相关题目
The effect of pressure altitude and ambient temperature is to define primarily the density altitude and its effect on takeoff performance. While subsequent corrections are appropriate for the effect of temperature on certain items of power plant performance, density altitude defines specific effects on takeoff performance. An increase in density altitude can produce a two-fold effect on takeoff performance: (l) greater takeoff speed and (2) decreased thrust and reduced net accelerating force. If an airplane of given weight and configuration is operated at greater heights above standard sea level, the airplane will still require the same dynamic pressure to become airborne at the takeoff lift coefficient. Thus, the airplane at altitude will take off at the same indicated airspeed as at sea level, but because of the reduced air density, the true airspeed will be greater.The effect of density altitude on power plant thrust depends much on the type of power plant. An increase in altitude above standard sea level will bring an immediate decrease in power output for the unsupercharged reciprocating engine. However, an increase in altitude above standard sea level will not cause a decrease in power output for the supercharged reciprocating engine until the altitude exceeds the critical operating altitude. For those power plants which experience a decay in thrust with an increase in altitude, the effect on the net accelerating force and acceleration rate can be approximated by assuming a direct variation with density. Actually, this assumed variation would closely approximate the effect on airplanes with high thrust-to-weight ratios.Proper accounting of pressure altitude and temperature is mandatory for accurate prediction of takeoff roll distance.1.An increase in density altitude can lead to （ ） ．
One day in March 1944, I was flying my Spitfire from Italy toward our base on Corsica. I was alone and it was late in the day. The sky was overcast and gray, as was the sea surface below, so my horizon was marginal. But I had no worries about my situation, and was not paying attention to the instruments. Suddenly, a change of air and engine noise told me something was wrong. I looked at my instruments and they showed my plane was in a diving turn. My reaction was, those instrument can’t be right!, but I knew immediately that they were right and that I had to rely on them to get out of the dive. I was at about 6000ft and had sufficient altitude to recover using the needle-ball-airspeed instrument and link-trainer time. For about a year and a half after graduation, I got much instrument and link-trainer time. I became fully competent in the needle-ball-airspeed technique, so I never used the artificial horizon, because its gyro would tumble if you made a steep turn. Incidentally, the Spitfire, instead of a ball to show skidding or slipping, had a second needle, pointing downward below the turn needle.I probably lost my horizon after flying into haze, or a region of uniform color and brightness. If I had flown into cloud I would have known that I had lost my horizon and had to go on instruments in order to stay oriented and in control. If I had been unable to fly on instruments I would have become disoriented, a condition called pilot vertigo, and I would have had to bail out or crash with the plane. But I didn’t suffer vertigo because I was not aware that I had lost my horizon, orientation, and control of the plane. It then wandered and went into a spiral dive producing the noises that alerted me.I recalled this experience in July 1999 when John F.Kennndy, Jr’s plane crashed. It was very clear to me, from the radar records of his plane’s behavior that the same thing happened to him.5.Why didn’t the pilot suffer vertigo?
One day in March 1944, I was flying my Spitfire from Italy toward our base on Corsica. I was alone and it was late in the day. The sky was overcast and gray, as was the sea surface below, so my horizon was marginal. But I had no worries about my situation, and was not paying attention to the instruments. Suddenly, a change of air and engine noise told me something was wrong. I looked at my instruments and they showed my plane was in a diving turn. My reaction was, those instrument can’t be right!, but I knew immediately that they were right and that I had to rely on them to get out of the dive. I was at about 6000ft and had sufficient altitude to recover using the needle-ball-airspeed instrument and link-trainer time. For about a year and a half after graduation, I got much instrument and link-trainer time. I became fully competent in the needle-ball-airspeed technique, so I never used the artificial horizon, because its gyro would tumble if you made a steep turn. Incidentally, the Spitfire, instead of a ball to show skidding or slipping, had a second needle, pointing downward below the turn needle.I probably lost my horizon after flying into haze, or a region of uniform color and brightness. If I had flown into cloud I would have known that I had lost my horizon and had to go on instruments in order to stay oriented and in control. If I had been unable to fly on instruments I would have become disoriented, a condition called pilot vertigo, and I would have had to bail out or crash with the plane. But I didn’t suffer vertigo because I was not aware that I had lost my horizon, orientation, and control of the plane. It then wandered and went into a spiral dive producing the noises that alerted me.I recalled this experience in July 1999 when John F.Kennndy, Jr’s plane crashed. It was very clear to me, from the radar records of his plane’s behavior that the same thing happened to him.4.Why didn’t the pilot ever use the artificial horizon when using the needle-ball-airspeed instrument technique?
