VATUSA Forums
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Isak Moebius on November 26, 2011, 06:03:35 PM
-
This is just two questions off of the S3 exam which proves that the test questions are extremely misleading and the questions have multiple answers or all of the answers are correct.
Question: What is the primary job of the radar approach controller?
A. To ensure aircraft reach their destination
B. To ensure expeditious flow of traffic
C. To ensure separation of radar arrivals
D. To provide radar service
-I answered D. To provide radar service which was incorrect
-First off I have gone through the entire S3 training material and no where in there does it use the exact words "The Primary job of the radar approach controller." Which of course isn't expected but thats just to point out it isn't obvious, which it shouldn't be.
-Second on VATSIM the Approach controller also controls the departure position if there is not a Departure controller online which is most of the time so wording the question as it is above does not specify that it is solely referring to the APP controller.
-Assuming that it is referring to an APP controller controlling the entire sector including departure (which is normal to assume) then all the answers are correct.
This next one is the most misleading:
Question: Which of the following is not a required piece of information that must be given to the pilot in an uncharted holding clearance?
A. Expect Further Clearance Time
B. Radial from the holding fix to hold on
C. Expected action after departing the hold
D. Direction of Turns in the hold
-I answered D. Direction of Turns in the hold which is incorrect
-The following is quoted from VATUSA S3 training under Issuing Holding Instructions in the first paragraph "The standard hold is one that consists of right hand turns and 1 minute legs." Also quoted from the same page: "Direction of holding pattern turns only if left turns are to be made, the pilot requests it, or you consider it necessary."
-This question states that the holding clearance is "UNCHARTED" not "NON STARDARD"
-Because of this it would be normal to assume that the direction of the turns would not be part of the clearance
This isn't the first time I have seen questions that are misleading or completely irrelevant and I have found many times questions have multiple answers but they aren't the answer VATUSA wants obviously. In order to pass these test you have to get all of the obvious questions correct and then you have to get lucky on the ones that are misleading which make the 7 day waiting period even more frustrating. Now don't think that I am complaining about the 7 day wait I am just pointing out that the 7 day wait is like insult to injury when the questions don't make sense and cause one to fail.
-
Isak,
I'm sure there are more qualified people (ie Instructors) who can better answer your concerns, but here's my attempt:
As for the first question, it says right there radar approach controller. A radar approach controller is, well, an approach controller. Just because the S3 training material doesn't state the answer in the exact format of the question doesn't mean there is an issue. You can look in other places such as the 7110.65 for answers to the exam questions as well. Second, when you are serving as an approach controller, as the question states, it assumes you are only doing approach. If it was assuming you were also doing departures, one would expect the question to state such, which in this case, it doesn't. Therefore, had I been taking the test, I would provide the answer as if I was solely acting as approach.
As for the second question, if something is uncharted, is it not non-standard? A SID and a STAR are both standard procedures which are charted. Therefore, again, I would think uncharted and non-standard are one in the same, again making my answer choice pretty obvious.
In short, it sounds like you did something that I normally do when I take exams, over analyze. Although you had an unfortunate experience, the exam truly wasn't misleading, you just thought too much about the situation thrown at you and thus, got the answer wrong. It doesn't make you any worse of a controller, just a stumbling block that many of us have tripped over before, and many others will trip over in the future.
-
in other places such as the 7110.65 for answers to the exam questions as well
My issue with utilizing the 7110.65 for answering questions is most of the tests are outdated to the point where I was bit in the butt by following the 7110.65 (albeit it was notated in the VATUSA training, but I was treating it as the 7110.65 was more accurate, therefore it was right).
The question was in reference to separation requirements at the final approach/tower level behind a B757. At the time the 7110.65 had been updated for about a year regarding the wake turbulence classifications of a 757 from a heavy to a large aircraft reducing the separation requirements by 1nm. Because I answered it based off of real-world procedures DIRECTLY from the 7110.65 I ended up getting the wrong answer. At that point I began treating all tests as being based on how VATSIM itself operates.
95% of the time VATSIM (at least VATUSA specifically) treats the approach (s3) rating as controlling both approach AND departure. The question is specific to what you would see REAL WORLD based on the 7110.65 -- however due to past experience (again) I treat it as a per-Vatsim/VATUSA training. I am a mentor and plan to work towards becoming an Instructor. As both we train our students on departure and approach procedures, and how to manage traffic levels whilst working both positions simultaneously as the APPROACH controller. You do not train it or treat it as an Approach OR Departure while in training, and save a few small examples (NY I think?) every ARTCC treats it as one position outside of events.
