ATPL Flight Planning/PEXO
Thread Starter
ATPL Flight Planning/PEXO
Hi all,
Just sat ATPL Flight Planning and absolutely tanked it. I finished with half and hour left and went back to double check the big questions. All of my answers were within 50KG (Usually 10-30Kg) of my selection and I clicked the finish button thinking I had nailed it. I put a lot of study into this and like to think I am a pretty switched on guy, I passed all of the practice exams I did with 90% plus. I was working the questions accurately and not using "rough" figures etc.
They rolled out the new PEXO system today so I wonder if the questions have been re-worked. I think what may have burnt me is the CASA rounding/accuracy limits. A lot of my answers/working (EMZWs, max allowable altitude etc.) were very close to the limits/mid points so I worked them accurately (Instead of rounding weights to the nearest 1000KG, temps to nearest 5 degrees etc.).
Has anyone else sat AFPA recently? (Particularly post 24th Sep using the new PEXO system) I would be interested to know how you did.
Thanks
Just sat ATPL Flight Planning and absolutely tanked it. I finished with half and hour left and went back to double check the big questions. All of my answers were within 50KG (Usually 10-30Kg) of my selection and I clicked the finish button thinking I had nailed it. I put a lot of study into this and like to think I am a pretty switched on guy, I passed all of the practice exams I did with 90% plus. I was working the questions accurately and not using "rough" figures etc.
They rolled out the new PEXO system today so I wonder if the questions have been re-worked. I think what may have burnt me is the CASA rounding/accuracy limits. A lot of my answers/working (EMZWs, max allowable altitude etc.) were very close to the limits/mid points so I worked them accurately (Instead of rounding weights to the nearest 1000KG, temps to nearest 5 degrees etc.).
Has anyone else sat AFPA recently? (Particularly post 24th Sep using the new PEXO system) I would be interested to know how you did.
Thanks
Have a look at the other threads on this.
On the old system (probably the same questions, most were updated quite recently) and CASA exam guide, you are NOT asked for the most accurate answers - you are asked to follow the SOPs.
(Yes I know that - regarding FPL - the exam guide takes lots of reading between the lines, but that's what we've got. I know, I was bitten by the previous exam changes, but got through in the end.)
Edited to add - Note the new exam guide (May 2013). A little clearer and more complete than the old.
On the old system (probably the same questions, most were updated quite recently) and CASA exam guide, you are NOT asked for the most accurate answers - you are asked to follow the SOPs.
(Yes I know that - regarding FPL - the exam guide takes lots of reading between the lines, but that's what we've got. I know, I was bitten by the previous exam changes, but got through in the end.)
Edited to add - Note the new exam guide (May 2013). A little clearer and more complete than the old.
Last edited by drpixie; 26th Sep 2013 at 09:13.
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
I think what may have burnt me is the CASA rounding/accuracy limits. A lot of my answers/working (EMZWs, max allowable altitude etc.) were very close to the limits/mid points so I worked them accurately (Instead of rounding weights to the nearest 1000KG, temps to nearest 5 degrees etc.).
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Everywhere
Age: 41
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
H-Dog, I also sat the exam yesterday. Having previously failed it I feel your pain. This time round I really focused on learning the procedures precisely as CASA describe in their May version of the ATPL exam info booklet.
I'd have to agree that your quest for super accuracy is probably what let you down, as has already been stated here you have to simply follow the SOP and the result you come up with at the end of your workings should be spot on with one of the available answer choices.
I'd have to agree that your quest for super accuracy is probably what let you down, as has already been stated here you have to simply follow the SOP and the result you come up with at the end of your workings should be spot on with one of the available answer choices.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Everywhere
Age: 41
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I self studied all ATPLs using AFT notes and cyber exams, then after my flight planning failure spent the little bit extra to get the Avery exam booklet only (as I wanted some fresh questions) and found that worked well.
Highly recommend AFT notes, and then using the Avery exams it just gave me that little bit extra of an overview looking at workings from a different perspective and playing with some different structured questions etc.
Highly recommend AFT notes, and then using the Avery exams it just gave me that little bit extra of an overview looking at workings from a different perspective and playing with some different structured questions etc.