One day in March 1944, I was flying my Spitfire from Italy toward our base on Corsica. I was alone and it was late in the day. The sky was overcast and gray, as was the sea surface below, so my horizon was marginal. But I had no worries about my situation, and was not paying attention to the instruments. Suddenly, a change of air and engine noise told me something was wrong. I looked at my instruments and they showed my plane was in a diving turn. My reaction was, those instrument can’t be right!, but I knew immediately that they were right and that I had to rely on them to get out of the dive. I was at about 6000ft and had sufficient altitude to recover using the needle-ball-airspeed instrument and link-trainer time. For about a year and a half after graduation, I got much instrument and link-trainer time. I became fully competent in the needle-ball-airspeed technique, so I never used the artificial horizon, because its gyro would tumble if you made a steep turn. Incidentally, the Spitfire, instead of a ball to show skidding or slipping, had a second needle, pointing downward below the turn needle.I probably lost my horizon after flying into haze, or a region of uniform color and brightness. If I had flown into cloud I would have known that I had lost my horizon and had to go on instruments in order to stay oriented and in control. If I had been unable to fly on instruments I would have become disoriented, a condition called pilot vertigo, and I would have had to bail out or crash with the plane. But I didn’t suffer vertigo because I was not aware that I had lost my horizon, orientation, and control of the plane. It then wandered and went into a spiral dive producing the noises that alerted me.I recalled this experience in July 1999 when John F.Kennndy, Jr’s plane crashed. It was very clear to me, from the radar records of his plane’s behavior that the same thing happened to him.3.What level was the pilot flying at when something wrong happened?
One day in March 1944, I was flying my Spitfire from Italy toward our base on Corsica. I was alone and it was late in the day. The sky was overcast and gray, as was the sea surface below, so my horizon was marginal. But I had no worries about my situation, and was not paying attention to the instruments. Suddenly, a change of air and engine noise told me something was wrong. I looked at my instruments and they showed my plane was in a diving turn. My reaction was, those instrument can’t be right!, but I knew immediately that they were right and that I had to rely on them to get out of the dive. I was at about 6000ft and had sufficient altitude to recover using the needle-ball-airspeed instrument and link-trainer time. For about a year and a half after graduation, I got much instrument and link-trainer time. I became fully competent in the needle-ball-airspeed technique, so I never used the artificial horizon, because its gyro would tumble if you made a steep turn. Incidentally, the Spitfire, instead of a ball to show skidding or slipping, had a second needle, pointing downward below the turn needle.I probably lost my horizon after flying into haze, or a region of uniform color and brightness. If I had flown into cloud I would have known that I had lost my horizon and had to go on instruments in order to stay oriented and in control. If I had been unable to fly on instruments I would have become disoriented, a condition called pilot vertigo, and I would have had to bail out or crash with the plane. But I didn’t suffer vertigo because I was not aware that I had lost my horizon, orientation, and control of the plane. It then wandered and went into a spiral dive producing the noises that alerted me.I recalled this experience in July 1999 when John F.Kennndy, Jr’s plane crashed. It was very clear to me, from the radar records of his plane’s behavior that the same thing happened to him.2.What had happened when the pilot first became aware that something was wrong?
