / question banks and find this to be one of the best study aids out there. You get a question wrong, you re-read the section and hopefully it stays in the ole grey matter between the ears!

wbryce.co.uk

[hughesyd]

Hello there, i am currently doing my ATPLs in spain under the Oxford syllibus. Can anyone recommenda good online quiestion bank, is Bristols still ok for the course i am doing or would anyone reccomend a different one?.

[Hobgoblin]

Far as I'm concerned Bristol is the best in the business and well worth the money.

If it wasn't for them I would never have passed so comfortably. A word of warning though - don't think that the question bank is the exact same as the exam. True, some questions are but the real value in the question bank lies in the fact that it teaches you the timing of the exam and most importantly the standard of the exam.

Good luck!

[tinmouse]

Am I reading the wrong thing here about this question ....



“Aircraft that have no intrinsic stall warning will need artificial stall warning. Aircraft that have undesirable stall characteristics, like the deep stall, will require stall avoidance systems. JAR 25 requires that stall warning begins not later than the greater of 5kt or 5% of CAS before the level flight stalling speed”.

Source – Instruments: Stall warning and stall Avoidance.
Bristol Computer CD.

ID No. Q4220 = 7%...?

[Alex Whittingham]

No, your reading of the regulations is correct but this question is specifically talking about aircraft that "do not respect the regulatory margins" in "some configurations". That is why the answer is 7% not 5%. I have no idea where they get it from.

We think that this question is very misleading and that they should only test the regulatory limits anyway not type specific stuff, but the examiners don't agree. The best we can do for the time being is show you the question and the answer and offer this half-explanation. If anybody can add to this I would love to know more.

[tinmouse]

The answer to this question does not make sense to me, am I missing something here?

Cheers

[BobC]

Left turn = needle left.

Insufficient (left) rudder = ball left (you need to "step on the (left) rudder".

Does that help?

Bob C
Hub'Air

[tinmouse]

Oh God! I did not read the question properly!

Opps!

[Dude~]

RTFQ
RTFQ
RTFQ

:)

Best advice I was ever given...

[BongleBear]

Dear all my pprune friends,

I am interested in going through a conversion for my cpl and ir over to the dark side and was wondering if anyone knows where i can get the question banks? I can get both in books for 30quid from transair but ive been told theyre published for free on the net somewhere.

thanks all, happy holidays!
BBear

[Dotun]

I would buy the book if I were you. From what I understand, the questions are available without answers. The book however provides answers to the questions and explanation. Alternatively, you can do what I did, and go to ALLATPs, they will get you ready in 1 day. Good luck.

Regards
DMan

[powdermonkey]

Hi folks, I don't like putting these questions on the forum, but I need to get through this chapter and can't wait until monday!!

The notes I have don't explain this too well so I want to check that I understand this right. Bear with me as I am trying to keep this VERY simple for myself:

"Series Wound DC Generator

An alternative system places the field coils in series with the electrical loads. As the field windings now have to take the full output current they must be made of fewer turns of heavier wire. Now we have the reverse of the parallel wound system, as load increases field current increases and output voltage also increases. "
My question is on the last sentence. Does the field current increase because it is the first load in the system, and as other electrical systems are switched on down the line, the overall resistance increases and more current is drawn through the field windings? If so how is more current drawn, how does the supply increase from the armature? In a simple series circuit, the more resistance the less the current using V=IR formula, with V being constant. This is where I am getting a little confused. If you have a set voltage supply like drom a car battery, the more loads you apply, the more the current drops, so slows down essentially throughout the circuit, can you tell me then how it happens or what happens or what it means when MORE CURRENT IS DRAWN?

Also in a parallel wound system, the more items are switched on, the less the resistance, so the current will drop in the field windings as this offers a lot of resistance due to the many wound thin coils. This means that the magnetic field generated by the elctromagnet drops and therefore so does the induced voltage in the armature. So why not simply make the field coils less tight in order to even out the problem and not loose magnetic field strength?

Sorry, it is a lot of info but I have never done electrics before and it is tough going, I am barely holding on to what I think I understand so far.
Anyone out there good with this sort of stuff who could clarify?

