Trick Questions

[Big Pistons Forever]

Just for fun I gave my Air Cadets a unit test where most of the answers were the same (D I think) - it made the smart ones extremely uncomfortable.

That is just evil

On second thought you should edit your post, we don't want to give TC any ideas

[Shiny Side Up]

Perhaps I am alone on this, but I firmly believe
that trick questions DO NOT belong on the PPL,
CPL or (gasp) IFR written tests.

Here is an example of a good written test question,
that measures PPL-level aviation knowledge:

In a traditional light single engine trainer aircraft equipped
with a vacuum pump, what instruments could you expect
to malfunction after a complete electrical system failure?

1) airspeed indicator
2) altimeter
3) attitude indicator and heading indicator
4) gas gauges and turn co-ordinator

I hate to point out to you the heavy irony present here in that you've asked a question that would stump a fair number of new PPLs, and that they would consider a "trick" question. Given that consideration I certainly don't envy anyone making such tests.

First trick: What is a "traditional" light single engine trainer? Does that mean tube fabric taildragger? Does it mean aluminum Cessna? or are we talking about a plastic Diamond?
Second trick: Why do you specify vacuum pump when this is clearly a question about the electrical system?
Third Trick: What do you mean by complete electrical system failure? Do we still have battery power?

Being tricksy I tells ya'. Different answers given different considerations. Either way, the point is that to really eliminate any question over what the correct answer is, you must be a lot more specific, which is going to require a longer worded question, and we know how potential pilots feel about reading more. I would guarantee that even what you view as a simple straight forward question, at least half of the potential PPLs out there would have issue with, especially if someone didn't sit down with them (or said question and correct answer) and make clear the assumptions present.

At the end of it, some subjects really aren't written test type questions. It belongs heavily in the practical testing regime. Systems knowledge, meteorology, and flight planning fall into this category. I would happily see flight tests extended if we could omit these sections from the written. The written test should really focus on the CARs and stuff that as pilots one should consider critical need to memorize knowledge. The way things are done though are because we hate to admit that as bad as the written test may be, most of the populace would feel it horribly unfair if they were to be grilled on said knowledge it tests in person and it being laid to judgement of said person.

Its all about everything being fair right?

[photofly]

Would it still be a fair question if the candidate had only ever flown a G1000-equipped aircraft, like a new 172?(http://www.cessna.com/single-engine/skyhawk)

Would it be fair to ask a candidate who had only ever flown a steam-gauge aircraft what instrument indications would be lost on failure of the flux gate magnetometer?

I don't think I have a good answer to that.

[Shiny Side Up]

My point exactly.

We're stuck with said written test though, because a 25% chance of getting an unfair question right is viewed as more fair than having someone in person tell someone their wrong in their judgement. That way we can blame the big bad government when someone doesn't know stuff rather than a mean ol' examiner. Part of the reason the flight test is so watered down too.

[Colonel Sanders]

I am happy to hear that all ab initio flight training
in Canada is now performed in glass cockpit trainers
like the Cirrus, and that all those old six-pack Cessnas
and Pipers have been scrapped and no one flies them
any more.

[davecessna]

I am happy to hear that all ab initio flight training
in Canada is now performed in glass cockpit trainers
like the Cirrus, and that all those old six-pack Cessnas
and Pipers have been scrapped and no one flies them
any more.

I earned my PPL-A in November flying ONLY 6 pack instruments. Granted, not ab initio. In fact, during the required solo x-country, my vacuum pump failed. Thank the lord Eastern Ontario is such a rich tapestry of easily identifiable landmarks.

[Colonel Sanders]

Wouldn't it be nice if PPL's flying the now-rare
six-pack trainers, knew which flight instruments
depend on vacuum, and which depend on electricity,
and which depend on neither?

That's all I was shooting for. No trick question.
Just a tiny bit of systems knowledge, to understand
what's going to happen, when the vacuum or electrons
go away. They're allowed to.

You simply wouldn't believe the number of PPL
candidates that I talk to, that think that the engine
will stop running if the master is turned off in flight

They understand that little about the fuel and
ignition systems, which horrifies me. I hasten to
add that I do NOT ask a PPL to describe the difference
between CAR 3b and FAR part 23.

I would never dream of asking them about older
Cessnas and Pipers with venturis on the side of
the cabin, because they will never fly them.

I know I am a Bad Person, but when I give someone
a type checkout, I love to hand them a pad of paper
and a pen, and ask them to draw the fuel system.

