lstorm2003

I Didn't mean to touch a nerve here, my apologies if I did... I'm just speaking from a practical standpoint. In fact, I didn't even think of that line about "written tests harassing rather than teaching" myself, it was actually something that Richard Collins wrote (Former Editor / Editor in Chief - Flying Magazine + Publisher & Editor AOPA Pilot Magazine) which I happen to agree with.

I didn't broadly bash the FAA test writers, I made a general statement about the tests. I'm quite certain that the "advanced pilots who write these tests" are quite capable and bright.... They just need a crack at freshening up the tests.

If you take a step back and look at the tests objectively, you will probably realize that a few questions on the test, ok I said "lots" in my earlier post, but certainly a few have the look and feel of that 1979 fake wood paneling that they used to put on everything from dashboards & wallpaper, to the sides of cars.

Now... I'm not saying there is zero value in learning how to calculate the time en route to the station if the relative bearing changes from 120 degrees to 130 degrees in 1.5 minutes, I'm just saying its very likely that no one will ever do this in real world flying unless it is for a demonstration.

Why not add some questions that actually are more relevant to flying today? That I know of, there are no questions about Glass Panels, RNAV, GPS, DUATS, WAAS, or Online resources like ADDS, and fltplan.com. There are no questions on Electronic Attitude Heading and Reference Systems, or integrated autopilots that are common in many aircraft today. I could think of a few good and relevant questions where the test could ask what might happen to an aircraft that starts to pick up ice where the pilot has set vertical speed climb mode on the autopilot... Or how about a question or two on RAIM? These are certainly things worthy of a pilots attention and learning, are they not?

How about some case studies on accidents that have happened in the past? Write out the narrative of some accidents where new pilots could learn from mistakes of other pilots, then ask some questions about them. This is an area where I really think the FAA lacks. I've spent a lot of time over the years studying and learning about many many aviation accidents. I want to know the what/when/why/how of things that have happened to others in the past and apply the lessons learned to my own every day flying. I've learned a great deal from this and I think others could benefit as well.

I really meant no disrespect with my comments, I just personally feel that the FAA written tests could be improved to teach more practical and relevant lessons.

SkyHigh

Cubdriver,

You are an engineer aren't you? To the rest of us all that high mathematics does not make any sense.

My father is an aerospace and electrical engineer. He can take apart a VOR and put it back together again. He can accurately explain how the signal works and show you complex mathematical formulas on its function. The problem comes when I ask him to turn it on, tune it in and track to the station.

In college they had us learn all this complex mathematics on aerodynamics. We were told that it was impossible to fly a transport category plane without it. In fact once I left college I never encountered a math problem in aviation again other then one of simple addition and subtraction.

When an engineer sees the world it is all broken down into expressions of mathematics and that is great. The rest of us memorize the answers and move on. Remember that when you try to explain aspects of fight to your next student using math and get a blank stare in return.

The stick in "stick and rudder" is not referring to a pencil.

Skyhigh

My advice to the OP is to throw away the Gliem and get a Jeppesen book that has lots of big colorful pictures and memorize the correct answer for the test. It is what people do who want to pass the test.

PearlPilot

Thanks, Cub!

nciflyer

I don't think Cub meant the phrase "mental exercise" implied complex equations with trig, calculus, etc.

Mental exercises are good because they show how to approach a particular subject from many different angles which in turn heightens our understanding and critical thinking. The time and distance to VOR problems are a mental exercise and meant to add one more tool to our mental toolbox. Even if a particular tool is never used it still helps us learn and appreciate its place among better tools.

About education… Education is taking the concept of mental exercises above and beyond to develop exceptional knowledge and the quest for learning, even with those tough courses. If we want an education that only shows us what we absolutely need to know for a particular job then it's not an education, it's job training. I'm not saying job training is bad, I'm just saying it should not be confused with a university education. Do the degree to get an education (to learn) which helps earn consideration/respect for internships. Do the internships to get job training and then a job. It seems like an ok system to me.

I'd like to think that's why education shown on resumes is valuable. It's valuable because it exhibits exceptional knowledge, problem solving ability, time management, and the desire to learn. Otherwise, if an interviewer thinks college educations aren't valuable then that lowers the value of the job applicant and in turn lowers the value of the job.

Great diagrams really make the subjects easier to understand. Also, in the end if one understands the subject then they'll be able to blow the examiner away on the checkride because they didn't give a canned answer. Memorizing is certainly essential for many areas too...

USMCFLYR

Did your father actually design and/or maintain VORs?
Out of all of the Ground Electronic Technicians/Ground Navaid Technicians that I have met in my job so far, including the ones who have come over to the Flight Inspection side of the business, I've never met one so far that has degrees in Aeronautical and Electrical Engineering.
Are you saying that he was such a technical person that you are sure he COULD HAVE taken one apart and put it back together while explaining the intricacies of its' function?

Time/Distance/Headings, Time to Go, Fuel Burn, Fuel Remaining, Loiter Time, ETA, ETE, etc.... are all mental exercises that are useful to everyday flying - general or professional. At the same time there are numerous outdated technologies and ideas involved in the FAA written tests and some certainly need to be cleaned out and updated. Of course this is easier said than done with the wide breath of knowledge that is suppose to be tested across all facets of aviation. Skyhigh uses the example of Celestial navgation and Morse Code as examples of requirements in the not so distant past that were essential for serious aviators. I only know of ONE guy whom I work with that knows Morse Code and NO ONE that I know of has any idea of Celestial Nav
I think I do a pretty good job in my own studying and preparing for which topics I need a deeper understanding of and which topics I can essentailly meorize the answer and move on. I would hope that each of us could make that same distinction in our own careers - which could likely change over time too.

lstorm2003 - you have some great ideas where this test should go. Maybe you should try to put it to use. Here are two sites that would list job opportunities with the FAA:
USAJOBS - The Federal Government's Official Jobs Site
FAA Career Opportunities

USMCFLYR