OEI - Why does the Balance Ball show a slip?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bristol
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keith
Well, I have to disagree with you. Yes, we have to teach students to pass the exams, but must not concentrate on rote learning to the exclusion of knowledge. We don't, and our students pass just as well as any others.
I have checked our feedback, and I am fairly certain that there is only one question on this, and it says something like "after engine failure the aircraft continues in straight and level flight with wings level. What will happen to the ball and turn indicator?" This, as you can see, is a very simple question.
I admit that I was surprised to find that this is so. Our tests have examples of the second (banking) case, but these are in there to illuminate the cross connection with the JAR certification rules and the bank rate limit on Vmcl for example. Our tests have this because we teach this.
A problem with analysing feedback is that it is an imperfect science. I, personally think you are putting too much emphasis on criticism of the question bank. There are howlers, but by and large it is sensible, and the howlers are being worked out by challenge.
Dick W
Well, I have to disagree with you. Yes, we have to teach students to pass the exams, but must not concentrate on rote learning to the exclusion of knowledge. We don't, and our students pass just as well as any others.
I have checked our feedback, and I am fairly certain that there is only one question on this, and it says something like "after engine failure the aircraft continues in straight and level flight with wings level. What will happen to the ball and turn indicator?" This, as you can see, is a very simple question.
I admit that I was surprised to find that this is so. Our tests have examples of the second (banking) case, but these are in there to illuminate the cross connection with the JAR certification rules and the bank rate limit on Vmcl for example. Our tests have this because we teach this.
A problem with analysing feedback is that it is an imperfect science. I, personally think you are putting too much emphasis on criticism of the question bank. There are howlers, but by and large it is sensible, and the howlers are being worked out by challenge.
Dick W
Moderator
ah .. the discussion is livening up a bit ...
For the benefit of any newchums ..
(a) it is very important to keep in mind that Vmc/Vmca is a certification animal and not a great deal of use in the real world (unless you get down too close to it .. in which case it becomes a major driver to pilot strategy)
(b) it is not feasible to play with the AFM Vmc in the real world due to thrust variations
(c) if the pilot finds him/herself at or close to Vmc, then the bank into the live engine becomes a necessity. Unless you have documented advice to the contrary, it is safe to presume that the AFM Vmc data is based on the 5 degree-into-the-live-engine trick.
(d) be VERY wary of bank near Vmc .. the real world Vmc is VERY sensitive to, and dependent on, the actual bank angle. Acknowledging the limitations of flight simulators, it is always an interesting exercise to give the student a Vmc limiting takeoff failure ... if the bank is not well controlled (and this usually means aggressively ..) the aircraft rapidly banks into the dead engine .. the real world Vmc goes up past the actual speed .. and the outcome is foregone. A bit of practice corrects the technique errors but the lesson for the student is driven home strongly and very convincingly.
... and
(e) thanks to B for his picture-worth-a-thousand-words .....'
(f) as Dick suggests, for normal ops OEI, it is conventional and convenient to fly wings level and take a small performance hit due to whatever sideslip exists ... but note (d)
(g) having had a lengthy involvement in pilot theory training in years gone by .. I have to echo Dick's sentiments about pass versus education. If the knowledge is there, then the pass is a small additional effort to come to grips with the idiosyncratic nature of examinations .. but if the training has only concentrated on past papers, etc., then the pass might be there, but there is no depth to the knowledge ... the Industry and the examiners really ought to question what it is that the examinations are trying to do.
For the benefit of any newchums ..
(a) it is very important to keep in mind that Vmc/Vmca is a certification animal and not a great deal of use in the real world (unless you get down too close to it .. in which case it becomes a major driver to pilot strategy)
(b) it is not feasible to play with the AFM Vmc in the real world due to thrust variations
(c) if the pilot finds him/herself at or close to Vmc, then the bank into the live engine becomes a necessity. Unless you have documented advice to the contrary, it is safe to presume that the AFM Vmc data is based on the 5 degree-into-the-live-engine trick.
(d) be VERY wary of bank near Vmc .. the real world Vmc is VERY sensitive to, and dependent on, the actual bank angle. Acknowledging the limitations of flight simulators, it is always an interesting exercise to give the student a Vmc limiting takeoff failure ... if the bank is not well controlled (and this usually means aggressively ..) the aircraft rapidly banks into the dead engine .. the real world Vmc goes up past the actual speed .. and the outcome is foregone. A bit of practice corrects the technique errors but the lesson for the student is driven home strongly and very convincingly.
... and
(e) thanks to B for his picture-worth-a-thousand-words .....'
(f) as Dick suggests, for normal ops OEI, it is conventional and convenient to fly wings level and take a small performance hit due to whatever sideslip exists ... but note (d)
(g) having had a lengthy involvement in pilot theory training in years gone by .. I have to echo Dick's sentiments about pass versus education. If the knowledge is there, then the pass is a small additional effort to come to grips with the idiosyncratic nature of examinations .. but if the training has only concentrated on past papers, etc., then the pass might be there, but there is no depth to the knowledge ... the Industry and the examiners really ought to question what it is that the examinations are trying to do.
Last edited by john_tullamarine; 1st Dec 2003 at 06:23.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dorset
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
Nothing that I have contributed to this nor to any other pprune string has ever advocated rote learning. Indeed the entire focus of my contributions has invariably been a desire to provide explanations pitched at a level at which the typical student can handle them. A good many students who have previously studied at other schools come to me for help in preparing for examination resits. The vast majority subsequently comment that having spent time with me they not only know the WHAT, but also the WHY of the subjects covered. Such comments are not the product of rote learning.
