Mass and balance new question
Moderator
14547 kg
Indeed. Very slightly more involved (less intuitive) than necessary to obtain the answer, but, no matter. Likewise, one might prefer to round it off to 14548.
However, somewhat in excess of the RTOM, as declared, so of not much value to the question ?
Indeed. Very slightly more involved (less intuitive) than necessary to obtain the answer, but, no matter. Likewise, one might prefer to round it off to 14548.
However, somewhat in excess of the RTOM, as declared, so of not much value to the question ?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
If memory serves I got 14547.2 something, but rounding off would depend on the answers available. The conversion to imp gals is also completely unnecessary just for a one mark question. Also, don't know why they bothered with the PLTOM. Just in case I ever become a question writer again 
how would you have approached it?
how would you have approached it?
Moderator
Only two considerations from my point of view:
(a) make sure that the question is "doable" by running some tests to check for stupidity. The RTOM mismatch, really, was unforgiveable.
(b) the use of distractors and other nonsense is fair game in larger questions given that the real life job of flying involves a lot of being stuffed about often with only half of the story. However, it is rather pointless to do so unless the answer is to be a full written solution and marked by a human who can assign credit for what is done sensibly.
For the student to lose all marks for, say, a single mistake in a lengthy theory exam question is, to me, not on. I don't see much benefit in theory exams which have a sudden death outcome. As I suggested earlier, sweaty exercises in the box are the place for that sort of pressure, providing that the examiner sets the problem and then sits back, holds his tongue, and observes the performance. Screaming skulls have no value as I see things.
(a) make sure that the question is "doable" by running some tests to check for stupidity. The RTOM mismatch, really, was unforgiveable.
(b) the use of distractors and other nonsense is fair game in larger questions given that the real life job of flying involves a lot of being stuffed about often with only half of the story. However, it is rather pointless to do so unless the answer is to be a full written solution and marked by a human who can assign credit for what is done sensibly.
For the student to lose all marks for, say, a single mistake in a lengthy theory exam question is, to me, not on. I don't see much benefit in theory exams which have a sudden death outcome. As I suggested earlier, sweaty exercises in the box are the place for that sort of pressure, providing that the examiner sets the problem and then sits back, holds his tongue, and observes the performance. Screaming skulls have no value as I see things.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Thanks for that - I was told that they left my questions last for review because they knew they would be sensible - the same went for the other UK writers, but since we got chucked off the database after Brexit the quality has fallen off a cliff.