Any help much appreciated
Thanks:ok:

[High Wing Drifter]

I'll try! I have to say electrics is a pretty slippery subject.

can you tell me then how it happens or what happens or what it means when MORE CURRENT IS DRAWN?
Isn't it simply that with a generator, the more current you pass through the field coil, the more voltage is generated by the armature. Therefore, as you switch appliances on in series, then there will be a greater resistance, but also current load is being drawn into the circuit, into the field coils and thust self exciting the series wound system to match the current demands; the armature responds to the increased current in the field coil and produces more voltage. Therefore I and R will increase hence the reason why V increases in accordance with the Ohms law you referenced (V=IR).

So why not simply make the field coils less tight in order to even out the problem and not loose magnetic field strength?
Do you mean a compound generator. A mixture of fat series wound coils and thin shunt coils to provide a means to produce a constant voltage regardless of the load (to a degree I imagine).

[green granite]

the field coils are in series with the loads (i.e the appliances) but they are not in series they are in parallel so the overall resistance decreases each time u switch some thing on (least i think that is what it means

[powdermonkey]

Hi GG and HWD

Thanks a lot for helping me on this. What I ment in the last paragraph is this. For a shunt generator, so with the field coil in parallel with the loads, when more systems are switched on, the resistance drops throughout the circuit. As a result, the current from what I understand, as other paths it can travel which offer less resistance than the tightly wound field coil. This means that the strength of the magnetic field created by the field coil drops and therefore the current or voltage induced in the armature is lessened. ( its voltage or emf, until something draws it in which case it becomes cureent is that right?) This seems to be a problem, hence why they make compound generators, but why simply not make the resistance of a parallel field coil LESS, and with that you would not get the voltage loss..............or is it that the whole purpose of the high resistance field coil ( many/thin, tightly wound) is to even out any fluctuations in the output from the armature, thereby making it a more constant and stable voltage output system?

Anyhow, I really appreciate you taking the time, as you said HWD, this is a slippery subject, and bar the little bit of electrics I did for PPL, this is all new and very hard to grasp, I turn each new page on the subject with dread!!! ...and I still have AC current and generators to get through, so I best have the basics straight before I move on.
Thanks

[High Wing Drifter]

Powdermonkey,

Argghh, my noggin hurts! And I'm winging it by joining the dots here! I think the point is that the wire needs to be thin to maintain the voltage but reduce the current to prevent the 'overspeed' problem of the fat series wound. But as you say the resistance is higher, so it is placed in parallel.

Resistance for parallel resistors is

1/rtot = 1/r1+ 1/r2 + 1/r3 etc.

So the total resistance is always less than any single resistor.

This maybe a question for the Tech Log forum?

[powdermonkey]

Hi HWD & GG

You guys are up early for a Sunday morning, this is truly above and beyond the call of duty, thank you.
HWD, does your nogging hurt due to a good night last night?........If not, then I'm not surprised if you are answering questions like this at this time of the morning!!

Anyway, I think I have got it. I am fallling into the same trap as during my first module and trying to understand everything in depth, which makes for a very slow and painfull study day.
I'll type up my notes on what I 've got so far and MOVE ON to AC generators. I think I 'm in for a fun Sunday!

Thanks for the link Green Granite, I think I understand. Best to go and answer some questions on the subject to make sure I've got it........although I'd rather go for a quick spin above...weather's not bad today...nice and calm, good vis....hmmmmmmmm, shame not to take the oppurtunity:E

Thanks again, hope you guys get to go flying or do something more enjoyable than answering these sort of questions!!:ok:

[Keith.Williams.]

The EMF or PD in a circuit can be considered to be the electrical pressure that is available to make the current flow. It is measured in Volts. The current in a circuit is the flow of electrons. It is a measure of how many electrons pass a given point per second. Current is measured in Amps.

Electrical power (in Watts) in a DC system is equal to the EMF (in volts) multiplied by the current (in Amps). For any given combination of RPM and field strength a generator will produce a certain amount of power. In theory this could be in the form of a large number of volts multiplied by a small number of amps, a small number of volts multiplied by a large number of amps, or any other combination of volts and amps, provided the product of the multiplication is the same for each combination.

If we connect lots of loads in series then the resistance of the circuit will increase. This will decrease the current. But if the generator RPM and field strength are unchanged then the power output will be the same, so the voltage must increase. We do not really want this because the loads will have been designed to operate most efficiently at a fixed voltage. We would also have a problem in that switching off one load would switch off all of the other loads that are in series with it. So we do not usually connect loads in series.

