JAA ATP - G-Nav question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAA ATP - G-Nav question
Currently having fun with the JAA ATP Question Database (QDB), particularly G-Nav. I’ve been trying for quite a while now, but I can’t figure out how to solve the following question, is there anybody who can help?
The QDB contains the following example asking two questions:
On a Lambert chart the distance between to parallels of latitude 2° is measured to be 112 millimeters. The distance between two meridians, spaced 2°, is, according to the chart 70 nm.
First question:
What is the scale of the chart, in the middle of the square described?
Correct answer would be 1 : 1 984 000
Second question:
What is the latitude in the center of the described square?
Correct answer would be 54°
The QDB contains the following example asking two questions:
On a Lambert chart the distance between to parallels of latitude 2° is measured to be 112 millimeters. The distance between two meridians, spaced 2°, is, according to the chart 70 nm.
First question:
What is the scale of the chart, in the middle of the square described?
Correct answer would be 1 : 1 984 000
Second question:
What is the latitude in the center of the described square?
Correct answer would be 54°
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These are really questions which test basic understanding of charts - nothing tricky or complicated, just pure basics.
1. 2° = 2 x 60NM (since we are looking the distance between paralels) = 2 x 60 x 1852 m = 2 x 60 x 1852 x 1000 mm = 222240000 mm
We now divide this by 112 mm and get 1984285,7, which is approximately the correct result.
2. 2° = 70 NM = 2 x 60 * cos x
cos x = 70 / (2 x 60)
x = arccos(70 / (2 x 60))
x = 54,3°
1. 2° = 2 x 60NM (since we are looking the distance between paralels) = 2 x 60 x 1852 m = 2 x 60 x 1852 x 1000 mm = 222240000 mm
We now divide this by 112 mm and get 1984285,7, which is approximately the correct result.
2. 2° = 70 NM = 2 x 60 * cos x
cos x = 70 / (2 x 60)
x = arccos(70 / (2 x 60))
x = 54,3°
Been flying Ng's for 3 years, passed this exam with 97% on my first attempt, and I don't have a CLUE how to answer these questions....
Funny that, knowing there is so much crud in the ATPL's you don't actually need...
Funny that, knowing there is so much crud in the ATPL's you don't actually need...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ FlyingStone: Thank you!
@ VJW:
Exactly - I totally agree with that!!!
I did my training in the US and have been working there as an instructor as well - so I'm not a total newbie!
In my opinion the entire JAA ATP theory is BS - it's totally exaggerated and escapist! Most of the stuff has nothing to do with real world flying, it's more about giving people a hard time. In the end you are a jack of all trades but master of none!
@ VJW:
Been flying Ng's for 3 years, passed this exam with 97% on my first attempt, and I don't have a CLUE how to answer these questions....
Funny that, knowing there is so much crud in the ATPL's you don't actually need...
Funny that, knowing there is so much crud in the ATPL's you don't actually need...
I did my training in the US and have been working there as an instructor as well - so I'm not a total newbie!
In my opinion the entire JAA ATP theory is BS - it's totally exaggerated and escapist! Most of the stuff has nothing to do with real world flying, it's more about giving people a hard time. In the end you are a jack of all trades but master of none!
Last edited by Transsonic2000; 27th Aug 2011 at 13:28.
I wouldn't say the entire amount is a total waste of time, there's a fair amount of useful stuff. In fact, the one I use the most now has to be MET of course.....(which was my worst subject at the time)...
Good luck with it all, and don't put yourself down. You're far from a newbie if you are a flight instructor in my opinion.
Good luck with it all, and don't put yourself down. You're far from a newbie if you are a flight instructor in my opinion.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As mentioned before, I totally agree with you! And no doubt, MET is certainly important and necessary! But on the other hand, lets be frank, the ATP theory still contains a lot of stuff which is quite escapist and has nothing to do with real world flying! In my opinion it's more about making things complicated and confuse people, instead of drawing a clear picture! Just take the above example?! Personally I prefer the FAA system for several reasons and I'm not the only one with this opinion - I even meet a JAA examiner once, he said: why didn't they just buy the FAR Regs book and printed JAR on it.
Last edited by Transsonic2000; 27th Aug 2011 at 14:41.