[Colonel Sanders]

Here are a couple of fuel system diagrams:

[Shiny Side Up]

Well....

Actually technically your question also discriminates against people who learned on airplanes without electrical systems, and airplanes with other alternate set ups. For example I know of one fellow I trained in a Citabria that had an electrically powered AI and DG installed.

I'm just trying to make th epoint that formulating a multiple choice question ain't as easy as somemight surmise. We're going to have a lot of different pilots from differnt backgrounds each with differing levels of learning ability. I personally would be suprised if it was even possible to get more than a 50% approval on any concesus of a written test.

I know I am a Bad Person, but when I give someone
a type checkout, I love to hand them a pad of paper
and a pen, and ask them to draw the fuel system.

But we're not talking specific type check outs here, we're talking about general knowledge for licenses. When someone gets their PPL we're assuming that they should have a wide range of knowledge about all the possible types because, lets face it, that license lets them hop in any of the things we've decribed. A PPL holder technically should be well versed on the systems of a tube and fabric, no electric taildragger to a plastic glass panel nosedragger and everything in between.

In most circles though, that would be considered unfair to require.

Maybe we should consider changing the testing process so its more specific, but then also issue specific licenses. For example, if you want an easier test, you can get a PPL that is limited to flying C172 only, or DA-20 only.

More rules will make it better, right?

[Colonel Sanders]

a Citabria that had an electrically powered AI and DG installed

Betcha it didn't have a vacuum pump
(see original question)

I think it is reasonable for a PPL to be required
to understand the basic operation and failure
modes of:

- pitot-static instruments
- vacuum-powered gyroscopic flight instruments
- light aircraft electrical systems
- light aircraft fuel systems
- light aircraft cabin heating systems

because that's what his PPL allows him to fly, without
any further checkout or training.

You could argue that a PPL that learned to fly at an
uncontrolled airport shouldn't be tested on controlled
airport procedures, but I'm not buying it.

Everyone learns under slightly different circumstances
and depending upon what they were, they may have to
do a little extra studying to learn about aircraft systems,
airspace, procedures, regulations, etc which they can
reasonably expect to have to deal with, as a PPL.

But the test questions (and answers) should be simple
and straightforward, with no trickery, double negatives
or knowledge of Margaret Atwood required.

a PPL that is limited to flying C172 only, or DA-20 only

Certified aircraft have sufficiently docile handling that
I think we both agree that's overkill.

However note that in the USA, the FAA requires training
and a logbook endorsement for:

- tailwheel aircraft
- retractable gear
- over 200 hp
- high altitude

Oddly enough, not for aerobatics.

[Shiny Side Up]

You could argue that a PPL that learned to fly at an
uncontrolled airport shouldn't be tested on controlled
airport procedures, but I'm not buying it.

But I'm willing to be if you took most PPL students, hell even most CPL students and made them do their test at an unfamiliar airport (student of controlled at an uncontrolled place, or vice versa, doesn't matter) holy hell would they be squawking about the unfairness of it all. This is my point I'm trying to get out there. Remember that its not you and I governing how this runs, its joe-wants-to-be-a-pilot who does. As such the testing both written and practical, ends up being so disappointing. Deep down it is designed to be fair at the expense of being inconclusive.

I see things every day, where one might argue that said stupid thing a pilot did, was something that he probably should have been tested on but either a) failed that part of the test,or b) wasn't tested on that at all.

I've long been of the opinion that our testing method is inadequate for pilot's licenses, and a lot of it stems from the demand of what the test should be, it empasizes fairness over quality assurance.

Betcha it didn't have a vacuum pump
(see original question)

Exactly. Which answer would he have picked then, if we assume he has no knowledge then of what instruments may be vacuum powered? Which instruments for him are electrical, that he would have lost? Does he assume that, without a wider knowledge of the small piston civil fleet, that his set up is "traditional" or not? Tube and fabric, it sounds like he has a traditional airplane, no?

[Colonel Sanders]

he has no knowledge then of what instruments may be vacuum powered?

The vast majority of light single-engine aircraft
in Canada (Cessna, Piper, Beechcraft, Maule, etc)
have six-pack instruments, with a vacuum pump
driving the AI and HI, and an electrically-driven
TC or T&B.

They have an ALT and VSI and ASI which will
continue to function after complete electrical
and vacuum failure - they are all connected
to the static port, and the ASI is connected
to the pitot tube.

