IFR Mock Checkride with

[@daniellamb7828]

Lower pressure in cabin. Fast moving air around the fuselage, due to Bernoulli's Principle, pulls air out of the fuselage thereby decreasing the pressure. When using the alternate static source, You should see a momentary climb of ~100fpm and about 20-40 feet high in altitude, depending on how fast you are moving. (A Bonanza would probably show a higher altitude than a Sky Hawk, due to the increased IAS).

[@cheesepilot]

Thanks for the correction

[@willonthewing2860]

At 1:29:30, the MRA of 4500 applies only to reception of the VOR whose cross radial is used to identify the intersection marked with the “R” flag; it does not apply to reception of the VORs used to track the airway.

[@gallot9536]

Nice video! More IFR mock checkrides please 🙏🏼

[@cheesepilot]

alot of students schedule them but not many are okay with getting them recorded and posted sorry. i only post the ones i have permission to post

[@alex13usa]

I did my PPL exam prep with @Cheesepilot and now watching this video to prepare for the IFR exam. BTW my PPL exam was easy and smooth!

[@kalinaarnold9794]

Such a coincidence I also fly in the Kansas City area! Watching in preparation for my check ride tomorrow!

[@EricaCalman]

Confidence in your answers implies you aren't just guessing, but it doesn't actually mean you're not guessing, and its much better to be uncertain but right than confidently incorrect.

[@MikeMcNanners]

That's how I feel, but we keep being trained to be confident even if you don't know, and never act uncertain. I wonder why training has adopted that...

[@PBAR_B1B]

I flew a B-1 on a transoceanic flight with no GPS, only INS, and it was fine. It was accurate enough to get the radar cursor within a mile or two for a radar update fix, even after several hours of no updates.

[@cheesepilot]

That’s awesome that it worked so well

[@londonmoren9611]

Fantastic video, I’m not even half an hour in but this format is great, explanation of the answer is not known or wrong.

[@londonmoren9611]

Finished whole video now, was great, I’ll watch more of your instrument videos if you have more, but you should go a little more in depth on weather atleast a little bit in future instrument checkrides.

[@PilotCesar]

1:17:00 8k because it is the highest of MEA( minimum for the segment, expected and assigned)

[@AhHalo-y2z]

ok so i just flew my C-172 X-Plane from Cancun, KMSY, KBNA, KMKE, KFLD. Smoked 12 cigars and listened to a bunch of these mock checkride videos all at the same time. One question.... Does Fleet Farm sell "Prop Wash"? I need to clean my real plane before the Packers game.

[@davidwasicek8999]

This guy is funny. Thanks

[@hmrbruce]

I agree what is going to brake this week

[@w1adfrank]

VORs MON: when they work-northern NV often out of range of ATC and VOR and more often than not VOR notamed as unserviceable.

[@aaronthomson2353]

Training out of falcon field in mesa. I appreciate this content !

[@Rodhern]

I will give a hot take on the deflection scale discussion at 59:30. I don't have any references, and I am basically pulling it out of thin air, so there is that. The most common traditional approach procedures have angular lateral deviation scales, e.g. LOC, VOR, NDB. At some point we became able to get LNAV guidance, and the obvious display choice was absolute cross-track-error. Likewise, the obvious choice for vertical deviation (BARO-V/NAV) was the difference, 'in feet', from your calculated nominal path. It turns out (easier to notice in hindsight for sure) that it is difficult to design a safe LNAV approach procedure with low MDA. It is reasonable to design approaches, such that an aircraft can safely go-around when reaching half-scale CDI deflection, say. The thing is on an ILS approach, established on approach close to the ground implies close to the runway, which in turn means a narrow CDI full-scale (or half-scale) deflection in absolute cross-track distance. Not necessarily so with LNAV. That means a go-around might begin from a relatively awkward off-track position when flying LNAV. In a nut-shell, it turns out the traditional ILS approach design was better than we maybe realized. To get the best from both worlds (angular scale and absolute scale) the LP guidance can be made so that at long distances it behaves like LNAV (absolute scale, so as to not become too wide), during final approach it is angular, and then somewhere nearer the threshold it again uses absolute scale. You may want ensure that you can fly the LPV vertical profile at least as precise as LNAV/VNAV. Therefore full scale deflection for LPV should not grow (too far) beyond that of a comparable LNAV/VNAV approach, which means LPV vertical guidance probably should be absolute at long distances too, just like the LP lateral guidance. So, to have the best of both worlds then, both lateral and vertical guidance should use angular scales for the final approach proper, but linear guidance may be better usable at the very far end and the extremely close end of the approach path. That might be the explanation why so few people are willing to confidently say angular or linear, as the truth may actually be "both". edit: added "(too far)" to soften statement about LPV vertical scale.

[@DrakePattee]

OK, so I have some questions. 1. @1:17:10 the scenario of lost comms direct to X. I understand 4K then 8k @ 10m but if there was an OROCA higher than 4K before the 10m, would you not pick the higher altitude until 8k @ 10m? 2. @1:30 MRA is to ensure reception of waypoint INDIC via SLN vor radial 151, correct? The MEA should ensure reception along the entire route @ 3600 via ICT - EMP vor v12. Example you would have navigation reception from ict to emp @ 3600 but would not be able to identify waypoint INDIC unless at 4500. Thank you in advance! Great video

[@sebastianwalker2200]

If atc does make that mistake, then yes you should climb to the oroca after the 4k then after 10min climb to 8k. This still plays into the minimum, expected, assigned for lost comms altitudes

[@danielreuter2565]

A velcro stopwatch would technically be permanent equipment but because it's not STC then it's not legal

[@moisesgonzalez421]

When pulling The Alternate Static Source the pressure inside the flight deck is lower to the pressure outside so it is like you're flying at a higher altitude because the pressure will be lower I believe correct me if I'm m wrong

[@cheesepilot]

I've always thought the pressure in the cabin is slightly higher since you have more air getting into the cabin through things like ram air vents than getting out through things like door seals

[@jonathanmeikle9773]

Pressure inside the cabin is higher due to venturi effect. The air along the fuselage (and static port) is moving at a high velocity, which creates a low pressure. Think Bernoulli’s.

