PPL Nav Course

[stiknruda]

Guys/Gals,

Yet again I post a new topic require where I need help!

A buddy of mine (lapsed FAA Private cert and current RAFVR Gliding Instructor) has started studying for a JAR PPL. To date he has sat 3 ground exams and has passed with all marks above 90%! This is all self study using Thom and current RAFVR material.

However, today he requested my help with the nav exam.

No problems there, I am a competent navigator who was trained by Aunt Betty at Finningley twenty odd years ago and even these days use a Dalton's computer!

My problem really is what should I help him with? I can not recall any astro-nav questions on my PPL but am also unsure as to how much Dalton computer expertise he will need. Conversions to mach numbers, for example. Speed/time/distance in secs is another technique I don't know if he needs, 1:60 rule, snapping for a turn, etc, etc!

I understand that he sits Nav in 12 days time!

Is there somewhere on-line that I can download a syllabus? Or is there a check-list available of what he needs to know to prepare himself for the exam.

All assistance greatly received.

Stik - wannabee tailwheel instructor not ground school coach!

[Bottle Fatigue]

Stik,

When I did my PPL exams 3+ years ago, the book to have was the PPL confuser - a collection of questions covering all the topics you were likely to be asked about, I don't know whether this has been updated for the JAA syllabus, but I think it might be worth getting hold of.

It's available from all the usual pilot shops/websites. Cost - about £15 when I got it.

[QDMQDMQDM]

Yes, there is a JAR version of the PPL confuser. Buy it -- it has about 90-95% of the actual questions in it. Beats a syllabus any day.

QDM

[Evo7]

PPL Nav is fairly simple once you've got to grips with the whizz-wheel. Plan a flight from A to B via C, possibly diverting to D. Remember a few simple facts about symbols you might see on the charts, work out angles to get back on track using the 1 in 60 rule, and finally five very easy questions about radio nav. I remember posting some more detailed stuff recently, but that's most of it.

Evo (100% in PPL Nav.... ;) :D )


edit: QDM - caution! Some exams (e.g. Met) are nothing like the Confuser. Others are identical (e.g. Human Perf.). Your milage may vary, but if you only work with the Confuser you may fail some...

[QDMQDMQDM]

Your milage may vary, but if you only work with the Confuser you'll fail some...

Evo,

I beg to differ. I didn't have much time to redo the exams (I did them the first time twenty years ago) and so bought the confuser and crammed it. I took the lot in one sitting and passed them all with 85%+. I had a couple of the Thom books, but only really looked at them to clarify questions as and when they arose. I await the self-righteous brigade telling me I'm therefore a danger to every living thing that moves on this planet, to which I reply: B@ll@cks.

You get reasonably good at passing exams in medical school and I can safely say that the surest way to do so is to know most, if not all, of the questions. Actually, I find knowing the questions a very good of way of learning the subject too -- makes sure you don't get sidetracked by irrelevancies. Anyway, if the CAA put 1/2oz of effort into the exams they could make them far more robust and partially foil skivers like me.

Huzzah for unimaginative bureaucrats, I say.

QDM

[HelenD]

The Thom book 4 should give all the information you will need to help the guy, it does have both methods for the whizwheel in it so it could be confusing. I taught myself wind up for the nav exam but when I came to do nav for real my instructor taught me wind down which is now my prefered method. A good understanding of the map including how to plot points, how to fill in a nav plog, good understanding of the whizz wheel and radio navigation basic theory should get him through.

[tacpot]

Hi Stik,

Tried to find a link to the syllabus, but couldn't.

The PPL Confuser is well over the top compared to the exam. It's no wonder Evo7 got 100% (I didn't by the way :mad: ) So I've disassembled the content of the Confuser's NAV test to arrive at a set of topics. They are:

Navigation Topics
----------------------
Use of the navigation computer to solve triangle of velocities problems, i.e. given any two velocities, find the third.
Use of the navigation computer to solve crosswind limit calculations, i.e. given a wind velocity, a crosswind limit for an a/c and a runway heading, determine whether you are inside or outside the limit for the a/c.
Chart scale conversions (1cm on 1:500,000 maps equals how far?)
1 in 60 rule to determine heading corrections and distance off track
Compass turning errors/Compass variation and deviations
VFR Map symbology
Calculations of TAS from RAS
Fuel consumption planning/endurance calculations
Flight planning using VFR map, scale ruler, protractor, and navigation computer
Weight of Fuel calculations using specific gravity of fuel
Quadrantal Rule
Vertical Navigation/safety altitudes/MEFs on VFR Maps/avoidance of controlled airspace/Rate of descent calculation (e.g. to lose 3000 ft in 6nm, what rate of descent would you use?)
Altimeter Setting procedures
ETA calculations/time to run
Radio Failure Procedures/MATZ Penetration Procedures/LARS usage
AIP Aerodrome information interpretation

Radio Nav Topics
---------------------
For the following Aids:
VDF
NDB/ADF
Transponders/SSR
Primary Radar
VOR/DME

understanding of:
associated errors/limitations
practical use of the service
components of system
frequency ranges used
ident'ing


Hope this helps.

