Old airplane driver's view of Part 107 test

[Mike Drop]

When I took my written test for my private ticket many years ago, I passed with a 92 percent. I was bragging about it to my CFI when he said "Well, you'll only be wrong 8 percent of the time."
Watching YouTube videos about the Part 107 test, I see a lot of people bragging about dragging a low passing score over the goal line.
I'm not sure that's the goal at all.
For the drone drivers who scored 72 percent, how much knowledge did you retain? The point, in my opinion, is not to just squeak by on the test but to demonstrate that you thoroughly understand the material.
Well, do you?
Its in my best interest (and maybe all of ours) not just to chew up and spit out the material but to digest it.
Having said that, I went back to review the AIM/FAR. I was shocked and not a little disappointed at what I had forgotten. Before I take the part 107 test, you can be sure I will study until I have a command of the material.
I don't want to be wrong 28 percent of the time.

 

[BSauce955]

When I took my written test for my private ticket many years ago, I passed with a 92 percent. I was bragging about it to my CFI when he said "Well, you'll only be wrong 8 percent of the time."
Watching YouTube videos about the Part 107 test, I see a lot of people bragging about dragging a low passing score over the goal line.
I'm not sure that's the goal at all.
For the drone drivers who scored 72 percent, how much knowledge did you retain? The point, in my opinion, is not to just squeak by on the test but to demonstrate that you thoroughly understand the material.
Well, do you?
Its in my best interest (and maybe all of ours) not just to chew up and spit out the material but to digest it.
Having said that, I went back to review the AIM/FAR. I was shocked and not a little disappointed at what I had forgotten. Before I take the part 107 test, you can be sure I will study until I have a command of the material.
I don't want to be wrong 28 percent of the time.

Truer words were never spoken.

 

[adcimagery]

When I took my written test for my private ticket many years ago, I passed with a 92 percent. I was bragging about it to my CFI when he said "Well, you'll only be wrong 8 percent of the time."
Watching YouTube videos about the Part 107 test, I see a lot of people bragging about dragging a low passing score over the goal line.
I'm not sure that's the goal at all.
For the drone drivers who scored 72 percent, how much knowledge did you retain? The point, in my opinion, is not to just squeak by on the test but to demonstrate that you thoroughly understand the material.
Well, do you?
Its in my best interest (and maybe all of ours) not just to chew up and spit out the material but to digest it.
Having said that, I went back to review the AIM/FAR. I was shocked and not a little disappointed at what I had forgotten. Before I take the part 107 test, you can be sure I will study until I have a command of the material.
I don't want to be wrong 28 percent of the time.

That’s an admirable sentiment. I think 100% command of the material would be more important if 100% of the material was relevant to safe and effective drone operation, however.

Consider the questions on runway markings and signage - it’s great to know those, but are 99% of drone pilots going to need that information? The same goes for reading the national scale weather charts - understanding the weather at 400 ft away, in VLOS, doesn’t require understanding the conditions on the other side of the continent.

 

[tibadoe]

...........Consider the questions on runway markings and signage - it’s great to know those, but are 99% of drone pilots going to need that information?.........

For me - YES. When I fly I check the VFR Sectional maps. Knowing the pattern planes fly gives me important info.

 

[BigAl07]

That’s an admirable sentiment. I think 100% command of the material would be more important if 100% of the material was relevant to safe and effective drone operation, however.

Consider the questions on runway markings and signage - it’s great to know those, but are 99% of drone pilots going to need that information? The same goes for reading the national scale weather charts - understanding the weather at 400 ft away, in VLOS, doesn’t require understanding the conditions on the other side of the continent.

@adcimagery you do realize that Part 107 is a little bit bigger than just "mavics taking Real Estate pictures" don't you? Part 107 encompasses up to 55lb aircraft and operations other than just your local neighborhood. As someone who has indeed actually USED airport markings for a large project we did on the grounds of KAVL I can say some people need that information. Just because it doesn't apply to you and how you currently operate doesn't mean the material isn't relevant to others in the industry. Think BIG PICTURE not just your mavic.

