10 Basic Aerodynamic Questions That Most Pilots Get Wrong

[@southerncrosshempoil]

During a spin to the right, which wing(s) is/are stalled? Both wings are stalled. In a spin, both wings are stalled, but they are stalled unevenly, which is what causes the rotation: The more deeply stalled wing, (in this case, the right wing during a spin to the right) produces less lift and more drag, causing the aircraft to yaw and roll in that direction. The less deeply stalled wing (in this case, the left wing) still produces some lift, but not enough to recover from the spin. This difference in stall characteristics between the two wings, creates the autorotation, that defines a spin. Proper recovery from a spin involves reducing the angle of attack on both wings to break the stall, apply rudder opposite direction of the spin and reduce power to idle.

[@user-dragondeez]

2:51 I remember you said it in a vid, "both wings are stalled one just more than the other" and it stuck.

[@FreePilotTraining]

That’s basically what is happening

[@3ZTN2]

Thank you for making these videos, started my flight training like a couple months back and your videos have been helping me a lot

[@FreePilotTraining]

Awesome!

[@smacfe]

Your point about "the best answer" is well taken. There are some "what ifs" for a few of these questions which make them seem like trick questions.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Leave it up to the government to put trick questions on the test lol

[@SoloRenegade]

I begin the first lesson with ANYONE I fly with for the first time, with a demonstration of inherent aircraft stability. I have Never even once had any student of mine get into PIT (pilot induce turbulence, or PIO pilot induced oscillations) as a result, and have a very easy time teaching students to fly relaxed on the controls as a result as well. I demonstrate stable flying before we practice ANY maneuvers of Any kind. And then I have them repeat what I showed them. Works like a charm.

[@MarkShinnick]

@@SoloRenegade Fundamental Joint Survival instilling that immediate belief....cool.

[@АндрейЦуркан-ы9ц]

Thank you so much for your effort it really helps to understand some basic things for PPL theory part. Well this summer I'm gonna take the ground school so I am thankful that I found such channel to be inspired from)

[@FreePilotTraining]

You’re welcome!

[@brettnanney1932]

Would love to see more videos like this! Maybe we can get one for commonly missed IFR questions as well?

[@FreePilotTraining]

Awesome! Thanks!

[@gnagyusa]

On the 1st one the way I learned is that to enter a spin, you have both wings stalled, but one more stalled than the other.

[@southerncrosshempoil]

Best channel on KZbin

[@FreePilotTraining]

Thanks again!

[@SoloRenegade]

the load factor question was a good one. The answer also could have been bank angle in a level turn. But since that wasn't an option, it was a good question. (can't have two good answers for the same question)

[@yclept9]

A snap roll depends on one wing stalling, and is just a horizontal spin. With light wing loading (cub, champ) you actually have to use aileron in the direction of the roll so that modifies the rule for some aircraft.

[@jimallen8186]

Spin entries may occur with only one wing stalling but this is different than being in the spin, during the spin both are stalled. If you look at the wording in the Glider Handbook as opposed to the Airplane Handbook, while still lacking, it at least recognizes this distinction. Snap rolls are spin entries not spins.

[@andrewmaclean9810]

That question about which aspect of stability is affected by the CG is confusing bc yeah it affects the aircraft longitudinally, but the effect will be noticed on the lateral (pitch) axis. I got that one wrong. Are these verbatim questions for the knowledge test?

[@TheGonkDroid]

Yeah the wording is inherently confusing. CG moves along the longitudinal plane (pun intended) yet the airplane pitches around the lateral axis, this is where they get you. Axis and plane should be included in the question imo but the FAA makes the questions confusing by omitting certain things that have to be inferred.

[@FreePilotTraining]

You are absolutely correct. I’m going to be remaking my earlier videos on these topics and it can be super confusing

[@andrewmaclean9810]

@@TheGonkDroid Yeah the FAA loves overcomplicating simple stuff. So many topics on the knowledge test are actually super easy stuff but the way the questions are setup they are a pain in the ass or very confusing (looking at you VOR question bank).

[@InquisitivePilot]

Yes, it is confusing terminology. Longitudinal stability refers to rotation about the lateral axis. Lateral stability refers to rotation about the longitudinal axis. An example of a situation where a person can know the concept being tested but get the question wrong.

[@MsZolon]

Why is CG in line with CL during the cruise phase?