If however we connect lots of loads in parallel each additional load will decrease the circuit resistance and increase the current. If generator RPM and field strength are unchanged then the power output will be unchanged. So the increase in current will cause the voltage to decrease. Once again this is unsatisfactory because the loads require a constant voltage.

What we really need is a generator in which field strength increases as we apply more loads in parallel. This will gradually increase the power output so that as more loads are added in parallel, the voltage remains constant but the current increases. Each load will then receive a constant voltage and current, provided we do not demand more than the generator can provide.

For any given number of turns in the generator field coil, the field strength depends upon the current going through it. So as we add more loads in parallel we need to increase the current through the field coil, so that the power output gradually increases to meet the increasing demand. This increasing power output will enable the generator to maintain constant voltage while gradually increasing the current to feed each additional load that is switched on.

SERIES WOUND GENERATORS
In a series wound generator the field coil is in series with the armature so the entire generator output goes through the field coil. This means that if the current in the circuit increases then the field strength will also increase. The loads are in series with the field coil but in parallel with each other. So switching on more loads will reduce the overall circuit resistance and increase the current in the circuit.

This sounds OK, but it makes it impossible for us to have direct control of the field current. If for example the RPM increases (because we open the throttle to take-off) the field strength and the voltage and current in the circuit will all increase. In extreme cases this will damage the loads or circuit wiring.


PARALLEL WOUND GENERATORS
In a parallel wound generator the armature, the field coil and the loads are all in parallel with each other. Once again this means that switching on more loads reduces circuit resistance and increases circuit current. But because the field coil is in parallel with the armature only part of the generator output goes through the field coil. And because the field coil is in parallel with the loads we can have direct control of the field current. We do this be adding a variable resistor in series with the field coil. This variable resistor is controlled by the voltage regulator.

If RPM increases the generator voltage will start to increase. The voltage regulator will sense this increase and will respond by increasing the resistance of the variable resistor. This will decrease the current through the field coil, which will reduce the field strength so that the voltage remains constant.

If more loads are added in parallel, this will decrease the circuit resistance and increase the current. With no initial change in power output, the voltage in the circuit will decrease. The voltage regulator will sense this decrease and will respond by decreasing the resistance of the variable resistor. This will increase the current through the field coil, thereby increasing field strength and power output. This increased power output will allow the generator to supply the increased current to feed the added loads while maintaining constant voltage.

[powdermonkey]

BRILLIANT Keith, thanks a lot, I didn't understand initially the Power part of the generator, ie P = A x V. I was missing that part so things were a little confusing. This explains a lot, so thank you very much. AGK notes are terrible and skip a lot of the bits in between, so I was filling in myself, and not doing a good job of it.
Well, back to it :ok: :ok:

[High Wing Drifter]

You guys are up early for a Sunday morning, this is truly above and beyond the call of duty, thank you.
HWD, does your nogging hurt due to a good night last night?
I suspect pain due to my simple series wound brain. I was meant to go flying too. You were in the middle of the required flight planning process: 1) pproon 2) weather 3) NOTAM 4) AIC in that order :D As it happened the Seneca is U/S and I ran out of time for a bimble at Popham. What a glorious day for it all to go so horribly wrong :{

[powdermonkey]

HWD,
Simple series wound brain?? At least you have power going to yours! Shame you missed yout flight. It started to rain 5mins after I put up my post this morning....so much for my forecasting ability. In my defence, the big dirty grey cloud was on the other side of the house, sun was shining on my side of things.
Flight planning ALWAYS begins with PPrune!! In fact, study day begins with PPrune, so does working day and any other day that you don't wish to start just immediately!
Well I start new job humping luggage tomorow at EIDW to pay the bills until next April when these b**** exams will be finished!
So I had best get some kip!
Thanks again everybody :ok:

[woof]

The effects of an engine failure in a MEP are well understood, but I am struggling to get a decent answer for a jet.

Suppose B737 in cruise without A/P A/T engage loses the right engine is the sequence:

Pitch down then roll / yaw right
or
Yaw / Roll right andthen pitch down.

I seem to recall the first event is a pitch down motion.

Some help would be reet grand.

Thanks

woof

[Hand Solo]

During cruise the power setting will be low so the pitch/power couple will be less pronounced. The first indication of engine failure will be the yaw to the right accompanied with roll. The secondary effect of this will be nose down pitch.

