Have you ever...

What will you do when that black box fails? I want to be able to use *any*
navigational equipment that happens to be in the plane I'm flying, and
*you'd* better be able to also ('cause I don't want you running into me
while you're trying to remember how it works).

When they disable the VOR network, *then* they should take all the
questions about it off the exams, but not until then.

I didn't say anything about not training pilots to use VORs, nor did I say
to take all VOR questions off the test.

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.

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. It's not like I'm going to turn on my VOR with NO
knowledge of where I am. I will know approximately where I am in relation
to the transmitter before I even turn it on (after all -- I will need my
sectional to even determine which VOR frequency to tune in -- duh), and will
thus be able to easily and quickly determine my position from/to it. From
that point on, reading a VOR needle is child's play.

The point is, get stupid "gotcha!" questions like these off the written
test. They are put there to confuse and eliminate candidates, nothing
more, nothing less -- and the knowledge they purport to "test" isn't even
represented well by the questions.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

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.

The point is, get stupid "gotcha!" questions like these off the written
test.

It's been a long time since I studied for the PPC written, but I don't recall a
single navigation question that was a "gotcha." Every single one had one
obviously correct answer that was obviously correct if you had any idea how the
things worked. Now, I took my written just before my 300 mile cross-country, so
I had been using a VOR for some time. If you found them to be "gotchas", I'd say
you didn't really have a handle on VOR navigation at the time.

As far as there being pages of study questions, that's simply because there are
ten study questions for every one that gets selected for the exam you take, and
all of those ten are basically the same. If you could've handled one, you
could've answered any of them.

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

It's been a long time since I studied for the PPC written, but I don't
recall a single navigation question that was a "gotcha." Every single one
had one obviously correct answer that was obviously correct if you had any
idea how the things worked. Now, I took my written just before my 300 mile
cross-country, so I had been using a VOR for some time. If you found them
to be "gotchas", I'd say you didn't really have a handle on VOR navigation
at the time.

As I said, I scored in the upper 90s, some ten years ago, and have no
trouble using VORs. But they *did* take a significant amount of time to get
proficient at using, and I hope that I'm the last generation of pilots to
have to rely on such an antiquated system for primary navigation.

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 wonder if VOR tracking is tested in the new Sport Pilot curriculum?
--
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.

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

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:20:56 -0400, Andrew Gideon
wrote in ne.com::

But I would like to see the test simplified *if* it would translate
to more pilots.

I would prefer that any changes to the airman's written test primarily
result in increased safety not numbers.

With the advent of GPS satellite navigation equipped aircraft it seems
more appropriate to _ADD_ GPS related questions to the test.

I would prefer that any changes to the airman's written test primarily
result in increased safety not numbers.

I'm not sure what can be added to a written exam that will increase the
safety of a pilot in the air -- but I'd entertain suggestions.

With the advent of GPS satellite navigation equipped aircraft it seems
more appropriate to _ADD_ GPS related questions to the test.

On the surface this appears more logical than asking about VORs, but asking
about GPS is still testing OPTIONAL knowledge. To fly, all you really need
is a sectional map and a compass -- and I know guys who fly safely without
*those*.

Again, do we want to make flying more accessible, or are we trying to keep
it exclusive? I fear that if we continue to weed people out, we will find
ourselves more and more alone at the airports as the early Baby Boomers --
who make up a huge percentage of active pilots -- start to die out.

And when that happens, what happens to the FBOs? The avionics guys?
Airport funding? We're already fighting to "only" lose one airport every
14 days in this country -- and it will only get worse. We need more
pilots.

Sport Pilot will hopefully be the answer, but I'm not holding my breath.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

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"

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:40:17 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
5vP7e.16612$xL4.10899@attbi_s72::

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.

I would prefer not to share the sky with those individuals, thanks.

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.

I would prefer not to share the sky with those individuals, thanks.

That's just crap.

Walk into your airport today, Larry, with the eyes of a newbie. Try to
imagine knowing NOTHING about flying, and trying to get your foot in the
door. Imagine trying to know Step One to learning to fly, just by standing
in your airport terminal building.

It's intimidating as hell, even at most uncontrolled fields. At a Class C
airport, you might as well be trying to break into Area 51.

In fact, it's so intimidating that people don't even consider the fact that
they MIGHT be able to fly, let alone wonder who to speak with about it.
It's a terrible situation.

Without a mentor, most new pilots never get started. We've made airports so
inaccessible that flying has become like some sort of priesthood, where you
must be inducted into it by the Elders.

We're not Jedi Knights. While I love the thought that what I do is special,
and that I've got knowledge that very few others have, we've simply got to
get past this ego thing if general aviation is to survive.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:40:17 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
5vP7e.16612$xL4.10899@attbi_s72::