相关题目
There are two basic types of approach procedures:precision and non-precision. Simply stated, the non-precision approach is a standard instrument procedure that does not use an electronic glide slope. Three precision approaches use a glide slope: instrument landing sys tem (ILS), microwave landing system (MLS), and the precision approach radar (PAR). Im plementation of the MLS has stagnated as a disappointment and will be disregarded in this discussion. PAR approaches are few and far between；they will also be disregarded because the ground controller talks the pilot in. and about all the pilot can do is listen and do what the controller says. Several components are necessary for an approach to be classified as an ILS. The ground components are a localizer, glide slope, outer marker, middle marker, and approach lights. If a procedure specifies a visibility minimum based on runway visual range (RVR), it will al so need high intensity runway lights (HIRL), touchdown zone lighting (TDZL), centerline lighting (RCLS) and markings, and, naturally, the RVR transmissometers for that runway. Of course, before the pilot can accept an ILS approach, her aircraft must have the airborne equipment necessary to receive the ground components. A few variations exist. The regulations do allow a compass locator or precision radar to be substituted for the outer marker (OM) or middle marker (MM), and an airport surveil lance radar (ASR) can usually be substituted for the outer marker. All other approaches are non-precision. These primarily consist of the localizer, back course, VOR，NDB (ADF), ASR, and the newest of all, GPS approaches - although be fore long you will see both precision and non-precision GPS approaches. The VOR and NDB (ADF) approach are, in effect, designed to bring the aircraft down to, the overall airport environment, while all other approaches will bring you right down to the runway.5. If the pilots desire an ILS approach, which of the following items may not be necessary?
There are two basic types of approach procedures:precision and non-precision. Simply stated, the non-precision approach is a standard instrument procedure that does not use an electronic glide slope. Three precision approaches use a glide slope: instrument landing sys tem (ILS), microwave landing system (MLS), and the precision approach radar (PAR). Im plementation of the MLS has stagnated as a disappointment and will be disregarded in this discussion. PAR approaches are few and far between；they will also be disregarded because the ground controller talks the pilot in. and about all the pilot can do is listen and do what the controller says. Several components are necessary for an approach to be classified as an ILS. The ground components are a localizer, glide slope, outer marker, middle marker, and approach lights. If a procedure specifies a visibility minimum based on runway visual range (RVR), it will al so need high intensity runway lights (HIRL), touchdown zone lighting (TDZL), centerline lighting (RCLS) and markings, and, naturally, the RVR transmissometers for that runway. Of course, before the pilot can accept an ILS approach, her aircraft must have the airborne equipment necessary to receive the ground components. A few variations exist. The regulations do allow a compass locator or precision radar to be substituted for the outer marker (OM) or middle marker (MM), and an airport surveil lance radar (ASR) can usually be substituted for the outer marker. All other approaches are non-precision. These primarily consist of the localizer, back course, VOR，NDB (ADF), ASR, and the newest of all, GPS approaches - although be fore long you will see both precision and non-precision GPS approaches. The VOR and NDB (ADF) approach are, in effect, designed to bring the aircraft down to, the overall airport environment, while all other approaches will bring you right down to the runway.4. Which of the following approaches won＇t bring you right down to the runway?
There are two basic types of approach procedures:precision and non-precision. Simply stated, the non-precision approach is a standard instrument procedure that does not use an electronic glide slope. Three precision approaches use a glide slope: instrument landing sys tem (ILS), microwave landing system (MLS), and the precision approach radar (PAR). Im plementation of the MLS has stagnated as a disappointment and will be disregarded in this discussion. PAR approaches are few and far between；they will also be disregarded because the ground controller talks the pilot in. and about all the pilot can do is listen and do what the controller says. Several components are necessary for an approach to be classified as an ILS. The ground components are a localizer, glide slope, outer marker, middle marker, and approach lights. If a procedure specifies a visibility minimum based on runway visual range (RVR), it will al so need high intensity runway lights (HIRL), touchdown zone lighting (TDZL), centerline lighting (RCLS) and markings, and, naturally, the RVR transmissometers for that runway. Of course, before the pilot can accept an ILS approach, her aircraft must have the airborne equipment necessary to receive the ground components. A few variations exist. The regulations do allow a compass locator or precision radar to be substituted for the outer marker (OM) or middle marker (MM), and an airport surveil lance radar (ASR) can usually be substituted for the outer marker. All other approaches are non-precision. These primarily consist of the localizer, back course, VOR，NDB (ADF), ASR, and the newest of all, GPS approaches - although be fore long you will see both precision and non-precision GPS approaches. The VOR and NDB (ADF) approach are, in effect, designed to bring the aircraft down to, the overall airport environment, while all other approaches will bring you right down to the runway.3. Which of the following has the least developing tendency? B.