[flighttime2.0]

hand solo

I'm actually doing engine failures every day at the moment finishing off my 737-800 type rating. The key to remember is just look at the yaw indication on the pfd or the slip indicator on the 200, If yawing to the right means right engine failure so turn the ailerons to the good engine IE ( the left ) one in this case to prevent roll and then step on the good engine rudder peddle to lift the control column back to neutral. If done like this smoothly and quickly enough once trimmed out on the rudder you hardly even notice you have lost an engine.. flighttime.

[Sheep Guts]

Hi Guys,
Anyone have any training aids ie. CD ROM interactive disks or and internet access data on this subject. I have the CAP 385 extract and tables and a PPSC question and answer book. Just seeing if there is anything else out there free;y available. Where I work at the moment its hard to purchase avaition study material.

Any takes much appreciated

Sheep

[whiskey1]

Why?

Are you upgrading your licence having not done Performance A under the old UK National system?

If so forget CAP385. My understanding is you now do the same Performance exam a everybody else doing ATPL(A). You need CAP 698. This is for three aircraft a Single Engine Piston, A Multi engine Piston and a Medium Range Jet Transport. Might find them similar to Beech Bonanza, Piper Seneca and B737-400.

That is the exam you'll be doing, not the old Performance A.

P.M if you need some help.

W1

[Sheep Guts]

Unfortunately the Country I am about to convert my licence to still uses this syllabus. I understand it is defunct, but does anyone have any left over material?

Sheep

[genius747]

CAP 697 I think is what you will need

[Sheep Guts]

Well no unfortunately in Singapore they still use CAP385, I Know its older and yes even the copy I have was 1st printed in 1976. I was just enquiring if anyone had any extra info out there?

Sheep

[powdermonkey]

Hi all,
Doing AGK at end of month and am doing Bristol and Italian Qbanks.
Both are relatively low on questions compared to the Abacus Qbank.
Bristol for instance has only 760 questions available.
My question is, has anyone done ok on exams recently using Bristol...did you find it accurate and up to date for AGK?
Thanks for any feedback
PM

[Tallbloke]

I did AGK in December using BGS database as well as Bristol brush up, got 96%. Quite a few questions word for word. I found it a fairly good representation of an exam.

[Dotun]

Took AGK as well, and am sure you will be ok with the Bristol online bank (try and score above 90% online before taking the exams). I have Gen Nav and Flight Planning next week, can anyone tell me if I would be ok with the bristol online (am scoring over 90%, bashing it at least 4 times a day). Thanks

Regards
DMan

[powdermonkey]

I did lots of gen nav q. with Bristol and got 92%. The exam was easy enough and didn't encounter anything out of ordinary. Flight Planning always tricky and it is the one I studied less, only got 75%, but cannot tell you how close it was to Bristol since the whole exam was a blurr of panic...first one and also my least favourite.
I have 3weeks of AGK qbank before the exam so hope that it will cover me!
PS I was doing IAA ATPLs and I know that they don't update exams as regularly as CAA, so my comments may not be relevant?!
Good luck with Gen Nav and Planning!:ok:

[3legs]

I got 94% for AGK in December with Bristol QBank and a bit of hard work!!;)

Best of luck with the exams! Only got planning left to do so if you are sitting at Silsoe, see you there!!....

3Legs :ok:

[powdermonkey]

3Legs
Wil be sitting in Dublin, will try and knock out AGK, Coms and HP, leaving me Mass/Balance, Principles of Flight and Performance in April. The IAA kindly allowed us to break up the 2nd module. Should help a little! Goiod luck with planning!!!

[eserifog]

Hello boys and girls.

While searching through the forum, I found some great airlaw questions which seems to be from an italian link.

I am looking for other sources of ATPL questions. Are there any more websites with free questions?

Thanks for the help.

Ciao

[Charlie Zulu]

Bristol Groundschool have an online question bank for ATPL(A)(H) and CPL(A)(H) questions. They are not "official" questions although, in my experience with the exams, they seem to resemble the actual questions "pretty well".

http://213.48.96.23/atponline/jalo/index.asp

It costs £50 for 3 months access but I would say it is most definitely worth every penny.

Please don't fall into the trap of studying the questions to pass the exam, make sure you study the manuals / books as well.

