Tall Vikings

Jim K

Jim K

Final Approach
PoA Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2019
Messages
5,913
Location
CMI
Display Name
Display name:
Richard Digits
Studying to take the commercial written. I used Gold Seal for my Private and Instrument ground school and really liked it, but they don't have a commercial course. I decided that I wasn't really a pilot having not taken a King course, so I went with them. Not that impressed; it's very much just teaching to the test questions rather than general knowledge, but maybe the checkride course covers more of that stuff. Gold Seal was a solid ground school where they taught everything, not just the test questions. John and Martha are fun and I'm enjoying seeing them in action more than anything.

Anyway, on the cross country planning module, John comes up with "Tall Vikings make dangerous company" as a way to remember the formula to get from true course to magnetic heading. WTF? Does that make sense to anyone?

He's pretty obsessed with the whiz wheel too. Not interested. Did that once and after 750 hours I've not found a single situation that I even needed an E6B at all, let alone a mechanical one. If the DPE expects me to use that thing I guess I'm just not going to be a commercial pilot. Life is too short.
 
isn't gold method the same as gold seal (although kinda weird to have the different names like that)? guess you're past that point anyways, but that's who I used for my comm written.
 
eman1200 said:
isn't gold method the same as gold seal (although kinda weird to have the different names like that)? guess you're past that point anyways, but that's who I used for my comm written.
Click to expand...
Looks like it. @write-stuff ...might want to link to the gold method site from groundschool.com...
 
Jim K said:
Looks like it. @write-stuff ...might want to link to the gold method site from groundschool.com...
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, on the gold method website:

6dee9a90a69db87d9a6bea30fca0edde.jpg


So, no real clue what’s going on.
 
Jim K said:
Studying to take the commercial written. I used Gold Seal for my Private and Instrument ground school and really liked it, but they don't have a commercial course. I decided that I wasn't really a pilot having not taken a King course, so I went with them. Not that impressed; it's very much just teaching to the test questions rather than general knowledge, but maybe the checkride course covers more of that stuff. Gold Seal was a solid ground school where they taught everything, not just the test questions. John and Martha are fun and I'm enjoying seeing them in action more than anything.

Anyway, on the cross country planning module, John comes up with "Tall Vikings make dangerous company" as a way to remember the formula to get from true course to magnetic heading. WTF? Does that make sense to anyone?

He's pretty obsessed with the whiz wheel too. Not interested. Did that once and after 750 hours I've not found a single situation that I even needed an E6B at all, let alone a mechanical one. If the DPE expects me to use that thing I guess I'm just not going to be a commercial pilot. Life is too short.
Click to expand...
True --> Variation --> Magnetic --> Deviation --> Compass
 
Is it whiz or wizz?

So this is a little bit written vs practical. In the written I used the whizzzz wheel all the way through the CFI tests.

On the practical - IIRC- it's all about planning. Once airborne changes/diversions are all about the mental math such as "what's the new heading" (dead reckoning) or the pilotage equivalent if you have enough landmarks and "will I have enough fuel to get there". I did end up backing up my mental math with my iPhone E6B app (I always fly with multiple redundancies).
 
My DPE didn’t make me use an E6B. I think most of them realize it’s all gone digital. I used Sheppard for the written. As long as you can explain what the difference between magnetic course and true course is and how you find it, then you’ll be good.
 
Jim K said:
He's pretty obsessed with the whiz wheel too. Not interested. Did that once and after 750 hours I've not found a single situation that I even needed an E6B at all, let alone a mechanical one.
Click to expand...

Got my private in 1993. Only used a whiz wheel, or electronic E6B for practical test taking.

And later on to teach students how to use one.
 
For actual flight planning, my CFIs and DPEs were perfectly happy for me to use an E6B phone app or ForeFlight. I bought a Sporty's electronic E6B for the written exams but didn't touch it; the one built into the test software was perfectly fine.

Just for fun, though, I do have several mechanical versions. I like to collect old slide rules, and E6Bs are just another part of the collection. My favorite is actually a WW2 era D-4 computer that's labeled "Property of US Army Air Forces." I just hope they don't come looking for it.

1711828939649.png​
 
Jim K said:
He's pretty obsessed with the whiz wheel too. Not interested. Did that once and after 750 hours I've not found a single situation that I even needed an E6B at all, let alone a mechanical one. If the DPE expects me to use that thing I guess I'm just not going to be a commercial pilot. Life is too short.
Click to expand...
It's a cool party trick to show someone how an abacus works.
 
asicer said:
You've got to be kidding me. :rolleyes:

I can already feel myself inching towards @midlifeflyer
Click to expand...
Oh, I never used the acronym or saying, I jusy remember from private, start with true on the chart, go to the -gonic lines to get magnetic heading then figure error to get compass reading.
 
Half Fast said:
For actual flight planning, my CFIs and DPEs were perfectly happy for me to use an E6B phone app or ForeFlight. I bought a Sporty's electronic E6B for the written exams but didn't touch it; the one built into the test software was perfectly fine.