[@FreePilotTraining]

That’s complicated answer. This video explains it. The Complete Guide to Weight and Balance (PPL Lesson 50) kzbin.info/www/bejne/n6nCc4aeedupqtU

[@miltonturney453]

Thanks for your help. Keep it up.

[@FreePilotTraining]

You’re welcome!

[@aviatortrucker6285]

It was one of the first thing I read in the Jeppesen manual. “Speed affects load factor.” This is why maneuvering speed decreases as the plane’s weight decreases from max gross weight.

[@InquisitivePilot]

The speed and load factor question is very confusing. I am at a load factor of 1.0 when I am in straight and level flight at cruise and I am also at a load factor of 1.0 when I am in straight and level flight at pattern speed. Speed itself does not impact load factor unless you make some other assumption, like constant angle of attack.

[@aviatortrucker6285]

@ if you use that line. You’ll get the question right. Rule number one in flying. Don’t over think it. This is how I was able to master the NDB approach when people were struggling to understand what the instrument was saying. Keep it simple.

[@jimallen8186]

These two don’t actually relate while the second concept of maneuvering speed decreasing with decreasing weight is only conditionally true under the condition that something other than the lift producing structure is the critical limiting factor. Two independent concepts one of which is only true conditionally (though easy to see why the FAA treats as absolute as they can’t know when you are or are not in said conditions).

[@jimallen8186]

RE Q1: consider in spin differently than spin entry. One wing stalling in the presence of a skid gets you a spin but once you’re in the spin, both wings will be stalled. Note once in the spin, even steep rolly ones, the roll and yaw work together in a fashion to throw your butt to the wind. (Or throw your canopy to the wind if inverted spin)

[@FreePilotTraining]

I can get behind that, but it only takes on wing stalled to enter the spin

[@KevinSmithAviation]

Excellent work as always Josh. Keep up the excellent work. Safe skies, my friend. 🇺🇸🛩️

[@FreePilotTraining]

Thanks Kevin! Same to you!

[@AirJoe]

Great quiz, I'd love to see some more free videos on data like this.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Awesome! I’ll see what I can do

[@superxpert2514]

I think a lot of people got confused when you had the answers of flaps up or down. On the written test it shows Heavy, clean, and slow. Clean is for flaps up.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Yeah, this is something I wanted to reword so my students actually knew what that meant instead of just studying for specific words

[@aelisenko]

For the CG question remember, CG is a point in 3D space, but in almost all scenarios, C of G questions are referring to the longitudinal CG. Its always some distance from some longitudinal datum. This is a way to remember that CG affects longitudinal stability. The CG of course has vertical and lateral components, but vertical is not usually affected easily, while lateral CG issues arise from fuel and passenger imbalances which can affect lateral stability.

[@jimallen8186]

Directional stability does not exist without the cg; remember it is surface area aft vs surface area forward of cg that creates directional stability. Regarding lateral stability, parts of it don’t rely on cg though other parts like high wing vs low wing do.

[@thomasshelley4617]

Great video! Thank you

[@FreePilotTraining]

You’re welcome!

[@amineamine1969-n5c]

Man , you are doing a great job 👏 ❤

[@FreePilotTraining]

Thanks!

[@ahmedsalaheldinas]

Just took the test last week, 93%

[@FreePilotTraining]

Nice! Congrats!

[@DN-kz7xl]

I'll hop on when you get 100%.😅

[@chillvibeschill5850]

Did you use his study course? I am studying as well. I am just trying to guidance

[@ahmedsalaheldinas]

@@chillvibeschill5850 I used Pilot Institute Course, I also completed basic flight maneuvers. Some of his videos simplified weather, airspace, and compass errors additionally, at least 2 of the questions he mentioned here are in the test.

[@ahmedsalaheldinas]

@@FreePilotTraining Thank you, even though I used a different software to study, I give you credit for the Compass errors, airspaces minimum requirements, and some aerodynamics topics.

[@syrgirl]

The heavy and slow question usually includes the word "clean" instead of flaps. It gets so confusing for me because I don't know if flaps up mean the actual position of the flaps on the plane or the movement of the stick to control the flaps. I know this is a silly question but I would love for someone to explain what flaps up/down actually means. For example, flaps up, to me means you're adding flaps, and flaps down means you're retracting them. These terms were all over the place when I googled. Please help!

[@FreePilotTraining]

Thank you for this comment! It helps me teach better. Never never never refer to the handle position when talking about flaps or gear. Always refer to the flaps or gear themselves. Also, when we say “clean,” that means flaps (and/or gear) are UP. Dirty refers to the flaps and gear being DOWN. Hopefully, this helps you.