[Bluebat_CZ]

You can also have a look at www.aviationexam.com - a very nice user interface with tons of questions...

[VC10 Rib22]

It often amazes me reading this forum when I consider the thousands of ATPL students out there - bearing in mind this forum is called 'Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies)' - how few questions directly relate to the ATPL syllabus or possible exam questions. Utilising the search facility it is evident that, compared to even a few short years ago, very few questions are now asked in this area. Whether this is because students are more sensitive now to fear of ridicule, students now feel entirely comfortable with the syllabus thanks to the huge amount of feedback available, or students are just more intelligent - which goes against everything the experts are saying - I do not know.
What I do know is that this forum is read by many experienced people (I do not conclude myself here), some of whom teach ATPL subjects for a living, who are more than willing to take the time to help a confused student (they've all been there themselves) with a question they do not understand and can talk them through it, perhaps in a slightly different way to that which the student has been taught, allowing the doors of enlightenment to open. In addition to this, there are many students (I include myself here) on this forum who, having seen and been very disappointed by fellow students' attitudes :ouch: (that every other student is evil competition for their entitlement to a right-hand seat), and do not have any time for that kind of behaviour, are only too willing to share 'The Knowledge'. Lastly we have our resident experts, such as John Tullamarine, Genghis the Engineer et al, who can take you to a deeper level of knowledge that borders on becoming a spiritual experience i.e. your brain starts to fry.
So, if any students reading this are having genuine problems - we are NOT here to replace endeavour and reduce study time, nor are we here for those unwilling to use the search facility on pprune or google - with parts of the ATPL syllabus, you are not alone. Let the pprune family help you. The chances are that there are others out there having problems in the same area. Also, you will be helping others who will go after you as your post shall remain in the archive.
I'm sure that as well as enabling pilots to communicate effectively, Danny created pprune to empower and educate pilots. So go on, educate yourself!!!
VC10 Rib22
:ok:

[powdermonkey]

VC10
Very true and I for one have posted questions related to various sticky topics during the duration of my studies, and still do. You will find also that many students will be using their own study forums ( like BGS forum ) as they find it more appropriate and may feel that posting a basic Law question on this site may piss people off? Wrong to think that way, but I myself only resorted to PPrune for such questions when at weekends for example, I was not going to get a reply on the school forum for a couple of days!
I could not agree with you more though, as there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers from high n mighty unhelpfull knowitall's, and any question put up with good replys will help all who have not yet asked same.
PM

[YYZ]

Could there now be less questions asked on Prune as more GS providers now have decent on-line Qbanks and assistance? Plus their own forums?

It sounds like a possibility?

YYZ

[jar-dk]

http://www.aerosolutions.be/
-that is the real Mccoy - exellent questions tool where you can get help from other users in the somtimes at best very confusing world of Jar ATPL exams

[pilotatlast]

What's the actual calculation for max drift?

[bultaco]

Hi All,

I reckon the Italian ATPL question bank is full of errors. I'm going through the navigation section and have found that the answer key often doesn't correspond to the correct answer. See below for an example.

If the IAA are using this as their CQB (central question bank) am I better off to select the wrong answer since their computer may be programmed with the incorrect answer ?

Bultaco
--------------------------
On the Italian feedback, navigation question 134 below,
Answer A was given as correct but I can't see how this is the case.

134) Given:

True track 180°

Drift 8°R

Compass heading 195°

Deviation -2°

Calculate the variation?

A 21°W

B 25°W

C 5°W

D 9°W

[Charlie Zulu]

The Italian Question Bank, whilst being quite useful does contain many errors throughout the subjects.

Never ever select the wrong answer based upon what you saw in the Italian "feedback" that you used. The IAA have probably recognised that there was an error in the question / answer and will have rectified it.

Always work out the answers, deduce which answer you think is right based upon your knowledge of the subject, NOT what the Italian feedback suggested is the correct answer (which is more often than not incorrect).

I doubt you'd be able to contest a question on the basis of, "but it said it was option (C) in the Italian Feedback version". In fact I'd put money on the IAA/CAA throwing it back in your face on that basis.

As for the question, I believe it is option A - Variation is 21W.

Compass Heading - 2 Degrees of Westerly Deviation = 193 Magnetic Heading.
True Track = 180 - 8 Degrees of Right Drift = 172 Degrees True Heading.

