A light-hearted look at the NPPL
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Lancs, UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A light-hearted look at the NPPL
After a little incident today I thought that the onset of the new NPPL would be a good time to review the syllabus and maybe introduce a few new exams for would-be pilots. This afternoon I had to fill in one of the CAA 'Birdstrike' forms and was fine with the questions along the lines of 'where was it?' and what height, speed etc, but being somewhat ornithologically challenged, was stumped by the question "what sort of bird was it?".
Even I, in my somewhat bemused state, could see that the response "a ***kin dead one!" would not be acceptable to the nice men in suits. Previous identification exercises have mainly been in identifying the odd beak, foot, gizzard, pool of blood etc, kindly donated by my cat and left in such locations as to guarrantee standing on in bare feet when getting up in the morning. These I was allowed to categorise as 'breakfast', lunch', 'supper' and 'light snack' (apart from the half-squirrel which quite obviously was not 'light', or at least hadn't been when alive and hunting nuts!) Luckily, my passenger was more current and recognised it as a house martin (sure it wasn't a swallow?) and thus helped keep the number crunchers happy.
What I suggest is that all prospective pilots undergo 2 hours of training in 'High Speed Bird Recognition' (6 hours for those flying near Martin Mere) and a multiple choice written exam.
Anyone else got any bright ideas to help make us more complete pilots?
Even I, in my somewhat bemused state, could see that the response "a ***kin dead one!" would not be acceptable to the nice men in suits. Previous identification exercises have mainly been in identifying the odd beak, foot, gizzard, pool of blood etc, kindly donated by my cat and left in such locations as to guarrantee standing on in bare feet when getting up in the morning. These I was allowed to categorise as 'breakfast', lunch', 'supper' and 'light snack' (apart from the half-squirrel which quite obviously was not 'light', or at least hadn't been when alive and hunting nuts!) Luckily, my passenger was more current and recognised it as a house martin (sure it wasn't a swallow?) and thus helped keep the number crunchers happy.
What I suggest is that all prospective pilots undergo 2 hours of training in 'High Speed Bird Recognition' (6 hours for those flying near Martin Mere) and a multiple choice written exam.
Anyone else got any bright ideas to help make us more complete pilots?
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something which our American friends find much easier than us, in my limited experience, and I don't have a clue as to why that is: recognising those places where they've lived all their lives from the air.
To me, when I look at the ground below me from an aircraft, I'm not looking at the same ground as I walk or drive on every day. It's a completely different world. Even now, 2 years after I first started flying, I'm only just getting the hang of correlating what I see in the air with what I see when I'm driving. Yet I've heard of many Americans who immediatley recognise their office, their house, the Interstate that runs to their parents' house, the lake that they went swimming in when they were 10 years old or the bike shed behind which they had their first kiss. The stories match my own experiences - I've flown 2 American friends on their frist trip in a light aircraft, and both of them have instantly been able to recognise ground features. In one case, I was flying in an area which I wasn't familiar with, and my pax was able to navigate better than me!
So, for British students only, I suggest someone builds a 1000 foot high vehicle which can be driven on motorways and country roads around the area in which you'll be flying. A couple of hours driving this vehicle will enable you to build up a picture of what your local area looks like from a reasonable height, thus removing the advantage which the Yanks have over us.
FFF
-------------
To me, when I look at the ground below me from an aircraft, I'm not looking at the same ground as I walk or drive on every day. It's a completely different world. Even now, 2 years after I first started flying, I'm only just getting the hang of correlating what I see in the air with what I see when I'm driving. Yet I've heard of many Americans who immediatley recognise their office, their house, the Interstate that runs to their parents' house, the lake that they went swimming in when they were 10 years old or the bike shed behind which they had their first kiss. The stories match my own experiences - I've flown 2 American friends on their frist trip in a light aircraft, and both of them have instantly been able to recognise ground features. In one case, I was flying in an area which I wasn't familiar with, and my pax was able to navigate better than me!
So, for British students only, I suggest someone builds a 1000 foot high vehicle which can be driven on motorways and country roads around the area in which you'll be flying. A couple of hours driving this vehicle will enable you to build up a picture of what your local area looks like from a reasonable height, thus removing the advantage which the Yanks have over us.
FFF
-------------
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: South Yorkshire
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about "Psychic Engine Managment"?
I think we should have to pass an exam on managing the engine without the use of engine instruments. I think is absolutely shocking that we are not taught how to intictively know when an engine is about to quit, or when it is running a little bit too lean.
We could be shown pictures of a covered up oil temperature gauge and have to tell the examiner the temprerature reading.
Or we could be given one big-end bearing and asked to comment on the condition of the rest of the bearings in the engine.
I can see a market for little 'test' engines where the examiner can tinker to create failure situations that we have to sense through nothing more than touching the throttle or smelling the exhaust.
I think we should have to pass an exam on managing the engine without the use of engine instruments. I think is absolutely shocking that we are not taught how to intictively know when an engine is about to quit, or when it is running a little bit too lean.
We could be shown pictures of a covered up oil temperature gauge and have to tell the examiner the temprerature reading.
Or we could be given one big-end bearing and asked to comment on the condition of the rest of the bearings in the engine.
I can see a market for little 'test' engines where the examiner can tinker to create failure situations that we have to sense through nothing more than touching the throttle or smelling the exhaust.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definitely need an exam to prepare our humble student for their first venture into the clubhouse bar. Questions like
My time to first solo was:
(a) 18 hours
(b) 22 hours
(c) 1 hour 5 minutes
and I learned to fly:
(a) With an instructor in a C150
(b) With an instructor in a PA-28
(c) Taught myself in my homebuilt replica Spitfire Mk. IX
should teach them to fit right into the conversation once they have their licence. For bonus marks, questions like:
GPS is
(a) My primary form of navigation
(b) A useful backup
(c) **** *** ***** *** ***** you ****** ****wit
should make them feel at home on PPRuNe...
My time to first solo was:
(a) 18 hours
(b) 22 hours
(c) 1 hour 5 minutes
and I learned to fly:
(a) With an instructor in a C150
(b) With an instructor in a PA-28
(c) Taught myself in my homebuilt replica Spitfire Mk. IX
should teach them to fit right into the conversation once they have their licence. For bonus marks, questions like:
GPS is
(a) My primary form of navigation
(b) A useful backup
(c) **** *** ***** *** ***** you ****** ****wit
should make them feel at home on PPRuNe...