[@danielreuter2565]

The written test says lower pressure inside and higher altitude also small change in the vsi before it returns to 0

[@cheesepilot]

@@danielreuter2565 oh thanks for the correction

[@EvanGear1527]

@@jonathanmeikle9773Phak says it is lower page 8-3

[@ethancarter8745]

SFO, IAH and EWR have several GLS/GBAS approaches. I think United has invested a lot in them

[@andrei111393]

When will we see a mock commercial? Great content

[@cheesepilot]

I think there is a few up already

[@HectorRodriguez-fl5dm]

@@cheesepilotare you sure? You dont sound very confident in your answer.

[@xmax126]

2 hour video couldve been 1 hour if you cut out all the bs.

[@adanl5910]

free video

[@xmax126]

@@adanl5910 Nah I paid​, with an extra hour of my life that I'll never get back

[@drewbrown7513]

Go make your own video for 1 hrs then.

[@cheesepilot]

sorry if this video didnt meet your expectation. This was a new experiment to try and bring experience and free training to the public. I feel as if I learned alot from the feedback on this and other videos and hope you check out some of the newer ones that stay a bit more on topic.

[@xmax126]

@@cheesepilot Hey I appreciate you putting out the video and taking the time to read the comments. My comment was meant to be more constructive criticism then anything else. Most people are going to watch to get an idea of the checkride and not hear of topic chatter. Keeping it to the point will ensure viewers watch the entire video, subscribe, as well as come back for more. Instructors will also recommend the video to the students if it's good enough....

[@Rodhern]

Well, LORAN might be back again some time (as eLORAN). Edit: Also, I am pretty sure that you can get, or at least used to be able to get, ADF and DME integrated in your Garmin G1000.

[@cheesepilot]

Yeah you can integrate it I knew I flew a c172 with @und that had adf

[@lewisaguilo8118]

What were you guys talking about starting at 51:11

[@Heli-IFR]

At the begining you kept mixing up IFR and IMC, you fly IFR anytime you file an IFR flight plan

[@cheesepilot]

Yeah sorry about that

[@jordenlafortune1811]

Did he just call me a nerd?!

[@cheesepilot]

A curd nerd to be correct 😅

[@rjwilso1]

Hello all!!!!

[@et1665]

What app are y’all talking about?

[@cheesepilot]

i use garmin pilot but she is talking about flightplango www.fltplan.com/

[@rafaelguzik4231]

I think it was the FAR AIM app

[@cheesepilot]

Oh yeah we were talking about that too

[@phillipssimracing9585]

The app is goated, its called like far/aim. It $10, always is updated. And you can hightlight and bookmark

[@rodolforeyes1293]

Can she log actual IFR time without having the rating?

[@cheesepilot]

Yep is it's received as part of training

[@craigcrissman4651]

A VFR pilot flying alone can log actual time if they're navigating solely in reference to instruments in VFR weather conditions, like for instance a moonless night in the desert. See the 1984 Carr letter. You don't need an instrument rating to legally log actual instrument time.

[@theRealGreenBaron]

​@@craigcrissman4651 Yeahhh...bout that bud; great for hangar lawyer talk, the Carr letter is an opinion; it does give reference to some governing FARs, but not in context. For example, is it legal to borrow a friends car? Yes. Is it legal to own a gun? Yes. Is it legal to get money from a bank? Yes. Is it legal to wear a ski mask? Yes. Is it legal to carry money in big bag? Yes. I rest my case your honor! Me thinks inadvertent flight into IMC would be a better hill for you to stand on. You spend 6 minutes in inadvertent IMC, can you legally log 0.1 actual instrument? Well, according the FARs I don't see why not! 🙄😅

[@codeganrcs]

I never post negative comments on videos but for this one I can't just ignore and move on... When I first saw the duration of this video, I thought it'd be great and one of the most complete IFR mock checkride videos out there. Unfortunately, that's far from being the case, very poor video, lacks lots of subjects (like weather, to mention one of the most important ones). A lot of time was wasted by adding side stories that are only funny for the owner of the channel. With a video this long, you missed the opportunity of doing something remarkable. Instead, you made one of the most mediocre videos for IFR mock checkride. I hope you come up with something better in the future, and I hope even more that IFR students who are about to get their checkride done (like myself) don't use this video as a reference for what an actual IFR checkride is.

[@cheesepilot]

Thanks for the feedback any other details you think I should have added?

[@cheesepilot]

as for weather by this point the student should already have a solid grasp on weather as its part of their private pilot check ride. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qWHIf3SZbpemaNU this one might be more your vibe if your looking for more question an answer. sorry that this didnt meet up to your standards

[@craigcrissman4651]

​@@cheesepilotweather is an extremely important part of flying IFR and DPEs are always going to be asking questions about it on an instrument ride. Especially things that you are far more likely to encounter in instrument flying than visual. Things like icing and de/anti-icing equipment, embedded thunderstorms, limitations of FIS-B radar. Saying that "they should know that from private" when referring to one of the most important topics for IFR flight is frankly ridiculous. The rest of the video was great and I really enjoyed it but this argument doesn't pass the sniff test.

[@alexandreamontano8036]

Have you found a good video? I’m still looking