Papillon Interview Process?

[Lindsey]

Just for you I took another look, and I still do not see a blue band (or vignette) anywhere,...and I was not refering to the "key" on the back!

 

Hmm, I'd recommend buying sectionals from around the country and studying them. You'll get REAL good at charts, then! It's easy to overlook certain features because you already feel familiar with the area you are studying. Being a Seattle gal, I recommend picking up a Seattle Sectional - it's got everything. On my PPL checkride, my examiner picked an airport underneath Seattle's class B and had me tell him the different airspace layers from the surface to 60,000 feet and their respective ceilings. This particular airport had everything except Class C above it (B, D, E, G). But it was fun, and I got it right!

 

A potential employer probably won't buy the excuse that "my chart didn't have that on it" when they are quizzing you about airspace. I'm NOT saying you would do that, at all, but it's yet another reason to go after different charts and get real familiar with different symbols and features, and how they relate. A couple charts I've picked up for this purpose are the Los Angeles sectional, LA Helicopter Route Chart, and a Hawaii sectional. Another interesting one at the flight school is of the GOM.

[r22butters]

Hmm, I'd recommend buying sectionals from around the country and studying them. You'll get REAL good at charts, then! It's easy to overlook certain features because you already feel familiar with the area you are studying. Being a Seattle gal, I recommend picking up a Seattle Sectional - it's got everything. On my PPL checkride, my examiner picked an airport underneath Seattle's class B and had me tell him the different airspace layers from the surface to 60,000 feet and their respective ceilings. This particular airport had everything except Class C above it (B, D, E, G). But it was fun, and I got it right!

 

A potential employer probably won't buy the excuse that "my chart didn't have that on it" when they are quizzing you about airspace. I'm NOT saying you would do that, at all, but it's yet another reason to go after different charts and get real familiar with different symbols and features, and how they relate. A couple charts I've picked up for this purpose are the Los Angeles sectional, LA Helicopter Route Chart, and a Hawaii sectional. Another interesting one at the flight school is of the GOM.

 

Thanks for the advice, but there is a blue vignetta on my sectional (its pretty far away though), however I never use the sectional. Its my TAC (which I carry all the time) that doesn't have it.

 

My point, though, was that's its easy to forget some of this stuff when your not exposed to it regulary! As opposed to the assumption that these 1000hr CFIIs who are failing tests on chart reading are doing so due to deficiencies in their initial training.

 

 

By the way, if you like studying charts, check out the one for DC, its pretty messed up. There's also a Grand Canyon chart if you want to better prepare for that interview.

Edited February 25, 2012 by r22butters

[Spike]

 

So again I ask, is this an "interview passable" way of flight planning?,...it took me about 10-15min.

 

 

When the interviewer selected the two points on the chart and asked, “how long will it take to plan a cross country between these two points?” my former collogue answered; “Done!”

 

He was hired…….

[r22butters]

When the interviewer selected the two points on the chart and asked, “how long will it take to plan a cross country between these two points?” my former collogue answered; “Done!”

 

He was hired…….

 

My initial inquiry as to how long a flight plan should take was in response to a couple of posts whereby it was stated that employers were complaining about the length of time it was taking the 1000hr CFII newbies,...however, for this one I was actually inquiring as to the way I planned, not the time it took!

 

...I suppose I should have left that last part out?

Edited February 26, 2012 by r22butters

[d10]

Maybe I'm not understanding what was meant by claiming an ability to plan a flight within seconds, but if I was interviewing somebody and they answered like that (disclaimer: I've never interviewed anyone), I would have a lot of questions about that plan. What are the applicable NOTAMs? How long will it take to get there and what will the weather be at the destination when we arrive? How much fuel will it require? For a short flight I could let that last one go, but 150nm is approaching the max range of a lot of helicopters, especially if you have to take off with less than a full tank. Those are basic, critical questions that I would expect even a hastily planned flight to consider. If someone answered "Done" without knowing those answers I wouldn't be impressed by their speed, I would take it as an indication that either he doesn't know everything he should be considering to plan a flight, or he knows but he has a dangerous attitude. Either way the interview would be over, and it wouldn't end with a job offer.

[r22butters]

Maybe I'm not understanding what was meant by claiming an ability to plan a flight within seconds,...

 

Yes, you are misunderstanding, and I find Spike's responses to be confusing, or possibly a joke?

 

Apparently some employers are complaining that their new 1000hr CFIIs are taking too long to flight plan!

 

I was just trying to find out, how long is too long?,...so far no luck!

Edited February 26, 2012 by r22butters

[Pohi]

IMO, when students were planning their long XC, they should be able to do, from getting destination to flight plan complete in less than an hour.

 

Last time I ferried an aircraft we had to go about 220 miles with having to plan around weather, when dispatch called us we had about 1:15 to plan, fuel, and be in the air in order to make it to the destination before down time. So I guess you could use that as a real life expectation of a company.

[d10]

Like others have said, it depends. Someone familiar with the airspace will already know a lot of things that someone unfamiliar would have to look up or calculate. Regardless of experience, something like an aerial tour where passengers are going to expect a certain amount of time in the air and overflight of specific areas will require more detailed planning than a simple ferry flight.