The holding question's answer is wrong as per the VATUSA training material itself. All 3 examples given on how to properly communicate with aircraft who are receiving a hold clearance do NOT include turns, and only 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED examples included legs.
Pulled directly from the training material:
http://www.vatusa.net/training/tiki-index....page=S3_Holding (http://www.vatusa.net/training/tiki-index.php?page=S3_Holding)
"The standard hold is one that consists of right hand turns and 1 minute legs" - This directly implies that you do not have to state the direction of turns and that the pilot should assume the standard.
"Direction of holding pattern turns only if left turns are to be made, the pilot requests it, or you consider it necessary." <-- Again same thing
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Examples
"American 113, Cleared to Ocala VORTAC. Hold North on the 360 Radial. Expect further clearance 1020z"
"Skyhawk N5204N, Cleared to Little Rock. Hold South on the 180 radial, 5 Mile Fix, Expect further clearance at 0200z"
"Learjet N7845Q, Cleared to Ardmore. Hold West on the V161 airway. Expect further clearance at 2325z"[/quote]
Albeit you could argue that the correct answer is the one that isn't mentioned at all in the training material, but the question remains vague and should be clarified further to state what it means, rather than what you should infer. With that in mind, both answers are "technically" correct.
As for the second question, if something is uncharted, is it not non-standard? A SID and a STAR are both standard procedures which are charted. Therefore, again, I would think uncharted and non-standard are one in the same, again making my answer choice pretty obvious.
The example I feel doesn't relate to the issue here. There is a complete difference, as per VATUSA training documents, between a PUBLISHED, NON-PUBLISHED, and NON STANDARD holding procedure and the clearances required for all 3. If not specifically stated, expect right turns and 1 minute legs. If on the Mountain6 Departure out of KSEA,lost coms procedures state you to proceed direct SEA VOR then on course. Not a very good example but better than your "procedure vs no procedure"
On topic with this there are a few questions that aren't even located within the training material for all of the exams from Tower on up (at least 1 on each). The thing that I want to request is tests should follow what is available on the VATUSA training material, rather than assuming you would follow the 7110.65 for some material but be wrong on others. There needs to be a very definitive line -- you either follow the VATUSA training material and nothing but that, or you follow the 7110.65. The best alternative is to keep the training documents updated as per the 7110.65 so we can reference it as needed, but is also located within the training center itself. Why would I EVER tell one of my students to reference the 7110.65 for some procedures, but ignore it for others because VATUSA isn't following it?
-
Regarding the 7110.65. This is a hobby of simulation controlling. I am not paid to do this, and I never would fathom that I would become an ATC in real life. This in mind the 7110.65 should be irrelevant to my hobby and not important. I haven't even read the first sentence of the 7110.65 and I don't particularly care to. If VATUSA's training material is supposed to be designed to teach me how to be an effective and good controller on VATSIM, which it does, then the 7110.65 should not matter. This is a hobby, the 7110.65 is an ATC bible particularly aimed at training real world controllers. Which I, and I am sure many other controllers on VATSIM are not. Because of this VATUSA should never have any of its test material based off of material from the 7110.65 that is not in its very own training material on the VATUSA site.
-
The VATUSA training material uses the 7110 and other regulatory guidance as a foundation. It attempts to clarify key points that are already housed in the 7110. You are expected, particularly at the S3 and higher levels, to have a decent grasp of what the 7110 says, what is applicable to VATSIM, understand a bit about charts/plates/diagrams, weather including METARS and TAFs, NOTAMs, know what the FAR is, the AIM is, and have at least half a dose of common sense. Do we replicate the real world exactly? No. Do we attempt to simulate it to a level of realism that meets the needs of the VATSIM network? Absolutely. If the VATUSA training material were all that were needed to have enough of a level of understanding to meet the GRP, the VATUSA training material would have to copy and then amplify the 7110 and the other aforementioned materials, would have to stay current with those materials, and would be several thousand pages long. A bit overkill. Yes, it stinks when a test question doesn't get caught up automatically when a chart or the 7110 gets updated. Happens in my ARTCC too. They get caught up pretty quickly. When folks find an error or something that can be worded more clearly and bring it up in a constructive manner, it can be fixed. When people whine, the people who could be fixing the exam tend to tune out. I'm not saying you were whining -- the but the OP sure was. Yes, due to traffic levels, we generally combine APP and DEP. But not always. You point out ZNY, who teaches DEP first. You're right that not many ARTCCs really distinguish the positions well (the rest of us probably could do a slightly better job of making sure that doesn't get lost on our new students). Yes, I agree that the option on that exam question could and should be changed to "To ensure separation of traffic." In any case, an email to Tom Seeley with a recommendation and your reasoning would be a mature way to handle the issue. Take that template and replicate it for the rest, and you'll be amazed how far you (referring to anyone generically, not just you guys) get vs. whining on a forum.
