ATPL Performance & systems NZ
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NZ
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATPL Performance & systems NZ
Has anyone sat this exam in NZ recently? I'm looking at sitting it in the very near future but I heard that they had changed the format slightly. Tried to get a sample exam but they aren't completed yet. Rang ASL to see if they could tell me of the applicable changes but of course good old ASL...." cant really answer that question"?? I'm using PPSC notes. Are these still ok?
Cheers People.
Cheers People.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NZ
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATPL Performance & systems NZ
I sat the exam recently and had the same experience. I wasnt able to get a sample paper as they were "re-evaluating whether or not to send them out to candidates"? I used the PPSC notes and found them really good, no real surprises in the exam. The performance sections overlaps with Flight planning a little and this part is long answer, and relatively easy compared to the rest of the exam, with a high percentage of the marks attached to it. Get the marks in this section and you should be home and hosed. All the the best!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NZ
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right thanks for that. Just question. Would appreciate any help on this.
Loading. Container question.
178 Ft cubic container, Tare 1270kg, Max gross weight 1656kg. Packages 9.4lbs. 305mm x 152mm x 305mm How many will fit into container.
I thought i new how to do this but actually I dont so please help.
Thanking you
DVDA
PS F-ing ginge....i'm going to have to hurt you soon.
Loading. Container question.
178 Ft cubic container, Tare 1270kg, Max gross weight 1656kg. Packages 9.4lbs. 305mm x 152mm x 305mm How many will fit into container.
I thought i new how to do this but actually I dont so please help.
Thanking you
DVDA
PS F-ing ginge....i'm going to have to hurt you soon.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: somewhere hot and sticky
Age: 44
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haven't done the course or the exam yet, but can give the question a shot (to show off... heh heh)
The constraint is either going to be weight or volume, so check both:
For Volume:
Each package is 0.305*0.305*0.152 = 0.01414 cubic metres.
One foot is 0.305 metres, so one cubic metre is (1/.305)*(1/.305)*(1/.305) = 35.25 cubic feet.
Each package is thus 35.25*.01414 = 0.5 cubic feet.
Assuming you could pack them perfectly, using all the space of the container, you could fit 178/0.5 = 356 packages.
Now for weight:
Each package is 9.4lb, or 9.4/2.2 = 4.27kg. The container's useful load is 1656-1270 = 386kg.
So it could take 386/4.27 = 90 packages.
So the critical factor is not volume, but weight - you're sure to be able to fit 90 packages into the container... it's only 1/4 full. Now you only need to worry about strapping them in so they don't move around in flight...
Dupre.
The constraint is either going to be weight or volume, so check both:
For Volume:
Each package is 0.305*0.305*0.152 = 0.01414 cubic metres.
One foot is 0.305 metres, so one cubic metre is (1/.305)*(1/.305)*(1/.305) = 35.25 cubic feet.
Each package is thus 35.25*.01414 = 0.5 cubic feet.
Assuming you could pack them perfectly, using all the space of the container, you could fit 178/0.5 = 356 packages.
Now for weight:
Each package is 9.4lb, or 9.4/2.2 = 4.27kg. The container's useful load is 1656-1270 = 386kg.
So it could take 386/4.27 = 90 packages.
So the critical factor is not volume, but weight - you're sure to be able to fit 90 packages into the container... it's only 1/4 full. Now you only need to worry about strapping them in so they don't move around in flight...
Dupre.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Not to sound anything like contrite..or snide.........but is THAT the type of question that is typical in NZ ATPL systems and performance?
If so...........were is the relevance?..how does this relate to systems or performance.....purely in practical terms....you have a package weight....a bit of simple maths...then hey presto..you have its impact on performance..based on the total weight(mass).
Whats with all the volumetric calculations? Its surely common sense that the container will only fit a set number of packages..and this set number will NEVER(or so seldomly as to be insignificant) be the same as the theoretical value. Just ask anyone who loads/flys freight!....Good one ASL more money down the pooper.
If on the other hand...im wrong.. them im shutting up!
If so...........were is the relevance?..how does this relate to systems or performance.....purely in practical terms....you have a package weight....a bit of simple maths...then hey presto..you have its impact on performance..based on the total weight(mass).
Whats with all the volumetric calculations? Its surely common sense that the container will only fit a set number of packages..and this set number will NEVER(or so seldomly as to be insignificant) be the same as the theoretical value. Just ask anyone who loads/flys freight!....Good one ASL more money down the pooper.
If on the other hand...im wrong.. them im shutting up!
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Sounds more like a question that should be in the Dangerous Goods exam to me!!
Cheers, HH.
Cheers, HH.