There are two basic types of approach procedures:precision and non-precision. Simply stated, the non-precision approach is a standard instrument procedure that does not use an electronic glide slope. Three precision approaches use a glide slope: instrument landing sys tem (ILS), microwave landing system (MLS), and the precision approach radar (PAR). Im plementation of the MLS has stagnated as a disappointment and will be disregarded in this discussion. PAR approaches are few and far between；they will also be disregarded because the ground controller talks the pilot in. and about all the pilot can do is listen and do what the controller says. Several components are necessary for an approach to be classified as an ILS. The ground components are a localizer, glide slope, outer marker, middle marker, and approach lights. If a procedure specifies a visibility minimum based on runway visual range (RVR), it will al so need high intensity runway lights (HIRL), touchdown zone lighting (TDZL), centerline lighting (RCLS) and markings, and, naturally, the RVR transmissometers for that runway. Of course, before the pilot can accept an ILS approach, her aircraft must have the airborne equipment necessary to receive the ground components. A few variations exist. The regulations do allow a compass locator or precision radar to be substituted for the outer marker (OM) or middle marker (MM), and an airport surveil lance radar (ASR) can usually be substituted for the outer marker. All other approaches are non-precision. These primarily consist of the localizer, back course, VOR，NDB (ADF), ASR, and the newest of all, GPS approaches - although be fore long you will see both precision and non-precision GPS approaches. The VOR and NDB (ADF) approach are, in effect, designed to bring the aircraft down to, the overall airport environment, while all other approaches will bring you right down to the runway.2. Which of the following will belong to precision approaches?
There are two basic types of approach procedures:precision and non-precision. Simply stated, the non-precision approach is a standard instrument procedure that does not use an electronic glide slope. Three precision approaches use a glide slope: instrument landing sys tem (ILS), microwave landing system (MLS), and the precision approach radar (PAR). Im plementation of the MLS has stagnated as a disappointment and will be disregarded in this discussion. PAR approaches are few and far between；they will also be disregarded because the ground controller talks the pilot in. and about all the pilot can do is listen and do what the controller says. Several components are necessary for an approach to be classified as an ILS. The ground components are a localizer, glide slope, outer marker, middle marker, and approach lights. If a procedure specifies a visibility minimum based on runway visual range (RVR), it will al so need high intensity runway lights (HIRL), touchdown zone lighting (TDZL), centerline lighting (RCLS) and markings, and, naturally, the RVR transmissometers for that runway. Of course, before the pilot can accept an ILS approach, her aircraft must have the airborne equipment necessary to receive the ground components. A few variations exist. The regulations do allow a compass locator or precision radar to be substituted for the outer marker (OM) or middle marker (MM), and an airport surveil lance radar (ASR) can usually be substituted for the outer marker. All other approaches are non-precision. These primarily consist of the localizer, back course, VOR，NDB (ADF), ASR, and the newest of all, GPS approaches - although be fore long you will see both precision and non-precision GPS approaches. The VOR and NDB (ADF) approach are, in effect, designed to bring the aircraft down to, the overall airport environment, while all other approaches will bring you right down to the runway.1. Which of the following belongs to non - precision approaches?
After a short flight returning from a maintenance check with a passenger(one of my first), we approach ZBAA as I have done on many previous occasions. We reported Three miles east of the field as requested and were given a downwind joining for runway 04 left-hand circuit. Being used to taking off and returning from runway 22, the prevalent runway, I steered the aircraft at the 04 numbers, crossed and turned right onto downwind for runway 22. On the inbound approach to the 04 numbers, the windy weather conditions were making the aircraft more difficult to control than I was used to, as an inexperienced and, hence, sometimes nervous pilot, this took the greater proportion of my mental capacity. Also, I was preoccupied with my passenger who was having difficulty hearing due to a medical hearing problem, which was compounded by technical intercom difficulties. He was taking photographs and I could see arm movements in the corner of my eye, which were distracting. After flying the downwind leg for 22 right-hand, the Tower controller asked me if I was sure I was downwind left hand for 04. I went over his words in my head and then realized my positional error. I immediately informed him, I have made a mistake, I am late downwind right-hand for runway 22. I asked him what he wanted me to do and I was instructed to turn the aircraft through 180 degrees and take up a position downwind left-hand for runway 04. I did this and, after a short radiotelephony apology, landed, taxied and shut down without further incident.5.When did the pilot realize that he had made a mistake in his landing?