-
Well actually this and many other things were explained in great detail to myself and a lot of the Seattle ARTCC this evening in our Teamspeak by Gary Millsaps.
-
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]the 7110.65 should not matter.[/quote]
A little off topic, but....
The 7110.65 isn't required reading material, but it absolutely make you a better controller if you utilize it. Although we arent real controllers, the .65 has tons of valuable information and addresses basically every situation that could arise while you are controlling. If you arent going to read it word for word, at least use it as a reference. There is no way VATUSA could include all of the information you may have to use at some point. Trust me, it will help you.
-
I don't expect VATUSA to include all of the information from the 7110.65. That would be ridiculous to assume. However I would expect that VATUSA's tests would not include any material that isn't in the training material on the VATUSA site. However often they do.
-
So what I am getting here is that those of us "staff" members in this hobby should read and understand the .65 and re-write all of the important parts onto a VATSIM related website so that it is easier to look up the answers.
If you are stumped on a question search for the topic in the .65. There are some more detailed instructions for this in the manual for your web browser or PDF viewer but for the most part the function is found under the edit menu and labeled "find". Click it and type in the subject to be guided to its appearance in the document.
-
I would imagine if there are mistakes they aren't intentional.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]In any case, an email to Tom Seeley[/quote]
^+1
-
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Regarding the 7110.65. This is a hobby of simulation controlling. I am not paid to do this, and I never would fathom that I would become an ATC in real life. This in mind the 7110.65 should be irrelevant to my hobby and not important. I haven't even read the first sentence of the 7110.65 and I don't particularly care to.[/quote]
Alright guys, everyone stop using the 7110.65. Since we aren't real controllers, we can't base anything off a real document.
How would we say callsigns? We can't use the 7320.2 (Contractions), so it looks like we are spelling things out. Wait! We can't do that! Those are defined in the 7110.65.
Man.. we are so screwed. Time to shut it down.
If you are so passionate about this hobby (which you appear to be, seeing as you want to progress super quickly), then maybe take a look at what our RL counterparts do and maybe you'll get a better understanding of why they do it and why you should to. Simply going blind and following a virtual instruction guide may not always be the best option. I'll give you the point that the guide is in need of some TLC, but that doesn't mean you can't look for the answers elsewhere.
/rant
-
I'm also going to suggest you contact Tom Seeley or Gary to clarify your points. In any organization, professional or volunteer, you'd be pretty heavily reprimanded for posting the exact copies of test questions and answers in a public forum to begin with.
-
If you'd rather participate in a game than an ATC simulation based on what our real world counterparts do, with appropriate modifications made based on the "demand" of the airspace system on this network, may I suggest that you may have inadvertently found the wrong place, and you take your quarters/tokens/game boy elsewhere. If you, like the rest of us, yearn to learn how to become enough of an ATC professional (note that you don't have to be paid to be professional) to serve and work well with others on this network, then I respectfully offer that you may want to open your mind to the multitude of people who are happy to invest countless hours in you so that we can all make this hobby of ours more enjoyable.
-
Okay you guys aren't even understanding the point of this.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I'm also going to suggest you contact Tom Seeley or Gary to clarify your points. In any organization, professional or volunteer, you'd be pretty heavily reprimanded for posting the exact copies of test questions and answers in a public forum to begin with.[/quote]
First of all I listed all the answers and only notated the one that was wrong. Never said which one was right so the next guy now has a 2/3 chances of getting it wrong too.
