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 26th Jul 2020, 18:54
  #1301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sunny Solihull
Age: 64
Posts: 214
When I was learning back in the 70s one of my early solo cross-country flights was to fly from Birmingham EGBB in a C150 (those were the days) to overfly Halfpenny Green (Wolverhampton International!) and observe & record (on paper) the signals square then report back to the CFI who had in the meantime checked with HG. Signals squares are still in use at some smaller UK GA airfields, useful for non-radio ops.
RichardH is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2020, 09:38
  #1302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 2
Question about Class B aircraft and ASDR

Hello,

I have a question regarding the rule applicable to Class B aircraft (a 6 seater twin for example (MP1)) for the ASDR. I am studying with the book from PadPilot "Performance".

In the chapter about "Multi - engine piston MP1" and "Take-off and Acceleration Stop distance" it says "although there is no requirement to be able to stop within the ASDA from the lift-off speed, it would be advisable to plan to achieve this".

Do you know where in the Air operation manual from EASA (or in another official document ) I can find explicitly the rule that states that for a multi engine piston aircraft class B it is not obliged to respect ASDR / ASDA ? Because I spent hours looking for it and I don't understand where its coming from.

Thank you very much !
Togaa is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2020, 15:44
  #1303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London
Posts: 578
There's no certification or operational rule requiring accelerate-stop distance to be determined for most small aeroplanes. Were it a rule for performance class B aeroplanes it would be in CAT.POL.A.305. Compare with CAT.POL.A.205 for class A and CAT.POL.A.400 for class C. The consolidated air ops rules are on EUR-Lex (link) or in the EASA Easy Access Rules for Air Operations (link).
selfin is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2020, 17:19
  #1304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 62
Posts: 1,617
The rules for Class B are now in a document behind a paywall, originating from outside EASA from memory. The EASA examinars have been told that the rules they are working to are some years out of date but have not visibly reacted, nor has the syllabus been changed. When I get back to my desk I'll give you the document reference. Probably Pad Pilot are out of date, either accidentally or deliberately teaching out-of-date material to match the exam. Some sympathy there!
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2020, 18:21
  #1305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London
Posts: 578
An appropriate consensus standard for 23.2115 (take-off performance) is ASTM F3179 which has been revised twice since 2016 but that version is freely viewable at https://www.astm.org/VIEW_ONLY/web/v...file=33n_8602N

There's a helpful GAMA Part 23 Rule Rewrite Training Session on Youtube (
) on the overhaul of CS/Part-23 standards done 3 years ago. In the GAMA video, at about 23 min 30 sec, there's an NTSB/GA-JSC chart categorising fatal GA accidents over the period 2008–2015. Eyeballing the chart it appears barely one per cent of are attributed to runway excursions "RE"—see ICAO taxonomy (pdf link). The chart is available on the GA Joint Steering Committee site under GA Safety Performance on the documents page (link). Similar statistics are reported for accidents in Europe, eg EASA GA-LOC-I fact sheet (link, pdf link).
selfin is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2020, 22:24
  #1306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 62
Posts: 1,617
That's it! I had to pay. Damn. PS good luck, it won't relate closely to Class B as you know it.
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2020, 20:52
  #1307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: N/A
Posts: 2
Question regarding field length requirement class B aircraft

Hi,

Me again. Questions regarding the calculation of the field length requirement for class B aircraft, The rule says:Takeoff Field Length Requirements - SEP and MEP

a) When no stopway or clearway is available the take-off distance when multiplied by 1.25 must not exceed TORA.

b) When a stopway and/or clearway is available the take-off distance must:i) not exceed TORAii) when multiplied by 1.3, not exceed ASDA; oriii) when multiplied by 1.15, not exceed TODAI actually have an issue understanding the "and/or" part and when to apply the i), ii), iii). If I take for example an airfield with these declared distance:

TORA = 1500m
ASDA = 1500m
TODA = 1500m

In this case, only a) is applicable. Therefore, for my aircraft, the maximum TOD will be 1500M/1.25 = 1200M