ATPL Flight Planning/PEXO
Does anyone know if you a have to round BRW to nearest 1000kg or the nearest 2000kg? Been using nearest 2t but Avery says use nearest 1t which is lots more time in interpolation.
Slam, i'd hardly say its a walk in the park given it's notoriety and failure rate.
Agree with everything else you've said.
Despite the study and work I put into it, I still distinctly feel I had a certain amount of luck to get through it on the first go. I know plenty of well prepared, intelligent candidates that have done all the right things and still failed it repeatedly before finally having the "heavens align" to achieve a pass. It's just one of those kinds of exams. Too many variables and not enough time.
Agree with everything else you've said.
Despite the study and work I put into it, I still distinctly feel I had a certain amount of luck to get through it on the first go. I know plenty of well prepared, intelligent candidates that have done all the right things and still failed it repeatedly before finally having the "heavens align" to achieve a pass. It's just one of those kinds of exams. Too many variables and not enough time.
Thread Starter
Thanks for that pearl of wisdom Slam Click, ha ha.
I have used the Rob Avery notes to study which I have found pretty good (Although things obviously have not gone according to plan). The only problem I have with the Avery notes is that the working has not been updated to the new CASA rounding/accuracy limits so if you use the correct rounding you get an answer ballpark to what Rob got but not exactly the same (There is a section on the CASA SOP but the pracci exams and examples do not follow it). Not a big deal but it does not do a good job of testing your adherence to the SOP. Given the money you have to pay for these notes it would be nice if they were accurate.
You round BRW to the nearest 2000KG, it is a little grey the way Rob explains it (I think it might be a typo in his notes) but it is discussed on Pg 2-2, para 11 of the 727 POH.
I have used the Rob Avery notes to study which I have found pretty good (Although things obviously have not gone according to plan). The only problem I have with the Avery notes is that the working has not been updated to the new CASA rounding/accuracy limits so if you use the correct rounding you get an answer ballpark to what Rob got but not exactly the same (There is a section on the CASA SOP but the pracci exams and examples do not follow it). Not a big deal but it does not do a good job of testing your adherence to the SOP. Given the money you have to pay for these notes it would be nice if they were accurate.
You round BRW to the nearest 2000KG, it is a little grey the way Rob explains it (I think it might be a typo in his notes) but it is discussed on Pg 2-2, para 11 of the 727 POH.
H-Dog, I think that was changed. Rob Avery issued a supplement early this year with a number of rounding changes including rounding to the nearest 1,000. Using that got me a pass this year.
Thread Starter
Neg,
It states in the 727 POH that you round to the nearest 2000KG. I think that the CASA rounding/accuracy limits SOP attempts to reference you to this but it has got the paragraph wrong (Points you to para 9 which is nothing)
I have also confirmed this with Rob and Gary (The bloke in charge of these exams at CASA).
Have subsequently passed this exam using this method. My tip for the exam is to slow down, take your time and know the accuracy limits. I didn't do any extra study for my second attempt I simply slowed down and double checked everything to prevent me from making any stupid mistakes. There's plenty of time if you know the material well.
For info, I did have 1 curly question that I hadn't seen before as follows;
You have just taken off at xxxx BRW and the LG did not retract. You are going to climb to 10000' and dump fuel before descending to land. Your FOB at BRW was yyyyy. What is the ETI between T/O and landing.
I worked it out as follows:
1. Calculate climb time/fuel
2. Calculate descent time/fuel (Landing at 72600KG, MLW)
3. The difference in weight between TOPC and TOPD is the amount of fuel you need to dump/burn (The FOB that it gives you is irrelevant for this question)
4. Calculate EMZW (Half way between TOPC and TOPD weight)
5. Calculate Fuel Flow with LG down at 10k at this EMZW.
6. Convert this FF to KG/min (I.e divide by 60)
7. Add this on to your dump rate (1050 Kg/min)
8. Use this figure to calculate the ETI to dump the fuel.
9. Add all ETIs up
This isn't necessarily an accurate answer (I.e how long does it take you to fly the circuit to land given you allow for approach fuel etc. etc.) but I think it's what CASA is after and as we know it's not about getting the correct answer, it's about getting the answer that CASA got. It's a bit of a joke given that CASA have not provided any guidance for questions like this and there are numerous ways you could work this out.