One day in March 1944, I was flying my Spitfire from Italy toward our base on Corsica. I was alone and it was late in the day. The sky was overcast and gray, as was the sea surface below, so my horizon was marginal. But I had no worries about my situation, and was not paying attention to the instruments. Suddenly, a change of air and engine noise told me something was wrong. I looked at my instruments and they showed my plane was in a diving turn. My reaction was, those instrument can’t be right!, but I knew immediately that they were right and that I had to rely on them to get out of the dive. I was at about 6000ft and had sufficient altitude to recover using the needle-ball-airspeed instrument and link-trainer time. For about a year and a half after graduation, I got much instrument and link-trainer time. I became fully competent in the needle-ball-airspeed technique, so I never used the artificial horizon, because its gyro would tumble if you made a steep turn. Incidentally, the Spitfire, instead of a ball to show skidding or slipping, had a second needle, pointing downward below the turn needle.I probably lost my horizon after flying into haze, or a region of uniform color and brightness. If I had flown into cloud I would have known that I had lost my horizon and had to go on instruments in order to stay oriented and in control. If I had been unable to fly on instruments I would have become disoriented, a condition called pilot vertigo, and I would have had to bail out or crash with the plane. But I didn’t suffer vertigo because I was not aware that I had lost my horizon, orientation, and control of the plane. It then wandered and went into a spiral dive producing the noises that alerted me.I recalled this experience in July 1999 when John F.Kennndy, Jr’s plane crashed. It was very clear to me, from the radar records of his plane’s behavior that the same thing happened to him.1.How did the sky look when the pilot was flying in Italy toward the base on Corsica?
SIDs, STARs, and other abbreviated clearances have been developed because of the need to put as many aircraft as possible into and through the ATC system. To accomplish this, it becomes necessary to keep the radio transmissions as brief as possible; hence, the use of abbreviations like as filed, and the use of SIDs and STARs.Another reason for these SIDs, and such, is to put them down on paper in such a man ner as to simplify what otherwise could be a difficult clearance to copy, read back, under stand, and comply with. In order for this to work, however, pilots have the responsibility to thoroughly understand the restrictions involved.The Jeppesen Airway Manual introduction has this to say about SIDs: Pilots of IFR civil aircraft operation from locations where SID procedures are effective may expect ATC clearances containing a SID. Use of a SID requires possession of at least the textual description of the SID. Pilots not desiring to use the SID are expected to advise ATC. Notification may be accomplished by filing NO SID in the remarks section of the filed flight plan or by the less desirable method of verbally advising ATC.I can’t see any reason to turn down a SID as long as you have the required textual por tion in your possession and your aircraft can meet the various restrictions, which are ex plained later. Turning it down will only make more work for everyone involved. If you filed NO SID, the only difference is that you will get the complete textual portion read to you, and you’ll have to copy it down and read it back, which is sometimes very complicated and time-consuming. After all, ATC has devised the departure routings to expedite traffic and to give adequate separation between inbound and outbound flights, so it stands to reason that as long as you will be departing on that route anyway, you might as well make it easy on all concerned by having the SIDs in your possession and reviewing them before flight.5.Which of the following is the most suitable title of the passage?
