Have you ever...

Jay Honeck wrote:
Since nowadays VFR pilots have little use for VORs, (I don't turn them
on --
ever -- except for the occasional practice VOR approach), to put those
kind
of questions on the Private written exam is just another way to weed out
potential pilots.

I love these general and absolutely correct conclusions based upon a
statistical sampling of one.

Jay, so what percentage of people fail their knowledge tests? Then what
percentage of those people failed because of questions you believe shouldn't
be there. I think we'd be approaching 0-1% - at the most.

Hilton

Hilton wrote:

Jay, so what percentage of people fail their knowledge tests?Â*Â*ThenÂ*what
percentage of those people failed because of questions you believe
shouldn't be there.Â*Â*IÂ*thinkÂ*we'dÂ*beÂ*approachingÂ*0-1%Â*-Â*atÂ*theÂ*most.

In defense of this thread, I think you're asking the wrong question (or at
least you're missing one of the two questions). While your question is
reasonable, the other is "what is the cost of including these questions?"

It's not just an increased failure rate. It may also serve to keep people
from taking the test in the first place, either because it is "too hard" or
because it adds to the time required for the PPL and this passes beyond
certain individuals' personal thresholds' for the time they're willing to
spend.

While VORs are still the main electronic nav in many planes (including
rentals), I think that they need to stay on the test. But I would like to
see the test simplified *if* it would translate to more pilots.

- Andrew

Jay, so what percentage of people fail their knowledge tests? Then what
percentage of those people failed because of questions you believe
shouldn't
be there. I think we'd be approaching 0-1% - at the most.

Irrelevant.

The "failed pilots" we should be concerned about are the ones who fail
because they are so intimidated by the process that they never even take the
test.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
Since nowadays VFR pilots have little use for VORs, (I don't turn them
on -- ever -- except for the occasional practice VOR approach), to put
those
kind of questions on the Private written exam is just another way to weed
out
potential pilots.


Gee...when I took the written back in 1980, most of the questions were 1)
pilotage/dead-reckoning, 2) ADF, and 3) VOR, in that order. RNAV didn't
exist except in bizjets and DME was an analog display (50nm max range).

Your cross-country was supposed to be pilotage and using VOR's only for
cross-checking.

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 04:37:47 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in vyH7e.15254$xL4.5745@attbi_s72::

... to put those kind of questions on the Private written exam is just
another way to weed out potential pilots.

That's true. The potential pilots it weeds out are those who are
incapable of understanding VOR operations. Would you prefer to share
the skies with them?

Dumbing down the airman training curricula in blind fear of future
dwindling numbers in our ranks is a policy about as astute as
squandering tens of billions of dollars of tax payers' money waging
your daddy's war during a time when our nation's future citizens are
being so poorly educated that it's embarrassing if not freighting.
Fortunately, it is you, not me, who will have to live in that future
America.

Larry Dighera wrote:
[snip]
squandering tens of billions of dollars of tax payers' money waging
your daddy's war during a time when our nation's future citizens are
being so poorly educated that it's embarrassing if not freighting.

I aint poorly educated! I'm gonna be retrained using Federal
monies for my next job -- working at Home Depot.

blanche-unemployed for 6+ months
BA, MS (math)
MS (computer science)
almost PhuD (math & computer science)

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 04:37:47 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in vyH7e.15254$xL4.5745@attbi_s72::


... to put those kind of questions on the Private written exam is just
another way to weed out potential pilots.

That's true. The potential pilots it weeds out are those who are
incapable of understanding VOR operations. Would you prefer to share
the skies with them?

Actually, it doesn't even do that. There are what? Maybe 2 or 3 questions on the
test that deal with VORs? Anybody who flunks 'cause they missed those is also
missing a lot of other knowledge that they really should have.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

Jay Honeck wrote:
I was referring specifically to the pages and pages (ad nauseum) of study
questions that show you a VOR instrument, totally out of context with
anything else, and ask you to determine where you are in relation to the
transmitter.


So what? Is that difficult for you? Consider that an "easy" question that
counts against the finite number they can ask. It could be replaced with a
bunch of PITA airspace questions.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

Jay Honeck wrote:

[...]
I was referring specifically to the pages and pages (ad nauseum) of study
questions that show you a VOR instrument, totally out of context with
anything else, and ask you to determine where you are in relation to the
transmitter.

I've always thought of that as akin to unusual attitude work. It's practice
for something having already gone wrong.

First of all, if I'm flying along and the "black box" goes dead, I've been
following my position on my sectional -- so I have a pretty good idea
where
I am from the get-go.

Except that the GPS signal has been warped by some weird error in either the
signal or your box. You're not where you think you are.

Except you weren't flying. You were sleeping in the right seat. The pilot
was so shocked that the GPS screen went blank that he fainted, but not
before waking you up.

Except you're not sure whether you're approaching or past that nearby VOR.

- Andrew

I was referring specifically to the pages and pages (ad nauseum) of
study
questions that show you a VOR instrument, totally out of context with
anything else, and ask you to determine where you are in relation to
the
transmitter.

I think those questions are good because if you can't answer them
instantly and
easily, you're doing it the hard way. If you understand the VOR as a
"quadrature instrument" instead of (or in addition to) as a "course
instrument",
it's VERY easy.

I agree though that with a working GPS the VORs are pretty useless...
--
Cheers,
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