193 Degrees Magnetic Heading - 172 Degrees True Heading = 21 Degrees difference and because the Magnetic Heading is greater than the True Heading then the Variation must be westerly. So variation = 21 degrees Westerly.

I used to have problems with Deviation when given with a - or a + isntead of W or E. If its a minus sign then it is a westerly deviation (I believe). If a plus then an easterly deviation. This used to mess my calculations up - I might be wrong though as its been a while since I sat the exam and my have got confused myself since then.

[pushapproved]

I agree with Charlie Zulu that the answer is A.

I use the mnemonic Cadbury's Dairy Milk Very Tasty.

Compass Deviation Magnetic Variation True

Going from left to right you add East and Subtract West deviations and variations.

For practical flight planning you would start on the right and work left, eg draw your true track on a chart and then add the West variation, (In this part of the world), giving you your Magnetic heading.

When you have a problem like this you put in the information you have and work out the blanks!

Therefore:

C = 195 D = -2 (2W) M = ? V = ? T = 172 (180-8)

M = C - D = 193

V is the difference between T & M

As Charlie Zulu states, you have to subtract 21 from 193 to get your true heading. Therefore going left to right in the mnemonic subtractions are West variation.

Hope this helps and isn't too confusing!

[bultaco]

Thanks guys, I knew "Deviation West Compass Best" but I thought when they give you a digit and a +/- sign you just perform the maths. I wasn't sure they were referring to a convention - but it's there in the PPSC notes !

[powdermonkey]

Charlie Zulu,
Although I entirely agree with you, NOT ALL errors have been corrected by CAA or IAA. However what I would do in those cases is to answer correctly but call the envigilator and point out the question. Tell them the reasoning behind your answer and also tell them you have seen the question before and that their is a possibility of error. If your score is below 75%, they will then look at the objections raised.
That way you cover yourself in the best manner possible. Most of these errors you will find in Bristol Qbank with a note from the guys at Bristol, stating that this is an error but that either they have appealed it or that it is still in error AND TO ANSWER INCORRECTLY!?....AGK question on frequency and rpm and the no of poles is an example. 4 magnets = 8 poles but the answer by the CAA is 4..?
Not good but what can you do. Best thing, if you are sure, point out the error and give the correct answer.
Good luck...
Bultaco...IAA envigilators are very accomodating...I had my hand up at least 5/6 times during exams as there were a number of errors throughout!

[bultaco]

Thanks powdermonkey,

I think I'd be wary of anybody that gets 100% in these tests - like what kind of mindset would they have ?
Also I have to say I'm surprised by the standard of ATPL documentation - I have a set of these documents which are covered in grammar/spelling errors, incorrect equations etc. The PPSC documents, however, are quite good.
Of all industries I would expect aviation to be accurate but it's not the case.

[Charlie Zulu]

I would have thought that errors should have been ironed out by the time someone takes the exam as don't they have people looking through each exam question for a particular month before they are sat? I believe our British CAA do that... then again some errors still do appear in our exams too.

Yes I'd go with what PowderMonkey their post above. I was specifically thinking about appealing questions after the exam itself but even if you'd appeal during the exam then please have a good reason why you are (ie, backup your answer with reasoning) appealing, not just "but it said it was option (C) in the Italian Feedback".

[powdermonkey]

Absolutely CZ! you must give a reason and the envigilator does write down your reasoning! IAA Q banks don't seem to differ too much from the CAA however, as I have been using Bristol and the questions were very similar and in certain cases word for word....makes you wonder who supplies who?
BULTACO, the manuals in many cases are confusing, have errors, are badly written with terrible punctuation which makes understanding the content that much more difficult! I don't think a comma is used in the world of aviation!!! Yes I have felt the same as you AND STILL DO!
Best of luck, it isn't perfect but we all get through it eventually and forget it all very soon after:{

PS don't be too critical of the mindset of the people who get 100%....by learning some of the answers off by heart! You sound ( don't mean to presume ) like you are starting the ATPL's, believe me, there comes a time when ideology goes out the window and you simply want to pass...and pass you MUST! Therefore you do what it takes, remember, flying is the important bit, you will learn how to apply the RELEVANT part of all this theory during the training.........at least I hope so 'caus I am not there yet.....and sitting exams in a week or so and learning a good few things off without full understanding of the subject matter! It used to make me feel very guilty during 1st module, so I tried to understand it ALL!........not possible!!!