Now, let's assume that the same airfield has now a clearway of 300 m but no stopway (very common layout). The declared distances will be:

TORA = 1500m
ASDA = 1500m
TODA = 1800m

In this case, I assume that b) is applicable because there is a clearway. BUT, b) has 3 conditions:
i) not exceed TORA
ii) when multiplied by 1.3, not exceed ASDA; or
iii) when multiplied by 1.15, not exceed TODA

So if we do the calculation, we will have:
TORA 1500/1 = 1500m
ASDA 1500/1.3 = 1154m
TODA 1800/1.15 = 1565m

Therefore, this time, the limited distance will be 1154m.

And this where I am lost. Knowing that the distances (without clearway, first example) would give a limited distance of 1200M and the same distances with a clearway would give a limited distance of 1154M, Why do we bother declaring a clearway if this will reduce the takeoff weight of the aircraft ?
So, should we always apply all these 3 conditions automatically (everytime there is a clearway or a stopway or both) or should we understand : "if there is a clearway, and no stopway, only apply i) and iii)" ? Which would make more sense for me. because that way, in the second example, the limited distance would be 1565m vs 1200m and then, the presence of a clearway is useful.

Am I correct ?

Thanks !
Togaa is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2020, 10:18
  #1308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Amsaterdam
Posts: 2
Hi,

Does anyone know if EASA uses 27 or 30 hPa for calculations?
I've come up short in my google search as they are both mentioned.

Thanks for the info
Marnixsjoerd is offline  
Old 22nd Oct 2020, 08:33
  #1309 (permalink)  
PFD
Ground instructor
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 87
In the new syllabus for 2020 Met is definitely 30 feet per hPa
PFD is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2020, 09:35
  #1310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: France
Posts: 27
Is anyone doing the new EASA ATPL theory program?

Is anyone doing the new EASA ATPL theory program? I wanted to know if they still was the flight Computer and if it was still used in the new EASA ATPL program which has changed recently...? Any ideas?
xplanefactor is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2020, 09:36
  #1311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: France
Posts: 27
it 30ft used for EASA ATPL exams! Sure!
xplanefactor is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2020, 09:37
  #1312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: France
Posts: 27
Originally Posted by PFD View Post
In the new syllabus for 2020 Met is definitely 30 feet per hPa
it 's 30ft/hPa used for EASA ATPL exams! Sure!
xplanefactor is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2020, 17:49
  #1313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Marocco
Posts: 12
Free ATPL Question Bank

Does anyone knows a good free question bank so you can refresh some knowledge, I've been looking for one but I am not able, all of then have free examples but thats not enough, I used to use Aviation exam but 170 for a year it's to much for me right know, anyone knows something

Thank you in advanced
Detrol5 is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2020, 18:55
  #1314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 62
Posts: 1,617
If you don't want to pay, the one known as paco has one that I think is free. He'll be on shortly I imagine. Most pay-for-use QBs give you free access for a limited time.
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2020, 19:10
  #1315 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 69
Posts: 3,891
The one known as paco is indeed lurking....

rtfq.org

No explanations, 50/50 button. use like flash cards
paco is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2020, 14:53
  #1316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: It's a secret
Posts: 294
Detrol5

If you can stretch your budget to 12 you could give atplontrack a try for a month ;-)
Specaircrew is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2021, 15:42
  #1317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Europe
Age: 30
Posts: 69
Originally Posted by Marnixsjoerd View Post
Hi,

Does anyone know if EASA uses 27 or 30 hPa for calculations?
I've come up short in my google search as they are both mentioned.

Thanks for the info
This is an interesting question.

When I sat my exams 2017-18, some subjects used 27 ft/hPa and others used 30. In fact, I remember a question in which depending on which assumption you used you obtained one of the possible options or another, which is really just plain mean by EASA.
Central Scrutinizer is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2021, 17:10
  #1318 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 69
Posts: 3,891
I believe the standard is now 30 (for the new syllabus), but the question should specify
paco is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.