![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I believe you are confusing the original question regarding the FAA exam
questions on primary/secondary instruments. This is not a Boeing 777 with primary/backup flight control computers and instruments with differing specified requirements for MTBF. In that context *all* flight instruments in a typical GA (as tested on the FAA IR written) are "primary instruments." The primary/supporting questions refer to which information is most relevent to the pilot during a particular flight manuver or attitude. Tarver Engineering wrote: : Fact, but nonsequitor. : Not exactly. In fact, my reason is why FAA tends to insist on certain : equipments for an approach. Quite correct... where "equipment" can be (but not limited to), VOR, DME, LOC, GS, GPS, Loran, etc... that could be construed as having "primary/secondary" functionality. For example, "Hrm... NAV1 seems to have died... let's use NAV2." The *FLIGHT INSTRUMENTS* are required for IFR flight... i.e. altimeter, rate-of-turn, airspeed, etc. : He's not using primary in the same way you are. : In your context, all of the instruments are "primary flight instruments." : No, each instrument system has it's own level of certification and : acceptable MTBF. Also true. Also irrelevent. : In the context of the FAA pedantry for the instrument knowledge test, : those instruments are divided into "primary" and "supporting" role for : each flight regime they list. What is a primary instrument in one : regime : is a supporting in others. : The secondary instrument gives the operator a cross check capability and may : be of a lower reliability. Almost true. WRT your primary/secondary equipment argument (think NAV1/NAV2), this may be the case. WRT FAA's definition of "primary/supporting" flight instruments, not so much. Cross-check: maybe. Lower reliability: perhaps. Slightly different information that can be interpretted to obtain equivalent information to the primary instrument: absolutely.... that's the point. -Cory -- ************************************************** *********************** * The prime directive of Linux: * * - learn what you don't know, * * - teach what you do. * * (Just my 20 USm$) * ************************************************** *********************** |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | June 2nd 04 07:17 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | May 1st 04 07:29 PM |
Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 05:54 PM |
Another Instrument written question.... | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 14 | October 29th 03 05:47 PM |