[@syrgirl]

@@FreePilotTraining thank youu!

[@SoloRenegade]

It would have been better to frame the second question about thrust and nose dropping to be about thrust line and CG position (thrust line is below the CG). But loss of slipstream over the tail is important to understand too, but the question is poorly worded for that.

[@jimallen8186]

Want some interesting thoughts regarding vortices, and adverse yaw, look into Al Bowers discussing the Prandtl wing. Bell curve lift distribution as opposed to elliptical, longer wings but with more wash such as to produce negative lift, or down forces, at the tips. Hence you get proverse yaw instead of adverse, and your vortices will go down instead of up at the tips… but you’ll get inboard vortices in the normal rotation too. Such necessitates longer wings but requires less structural mass for the wings as up bending is reduced. Significant improvement in efficiency though not going to be good for speed.

[@jeffreymendez3608]

You my friend need to get a life and some🐈 you have to much free time in your hands.

[@aviatortrucker6285]

When in doubt, “ Charlie out.”

[@paulgoducks5387]

I have an app called private pilot. Do you know that app? I like it alot

[@FreePilotTraining]

I’ve never heard of it. I’ll take a look

[@paulgoducks5387]

@@FreePilotTrainingyeah check it out

[@PghGameFix]

CG and CL absolutely should be aligned !!!! that way, when you roll inverted, you don't have to retrim !! LOL

[@FreePilotTraining]

Lol.😂 as we say in the AF, when things get tough, just roll inverted and pull. You’re troubles will be all over

[@jimallen8186]

And increasing your AOA results in unrecoverable backflips.

[@jimallen8186]

“What aspect of stability does cg affect?” Yes, it does longitudinally, but it also plays in lateral too. Vertical cg displacement is really what drives the whole high wing low wing portion of spiral stability discussion. (Reference what they call ‘keel effect’ in PHAK)

[@FreePilotTraining]

Yes, but not all airplanes have a keel effect. Only highwings

[@InquisitivePilot]

Keel effect is for boats. With a boat, the bouyancy force acts vertically. With an airplane in a coordinated turn, the force countering weight does not act vertically, it acts on an angle so it is still aligned with the CG (assuming the cg isn't offset to one side). That doesn't create a restoring moment. The restoring moment is actually a product of slip. Flow over the top of the fuselage increases the lift on the upwind wing and decreases it on the downwind wing.

[@jimallen8186]

@@InquisitivePilot and the FAA’s book calls the high wing low wing stability discussion “keel effect.” Draw the picture, high wing puts cg under the cp and such does create restoring moment, nothing to do with coordinating the turn. Low wing, cp under cg, you get the opposite similar to having anhedral. Draw the picture for both situations.

[@jimallen8186]

@@InquisitivePilot PHAK page 5-17 “There are four main design factors that make an aircraft laterally stable: dihedral, sweepback, keel effect, and weight distribution.” Keel effect is further discussed on page 5-18 though is rather poorly illustrated from the wingtip view, really want a nose or tail on. The seaplane handbook shows the high cg case on 5-3 and 5-4. Alternately, you could look at tailwheel vs tricycle stability and rotate it from the directional to the lateral - it is the same idea cg relative to cp as opposed to cg relative to wheels.

[@InquisitivePilot]

@@jimallen8186 The fact that the PHAK says it means that it would probably be graded as a correct answer on a knowledge test. That doesn't mean that it is actually correct. The reason that paragraph is so confusing is because they are trying to explain something that doesn't actually make sense. Even the confusingly worded paragraph about it in the PHAK attributes the effect to the slip that results from a wing being low, so it would not happen in coordinated flight. The discussion in the seaplane book is talking about something different - inertia. Tailwheel landing gear is not analogous because the forces in question do not aligned with the CG.

[@jimallen8186]

Disagree with your discussion flaps up vs flaps down for stronger vortices; lowering flaps does not decrease your AOA as lowering flaps changes your chord line. You can get a lower pitch, and depending upon where your AOA probe is located, it may display a lower AOA, but you didn’t actually change it as you just changed your average angle of incidence. Rather, instead, you have created a new flow point for high pressure to get around to low pressure. Rather than having strong vortices at the tips, you have “moderate” vortices at the tips and mini vortices slipping around the edges of the flaps.