Just for fun, though, I do have several mechanical versions. I like to collect old slide rules, and E6Bs are just another part of the collection. My favorite is actually a WW2 era D-4 computer that's labeled "Property of US Army Air Forces." I just hope they don't come looking for it.

Click to expand...

I have one like that, it also says Property Of US Army Air Forces. It is packed away somewhere but if I remember correctly it is/was for a B-17.
 
Jim K said:
Studying to take the commercial written. I used Gold Seal for my Private and Instrument ground school and really liked it, but they don't have a commercial course. ….
Click to expand...
It’s supposed to be out this summer.
 
EdFred said:
Oh, I never used the acronym or saying, I jusy remember from private, start with true on the chart, go to the -gonic lines to get magnetic heading then figure error to get compass reading.
Click to expand...
I meant “you” in the collective/colloquial sense, not singling anyone or any subgroup out.

And I did the same thing in private, but without an acronym. Once someone explained variation and deviation, it was obvious what needed to be done. I think a corny acronym would have just confused the matter.
 
True ± Variation - > Magnetic ± Deviation -> Course is what I remember, being too lazy to google.

Or as @IK04 properly remembered "true virgins make dull company"
 
When I was undergoing my final phase of flight training, my instructor, Lee Ragsdale, had me plan a flight in my Cherokee 140 from Fredericksburg VA to Knoxvilke TN. The object was to plan a flight that used all but 1/2 hour of available fuel and to land the airplane with 30 minutes of fuel remaining in the tanks. He also had me pick an alternate airport near my destination and two alternates along the route. Then I was to calculate required takeoff and landing distances at each of those 5 airports for the hottest part of the day, and compare that information to runway lengths to determine if normal or short field landing techniques should be used.

Does that sound like overkill to you? After completing this task I don't think so. In August of 2016 a fully loaded Bonanza attempted to land at KEZF without using short field landing techniques when they absolutely should have. Six people lost their lives including 2 high time commercial pilots. If they had done the above exercise before takeoff they would still be alive today.

www.kathrynsreport.com

Beechcraft 95-B55 (T-42A) Baron, registered to Ross and Company PLLC and operated by the pilot, N128VB: Fatal accident occurred August 12, 2016 near Shannon Airport (KEZF), Spotsylvania County, Virginia

The National Transportation Safety Board traveled to the scene of this accident. Additional Participating Entities: Federal Aviation Admi...
www.kathrynsreport.com www.kathrynsreport.com

Learn how to use the Wizz wheel, even if it is difficult, embrace what it can and cannot do for you. Always know if you need normal or short field landing techniques based on the airplane you are flying and atmospheric conditions. Understand the concepts it is trying to impart so that you never make the mistakes they did in Aug 2016. It might keep you alive one day.

Hope this helps.
 
Jim K said:
.......... I decided that I wasn't really a pilot having not taken a King course, so I went with them. .........
Click to expand...

That's funny. I remember buying a King course back in the 1990's...VHS Tapes I don't recall of that was PPL, instrument, or maybe even multi.
regardless, it's most definitely a "teach to the test" course, and not much more....
and yes, They are somewhat of an icon. A unique experience for sure. Even back then, they seemed like old-timers to me...complete with the corny dad-joke humor.
But I will admit to thinking that it was a helpful tool to pass the test. They had figured out a solution that works, and I reckon set a genre of their own!

Last year, I was looking to get checked out in a rental Cessna Skycatcher. I was looking around online for info regarding the type, and came across a King course on it. That course of course a few years old...looks to have been produced back when Cessna was still marketing that "next best trainer"
but I figured why not....if for no other reason that Nostalgia...so I watched the videos. The course was everything I thought it would be.
 
What does a flight planning/fuel consumption calculation on the whiz wheel have to do with runway length? And how is a 2900 foot runway a short field, even for a Baron? Of course, runway length had nothing to do with that crash. They were high and fast and botched the go-around.
 
William Pete Hodges said:
When I was undergoing my final phase of flight training, my instructor, Lee Ragsdale, had me plan a flight in my Cherokee 140 from Fredericksburg VA to Knoxvilke TN. The object was to plan a flight that used all but 1/2 hour of available fuel and to land the airplane with 30 minutes of fuel remaining in the tanks. He also had me pick an alternate airport near my destination and two alternates along the route. Then I was to calculate required takeoff and landing distances at each of those 5 airports for the hottest part of the day, and compare that information to runway lengths to determine if normal or short field landing techniques should be used.

Does that sound like overkill to you?
Click to expand...
Nope, that was normal training at the ''puppy mill'' I went to, and I made my students do the same.
 
Jim K said:
Studying to take the commercial written. I used Gold Seal for my Private and Instrument ground school and really liked it, but they don't have a commercial course. I decided that I wasn't really a pilot having not taken a King course, so I went with them. Not that impressed; it's very much just teaching to the test questions rather than general knowledge, but maybe the checkride course covers more of that stuff. Gold Seal was a solid ground school where they taught everything, not just the test questions. John and Martha are fun and I'm enjoying seeing them in action more than anything.

Anyway, on the cross country planning module, John comes up with "Tall Vikings make dangerous company" as a way to remember the formula to get from true course to magnetic heading. WTF? Does that make sense to anyone?