As mentioned earlier I can recommend the Rob Avery material to study. From what I have seen all of the courses are much of a muchness.
Best of luck all with this one, and may the flight planning gods look favourably upon you when you sit the exam.
It states in the 727 POH that you round to the nearest 2000KG. I think that the CASA rounding/accuracy limits SOP attempts to reference you to this but it has got the paragraph wrong (Points you to para 9 which is nothing)
I have also confirmed this with Rob and Gary (The bloke in charge of these exams at CASA).
Have subsequently passed this exam using this method. My tip for the exam is to slow down, take your time and know the accuracy limits. I didn't do any extra study for my second attempt I simply slowed down and double checked everything to prevent me from making any stupid mistakes. There's plenty of time if you know the material well.
For info, I did have 1 curly question that I hadn't seen before as follows;
You have just taken off at xxxx BRW and the LG did not retract. You are going to climb to 10000' and dump fuel before descending to land. Your FOB at BRW was yyyyy. What is the ETI between T/O and landing.
I worked it out as follows:
1. Calculate climb time/fuel
2. Calculate descent time/fuel (Landing at 72600KG, MLW)
3. The difference in weight between TOPC and TOPD is the amount of fuel you need to dump/burn (The FOB that it gives you is irrelevant for this question)
4. Calculate EMZW (Half way between TOPC and TOPD weight)
5. Calculate Fuel Flow with LG down at 10k at this EMZW.
6. Convert this FF to KG/min (I.e divide by 60)
7. Add this on to your dump rate (1050 Kg/min)
8. Use this figure to calculate the ETI to dump the fuel.
9. Add all ETIs up
This isn't necessarily an accurate answer (I.e how long does it take you to fly the circuit to land given you allow for approach fuel etc. etc.) but I think it's what CASA is after and as we know it's not about getting the correct answer, it's about getting the answer that CASA got. It's a bit of a joke given that CASA have not provided any guidance for questions like this and there are numerous ways you could work this out.
As mentioned earlier I can recommend the Rob Avery material to study. From what I have seen all of the courses are much of a muchness.
Best of luck all with this one, and may the flight planning gods look favourably upon you when you sit the exam.
Last edited by H-Dog; 11th Oct 2013 at 05:29.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: very far
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all
I am going through CASA information booklet again and a couple of things are confusing me a little, the booklet says:
"For climbs and descents the candidate should use the met data closest to the 2/3rd height for the climb, and 1/2 height for a descent, as per paragraphs 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 above"
Let's take a climb to FL330 for example, I used to use FL220 data and therefore interpreted between FL185 and FL235 RWST data but reading the CASA booklet again I am now wondering if I shouldn't just use FL235 data with no interpretation as it's the closest from FL220.
What's your take on that, I have read bob avery handout on tips to speed up and conform with casa accuracy limits but I am just a bit confuse on this one after reading the casa leaflet again.
Also on DP OPS the CASA booklet states that Where a descent to a lower level is required, a “normal descent” as per the B727 Handbook on page 4-3 is to be planned. I always assumed an instantaneous descent to FL130 on that case, did this changed with PEXO or that instantaneous descent assumption is just valid enought for CP and PNRs ?
Thanks heaps,
Julien
I am going through CASA information booklet again and a couple of things are confusing me a little, the booklet says:
"For climbs and descents the candidate should use the met data closest to the 2/3rd height for the climb, and 1/2 height for a descent, as per paragraphs 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 above"
Let's take a climb to FL330 for example, I used to use FL220 data and therefore interpreted between FL185 and FL235 RWST data but reading the CASA booklet again I am now wondering if I shouldn't just use FL235 data with no interpretation as it's the closest from FL220.
What's your take on that, I have read bob avery handout on tips to speed up and conform with casa accuracy limits but I am just a bit confuse on this one after reading the casa leaflet again.