Final thought: As the questions on the exam are multiple choice, 'to the second' calculations are generally not required. But you are expected to achieve the maximum degree of accuracy using the navigation computer. This threw me a bit, I thought a ballpark figure would suffice, but no, you have to position the whizzwheel very accurately to get the correct answer.

[MLS-12D]

"I await the self-righteous brigade telling me I'm therefore a danger to every living thing that moves on this planet, to which I reply: B@ll@cks."

Couldn't agree more. I don't know if I would go so far as to propose the abolition of the written exams but I could be persuaded ...

Certainly, the great majority of the questions seem to have little or no practical application, and one has the sense that they are not written to actually probe your knowledge but just to see whether you can memorize trivia.:rolleyes:

[Evo7]

QDM - The Met exam that I did in March was nothing like the Confuser questions. Having got used to seeing CAA exams that were 'similar' to the Confuser, my first thought was WTF!?!? My second was relief that I'd learned the subject rather well :)

I'm not one of the Confuser is Evil brigade, so I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong. I was just trying to pass on a warning :)

MLS-12D - not sure I agree. I've just done them all (finished last month) and they've taught me a hell of a lot. There's plenty of dull stuff too, of course, but there always will be in any exams. I think they're well worth the effort.

[vancouv]

I did the JAR Nav exam last year. The confuser is a must - the questions are just like the 'real' ones.

I also used 'Questions + Answers for the Private Pilot's License'. This is similar to the confuser, but has papers that are the same format as the exam ones.

I didn't find it too difficult, so long as you know how to use a whizz wheel, but you do have to be quite accurate in your measurements and so forth. A ball-park figure is not really good enough. Also, there are several questions based on one calculation, so messing it up can cost you a few wrong answers.

This was the only exam where I found the time allowed quite tight. Don't waste time on questions you find difficult, get the others done and then come back.

If you can successfully answer the questions in the confuser and the book I mentioned above, there should be no problem.

Good luck to your friend.

[Aussie Andy]

Get the confuser... do it again and again until getting 100%, then sit the exam next day - guaranteed pass!

[Evo7]

Unless, like me, you get an exam that isn't in the Confuser. Apart from that, it's great :) :)

Seriously, Nav is the exam for which that approach is the least applicable. The routes you are given aren't in the Confuser, so unless you can work the whizz-wheel well (and you have to be precise, because a ballpark figure isn't good enough to differentiate between the answers) you are in trouble. Also, in Nav mistakes in one question lead to mistakes in others (e.g. wrong GS means that you get the wrong ETA in the next question) and so one mistake can easily lead to three, four or five wrong answers - and you can only get 6 wrong and still pass.

[QDMQDMQDM]

Seriously, Nav is the exam for which that approach is the least applicable. The routes you are given aren't in the Confuser,

Evo,

I don't suggest learning the answers by rote, just that if you can answer the nav questions in the confuser you will see exactly analogous questions in the exam which you will also be able to answer. Many will also be exactly the same.

There are many ways to pass an exam. The most time-consuming and hit and miss is to learn the subject thoroughly without reference to exam questions. The simplest and easiest is to learn to answer the questions they ask, whether that is the type of question or even the actual question.

More upstanding souls than me will probably use a combination of the two methods above. I more or less used the second, but I still think it gave me a reasonable understanding of the subjects involved.

QDM

[sennadog]

I'm with Evo on this one - the Confuser is great but is less of a help on some of the Nav exams than it is with others. I had chronic brain fade during my exam adding on wind vectors instead of taking them off and got into a real mess. I had about 5 minutes left at the end of the exam and was still panicking even though I had been taught to use the Computer and had been doing my own Nav almost since the beginning of my PPL.

Luckily I realised what I had done and quickly reworked some of the the plog and managed to scrape through.:eek:

It wasn't representative of my Nav skills such as they are but without a good working knowledge of the Computer I'd have been in deep sh*t. Of course I shouldn't have let my brain scramble in the first place but I have suffered from examitis recently.

I'd suggest using a combination of the Thom book 4 (although it is not that easy to understand), practical Nav exercises and the Confuser.

[Evo7]

QDMx3


There are many ways to pass an exam. The most time-consuming and hit and miss is to learn the subject thoroughly without reference to exam questions. The simplest and easiest is to learn to answer the questions they ask, whether that is the type of question or even the actual question.


I agree completely - the only smart thing that I ever did as an undergraduate was to figure out the exam format to the extent that I could second-guess the possible questions. Did essentially the same thing as a postgraduate, to be honest :)

My personal view is that you should learn each subject to the extent that you can apply it in practice. The TAF says this, should I go? No RPM drop during the mag check, so what? That's what is really important, and if you do this the exams are easy anyway - the Confuser is just the difference between 85% and 95%. In your case the other approach works, but I doubt that you were a typical student - you are used to doing exams and have also covered the material in the past. I'm not sure it's true generally. I've met a number of fellow students who have aced their exams thanks to the Confuser but show very little understanding of the subjects themselves. The Confuser is an excellent learning tool - I would recommend it to anyone - but IMHO it's a little bit too close to the real exams.