The above is essential systems knowledge
for a PPL to operate any of these aircraft, which
is a privilege of his PPL.

Sure, there are some different arrangements
but that's why certified aircraft are required to
have a POH/AFM describing their systems and
operation thereof.

Electrical systems are similarly fair game. It's
reasonable to expect that the vast majority of
aircraft will have
- a battery
- a starter
- an alternator or generator
- a voltage regulator
- circuit breakers or fuses
- a master switch
and a PPL should have a rudimentary understanding
of them, too. Fair game for written.

Cabin heating system knowledge is also essential
knowledge for the written test. This is NOT a taboo
subject.

Fuel systems are absolutely fair game, despite the
variations. They all have fuel caps and vents and
a method of priming. Again, fair game for written
test, with clear, simple questions like:

"What can happen if you forget to put the fuel cap
back on after refuelling?"

"If you lose a fuel cap, can you just replace it with
one that fits?"

"What can happen if you don't lock a primer knob?"

"What is the major source of water in the fuel?"

"What is the difference in the preflight of an aircraft
which flew 5 minutes ago, vs an aircraft that's been
parked outside and hasn't flown in 11 months?"

"What is the difference in the preflight of an aircraft
that has just come out of inspection, vs one that is
just going in for inspection?"

This is all really important knowledge. This can kill
a PPL if he doesn't do it right. That's what needs to
be on the written.

[davecessna]

Wouldn't it be nice if PPL's flying the now-rare
six-pack trainers, knew which flight instruments
depend on vacuum, and which depend on electricity,
and which depend on neither?

That's all I was shooting for. No trick question.
Just a tiny bit of systems knowledge, to understand
what's going to happen, when the vacuum or electrons
go away. They're allowed to.

You simply wouldn't believe the number of PPL
candidates that I talk to, that think that the engine
will stop running if the master is turned off in flight

They understand that little about the fuel and
ignition systems, which horrifies me. I hasten to
add that I do NOT ask a PPL to describe the difference
between CAR 3b and FAR part 23.

I would never dream of asking them about older
Cessnas and Pipers with venturis on the side of
the cabin, because they will never fly them.

I know I am a Bad Person, but when I give someone
a type checkout, I love to hand them a pad of paper
and a pen, and ask them to draw the fuel system.

The flight examiner from TC made me draw the fuel system. He also asked me which instruments were powered electrically on a 152 (turn n' bank and the VOR). He also asked me what Mode-C meant, and then followed up by asking me which type of altitude was reported by it.

I guess we're so poor in Quebec we have no choice but to do things the old fashioned way.

[Pop n Fresh]

which type of altitude was reported by it.

That's hard core. I know it would be an uncorrected pressure altitude but I don't know what else to say about it.

[davecessna]

which type of altitude was reported by it.

That's hard core. I know it would be an uncorrected pressure altitude but I don't know what else to say about it.

I wasn't trying to come off as if it was a difficult question, but I've known people to forget the formula that describes Newton's 2nd Law in an exam due to nerves.

[Pop n Fresh]

Sorry. I wasn't trying to be smarmy. Was my answer all he wanted? I thought he would be looking for more.

[Pop n Fresh]

Just googled mode c. I was imagining a better article about how they work. I thought someone had posted a Wikipedia link that was really thorough but now I can't find it. Again sorry if it sounded like I was mocking you davecessna.

[cap41]

Whats the answer to the original question. My C150 has an electric T&B therefor I answer 4!

[davecessna]

I misread your post as sarcasm. No, he just asked me all that in quick succession as I was going over procedures in my head doing the walk-around.

i.e. Which instruments are connected to the pitot-static system, show me where the aileron mass balance is and what does it do, which instruments are powered by vacuum/electric.

I really liked the guy, he even threw me a bit of an unexpected curve; he yelled about halfway back to the airport that my engine was on fire, do something. I hesitated for a second, thinking what is the correct procedure. He just said, "hint, we need speed", so I dropped the nose down in a fast dive. He then said, "ok that didn't work, put her down". I immediately raised the nose and went into a slip, white-arc'd, dumped the flaps and put us on a nice approach for a field. The initial hesitation wasn't there anymore. You can bet your ass if that ever happens again I will be ready. I hope every new PPL gets a chance to fly with a guy like that at some point.

[Pop n Fresh]

It sounded ok when I thought he was looking for some intricate avionics technical answer I could not think of but scary at the same time.

I just thought he knew you were very well prepared and asked really tough questions.

Much better question now that I may have answered right.