Also on DP OPS the CASA booklet states that Where a descent to a lower level is required, a “normal descent” as per the B727 Handbook on page 4-3 is to be planned. I always assumed an instantaneous descent to FL130 on that case, did this changed with PEXO or that instantaneous descent assumption is just valid enought for CP and PNRs ?
Thanks heaps,
Julien
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Everywhere
Age: 41
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too wondered the same about the 2/3rds climb requirement but you'll find that you should use the 185 RSWT data for cruise levels up to and including FL310, and use 235 data for FL330 and above. My understanding is that there is to be no interpolation between RSWT levels at any time.
Assume instantaneous descent for DP and 2E ops, the "descent to lower level" applies to a yaw damper level or for a descent from cruise down into a holding level etc.
Assume instantaneous descent for DP and 2E ops, the "descent to lower level" applies to a yaw damper level or for a descent from cruise down into a holding level etc.
ATPL Flight Planning/PEXO
I agree, Upto and including f310 use 185, above f310
Use f235. This is what I understand to be correct. I also believe you should not interpolate between levels at any stage.
Half of this exam is luck IMO, so good luck!!
Use f235. This is what I understand to be correct. I also believe you should not interpolate between levels at any stage.
Half of this exam is luck IMO, so good luck!!
Last edited by Joker89; 17th Oct 2013 at 10:05.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATPL Flight Planning / PEXO
Thought I would add my 5 cents. Passed well yesterday - after a bad fail 10 days ago. My path was AFT distance (this is the 4th subject I have done with them - but the first time I have also used someone else to help) to learn the whole process and do the 8 practice tests, then i went to UNSW for 1.5 days to do practice exams. I then failed, took a breath, got the Rob Avery ATPL 5 test pack and his speed guide - and that was the final piece I needed to be able to handle it.
Cheats I can give you (if you can call them that...)
- I used the SGRs from AFT - which are also close to the AVFACTS ones. The UNSW use a slightly different set which I found (for me) it was often out in the EMZW so i had to redo.
- On your ERC mark the tracks that come up in your pracs with highlighter (I did just the markers NOT the whole lines) and mark the waypoints that you see come up in the pracs so you can find them quick in the test
- Write distances on the ERC for regular legs (eg SYD-ML, ADEL-PH etc) to save you in the test
- Highlight (well) the edges of the pages you always use in the B727 manual (Descent Table, DP FF table, Fuel for NO/DP/1E, Altitude->Temp) as it will make the flicking faster. I had tabs in the first test and had to remove them - and it made it real hard even though i knew where the pages where
- Put notes in the B727 man next to things so you dont forget when you turn to it - EG YAW Damp Inop = NO TF Holding, Yam Damper Mach numbers for heights (they never change - 290 = .73 etc)
- Start at Q1 !! You will build up during the test and starting at the last question just puts you in the wrong place.
Grab the CASA PDF from Joker89 above - that will give you the guides for interpolation and rounding you need to do. Good luck to all - now onto the last 3 subjects
Cheats I can give you (if you can call them that...)
- I used the SGRs from AFT - which are also close to the AVFACTS ones. The UNSW use a slightly different set which I found (for me) it was often out in the EMZW so i had to redo.
- On your ERC mark the tracks that come up in your pracs with highlighter (I did just the markers NOT the whole lines) and mark the waypoints that you see come up in the pracs so you can find them quick in the test
- Write distances on the ERC for regular legs (eg SYD-ML, ADEL-PH etc) to save you in the test
- Highlight (well) the edges of the pages you always use in the B727 manual (Descent Table, DP FF table, Fuel for NO/DP/1E, Altitude->Temp) as it will make the flicking faster. I had tabs in the first test and had to remove them - and it made it real hard even though i knew where the pages where
- Put notes in the B727 man next to things so you dont forget when you turn to it - EG YAW Damp Inop = NO TF Holding, Yam Damper Mach numbers for heights (they never change - 290 = .73 etc)
- Start at Q1 !! You will build up during the test and starting at the last question just puts you in the wrong place.
Grab the CASA PDF from Joker89 above - that will give you the guides for interpolation and rounding you need to do. Good luck to all - now onto the last 3 subjects