IFR Knowledge Test Answer Discrepancy

AirDC

AirDC

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
373
Location
Washington, DC
Display Name
Display name:
Andrew
I noticed while taking some practice exams this week with both Sporty's (iphone app) and Gleim IFR Knowledge Course that an identical question came up with different correct answers being given by each company.

I emailed both companies, and the chief instructors from each defended their respective answers. Just curious if anyone actually saw this question on the test, and what the actual right answer was. I'm taking the exam on Saturday morning. Other questions like this with unclear answers?

The Question (13. PLT083 IRA)

(Refer to figure 49 below) When conducting a missed approach from the LOC/DME RWY 21 approach at PDX, what is the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) while maneuvering between the runway and BTG VORTAC?

A - 4,000 feet MSL.
B - 3,400 feet MSL.
C - 6,100 feet MSL.

dHDFecR.jpg


Gleim Response

Hi Andrew,

I hope you are doing well today.

It is a bit of a trick question. The MSA for that particular area is depicted as 3,400 feet. If the question stated what is the Minimum Safe Altitude for maneuvering between the runway and the BTG VOR than 3,400 feet would be the correct answer. In this case however the question specifies the maneuvering is being conducted as part of the missed approach procedure, which would raise the MSA to 4,000 feet, the lowest altitude permitted for the return to the VOR on the missed approach segment.

Thank you, have a great day, and fly safely!

Scott
Part 141 Chief Instructor
Gleim Internet, Inc.
2nd response

All of these questions always come back to the "most right" answer. In this case there is nothing in the regulations, the AIM, or the IFHB that specifically deals with an MSA that is lower than the altitude specified in the MAP. It is however stated in the AIM and the IFHB the MSA depicted on IAP charts is for emergency use and navigation reception is not guaranteed.

Can I find conclusive evidence to back up my answer? No I can not. I do believe that is the answer the FAA is looking for, since there is no mention of anything abnormal in the question. Sporty's may have a different opinion so I would try asking them, I would be interested in hearing how they explain their answer. I would answer 4,000 feet if I was taking the test.

Scott
3rd Response
​
(redacted a couple paragraphs)

So what should you do if this question comes up on the test? In my expert opinion, I am going to recommend that you flip a coin. I will continue to research the issue and see if I can learn more.

Scott

​
Sporty's Response

The correct answer is 3,400’. The circle in the lower right corner of the plan view shows the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) around BTG as 6,100' and 3,400'. Since the runway is southwest of BTG, the MSA is 3,400'.

As defined by the FAA in the Instrument Flying Handbook (IFH), the Minimum safe altitude (MSA) is the minimum altitude depicted on approach charts which provides at least 1,000 feet of obstacle clearance for emergency use within a specified distance from the listed navigation facility. There is no mention of it changing based upon where you are in the approach. It only changes based upon the sector where you are in relation to the navigation facility.

Also from IFH: The MSA circle appears in the plan view, except in approaches for which the Terminal Arrival Area (TAA) format is used or appropriate NAVAIDs (e.g., VOR or NDB are unavailable. The MSA is provided for emergency purposes only and guarantees 1,000 feet obstruction clearance in the sector indicated with reference to the bearings in the circle. For conventional navigation systems, the MSA is normally based on the primary omnidirectional facility (NAVAID) on which the IAP is predicated. The MSA depiction on the approach chart contains the facility identifier of the NAVAID used to determine the MSA altitudes. For RNAV approaches, the MSA is based on the runway waypoint for straight-in approaches, or the airport waypoint for circling approaches. For GPS approaches, the MSA center header will be the missed approach waypoint. The MSL altitudes appear in boxes within the circle, which is typically a 25 NM radius unless otherwise indicated. The MSA circle header refers to the letter identifier of the NAVAID or waypoint that describes the center of the circle.

4,000’ is the altitude that the pilot should climb to during the missed approach but it is not the MSA. Mr. Gleim’s instructor is correct in that you would climb to this altitude as part of the missed approach but appears to be confusing the terms. The MSA is the MSA as listed on the approach chart. The missed approach altitude and the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) are two different terms and the mention of the missed approach is a distracter used by the FAA. The mention of the missed approach does not make the missed approach altitude the MSA while on the missed approach. They are different things and have different uses as indicated by the MSA definition.

The FAA does not provide correct answers to any of their sample questions. We simply must use the available resources from the FAA to determine the correct answers.

If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me directly via this Email address.