I totally agree with you @Mike Drop !! With Part 107 being so silly easy it should require much higher standards but passing is passing unfortunately. What do you call the guy who scored 70% on his medical license? DOCTOR lol

Unfortunately there is no "practical" aspect to Part 107 so if you can memorize well you can probably pass the test with little to NO subject matter retention. Sadly we see this glaring fact every single day online between this forum and FaceBook. People who have their Part 107 asking the most rudimentary questions demonstrating they studied to pass the test rather than knowing the subject matter. To be honest, the way Part 107 is right now, I think that should be for Recreational operations and a much tougher test and flight/safety demonstration be created for Commercial Operations. I also would be good with levels of Commercial licensing. One level for simple Real Estate in G Airspace and tougher licensing for higher risk aircraft and more complicated flights.

 

[adcimagery]

For me - YES. When I fly I check the VFR Sectional maps. Knowing the pattern planes fly gives me important info.

I’m referring to runway markings and signage, not sectionals. Something like the taxiway ending marker, for instance.

@adcimagery you do realize that Part 107 is a little bit bigger than just "mavics taking Real Estate pictures" don't you? Part 107 encompasses up to 55lb aircraft and operations other than just your local neighborhood. As someone who has indeed actually USED airport markings for a large project we did on the grounds of KAVL I can say some people need that information. Just because it doesn't apply to you and how you currently operate doesn't mean the material isn't relevant to others in the industry. Think BIG PICTURE not just your mavic.

I totally agree with you @Mike Drop !! With Part 107 being so silly easy it should require much higher standards but passing is passing unfortunately. What do you call the guy who scored 70% on his medical license? DOCTOR lol

Unfortunately there is no "practical" aspect to Part 107 so if you can memorize well you can probably pass the test with little to NO subject matter retention. Sadly we see this glaring fact every single day online between this forum and FaceBook. People who have their Part 107 asking the most rudimentary questions demonstrating they studied to pass the test rather than knowing the subject matter. To be honest, the way Part 107 is right now, I think that should be for Recreational operations and a much tougher test and flight/safety demonstration be created for Commercial Operations. I also would be good with levels of Commercial licensing. One level for simple Real Estate in G Airspace and tougher licensing for higher risk aircraft and more complicated flights.

Do you think the patronizing tone is necessary for a response to a casual comment?

The fact that you have to present a special scenario for your superior knowledge of runway markings proves my point. The vast majority of 107 ops will not require 100% understanding of meteorology and markings.

The test currently emphasizes broad, mediocre knowledge of all aspects of aviation, and I believe that’s why many people are left with questions. Refocusing it on the fundamentals of safety, with supplemental tests for more unique scenarios, like airport ops, would be better for everyone.

 

[BigAl07]

@adcimagery I stand behind ever word I posted as it's fact and a Real-World scenario. Part 107 is a BROAD subject. That's how this works.... the UAS Industry is so much more than just flying a mavic around a house/landscape/desert for pretty pictures.

Yes I gave a "special scenario" (One that actually took place and does across the country every day) to emphasize one of the many errors of your post. Should I have included doing Structure Inspections on the ILS towers as an example? Maybe so. Should I have included doing Search-n-Rescue directly under the approach path of an ACTIVE runway? Maybe so. The "special scenarios" that seem to not sit well with you happen all the time day in and day out and they are part of just a sliver of why Part 107 is so broad.

Just because the subject matter is bigger than what you need/use doesn't mean it's not suitable to many others in this industry. Think bigger than just your needs and uses and even bigger than just what you see on Mavic/Phantom Pilots forums. There is a great big world out there not restrained by "just" Mavics and Phantom UAS and they need to be included in Part 107 for the Good and Safety of ALL of us! thinking any other way is being very short sighted!