I am not saying that 7110.65 should not be read. If you feel like you want to read it then fine that's your prerogative. I might actually read it at some point but what I am trying to say is yes VATUSA probably gathers its information from the 7110.65 and probably some other ATC sources but to quote Skylar
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]My issue with utilizing the 7110.65 for answering questions is most of the tests are outdated to the point where I was bit in the butt by following the 7110.65 (albeit it was notated in the VATUSA training, but I was treating it as the 7110.65 was more accurate, therefore it was right).[/quote]
The 7110.65 is updated more often obviously because it pertains to real life situations where making sure everything is done correctly is of vital importance. But in addition to this I am sure the 7110.65 is a wealth of knowledge that just cannot be copy and pasted into a training material environment such as the one here.
My point to make is that the wording of the questions above and the questions themselves should really only be focused on how the positions work on VATSIM. For example the Approach Controller Primary Function: On VATSIM the APP controller also controls Departure and that is how it is taught in my ARTCC from what I hear almost every other ARTCC. So when I come into a test with practical training and experience on the APP controller position and see the word Approach Controller it is obvious to assume that the APP controller is controlling both positions because well VATUSA is a VATSIM controller training environment and none of this training should be used for real life controller training as the disclaimer states.
When there are questions on the test that pertain more to real life operations next to questions that pertain more to the VATSIM environment it can be misleading.
I would think that VATUSA cannot assume that everyone will read the 7110.65 or even have knowledge of it for that matter. So in the same light I would naturally think that even though the training material may be based of the 7110.65 in some form or another that the test questions would only pertain to the material found on the VATUSA site. Most of the questions do yes however some don't and as Skylar said going to the 7110.65 for help on answers could end up making me select the wrong answer anyway.
My point isn't to say that the 7110.65 is worthless its just to say that the wording of the questions can be confusing and cause one to answer incorrectly. Which I admit can be test taker error in many and probably most cases.
-
I am not saying that 7110.65 should not be read. If you feel like you want to read it then fine that's your prerogative.
Yes, you are. Remember what you just said?
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]This in mind the 7110.65 should be irrelevant to my hobby and not important.[/quote]
Stop trying to kid yourself.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]My point to make is that the wording of the questions above and the questions themselves should really only be focused on how the positions work on VATSIM. For example the Approach Controller Primary Function: On VATSIM the APP controller also controls Departure and that is how it is taught in my ARTCC from what I hear almost every other ARTCC. So when I come into a test with practical training and experience on the APP controller position and see the word Approach Controller it is obvious to assume that the APP controller is controlling both positions because well VATUSA is a VATSIM controller training environment and none of this training should be used for real life controller training as the disclaimer states.[/quote]
Please stop trying to justify your answer to that question. It won't work. Just because you do things that way in Seattle doesn't mean that everyone does it that way.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]When there are questions on the test that pertain more to real life operations next to questions that pertain more to the VATSIM environment it can be misleading.[/quote]
Namely?
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I would think that VATUSA cannot assume that everyone will read the 7110.65 or even have knowledge of it for that matter. So in the same light I would naturally think that even though the training material may be based of the 7110.65 in some form or another that the test questions would only pertain to the material found on the VATUSA site.[/quote]
By going through the training program, your instructors absolutely should have brought up what the 7110.65 is. If not, then I think that there is a problem. They don't have to teach it word for word, but at least bring it up and make sure that the student is aware of the document. That way, if the student has questions, they'll go to the document and look it up.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Most of the questions do yes however some don't and as Skylar said going to the 7110.65 for help on answers could end up making me select the wrong answer anyway.[/quote]
I honestly cannot think of anything that is in the VATUSA material that isn't in the 7110.65. The only thing that has changed in the last year (or so) is "line up and wait". Granted I haven't taken the tests in a long time, but I doubt that something would have tied you up.
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]My point isn't to say that the 7110.65 is worthless its just to say that the wording of the questions can be confusing and cause one to answer incorrectly. Which I admit can be test taker error in many and probably most cases.[/quote]
I'm going with test taker error.
-
First of all I listed all the answers and only notated the one that was wrong. Never said which one was right so the next guy now has a 2/3 chances of getting it wrong too.
Isak - I won't assume your age but I will assume that at some point you have been exposed to the high school or college education level. Do you think that if you posted this material in conjunction with a course you were taking in school that it would be acceptable? It is unprofessional at best. If we wanted the questions published we would publish them so that those taking them could see it.
The reality is that regardless of whether the questions are misleading the answers that you chose are incorrect. They aren't even supported necessarily in the VATUSA training material.