[@jimallen8186]

In reality, the decreasing AOA with flaps discussion is an ‘and/both’ discussion, not an either/or, but note the inconsistencies around this discussion and discussions around ailerons and how ailerons work. We speak of differential AOA on ailerons not of differential cambers. Lowering flaps changes both camber and also chord’s angle of incidence to fuselage. The primary point regarding vortices, however, that you get more points for pressure relief hence more vortices which spread the strength and can interfere with each other destructively remains.

[@MarkShinnick]

What I know is an airframe pitch up by lowering C150 flaps.

[@jimallen8186]

@@MarkShinnick pitched up or ballooned? And why do you suppose such happened? (Ballooning is a sharp rise sort of a mini-zoom but without pitch similar to as if you just dropped a bomb or load of water).

[@Ifly1976]

I disagree with your disagreement 😮

[@jimallen8186]

@@Ifly1976 which part?

[@SoloRenegade]

The question about AOA and controllability is so horribly written and vague that it needs to be removed from the test altogether. AOA of the wing has nothing to do with elevator effectiveness. First, airplanes are designed with excess tail authority so that you never stall teh tail first and NEVER lose tail control in normal flight. Second, the wing can be designed to have different angle of incidence on different aircraft, and thus has no direct link to tail effectiveness for a given AOA. Whoever wrote these questions doesn't know much about aerodynamics themselves.

[@jimallen8186]

If you increase AOA, you increase downwash which makes the horizontal stabilizer nose up moment stronger. This biases what the elevator can do. If you want nose up, fine, but if you want nose down, your elevator has become more limited. Further, increasing AOA can increase wing and fuselage blanking of the empennage. If blanked, elevator effectiveness is reduced due to less airflow. So the question is fine. Both elevator and rudder become less effective at high AOA. Even if we had no wash and no blanking, such would still be true as, for a given load, high AOA has less airspeed which means less flow by both rudder and elevator which means less “power” to moment development they can apply. So, AOA of the plane has a lot to do with elevator effectiveness. Consider the extreme AOA of a flat spin, in such, your elevator is about useless.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@jimallen8186 "If you increase AOA, you increase downwash which makes the horizontal stabilizer nose up moment stronger." how did you come to this conclusion? what is your proof? Who taught you this? "Further, increasing AOA can increase wing and fuselage blanking of the empennage. " you obviously have no clue how an airplane flies. "So the question is fine. " 1) not it's not a fine question. 2) your understanding is wrong and atrocious 3) you 100% missed the issue with teh question I was talking about. "Both elevator and rudder become less effective at high AOA." this is not true. who taught you this? "Even if we had no wash and no blanking, such would still be true as, for a given load, high AOA has less airspeed which means less flow by both rudder and elevator which means less “power” to moment development they can apply. " please tell me you don't have a pilot's license. this is so horribly false. High AOA can also happen any any speed. "So, AOA of the plane has a lot to do with elevator effectiveness. " no it doesn't, otherwise that make/model of plane would have fatal accidents every week. it would never pass certification. "Consider the extreme AOA of a flat spin, in such, your elevator is about useless." What extreme AOA? Using the elevator is part of how you exit a spin, depending upon the airplane. Have you ever even done a spin? And if so, what airplanes?

[@SoloRenegade]

CG 100% affects lateral stability as well as longitudinal, and anyone who claims otherwise is a Liar! Go fly a C150 and move from one side of the cockpit to the other in flight. What happens when you forget to switch wing tanks in a cherokee? the one side gets heavier and you have to use constant aileron to hold the wings level, and it's exhausting without aileron trim on long flights. Same thing happens in the C150 when one tank doesn't drain as fast as the other on a long flight (really notice it on a 3-5hr leg where you started full fuel and are getting low on fuel and one tank has noticeably more fuel in it than the other). I have "weight shift control" flown cessna 150s all over the United States on xcountries of up to 6hrs one-way. Flew trimmed, hands-off, just using the rudders and shifting my weight in the seat fore, aft, and side-to-side.

[@edixonocilis4482]

Regarding longitudinal stability, I think this question was poorly worded. Here's why. For a number of small planes I've flown (where the effect is most noticeable) when I lean my body forward the plane pitches down because the CG moves forward. Conversely, when I pull my legs back and lean my body rearward the nose pitches up slightly because CG has effectively moved rearward. Therefore, the plane pitching up or down due to a change of the CG is a vertical stability issue. Suggest better defining what is meant by vertical and longitudinal stability. Yaw and pitch could both be considered components of longitudinal stability because the attitude of the longitudinal axis is changing.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Unfortunately, that is incorrect. Longitudinal movement (pitching up and down) occurs around the lateral axis. This is why many pilots refer to this as the “pitch axis.” Movement is always perpendicular to the axis. That is why CG movement causes a pitch up or down. Movement is perpendicular to the axis. It is extremely confusing, but that’s the way it works.