 

[Mike Drop]

@adcimagery you do realize that Part 107 is a little bit bigger than just "mavics taking Real Estate pictures" don't you? Part 107 encompasses up to 55lb aircraft and operations other than just your local neighborhood. As someone who has indeed actually USED airport markings for a large project we did on the grounds of KAVL I can say some people need that information. Just because it doesn't apply to you and how you currently operate doesn't mean the material isn't relevant to others in the industry. Think BIG PICTURE not just your mavic.

I totally agree with you @Mike Drop !! With Part 107 being so silly easy it should require much higher standards but passing is passing unfortunately. What do you call the guy who scored 70% on his medical license? DOCTOR lol

Unfortunately there is no "practical" aspect to Part 107 so if you can memorize well you can probably pass the test with little to NO subject matter retention. Sadly we see this glaring fact every single day online between this forum and FaceBook. People who have their Part 107 asking the most rudimentary questions demonstrating they studied to pass the test rather than knowing the subject matter. To be honest, the way Part 107 is right now, I think that should be for Recreational operations and a much tougher test and flight/safety demonstration be created for Commercial Operations. I also would be good with levels of Commercial licensing. One level for simple Real Estate in G Airspace and tougher licensing for higher risk aircraft and more complicated flights.

Yer preachin' to the choir.
I think a demo flight monitored by a designated instructor/examiner is a darn good idea.

 

[Deleted member 137163]

Truer words were never spoken.

BSauce955 I am impressed with your perspective and outlook at 16. Keep that going and life will be good! You appear wise beyond your years!!

 

[JC in New Hampshire]

I'm not sure many would call the 107 test "silly easy". When I took mine, I knew the stuff cold and fully expected to score 100%. When I complained to the monitor that some of the questions were deliberately vague resulting in a score only in the mid-90s, he quipped, "If somebody got a 100 they'd probably change the test!"

By comparison, I'll say, the TRUST certification is a joke. Since you must guess repeatedly until getting the right answer before advancing to the next question, a monkey making random mouse clicks would eventually pass with a perfect score.

 

[BigAl07]

I'm not sure many would call the 107 test "silly easy". When I took mine, I knew the stuff cold and fully expected to score 100%. When I complained to the monitor that some of the questions were deliberately vague resulting in a score only in the mid-90s, he quipped, "If somebody got a 100 they'd probably change the test!"

By comparison, I'll say, the TRUST certification is a joke. Since you must guess repeatedly until getting the right answer before advancing to the next question, a monkey making random mouse clicks would eventually pass with a perfect score.

It's done that way so that study tactics like "memorization" and "associations" will not work. This is SOP for testing with the FAA and other such agencies. Just because you "recognize" an answer doesn't make it the RIGHT answer. It helps weed out those who study "just to pass" as opposed to those who actually learned the Subject Matter to begin with.

It's very common to see the most common (or 2 most common) WRONG answers in the answer bank. Here's a totally made up example:


What is the MAX altitude a UAS can fly, under Part 107, in class G airspace?

• A) 500'AGL
• B) 400'MSL
• C) As high as you can see the UAS and still be able to control it safely
• D) 400'AGL

I wouldn't blame the testing creator for mixing up words and answers in order to make the applicant do some thinking and pay attention to details and wording . . . seems kind of logical tbh.

 

[Deleted member 137163]

I'm not sure many would call the 107 test "silly easy". When I took mine, I knew the stuff cold and fully expected to score 100%. When I complained to the monitor that some of the questions were deliberately vague resulting in a score only in the mid-90s, he quipped, "If somebody got a 100 they'd probably change the test!"

By comparison, I'll say, the TRUST certification is a joke. Since you must guess repeatedly until getting the right answer before advancing to the next question, a monkey making random mouse clicks would eventually pass with a perfect score.

In all seriousness I believe most tests have psychologists behind them. If a quality, seasoned airline pilot had to take the current ATP exam they hopefully would not fail but may get lower than expected. As a manned pilot I earned my 107 easily in 2016. That said I did not purchase and fly a drone until Spring 2021.

