Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekchips.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!tekchips!jackg
From: jackg@tekchips.UUCP (Jack Gjovaag)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: weekend ground schools
Message-ID: <401@tekchips.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-Nov-85 15:08:37 EST
Article-I.D.: tekchips.401
Posted: Fri Nov 29 15:08:37 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Dec-85 04:28:27 EST
References: <219@dcdwest.UUCP>
Reply-To: jackg@tekchips.UUCP (Jack Gjovaag)
Distribution: na
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 21
Summary: 

I took a weekend ground school for my instrument rating and found it to
be quite worth it, but maybe not for the reasons you might expect.
First, the instrument rating written exam has a fair amount of stuff
in it that may not be very relevant to every examinee.  For instance,
all chart material used in the exam is based on NOS charts, while
every instrument pilot I know of, including myself, use the
(superior--editorial comment) Jeppesson charts for flying.  The ground
school lets you get over this hurdle with ease.  Also, in instrument
flying, you are really dealing with the needed knowledge much more
intimately while you are in the cockpit, than when you are working
on a private rating.  Thus, I view the exam as just a formality
to get out of the way as quickly as possible.  The real knowledge
of instrument flying and the regulations comes from flying, studying
and encountering many of the situations you must be familiar with.

I took the exam before ever beginning the flying part of the training.
I suppose one might avoid paying the $150 (or whatever it costs these days)
by taking the exam late in the training, when you already will (better)
know what you need to know.  Unfortunately that still leaves you
with the NOS problem and bits of material that remain in the exam
even though outdated.