 

I would say without any further guidance, I would like to see someone spend the time to plan as many details as possible. So the important thing wouldn't be whether it takes you 15 minutes or 30 minutes, but how much information you can compile in the time you take. If you fumble around for 5 minutes trying to figure out how long it will take to fly 90nm at 90 KIAS because you don't remember how to use your E6B or what numbers to put into a calculator you're taking too long. Your process can throw you off too. If you have to plan your route twice because you planned the first one before looking for restricted areas that might be in your path, you're taking too long. If you spend an hour planning a flight but at the end you can tell me the applicable weather, NOTAMs, flight time, fuel requirements, headings and distances for each leg, frequencies you'll be talking on, runways and taxiways you'll be using, the best restaurants available near the destination airport and what kind of transportation the FBO can provide to get to said restaurants, I would say you've done good.

[Falko]

Speaking of flight planning. I ran across an iPhone/ ipad application called "foreflight". It has everything a pilot can ask for. You can plan and file a your flight plan within minutes and you will have everything "notams,Wx, fbo's, airport charts, all sectionals ifr/Vfr , iap's, eta, fuel consumption, weight and balance ....Etc" . Plus you see yourself on the sectionals the whole time "gps"

 

 

Sure there is nothing wrong by doing flight planning the old way. I personally would recommend that flight schools start using such applications in training too since more and more companies are using such tools in cockpit.

 

[ChopperJ]

Sure there is nothing wrong by doing flight planning the old way. I personally would recommend that flight schools start using such applications in training too since more and more companies are using such tools in cockpit.

 

I think my original post has been done for a while so I will pile on to this new topic. Falco makes a good point, I have been a CFI and have flown corporate and to say the least flight planning is not the same for each. Obviously with flight instruction you have to teach flight planning the old fashion way and the student has to be able to fly from point A to B using pilotage and dead reckoning. And with corporate flying (the kind I did at least) the destination can change after the engine was started. You can't shut down and take an hour to redo your flight plan. You put the new destination in the GPS, figure out if you will have enough gas to get there, you should already know of any TFRs around and the wx, what your route will be (destination, airspace and terrain) and you go. And some of that stuff will done in the air.

 

I have heard this from instructors "we don't let the students use the GPS, ever" That is a big mistake. I have flown with pilots who owned R44s with Garmin 430s installed and had no idea how to use them. It's a GPS world, it's one of your best situational awareness tools. I'm not saying that you can throw the chart under the seat and forget about it, you should be able to at any time in the flight find yourself on the chart and navigate by it if need be. You will have to when the GPS fails, because it does. But knowing your GPS (and all the new smart phone apps) inside and out can make your life a lot easier.

Edited February 27, 2012 by ChopperJ

[r22butters]

I think my original post has been done for a while so...

 

Ya, sorry about that!

 

I'd actually like to here more about Papillion,...especially the South Rim?

[Spike]

I find Spike's responses to be confusing, or possibly a joke?

 

Sorry to be confusing and not joking….

 

In my opinion, If the weather is VFR, no NOTEMs are affecting the route of flight and no complicated airspace to deal with, ya should be able to look at the chart and go……

 

ChopperJ, I too apologized for the digression……

Edited February 27, 2012 by Spike

[ChopperJ]

ChopperJ, I too apologized for the digression……

 

I don't care that the topic changed, as long as people are still getting something out of it. I appreciate all responses.

[d10]

Sorry to be confusing and not joking….

 

In my opinion, If the weather is VFR, no NOTEMs are affecting the route of flight and no complicated airspace to deal with, ya should be able to look at the chart and go……

 

ChopperJ, I too apologized for the digression……

 

You can't know these things without looking them up though. You also can't comply with 91.103 without looking them up.

[TXFirefly]

The only flight plan you will do at the South Rim will be for your checkride (until you move up to West Rim or utility). It will be from point A to point B, pick up X number passengers and fly to point C. You will have to check your performance to make sure you will be able to complete the flight at the appropriate altitude with that weight. Also, you will have to take the SFRA into account. Not something you will see on any other sectional. It is very specific airspace.

[r22butters]

...Also, you will have to take the SFRA into account. Not something you will see on any other sectional. It is very specific airspace.

 

There's an SFRA around the Baltimore/DC area where you have to file a flight plan everytime, and basically get cleared to operate, is it anything like that?

[TXFirefly]

It's totally different from the Washington SFRA. If you look at a Grand Canyon sectional, 1 side is for tour operators only (have to have passed the checkride and checked out on all routes). The 2nd side is for everyone else, showing corridors and altitudes of flight. You can also look at 14 CFR part 93 subpart U

[Spike]

You can't know these things without looking them up though. You also can't comply with 91.103 without looking them up.

 

As stated as a given, the wx is VFR, no NOTAMS affecting the route of flight and no complicated airspace. And cuz it was originally left out, yes, we know the runway length.......

[ChopperJ]

Thanks guys, I got the job. I appreciate everyone that took the time to post, the VR forums have been a wealth of information to me over the years.

 

TXFirefly and Gunner, you guys were right on the money. Special thanks.

[TXFirefly]

Congrats and good luck!!!

[Goldy]

Thanks guys, I got the job. I appreciate everyone that took the time to post, the VR forums have been a wealth of information to me over the years.

 

TXFirefly and Gunner, you guys were right on the money. Special thanks.

 

Congratulations! Plenty of VR folk flying over there now. Say hey to my buddy Alex if you're not at the south rim.