[pilotatlast]

Come on someone must know?!

[hedges81]

Hi all,

got a couple of questions for a atpl theory course entrance test which I am stumped on. Probably just being thick but:

1. Given that in general, the top surface of the wing is responsible for the creation of most of the lift, what type of aerofoil would give the greatest lift characteristics?
a low wing
b mid wing
c high wing
d low or mid wing.

2. increased fuel densities will increase or decrease the performance of the aircraft engine. Allowing for the same fuel type and volume, what would be the effect of using a fuel of specific gravity 0.75, as opposed to the published sg of 0.8?

a increased performance
b decreased performance
c no effect on performance
d insufficient information.

ta to anybody who helps, unless ur wrong of course!

[172driver]

OK, I'm only a lowly PPL, but my guesses would be
1c and 2d
Reasons:
1c) In a high-wing a/c the upper surface runs across the entire span, so should, logically, create slightly more lift than an interrupted (by the fuselage) mid or low wing. Indeed if you look at some of the Russian high-wing a/c, the aerofoil appears uninterrupted over the fuselage (in other words the profile is, or at least appears to be, carried through the entire span). Same goes for the stuff I usually fly....
2d) As the first sentence states "will increase OR decrease" there must be some other info required to determine the outcome.
My 2 cents ;)

[hedges81]

ta, I think ur right about the 2nd one, it does seem self evident from the question.

Could do with a bit more deffinite answer for the 2nd one though.
Where's Scroggs when you need him?

[wbryce]

I would guess

1) d
2) d

[172driver]

hedges,
you might find some clues here:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0184.shtml
note that (quote) The efficiency factor, e, varies for different aircraft, but it doesn't change very much. As a general rule, high-wing planes tend to have an efficiency factor around 0.8 while that of low-wing planes is closer to 0.6 (unquote)
How did we ever live without Google :ok: ?

[SMOOTHFLIER]

As an aeronautical engineer the answer for 1 i think is low wing. Why else is this day and age of engineering and advanced aerodynamics testing would large aircraft manufacturers continue to use a low wing configuration on the newest aircraft such as the A380 and 350 when much of the emphasis is on reduced fuel consumption due to low cost movement in avaition. This is acheived by reducing drag and increasing lift to increase the specific fuel consumption sfc. Could be talking balls through!

[hedges81]

its got me stumped. Have got a physics degree n all, but can seen no scientific reason why there might be a difference in the lift due to where the wing is mounted.

[OpenCirrus619]

The total drag is the sum of parasite and induced drag.

Total Drag = Parasite Drag + Induced Drag

But the net (or total) drag of an aircraft is not simply the sum of the drag of its components. When the components are combined into a complete aircraft, one component can affect the air flowing around and over the airplane, and hence, the drag of one component can affect the drag associated with another component. These effects are called interference effects, and the change in the sum of the component drags is called interference drag.


Presumably the interference of the airflow over the wing, caused by interaction with airflow past the fuselage near the root, will have different effects on efficiency depending on whether it affects the upper or lower surface.

OC619

P.S. Of course that could be complete B******S.

[High Wing Drifter]

I suspect this is one of those 'learn the answer they want' questions. The notion that the top surface of the wing (assuming an allusion to equal transit time effects) creates most of the lift has never really managed to convince me.

Thin delta wings and symetrical aerofoils suggest otherwise (for example).

[172driver]

hedges I guess you get more laminar airflow over the uninterrupted wing surface in a high wing config.

Smoothflier you are right of course, but there are other considerations as well. A high wing on a big transport takes up A LOT of space inside the fuselage where the spars go through. Had the pleasure of being on both the AN-124 and AN-225 and this eats up a lot of - to a passenger airline - valuable real estate. Doesn't matter much on these transports, as the wing effectively devides the upper deck which carries crew only anyway. Typically flight crew in the front compartment and cargo/service crew in the back. Plus, these things were originally designed for military use, where comfort is a second thought - at best. Add to the above access for servicing (the engines are a long way up on the ANs), and you may find that the cumulative benefit from having a low wing outweighs the aerodynamic advantages of a high wing. But, like seemingly everyone on this thread, groping in the dark here...:(