After a short flight returning from a maintenance check with a passenger(one of my first), we approach ZBAA as I have done on many previous occasions. We reported Three miles east of the field as requested and were given a downwind joining for runway 04 left-hand circuit. Being used to taking off and returning from runway 22, the prevalent runway, I steered the aircraft at the 04 numbers, crossed and turned right onto downwind for runway 22. On the inbound approach to the 04 numbers, the windy weather conditions were making the aircraft more difficult to control than I was used to, as an inexperienced and, hence, sometimes nervous pilot, this took the greater proportion of my mental capacity. Also, I was preoccupied with my passenger who was having difficulty hearing due to a medical hearing problem, which was compounded by technical intercom difficulties. He was taking photographs and I could see arm movements in the corner of my eye, which were distracting. After flying the downwind leg for 22 right-hand, the Tower controller asked me if I was sure I was downwind left hand for 04. I went over his words in my head and then realized my positional error. I immediately informed him, I have made a mistake, I am late downwind right-hand for runway 22. I asked him what he wanted me to do and I was instructed to turn the aircraft through 180 degrees and take up a position downwind left-hand for runway 04. I did this and, after a short radiotelephony apology, landed, taxied and shut down without further incident.4.On the inbound approach, the pilot was influenced by（ ） .
After a short flight returning from a maintenance check with a passenger(one of my first), we approach ZBAA as I have done on many previous occasions. We reported Three miles east of the field as requested and were given a downwind joining for runway 04 left-hand circuit. Being used to taking off and returning from runway 22, the prevalent runway, I steered the aircraft at the 04 numbers, crossed and turned right onto downwind for runway 22. On the inbound approach to the 04 numbers, the windy weather conditions were making the aircraft more difficult to control than I was used to, as an inexperienced and, hence, sometimes nervous pilot, this took the greater proportion of my mental capacity. Also, I was preoccupied with my passenger who was having difficulty hearing due to a medical hearing problem, which was compounded by technical intercom difficulties. He was taking photographs and I could see arm movements in the corner of my eye, which were distracting. After flying the downwind leg for 22 right-hand, the Tower controller asked me if I was sure I was downwind left hand for 04. I went over his words in my head and then realized my positional error. I immediately informed him, I have made a mistake, I am late downwind right-hand for runway 22. I asked him what he wanted me to do and I was instructed to turn the aircraft through 180 degrees and take up a position downwind left-hand for runway 04. I did this and, after a short radiotelephony apology, landed, taxied and shut down without further incident.3.According to the passage, the pilot was accustomed to （ ）.
After a short flight returning from a maintenance check with a passenger(one of my first), we approach ZBAA as I have done on many previous occasions. We reported Three miles east of the field as requested and were given a downwind joining for runway 04 left-hand circuit. Being used to taking off and returning from runway 22, the prevalent runway, I steered the aircraft at the 04 numbers, crossed and turned right onto downwind for runway 22. On the inbound approach to the 04 numbers, the windy weather conditions were making the aircraft more difficult to control than I was used to, as an inexperienced and, hence, sometimes nervous pilot, this took the greater proportion of my mental capacity. Also, I was preoccupied with my passenger who was having difficulty hearing due to a medical hearing problem, which was compounded by technical intercom difficulties. He was taking photographs and I could see arm movements in the corner of my eye, which were distracting. After flying the downwind leg for 22 right-hand, the Tower controller asked me if I was sure I was downwind left hand for 04. I went over his words in my head and then realized my positional error. I immediately informed him, I have made a mistake, I am late downwind right-hand for runway 22. I asked him what he wanted me to do and I was instructed to turn the aircraft through 180 degrees and take up a position downwind left-hand for runway 04. I did this and, after a short radiotelephony apology, landed, taxied and shut down without further incident.2.When returning to the airport, the pilot was asked to（ ） .
After a short flight returning from a maintenance check with a passenger(one of my first), we approach ZBAA as I have done on many previous occasions. We reported Three miles east of the field as requested and were given a downwind joining for runway 04 left-hand circuit. Being used to taking off and returning from runway 22, the prevalent runway, I steered the aircraft at the 04 numbers, crossed and turned right onto downwind for runway 22. On the inbound approach to the 04 numbers, the windy weather conditions were making the aircraft more difficult to control than I was used to, as an inexperienced and, hence, sometimes nervous pilot, this took the greater proportion of my mental capacity. Also, I was preoccupied with my passenger who was having difficulty hearing due to a medical hearing problem, which was compounded by technical intercom difficulties. He was taking photographs and I could see arm movements in the corner of my eye, which were distracting. After flying the downwind leg for 22 right-hand, the Tower controller asked me if I was sure I was downwind left hand for 04. I went over his words in my head and then realized my positional error. I immediately informed him, I have made a mistake, I am late downwind right-hand for runway 22. I asked him what he wanted me to do and I was instructed to turn the aircraft through 180 degrees and take up a position downwind left-hand for runway 04. I did this and, after a short radiotelephony apology, landed, taxied and shut down without further incident.1.How many people are there on the plane?