You are not going to get away from the 7110 guys. It is what was used to create the training material in the first place, and I guarantee that if you got an answer wrong because you followed the information in the 7110 that this would be a completely different conversation. You may not ever want to be a real world controller, neither do I, but this is where we get the information that we need to control. Most facilities procedures are written almost word for word like that of their real world counterparts. This is a simulation, that is what makes it enjoyable to most of us. Trust me though there is such a thing as too realistic and I think we do a good job balancing this. When I got on this network there were some facilities that the minimum time to get promoted to C1 was nearly 2 years because you essentially had to have the 7110 memorized like a real world controller. We are a long way from that.
I would say that if you can show your instructor or TA why the answers you chose were correct that they would be happy to fight for your test to be changed. I actually had this happen to me on my S3 test. But I went through my instructor and TA.
-
Not worried about it anymore. I can wait the 7 days
-
[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]On topic with this there are a few questions that aren't even located within the training material for all of the exams from Tower on up (at least 1 on each). The thing that I want to request is tests should follow what is available on the VATUSA training material, rather than assuming you would follow the 7110.65 for some material but be wrong on others.[/quote]
I'm sure the FAA has personnel on its payroll that closely follow changes to the 7110.65 and incorporate them into the training material it uses for its controllers. VATUSA does not. As has already been suggested several times, a simple email about matters such as these will in almost all cases result in updates or corrections being instituted with very little delay. The VATUSA training material and tests were not authored by any current staff; what we try to do within our available time and with a little heads up where appropriate, is maintain and update the material when necessary.
It's one thing to come into a public forum and complain about the existing system, where eventually it will come to the attention of those that can address it. It's far more constructive and effective to bring it to staff attention directly, thereby enabling a quick remedy. Since the word "assume" was used above, is it logical to assume that an error on a question will be addressed if you simply have a problem with it, but don't let someone know? If not you, at least bring it to the attention of your training staff, and let them forward it.
[size=]InterimPlease note the word interim.[/size]
-
My point to make is that the wording of the questions above and the questions themselves should really only be focused on how the positions work on VATSIM. For example the Approach Controller Primary Function: On VATSIM the APP controller also controls Departure and that is how it is taught in my ARTCC from what I hear almost every other ARTCC. So when I come into a test with practical training and experience on the APP controller position and see the word Approach Controller it is obvious to assume that the APP controller is controlling both positions because well VATUSA is a VATSIM controller training environment and none of this training should be used for real life controller training as the disclaimer states.
Purely for the sake of education:
Don't let your VATSIM callsign make you think differently about your radio callsign. In terminal radar, if you are providing departure control services, you should be called "Seattle Departure" by the pilot and yourself on initial contact with that pilot. Likewise, if you are providing approach control service, you should be called "Seattle Approach" by the pilot and yourself on initial contact with that pilot. This is how it's done in every terminal radar facility throughout the US. Some of those facilities do split the normal departure and arrival airspace corridors into two or more positions, but it makes no difference.
In Denver, the guy manning DEN_L_DEP is controlling the departure corridors in the Denver TRACON, but he also works the satellite airport sectors, too. When aircraft contact that controller, he identifies himself as "Denver Approach." The VATSIM callsign is simply a means of helping controllers identify who is who, and pilots place way too much reliance on those callsigns when flying in the virtual system. The same goes for NORCAL and SOCAL Departure and Approach.
-
Regarding the 7110.65. This is a hobby of simulation controlling. I am not paid to do this, and I never would fathom that I would become an ATC in real life. This in mind the 7110.65 should be irrelevant to my hobby and not important. I haven't even read the first sentence of the 7110.65 and I don't particularly care to. If VATUSA's training material is supposed to be designed to teach me how to be an effective and good controller on VATSIM, which it does, then the 7110.65 should not matter. This is a hobby, the 7110.65 is an ATC bible particularly aimed at training real world controllers. Which I, and I am sure many other controllers on VATSIM are not. Because of this VATUSA should never have any of its test material based off of material from the 7110.65 that is not in its very own training material on the VATUSA site.
I disagree completely. The .65 is the reason you know how to give anything from a taxi clearance to an approach clearance, it's just been laid out nicely and is a bit easier to find in the training material. While this isn't real life, and we aren't real controllers, realism is what VATSIM users are to strive for; especially controllers. Why control if you don't want to replicate realistic procedures? While VATSIM controllers shouldn't be expected to know it cover to cover, "not even reading even the first sentence" means that more than likely, pilots are receiving unrealistic service in some manner.
The only thing that separates VATSIM from "a game", is the fact that we do strive for realism; both pilot's and controllers.