Learning to fly, or thinking of learning? Post your questions, comments and experiences here

Moderator: AndyR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 11
By ericgreveson
#1908820
I think there is an implicit 'which of the following answers...' in every theory question as they're all multiple choice. Sometimes there might be more than one 'correct' answer but you have to pick the 'most correct' out of the answers given. Sometimes you can even 'game the system' and use the given answers to speed up getting the right answer (especially for numeric answers in later exams). But I would say for this specific question, if FL35 had been an option, it would have been a correct answer - unless you were also given a QNH or similar that then made it such that [usermention=25776]@FlyingBoot[/usermention]'s answer was needed!
Hexsplosions liked this
User avatar
By GrahamB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1908827
I’m surprised that the question used the term ‘heading’ when it’s actually magnetic track that determines whether to fly at an odd or even altitude/FL +500.

As to whether you use altitude or Flight Level, that is determined by whether you are below the Transition Altitude or not, i.e. above it you use FL. That is where the local QNH matters as it determines the lowest FL available.
User avatar
By StratoTramp
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1908829
Started mid 30's never realised how affordable (if not cheap) 3-axis microlights were. If I had I would have started 10+ years back! Maybe even done my commercial. Maybe a bit late now, but I can deffo afford it as a hobby now!

Plenty of years left. Look forward to seeing you at some flyouts. I still have to sort Solo Nav & GST but I am pretty confident I can do it now when I find the time. Total turn around from imposter syndrome last year.

Enjoy the journey, It's been 2 years for me, I lost 6 months with the lockdown but will get my licence this year. I think the best part is where you just start flying (similar to learning to drive where previously you had to consciously think about changing gears - now it is automatic, and you can spend more time predicting other threats rather than thinking how do I fly this thing!)
Hexsplosions, T6Harvard liked this
#1908834
ericgreveson wrote:
> I think there is an implicit 'which of the following answers...' in every
> theory question as they're all multiple choice.

Having gone back and read the question again, a few times, I think this is the case. It’s a learning point in its own right though, so now I know.
ericgreveson liked this
User avatar
By Milty
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1908839
If I understand it correctly, that part of air law no longer applies anyway so it may not be in the exam. I’m waiting to be shot down.
By FlyingBoot
#1908862
For VFR, the semi-circular rule (it used to be quadrantal rule) is a recommendation rather than a law. I believe it is used on the continent (please correct if I am wrong) so probably isn't a bad idea to get used to it if ever you are thinking of crossing the channel. It could come up in Air Nav though.
T6Harvard, ericgreveson liked this
User avatar
By T6Harvard
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1908882
Does the question state what the QNH is? Without that you cannot determine your pressure altitude or anything else. Did the question start by telling you your altitude and then ask you to find the appropriate FL under VFR?

As you know, FL is just what your altimeter reads if you set standard pressure, 1013 hPa as the datum. If the pressure is, in reality, different you need to do a simple calc to find the pressure altitude (ie, how high up you actually are amsl ). Adding or subtracting 30' per 1hPa difference to give you your pressure altitude.

IIRC the exam questions usually use a higher-than-ISA-pressure to make sure the first FL is inappropriate :roll: Eg, if the QNH is 1026 hPa with indicated alt 3000', doing the calc finds
1026 - 1013 = 13 hPa.
13 hPa x 30' = 390' difference.

As you'd wind off the datum down from 1026 to get to SPS 1013 so you take off the 390' from your altimeter reading to find pressure alt. Oh look, you are lower than you thought!

So start at the 3000' transition level, then remember that you are not ACTUALLY as high as you need to be by 390', so FL35 is not appropriate. You have to take the next appropriate FL up, depending on your magnetic track* (ie, correct your heading for any stated variation before checking whether you need to be using Odds or Evens plus 500' !).

*all the questions I've seen remain silent on Wind so assume Magnetic Heading corrected for variation is your Magnetic Track.

(It's taken me ages to type that because HeliMed was looking for a field to land in so I've curtain-twitching. They considered the one right in front of our house but the cows were in the way)
Hexsplosions liked this
User avatar
By Hexsplosions
#1908887
T6Harvard wrote:
> Does the question state what the QNH is? Without that you cannot determine
> your pressure altitude or anything else. Did the question start by telling
> you your altitude and then ask you to find the appropriate FL under VFR?

No, it doesn't. I think that's what threw me so much. I put the exact question in my post to avoid any confusion caused by my own paraphrasing: "What is the correct semi-circular cruising level to adopt for a VFR aircraft maintaining a heading of 055 degrees M?"

My brain said "FL 35" whereas that wasn't an option for the question. The options were FL 40, FL 45, FL 50 and FL 55. It confused me because I couldn't understand why it wasn't FL 35. I think [usermention=25756]@ericgreveson[/usermention] got it spot on in that it's an implied "which of these is valid" question. I think it would be better worded as "Which of these is the correct..." (multiple choice, 3 wrong, 1 right) rather than "What is the correct..." which is confusing.

Mind boggled. :lol:
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1908890
It's worth making sure you say to yourself, "What are they REALLY asking about here?" even for apparently simple questions.
In your example they are asking if you know that the correct cruising level is not one, the lowest possible, but is repeated higher up. The fact that they didn't mention QNH in the question is a clue that it's a bit more involved than the obvious. It's a clever question because it needs two bits of knowledge to understand it.
You'll find this is true many times in the exams if you look for it.
Setting multiple choice questions that can test your understanding of the subject, rather than just getting you to spot the answer from four options, is difficult.
Hexsplosions liked this
By FlyingBoot
#1908932
I tried the 'what are they really asking' technique on a practice question and failed. The question was,

Roll can be controlled by
a) Flaps
b) spoilerons
c) air brakes
d) ruddervator

The correct answer was b with the statement 'on some aircraft the spoilers can be operated independently reducing the lift on one wing only, causing the aircraft to roll towards that wing'. This I did actually know

Well, fair enough, but it requires independent spoilerons not just spoilerons. The only answer that I think is correct without any additional qualification is ruddervator as it can produce yaw which leads to roll. I would put 'always leads to roll' but I am sure someone will find a case where it doesn't such as if you also put in opposite aileron but a similar argument could be made for the spoilerons.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1908967
ericgreveson wrote:
> Aren't spoilerons by definition able to be operated independently to
> provide roll control? Otherwise they would just be called spoilers I think.
> The '-on' suffix is the key...

Yes.
Read the question very carefully - there are not often irrelevant pieces of information in it (except sometimes there are when part of the intent of the question setter is to test your knowledge that it is irrelevant - so I go back to my earlier advice of asking yourself what is the question really getting at. So, for example, why does this question call them spoilerons, not spoilers? That's not irrelevant and is part of what they were asking)
Hexsplosions liked this
By FlyingBoot
#1909026
Mmmm. There I was thinking that roll can be controlled by inducing yaw with a ruddervator which then gives roll does it not. I think my point was more that there another answer there that couls also be correct.

Funny thing is, aerodynamics and the actual theory of control and flight I have no problem with. It is trying to remember the random names that seem to be given that usually foxes me. After all, if you had differential flaps you would be able to control roll. In fact, it seems such a good idea that I am going to patent it.

Oh, they exist as flaperons. Might have to call them aileraps instead. For V-tail aircraft I can patent elevaders.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 11