Best Regards,

Paul
Chief Instructor

ASA Opinion (found via google) - 4,000'
See last question on this PDF
http://www.asa2fly.com/files/updates/TP-I_Update_0612.pdf
 
I agree with the Gleim/ ASA response. The experts will be along soon to debate this until all of PoA has a common mind.
 
Interesting question for sure. I would have answered it 3400. The question does talk about the missed, but specifically says (MSA).
 
I would go with Sportys response.
The question is asking you what is the Minimum Safe Altitude ?

Minimum Safe Altitudes identify areas of obstruction refuge while your in an emergency situation and are a very important part of your approach brief along with the missed approach procedure. I think the missed approach part of the question is the distractor .

Keep it simple...what is MSA between PDX and Battleground ? 3400

Edit. in response to Gleim , how would the MSA be "raised" just because Im on a missed approach procedure? Ex . So I lose an engine/coms on the missed approach and cannot comply with the procedure.
Because Im on a missed does that now mean I could hit something at 3400 around the BTG sector in question but not at 4000 ? Of course not. I would get above MSA 3400 and proceed with securing my emergency.
 
Last edited:
taters said:
I would go with Sportys response.
The question is asking you what is the Minimum Safe Altitude ?

Minimum Safe Altitudes identify areas of obstruction refuge while your in an emergency situation and are a very important part of your approach brief along with the missed approach procedure. I think the missed approach part of the question is the distractor .

Keep it simple...what is MSA between PDX and Battleground ? 3400

Edit. in response to Gleim , how would the MSA be "raised" just because Im on a missed approach procedure? Ex . So I lose an engine/coms on the missed approach and cannot comply with the procedure. Because Im on a missed does that now mean I will hit something at 3400 around the BTG sector in question but not at 4000 ? Of course not. I would get above MSA 3400 and proceed with securing my emergency.
Click to expand...
And you're aware that MSA includes a 1,000ft buffer, right?
 
Jaybird180 said:
And you're aware that MSA includes a 1,000ft buffer, right?
Click to expand...

Of course but that's outlined in the OP and trying to keep response simple with regard to the question
 
Doh! I just happened to have been reading FAA 8083-15A yesterday, so this is a good exercise for me.
 
I read this question a bit differently. It says when conducting the missed approach "what is the MSA for the area between the airport and the VOR?". I do not believe it is asking what altitude you SHOULD be on conducting the missed approach, it is asking what the MSA while you are on it.

In other words, you miss, find out you you picked up too much ice on the approach and need to know the lowest safe altitude you can maintain (3,400) for the area you are in during the missed.

Am I missing something?
 
I'm with Sporty's answer. MSA = 3400, simple. Think - why is the missed approach altitude 4000? It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with obstruction clearance - maybe it was rounded to a nice round altitude for holding, maybe it fits in with ATC's flow better at that altitude, maybe the airways from BTG all have MEAs of 4000 anyway, on and on. My point is, the 4000 missed approach altitude is in no way to be considered a "minimum safe altitude" in the same way that an MSA is, that's the whole purpose of the MSA diagram.

It's a safe altitude, but by no means the minimum safe altitude.
 
There is an altitude at the 2 oclock position on the MSA circle that I cannot read on the PDF. As for the response to the question, I would say 3400 as the MSA circle gives 3400 from 130* to 300*. If the MA path takes you to the other side of the VORTAC then would have to adhere to the unreadable altitude. Could that possibly be 4000 or more which would explain the MA having an altitude of 4000?

Looking at the current plate for that approach the SW half is now 3500 and the NE half is 6200. The MA altitude is now listed as 4200.

Are the mountains growing? Go figure.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Doh! I just happened to have been reading FAA 8083-15A yesterday, so this is a good exercise for me.
Click to expand...

FYI, 15B is current. They made some major changes from 15A, especially when discussing control/performance and primary/supporting instruments.

Bob Gardner
 
3400. Seems like Gleim needs new instructors.
 
Count me among those who say 3400. I'll be talking to ASA this morning (well, emailing).

Bob Gardner
 
MSA is a defined term, and they asked for the MSA. It makes no difference if you are driving a car, flying a missed, or anything else. The MSA for that airspace remains unchanged.

Now the real question for the IFR exam, is what is the correct FAA exam answer?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
 
Personally, I don't see the controversy. They're asking for MSA between the airport and the VOR. That's clearly depicted as 3,400' on the MSA depiction. Put me solidly in the 3,400' camp.
 
Are they really still using the old style approach charts on the exams today? Haven't we had the new design for more than a decade??
 