[@SoloRenegade]

10:10 you're confusing nose position with AOA. the two are not the same thing. if you are flying wings level in level flight (not climbing nor descending) and you deploy flaps while holding a constant nose position relative to the horizon, you just increased your AOA, at least momentarily. Now, as things settle out and you descend, slow down, etc. yes, you are generating the same lift at the same or lower AOA. But it CAN increase AOA, and DOES increase your angle of incidence. And refusing to accept this fact is why people continue to struggle with this question. People compare apples to oranges with regards to no-flaps and flaps. People in general simply do not understand flaps.

[@FreePilotTraining]

I discuss this more in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qnyxnXmAbZ6qrKMsi=gz-egvFVWpXzqwTv

[@SoloRenegade]

@@FreePilotTraining I know you have. But I vaguely recall posting comments on that video as well. I don't recall what I posted offhand.

[@CheckrideStudyGuide]

What's that in the corner? 👀

[@FreePilotTraining]

Lol. Hoping yo mention those sometime soon

[@SoloRenegade]

3:06 Wrong. Thrust is NOT tied to lift. Velocity is tied to lift. There is NO variable for Thrust in the lift equation. This is a critical distinction. But I get why people struggle with this idea, as thrust is related to velocity, but not directly. You can increase thrust, and not fly any faster. You can also decrease thrust, and not fly slower. You could even increase thrust, and fly slower, or decrease thrust and fly faster. Velocity affects lift, not thrust, and more thrust does NOT equate to more lift.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Thrust also affects lift in some airplanes. Speaking as a Herk pilot, 60% of lift is achieved by the blown wing in that aircraft. Trainers are also subject to some of the effects of blown wing.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@FreePilotTraining Fair point. but that is why the issue of Thrust affecting list if so confusing for people. The reason you're getting more lift in teh C-130's case is because the LOCAL velocity of the airflow (slipstream) over the wings has changed, NOT the velocity of the airplane necessarily. But the lift equation doesn't care about the aircraft velocity, only the airflow velocity. This is why the Custer Channelwing worked, and why it was able to hover with zero forward airspeed. This is also how the Jetwing experimental airplane achieved its effects, and how blown wing controls that NASA is experimenting with work. As well as how slots and slats on wings helps lift at high AOA (controlling and/or accelerating the local airflow velocity). VELCOITY of the airfoil relative to the air is what affects lift, not thrust. Sometimes, sometimes, that airflow velocity change can come from thrust. But many design have pusher engines, or propellers underslung like the Ford Tri-motor, or internal jet engines. But, we can also reduce the thrust on all four of the C-130's engines, and still increase velocity. Or push the C-130's engines to max thrust and still slow down enough to stall the wing entirely due to insufficient velocity (on the much of the wing at least).

[@FreePilotTraining]

@@SoloRenegade I get your point, but technically, velocity is not correct either. It would technically be the velocity of the relative wind, not the aircraft.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@FreePilotTraining "I get your point, but technically, velocity is not correct either." Wrong. It is velocity. Let me remind you what the Lift Equation is, L = 1/2*Cl*r*S*v^2 L=lift Cl=coefficient of lift r=rho [air density] S=surface area v=VELOCITY [not thrust...VELOCITY] It's right there in the equation. if you want to debate the laws of physics and try to claim the laws of physics are false, be my guest. But if you are not a science denier, then you'll accept that airflow velocity, is an explicit variable of lift. Nonnegotiable. You're debating an Aerospace Engineer and a CFII. You have to be accurate and adhere to the laws of physics with me. "It would technically be the velocity of the relative wind, not the aircraft." Correct, now go back and reread what I wrote. I said, and I quote, "The reason you're getting more lift in the C-130's case is because the LOCAL velocity of the airflow (slipstream) over the wings has changed, NOT the velocity of the airplane necessarily. But the lift equation doesn't care about the aircraft velocity, only the airflow velocity." I even gave you an example of multiple airplanes including one specifically that could hover stationary over the ground, thus proving that it's airflow velocity, not the airplane velocity. If you knew anything about any of the numerous and specific examples I cited, you would have realized that. But the key here is to understand that thrust is not always responsible for more lift, and can also result in LESS lift (such as a thrust reverser). And so claiming thrust and lift are linked when I can cite countless examples with countless aircraft in which that claim is objectively, factually, and scientifically false, is a false statement. And this lack of explaining to student pilots the nuanced realities and complexities of aerodynamics, and instead trying to reduce nuanced concepts down to black and white answers that aren't always true, will continue to confuse and confound pilots for generations to come.