The subjects of minimum control speeds and aircraft handling following single engine failure are a standard part of the JAR POF syllabus. I therefore deal with them in that manner. Before we get too wound up on what is or is not an appropriate aim for the JAR exams, we should remember that the advanced flying training carried out on completion of the written exams includes a period of theoretical and practical exercises which cover these subjects in great detail. You appear to be making the mistake of assuming that the ground school training is the only training. It is not.
When the time comes for providing guidance on examination technique, I remind the students of the advice most frequently voiced by the CAA examiners. "Answer the questions that have actually ben asked in the exam paper, and not those that you might wish to have been asked" Or to summarise "RTFQ".
The comments in my previous post related specifically to your assertion that, "However, the cases referred to in the JAA questions are for Vmc, and if you want minimum Vmc....". This is a classical case of failure to RTFQ. Any student faced with this question is quite simply wasting valuable examination time if he/she ponders the subject of Vmc. The question is actually about forces in flight and instrumentation, and should be addressed as such.
You comments "I, personally think you are putting too much emphasis on criticism of the question bank." is somewhat curious. I am not aware of having made any serious critiscism of the question banks in any of my posts to this string. I actually think that the questions to which we have referred are quite good in that they combine aspects of more than one subject and require the students to think.
Finally it might be worth looking again at my comments regarding the purpose of the student when taking the examination. From the moment a student walks into the examination room concepts such as learning or what should or should not be in the syllabus become irelevant. The sole objective of the student must be to pass that examination. Nothing else matters for the duration of that examination period.
Nothing that I have contributed to this nor to any other pprune string has ever advocated rote learning. Indeed the entire focus of my contributions has invariably been a desire to provide explanations pitched at a level at which the typical student can handle them. A good many students who have previously studied at other schools come to me for help in preparing for examination resits. The vast majority subsequently comment that having spent time with me they not only know the WHAT, but also the WHY of the subjects covered. Such comments are not the product of rote learning.
The subjects of minimum control speeds and aircraft handling following single engine failure are a standard part of the JAR POF syllabus. I therefore deal with them in that manner. Before we get too wound up on what is or is not an appropriate aim for the JAR exams, we should remember that the advanced flying training carried out on completion of the written exams includes a period of theoretical and practical exercises which cover these subjects in great detail. You appear to be making the mistake of assuming that the ground school training is the only training. It is not.
When the time comes for providing guidance on examination technique, I remind the students of the advice most frequently voiced by the CAA examiners. "Answer the questions that have actually ben asked in the exam paper, and not those that you might wish to have been asked" Or to summarise "RTFQ".
The comments in my previous post related specifically to your assertion that, "However, the cases referred to in the JAA questions are for Vmc, and if you want minimum Vmc....". This is a classical case of failure to RTFQ. Any student faced with this question is quite simply wasting valuable examination time if he/she ponders the subject of Vmc. The question is actually about forces in flight and instrumentation, and should be addressed as such.
You comments "I, personally think you are putting too much emphasis on criticism of the question bank." is somewhat curious. I am not aware of having made any serious critiscism of the question banks in any of my posts to this string. I actually think that the questions to which we have referred are quite good in that they combine aspects of more than one subject and require the students to think.
Finally it might be worth looking again at my comments regarding the purpose of the student when taking the examination. From the moment a student walks into the examination room concepts such as learning or what should or should not be in the syllabus become irelevant. The sole objective of the student must be to pass that examination. Nothing else matters for the duration of that examination period.
The extract from the BAE SYSTEMS safety magazine JETSETS Asymmetric flight at low airspeed.pdf can be found here together with the Turboprop PSM+ICR files, thanks to alf5071h for hosting the file at his web site
Please note disclaimer from JETSETS magazine:
BAE SYSTEMS does not warrant the accuracy of the information contained in this document and accepts no liability for the misuse or misinterpretation of such information. It is published as flight safety information and does not supersede or replace any officially approved aircraft publication, nor does it constitute a warranty or condition of any contract. For definitive guidance, reference must always be made to Flight Manuals, Crew/Manufacturer's Operating Manuals and Maintenance Manuals as appropriate.
JETSETS is published solely for the purpose of improving flight safety and, unless copyright is indicated, articles may be reproduced providing that the source of material is acknowledged.
Please note disclaimer from JETSETS magazine:
BAE SYSTEMS does not warrant the accuracy of the information contained in this document and accepts no liability for the misuse or misinterpretation of such information. It is published as flight safety information and does not supersede or replace any officially approved aircraft publication, nor does it constitute a warranty or condition of any contract. For definitive guidance, reference must always be made to Flight Manuals, Crew/Manufacturer's Operating Manuals and Maintenance Manuals as appropriate.
JETSETS is published solely for the purpose of improving flight safety and, unless copyright is indicated, articles may be reproduced providing that the source of material is acknowledged.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: RSA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
where does weight act
hi there - am a bit confused
had a look at the notes on asymetric flight the diagrams (some) indicate that a "component of weight acts as a turning force" when a aircraft is flying with zero sideslip
can somebody please explain (thought weight always acted toward earths mass center through the center of gravity?
thanks
had a look at the notes on asymetric flight the diagrams (some) indicate that a "component of weight acts as a turning force" when a aircraft is flying with zero sideslip
can somebody please explain (thought weight always acted toward earths mass center through the center of gravity?
thanks
Several notes on asymmetric flight – revised pages Turboprob PSM+ICR and Asymmetric Flight