SIDs, STARs, and other abbreviated clearances have been developed because of the need to put as many aircraft as possible into and through the ATC system. To accomplish this, it becomes necessary to keep the radio transmissions as brief as possible; hence, the use of abbreviations like as filed, and the use of SIDs and STARs.Another reason for these SIDs, and such, is to put them down on paper in such a man ner as to simplify what otherwise could be a difficult clearance to copy, read back, under stand, and comply with. In order for this to work, however, pilots have the responsibility to thoroughly understand the restrictions involved.The Jeppesen Airway Manual introduction has this to say about SIDs: Pilots of IFR civil aircraft operation from locations where SID procedures are effective may expect ATC clearances containing a SID. Use of a SID requires possession of at least the textual description of the SID. Pilots not desiring to use the SID are expected to advise ATC. Notification may be accomplished by filing NO SID in the remarks section of the filed flight plan or by the less desirable method of verbally advising ATC.I can’t see any reason to turn down a SID as long as you have the required textual por tion in your possession and your aircraft can meet the various restrictions, which are ex plained later. Turning it down will only make more work for everyone involved. If you filed NO SID, the only difference is that you will get the complete textual portion read to you, and you’ll have to copy it down and read it back, which is sometimes very complicated and time-consuming. After all, ATC has devised the departure routings to expedite traffic and to give adequate separation between inbound and outbound flights, so it stands to reason that as long as you will be departing on that route anyway, you might as well make it easy on all concerned by having the SIDs in your possession and reviewing them before flight.4.If pilots don’t want to use the SID, they’d better （ ） ．
SIDs, STARs, and other abbreviated clearances have been developed because of the need to put as many aircraft as possible into and through the ATC system. To accomplish this, it becomes necessary to keep the radio transmissions as brief as possible; hence, the use of abbreviations like as filed, and the use of SIDs and STARs.Another reason for these SIDs, and such, is to put them down on paper in such a man ner as to simplify what otherwise could be a difficult clearance to copy, read back, under stand, and comply with. In order for this to work, however, pilots have the responsibility to thoroughly understand the restrictions involved.The Jeppesen Airway Manual introduction has this to say about SIDs: Pilots of IFR civil aircraft operation from locations where SID procedures are effective may expect ATC clearances containing a SID. Use of a SID requires possession of at least the textual description of the SID. Pilots not desiring to use the SID are expected to advise ATC. Notification may be accomplished by filing NO SID in the remarks section of the filed flight plan or by the less desirable method of verbally advising ATC.I can’t see any reason to turn down a SID as long as you have the required textual por tion in your possession and your aircraft can meet the various restrictions, which are ex plained later. Turning it down will only make more work for everyone involved. If you filed NO SID, the only difference is that you will get the complete textual portion read to you, and you’ll have to copy it down and read it back, which is sometimes very complicated and time-consuming. After all, ATC has devised the departure routings to expedite traffic and to give adequate separation between inbound and outbound flights, so it stands to reason that as long as you will be departing on that route anyway, you might as well make it easy on all concerned by having the SIDs in your possession and reviewing them before flight.3.In the author’s opinion, SID （ ） ．
SIDs, STARs, and other abbreviated clearances have been developed because of the need to put as many aircraft as possible into and through the ATC system. To accomplish this, it becomes necessary to keep the radio transmissions as brief as possible; hence, the use of abbreviations like as filed, and the use of SIDs and STARs.Another reason for these SIDs, and such, is to put them down on paper in such a man ner as to simplify what otherwise could be a difficult clearance to copy, read back, under stand, and comply with. In order for this to work, however, pilots have the responsibility to thoroughly understand the restrictions involved.The Jeppesen Airway Manual introduction has this to say about SIDs: Pilots of IFR civil aircraft operation from locations where SID procedures are effective may expect ATC clearances containing a SID. Use of a SID requires possession of at least the textual description of the SID. Pilots not desiring to use the SID are expected to advise ATC. Notification may be accomplished by filing NO SID in the remarks section of the filed flight plan or by the less desirable method of verbally advising ATC.I can’t see any reason to turn down a SID as long as you have the required textual por tion in your possession and your aircraft can meet the various restrictions, which are ex plained later. Turning it down will only make more work for everyone involved. If you filed NO SID, the only difference is that you will get the complete textual portion read to you, and you’ll have to copy it down and read it back, which is sometimes very complicated and time-consuming. After all, ATC has devised the departure routings to expedite traffic and to give adequate separation between inbound and outbound flights, so it stands to reason that as long as you will be departing on that route anyway, you might as well make it easy on all concerned by having the SIDs in your possession and reviewing them before flight. 2.Using a SID, the pilot is required to （ ） ．