He's pretty obsessed with the whiz wheel too. Not interested. Did that once and after 750 hours I've not found a single situation that I even needed an E6B at all, let alone a mechanical one. If the DPE expects me to use that thing I guess I'm just not going to be a commercial pilot. Life is too short.
Click to expand...
Interesting... when I was learning... it was... TVMDC.. True Virgins Make Dull Company...
Of course, when I was learning... the "Apple Watch" was all Dick Tracy science fiction. Pocket Calculators? forgetaboutit

For my military flying, I had "Speed Dividers", the front side of the E6B was used for Mach Compression corrections and the back side or "wind side" for celestial corrections.
 
Close…

True
Virgins
Make
Dull
Companions

at weddings (add west)

Going the other way:

Can
Dead
Men
Vote
Twice

at elections (add east)
 
EdFred said:
Oh, I never used the acronym or saying, I jusy remember from private, start with true on the chart, go to the -gonic lines to get magnetic heading then figure error to get compass reading.
Click to expand...
Same.
 
ateamer said:
What does a flight planning/fuel consumption calculation on the whiz wheel have to do with runway length? And how is a 2900 foot runway a short field, even for a Baron? Of course, runway length had nothing to do with that crash. They were high and fast and botched the go-around.
Click to expand...
The wizz wheel also calculates density altitude. They were high and fast because they didn't realize they needed 1600 feet to roll to a stop, and didn't put the wheels on the ground until after they had used up 2000 feet of a 2900 ft runway. If it was 60F instead of 95F they might still be alive today. They needed to use a short field landing technique, and they didn't. Just 10 miles away was a 5000 ft runway they could have used without incident. It is all very sad.

It's not just learning to use the Wizz wheel, it is learning why you need the information it can prprovide. Every runway can be too short depending on what you are flying and the atmospheric conditions. Don't guess, KNOW.
 
Tools said:
Close…

True
Virgins
Make
Dull
Companions

at weddings (add west)

Going the other way:

Can
Dead
Men
Vote
Twice

at elections (add east)
Click to expand...
This is what I was taught when learning to navigate ships in the Navy. Someone must have gotten “offended” because the Navy changed it to Timely Vessels Make Distance Count at war.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2292.jpeg
    IMG_2292.jpeg
    173 KB · Views: 5
William Pete Hodges said:
The wizz wheel also calculates density altitude. They were high and fast because they didn't realize they needed 1600 feet to roll to a stop, and didn't put the wheels on the ground until after they had used up 2000 feet of a 2900 ft runway. If it was 60F instead of 95F they might still be alive today. They needed to use a short field landing technique, and they didn't. Just 10 miles away was a 5000 ft runway they could have used without incident. It is all very sad.

It's not just learning to use the Wizz wheel, it is learning why you need the information it can prprovide. Every runway can be too short depending on what you are flying and the atmospheric conditions. Don't guess, KNOW.
Click to expand...
Maybe some of you don't think about this the way I do. If you are going to use more than 1/2 of the runway to roll to a stop, then it becomes imperative to be on you game and put the wheels down on the first 25% of available runway space. That Baron fully loaded needed 1600 feet or more to roll to a stop on a 95F day. To me that means short field landing on a 2900 foot runway, or find a different airport, and they should have known that before takeoff. If you were the pilot at what point do you decide this short is too short? Or this short is just scary enough to be on my game?

I realize I am not saying this very well at all. This affected me greatly because EZF was my home airport at the time, and it was completely avoidable if they simply had done their homework beforehand.
 
William Pete Hodges said:
That Baron fully loaded needed 1600 feet or more to roll to a stop on a 95F day.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but the accident report reads like a botched go-around. The runway length would have mattered if they'd set down and run off the end, I agree. It looks like they landed long, bounced, then stalled and spun. They would have lived to try again had they done a safe go-around.

About 3 seconds later, as the airplane's speed decreased to 60 knots groundspeed, it pitched up then began a climbing left turn, while slowing to 54 knots groundspeed and a positive pitch of about 15.4°. About 30 seconds after beginning the climb, while on a heading of 198°, the pitch up and left roll increased rapidly immediately before impact.

Several witnesses observed the airplane on final approach to runway 24 at EZF. One witness stated that the airplane appeared "high" as it approached the runway and that it was traveling fast. Two other witnesses stated that airplane "landed long," bounced several times, and initiated a go-around. The witnesses reported that both engines seemed to be producing power.
Click to expand...
 
Half Fast said:
I understand your point, but the accident report reads like a botched go-around. The runway length would have mattered if they'd set down and run off the end, I agree. It looks like they landed long, bounced, then stalled and spun. They would have lived to try again had they done a safe go-around.
Click to expand...
Yes they missed the go around, but their real problem was they missed the approach!! The go around should have started just past the numbers, at about 25% of runway length, when they realized they were way too high and fast, not 3/4 down the runway that was all too short at that point. They approached like they had 6000 feet instead of 2900. They missed the approach and the go around because they were totally unprepared for a runway that short on that hot of a day. Thinking about it makes me sick it is so sad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top