I will opine that it's 3400'. My reasoning is that despite being on the missed, the instructions in the missed appr say to climb to 4000' via the 160 radial.
 
bobmrg said:
FYI, 15B is current. They made some major changes from 15A, especially when discussing control/performance and primary/supporting instruments.

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...

I'm aware, however I started my self-directed curriculum with A and did not want to start over when B was released. I'm hoping I can (after completing my reading) pick up an erratum document or something of the sort to get the delta.
 
LDJones said:
Personally, I don't see the controversy. They're asking for MSA between the airport and the VOR. That's clearly depicted as 3,400' on the MSA depiction. Put me solidly in the 3,400' camp.
Click to expand...

Same here. There is, as I would say to my students for comedic effect, a "little circle thingy" on the approach chart that tells us what the MSA is. It clearly states 3,400 ft for the area in question.
 
tmyers said:
There is an altitude at the 2 oclock position on the MSA circle that I cannot read on the PDF.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure this is the plate that I've posted about before. Another question in the bank asks about maneuvering between BTG VORTAC and CREAK INT, and there of course you DO need the MSA altitude that's illegible. It's pretty much the ne plus ultra of guvmint test idiocy.

However, as of last summer, they seem to have fixed the plate in the supplement book you're provided for the actual exam.

Looking at the current plate for that approach the SW half is now 3500 and the NE half is 6200. The MA altitude is now listed as 4200.

Are the mountains growing? Go figure.
Click to expand...
Maybe a revised survey showed a higher altitude, or a tower went up on one of the hills?
 
Last edited:
flyingmoose said:
Interesting question for sure. I would have answered it 3400. The question does talk about the missed, but specifically says (MSA).
Click to expand...
That's my thinking -- the question was "Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA)", not "minimum safe altitude," and most definitely not "correct altitude for the missed approach procedure." The procedurally correct altitude on the missed approach procedure may be 4000, but the "Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA)" is clearly depicted on the chart as 3400, so count me in Sporty's Paul's camp.

Or, to quote the Chief Instructor at the Viennese School of Flying (circa 1905), "Sometimes an MSA is just an MSA."
 
tmyers said:

Looking at the current plate for that approach the SW half is now 3500 and the NE half is 6200. The MA altitude is now listed as 4200.

Are the mountains growing? Go figure.
Click to expand...


Not the mountains, but the antennas on the mountains.

In addition, it's a really old example chart, from 1999. One of the changes that was made since then was that, when setting minimum altitudes, TERPS requires the developer to assume there's a 200 foot tall antenna tower just about everywhere. Why 200 feet? Because that's the maximum height you can put up an antenna without incurring FAA review (less if it's within a few miles of an airport). With the proliferation of cell phone towers, now the developers just assume that there's a 200 foot antenna on that mountain top, even if there isn't - yet - because nobody has to tell the FAA if they do put one up. So, often you'll see an increase of a minimum altitude by 200 feet, just for that reason.

LDJones said:
Are they really still using the old style approach charts on the exams today? Haven't we had the new design for more than a decade??
Click to expand...
Yes, and yes.
 
BTW, the first full IR knowledge test rewrite in about 20 years is just beginning -- I heard 2014 for it to hit the streets. That should fix a lot of issues.
 
Ron Levy said:
BTW, the first full IR knowledge test rewrite in about 20 years is just beginning -- I heard 2014 for it to hit the streets. That should fix a lot of issues.
Click to expand...

So I should probably take the instrument written again for my -II before then, so I don't have to learn anything new? :D
 
Who cares what the right answer is - what does the FAA say it is?
 
LDJones said:
Are they really still using the old style approach charts on the exams today? Haven't we had the new design for more than a decade??
Click to expand...

Yes I thought picking up salient details from unfamiliar charts was part of the test
 
Ron Levy said:
BTW, the first full IR knowledge test rewrite in about 20 years is just beginning -- I heard 2014 for it to hit the streets. That should fix a lot of issues.
Click to expand...

You're more optimistic than I. Rewrites usually introduce errors, not remove them.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I agree with the Gleim/ ASA response. The experts will be along soon to debate this until all of PoA has a common mind.
Click to expand...

Or until the sun cools. Whichever comes first.:lol:
 
Well - I took and passed the IFR and IGi (for good measure) and no MSA questions on either, so the mystery remains unsolved.
 
I memorized that the answer was 3400 but upon reading the chart initially answered as the sector MSA. Either here or the red board had a discussion of what a "good" written score was and I think this question illustrates why a score of 100 indicates rote memorization over understanding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top