Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies) A forum for those on the steep path to that coveted professional licence. Whether studying for the written exams, training for the flight tests or building experience here's where you can hang out.

ATPL theory questions

Old 5th Aug 2015, 13:21
  #641 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: north or south
Age: 50
Posts: 592
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Transonic

Yes the answer is correct

clacton via 256 radial UB29 to lambourne and then ur1 tracking 225 to midhurst

If your not using the CAA E(HI)4 then it won't make sense , there is a Jeppesen E(HI)4 chart as well , which one are you using
ersa is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2015, 14:01
  #642 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 71
Posts: 4,127
Likes: 0
Received 27 Likes on 12 Posts
There's a 3/4 and a 4/5 - use the 4/5 unless told otherwise. They don't merge at the same places.

Phil
paco is online now  
Old 5th Aug 2015, 22:48
  #643 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many thanks for the feedback! Indeed I was looking at the wrong chart, now it makes sense.
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2015, 19:25
  #644 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flight Planning - Jeppesen Student Manual, labeling app. charts?)

I got a quick question regarding the Flight Planning exam (ATP 033) is it allowed to put any labels (free of any notes of course) on the approach charts contained in the Jepp Student Manual to make it a bit easier to find the particular airport/approach and to safe time during the exam?

Any advise appreciated!
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2015, 19:51
  #645 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sunny Solihull
Age: 67
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not anymore. Supposed to be a totally clean copy, that means all the lines, marks & aids you may have made during training need to be erased or removed.
Interesting how highlights you marked a year ago before the rule change came in force a couple of months ago might be viewed.

Be interested to know how well/determined this is actually been policed/enforced.

Back in 1999 when all this changed (for the worst) the accepted convention was no highlights or extra information but pencil lines were okay as it was "a working document" the trouble is the 'competent authority' keeps changing its mind.
RichardH is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2015, 20:43
  #646 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 71
Posts: 4,127
Likes: 0
Received 27 Likes on 12 Posts
Richard - it's being strictly enforced, I'm told.

Phil
paco is online now  
Old 14th Aug 2015, 22:58
  #647 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Perfomance - MRJT Take-Off

I'd need some help with the following question.

During the certification flight testing of a twin engine turbojet aeroplane, the real take-off distances are equal to:
- 1547m with all engines running
- 1720m with failure of critical engine at V1 with all other things remaining unchanged.
The take-off distance adopted for the certification file is:

a) 1978 m
b) 1779 m (correct answer)
c) 1547 m
d) 1720 m

It's been a while since I last reviewed this, can't remember how to solve this type question. Any advise would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 15:25
  #648 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,797
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The limiting TODR is the longer of the all engines gross distance x 1.15 or the gross distance engine out. 1547 x 1.15 = 1779, longer than the engine out distance and therefore limiting. It is actually unlikely that a two engine aircraft would be all engines limited as loss of one engine = loss of half the thrust, a bad thing. Much more likely on a four engined aircraft where loss of an engine = loss of a quarter of the thrust.
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2015, 18:15
  #649 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi Alex,

many thanks for your explanation, it's very much appreciated! Last three exams coming up next week, hope that everything goes well!
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 01:41
  #650 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EASA ATPL Exam Statistics;

was just wondering if there are any statistics about the pass/failure rate regarding the different subjects of the ATP exams? I think this would be rather interesting!

I had/have to retake two subjects, Performance and Flight Planning. Recently retook Performance, fortunately passed, but again it turned out that time was tight, ran out of time in the and and was unable to answer the last three reaming questions, but I still was able to pass!!! Had a lot of charts again, would say around 10, many MEP and SEP.

Unfortunately I failed Flight Planning (but it was the first attempt), I had the impression that here where new questions added recently, which I've never seen before. I guess the calculating fuel costs charts killed me. But on the other I must say I passed all other subjects the first time, Flight Planning is the only one left and I have sufficient time to prepare thoroughly this time!
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 04:22
  #651 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: north or south
Age: 50
Posts: 592
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Not sure if there are any statistics , I completed mine 6 months ago, and failed 1, but i noticed back them, that the good old question banks are getting less useful as the time ticks by.
ersa is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 23:49
  #652 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: LONDON
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I need help with a question

You are approaching an airfield, touchdown elevation is 260 ft and surface OAT is -30C.

your pub decision height is 1065 ft what us your indicated decision alt.

Need breakdown of calculation pls.
SAFSB is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2015, 10:03
  #653 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,797
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I appreciate you asked for a calculation but it would be more normal to use a correction table like the one published by Transport Canada.



You have asked for decision altitude, the current decision altitude would be a 260+1065=1325ft. The corrections are for decision height but they work the same way with altitudes. For 1500ft and -30C the correction is 280ft so, using the TLAR principle I would add on 250ft to get a DA of 1325+250= 1575ft.

Picky interpolation (which you would not do in real life) gives me a correction of 255.45ft.
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2015, 14:13
  #654 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,797
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hmmm, having thought about it the correction should probably be based, as the table says, on the height above the altimeter setting source, ie 1065ft, so the correction is more like 200ft and the corrected decision altitude is 260+1065+200=1525ft.
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2015, 13:07
  #655 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flight Planing - SID & STARS

I'd need some help with the following questions.

The route distance from CHIEVRES (CIV) to BOURSONNE (BSN) is: 97 NM

Which chart/Airport is the question referring to, since there is no reference given in the question? I believe it's EHAM (Schiphol) but I can't find the respective chart (SID/STAR). Any advise would be greatly appreciated!

Many thanks!
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2015, 13:15
  #656 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamburg
Age: 46
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi Transsonic2000,

In the exam, you will be given the appropriate chart. If this is from a practice question bank, you might want to take a look at an en-route chart that covers France.
hvogt is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2015, 14:13
  #657 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi hvogt,

yes indeed this question is out of a practice QDB, but meanwhile I found the appropriate chart. I was looking at the wrong chart, it's not Schiphol it's Paris (STAR 20-2). Anyway, thanks for your reply.
Transsonic2000 is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2015, 20:48
  #658 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Middle East
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi,

as far as I remember, a quick approximation is:

4ft / per each° away from ISA / 1000ft

decision height: 1065
thouchdown elev: 260
Delta ISA: from -35 to +13 = 48

temp correction: 4 x 48 x 1.065 = 204ft

meaning your new minimum becomes: 1065 + 260 + 204 = 1529ft

Last edited by Feather44; 18th Nov 2015 at 20:51. Reason: typo error
Feather44 is offline  
Old 29th Nov 2015, 17:18
  #659 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: asdf
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any guys with feedback from GNav CAA Uk in November this year??
dlcmdrx is offline  
Old 3rd Dec 2015, 11:18
  #660 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: with my parents
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
lil help with this one plz...

DR position is 62N09W and a relative bearing on an NDB at 64N17W is found to be 247 when the magnetic heading is 070. the variation at the aircraft is 14 W and at the NDB 20 W. Give the true bearing to plot from the NDB on a polar stearographic chart:

Answer given is 111
D driver is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.