CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 10 Issue 2 - 26

POINT/COUNTERPOINT
THE DEBRIEF INVARIABLY BEGINS AS YOU'RE PUTTING AWAY THE AIRPLANE-BUT
THIS GETS THE DISCUSSION GOING WHILE YOU'RE BOTH PARTIALLY DISTRACTED.
Continue teaching the E6B. Pushing a "results
only" button fails to provide the relationships of the
variables being solved for. No thinking required.

All pilots should be required to mentally estimate
the actual answer quite closely before pushing
the magic button or spinning the whiz wheel. A
pilot with no concept of the correct answer may
accept and count on a result that will fail them.
Entering values on the wheel forces an
awareness of the quantity relationships since
order of magnitudes must be conceptualized.
I do not advocate using the E6B in place of
EFB resources in TAA ops but I very much
favor requiring all students learn and become
proficient with the E6B and perform periodic
repeat practice.
Redundant layers add to safety. It seems
reasonable to have a whiz wheel accessible in
the cockpit. We all know that systems can fail.
What cost to learn and have a mechanical backup
compared to the single layer electronic only
choice? Knowing and being able to operate an
E6B is also a nod to ancient usages, traditions,
and landmarks in aviation.
-Jim Walp, CFII, AGI, IGI, LR Type

I was introduced to wind-drift calculations in
my private pilot training 56 years ago, and of
course, used a very basic device with a sliding
azimuth and a pencil dot. I don't believe that it
even rose to the level of the E6B. Over the years
I have, like most pilots, converted to electronic
devices. Almost 40 years ago, I wrote a series of
programs that worked on a programmable HP
hand-held calculator that was about the size of
today's devices such as the ASA CX-2. Of course,
any examination invigilator would have had a
stroke if I had attempted to take that device into
an exam. Two comments:
Armed with high school math, most people can
grasp the concepts of TAS/GS/WCA calculations
with the E6B. Once those are instilled, the
move to the digital devices certainly makes
sense. Without those concepts firmly in mind,
the calculator becomes a black box and more
prone to entry errors, and a lack of an intuitive
understanding of what calculation is needed for
the task at hand. As an instructor, my preference
remains to teach the basics with the manual
devices. Over the years, I have maintained my
collection of manual calculators, the favorites
being the 1972 Aerodyne C1 Computer and the
Jeppesen-Sanderson CR-2 and CR-3. For aging
eyes, the larger CR-3 with a correspondingly
larger print size is handy.

The other comment relates to the evolving
response of the regulatory people to the devices.
While there is still a measure of suspicion
on their part that somehow the devices will
enable cheating on aviation exams, there also
seems to be evident glee in devising ever more
complex scenarios and calculations to answer an
individual question on examinations. Designed to
be solved with more capable computing devices,
the questions sometimes require a lengthy series
of calculations for which a set of choices are
provided that are close enough that only by a
repeated execution of the entire series can the
applicant be sure of their answer. The proponents
of such gleeful complexity will say that this
represents real life as a pilot, and they are not
entirely wrong, but with the advent of Foreflight,
tablets, and touch-screen capabilities I wonder
if the ASA CX-2 and its cousins might be hardly
remembered in a few years.
-David MacRae, CFII
CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 10 Issue 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 10 Issue 2