[@FreePilotTraining]

@@SoloRenegade the lift equation is not perfect. It was made by human beings. We could argue over this all day. “Experts” don’t even understand fully what causes lift. lol

[@robav8or]

I know there’s nothing anyone can do about it but many of these questions appear to have been written by amateurs. They’re poorly worded and almost seem to be deliberately confusing REQUIRING ROTE MEMORIZATION to pass the test (ie: decreasing power causes nose to pitch down in other than T-Tail aircraft). Question: If a pilot flying a T-Tail aircraft decreases the power; does the pitch attitude remain level because the horizontal stabilizer is out of the “prop wash”? An airplane designed with more stability requires more effort (pressure) to change the pitch attitude of the aircraft. This could mean it’s “more difficult to control”. Don’t interpret my criticisms as being against this channel. I’m criticizing the test(s) itself. It’s been literally decades since I became a Private Pilot and I’m an airline pilot today. I got several of these questions wrong! And I taught undergraduate-level courses in Aerodynamics and Aircraft Performance at Embry-Riddle!

[@DN-kz7xl]

Question : Is there a PS game which simulates real flying?

[@FreePilotTraining]

I don’t know. Possibly

[@DN-kz7xl]

​@@FreePilotTraining Thank you for the answer. I was just asking because big companies use flight simulators and if there was something similar that could aid in training for the average man which could be utilized in conjunction with actual flying. I have read somewhere that the pilot of the passenger plane lost in Indian ocean, practiced on a simulator in his home. In any case, have a nice day.

[@keppscrossing]

MSFS isn't officially a sim, but it's good enough to really help. Roughly 20-25 or so years ago the US Navy found that their cadets were much more successful in flight school if they had a certain number of hours on MSFS as compared to nothing before flight school. I don't remember the number of hours, but it seems like it was something like 10-20. I would expect similar results from X-Plane. My personal experience with it is minimal, but it seems good enough to help.

[@DN-kz7xl]

@@keppscrossing Thanks for the reply. I do not fly myself as pilot or passenger, but are interested in all aspects of piloting an aircraft. Have a good day.

[@keppscrossing]

@ I got a private pilot license 33 years ago. I also got about half of my instrument rating, working towards being a commercial pilot before I decided that it was a tough career on family life and went a different direction. So I haven't flown much at all in the last 30 years. So I'm not somebody with a huge amount of experience with this, but a fair amount. For many years I did think I would go back to flying in my retirement years but now I have some health problems such as a really bad back injury that will keep me from ever doing it. But I tell you that because for many years I practiced keeping up my skills using Microsoft flight simulator so that it would be easier to pass a check ride when I got back to it. I used to use my real world sectional charts and fly FR routes in my area. Also, sometimes I would fly instrument routes from my hometown to Salt Lake City, using the charts that I had from flight school. Flight simulator is certainly not a perfect training aid, but it is quite good. I think one of the main things that it's lacking is realistic ATC. I am not familiar with the very newest versions of Microsoft flight simulator, but what I was using did not have the ability to verbally talk back to ATC, you had to select Possible responses from a menu. There was, and maybe still is VATSIM, the virtual air traffic simulation network where you would talk to human controllers via team speak. I only did that a little bit because of some of the limitations of my system and my Internet connection 15 years ago. I don't know the status of that now. Please excuse any gross typos because I'm voice texting this on my commute to work, so I'm not going to proofread it until I park.

[@giorgioottaviani2841]

I don’t agree with the answer and the explanation: at the question number 2. Think at a jet (single engine). It has non propwash acting on stabilizer/elevator.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Unfortunately, this is a real question. Just remember it this way. I don’t mind that you disagree one bit

[@giorgioottaviani2841]

@ don’t mind? Sorry. Negativeve training. Maybe FAA should consider to modify this question and the answer. Than you are right. At the moment, it this is. Regards.

[@rodolfopulidosalas6185]

Instead of using your hand to demonstrate something I would suggest to use a scale model.

[@FreePilotTraining]

Yeah, sorry about that. I couldn’t find it