Trust like other FAASafety.gov courses, including TSA training are exactly as you properly state. I would hope flyers of all kinds want to have knowledge to be safe and competent. I said "I would hope..."

 

[JC in New Hampshire]

What is the MAX altitude a UAS can fly, under Part 107, in class G airspace?

• A) 500'AGL
• B) 400'MSL
• C) As high as you can see the UAS and still be able to control it safely
• D) 400'AGL

Interesting. Thanks for that information.

More interesting is that your example is very closely a question I missed. The question on the exam was worded such that selecting the correct answer hinged on differentiating between whether the maximum allowable altitude is less than 400'AGL or not more than 400'AGL.

Frankly, I don't remember the answer and I'd venture a guess that if we polled the members of this community about half would guess right and the other half would guess wrong. And, it's a moot point anyway since there doesn't exist an altimeter that can tell you with zero error when you are at precisely 400'AGL.

I agree with you that the test should be rigorous, but in my HUMBLE opinion, that particular question was unfairly vague and designed as much to trip up people as to elicit a firm understanding of the underlying principles.

 

[Deleted member 137163]

If manned air

Interesting. Thanks for that information.

More interesting is that your example is very closely a question I missed. The question on the exam was worded such that selecting the correct answer hinged on differentiating between whether the maximum allowable altitude is less than 400'AGL or not more than 400'AGL.

Frankly, I don't remember the answer and I'd venture a guess that if we polled the members of this community about half would guess right and the other half would guess wrong. And, it's a moot point anyway since there doesn't exist an altimeter that can tell you with zero error when you are at precisely 400'AGL.

I agree with you that the test should be rigorous, but in my HUMBLE opinion, that particular question was unfairly vague and designed as much to trip up people as to elicit a firm understanding of the underlying principles.

Having taken 10 FAA (what we used to call written) exams over 37 years I understand BigA107's example and statements. A goal of 100% is a good thing but not always possible....enter the psychology infused questions. I have attained 100% on 2 out of 10 but I will admit the others were somewhat close but not 100. I always prepared for the best score. The computer testing center of today let you review the incorrect questions which is useful. There have been times like BigA107 showed....and I said "oh AGL not MSL" and that is my fault.

Being excited about a 70% is a bad way to go about life in general.

 

[Zbip57]

I think a demo flight monitored by a designated instructor/examiner is a darn good idea.

The Canadian "Advanced" certificate requires passing an actual flight test, whereas the "Basic" does not. I would think demonstrating adequate ability to control your aircraft in flight would be a far more relevant test than being able to identify different cloud types, etc.

Being excited about a 70% is a bad way to go about life in general.

So true.

There are too many videos on YouTube from people bragging they passed the online knowledge test having done no studying whatsoever. They simply Googled the answer to every question. So even if they don't understand the question, or don't understand why the correct answer actually is the correct one, they still managed to pass the test.

It does make one question the utility of such a test.

How often will the average drone flyer ever encounter a need to decode a METAR? If you're planning to fly something all the way across the continent, it would make sense to know what the weather is doing at certain points enroute. But if you are simply flying in your backyard or local park, with a drone capable of staying airborne for 20 minutes or less, wouldn't the standard weather rock be just as useful at predicting the weather?

 

[Davebacon137]

That’s an admirable sentiment. I think 100% command of the material would be more important if 100% of the material was relevant to safe and effective drone operation, however.

Consider the questions on runway markings and signage - it’s great to know those, but are 99% of drone pilots going to need that information? The same goes for reading the national scale weather charts - understanding the weather at 400 ft away, in VLOS, doesn’t require understanding the conditions on the other side of the continent.

Right on. To me it's like whoever made up the test questions ran out of the ones pertaining to drones.

 

[adcimagery]

@adcimagery I stand behind ever word I posted as it's fact and a Real-World scenario. Part 107 is a BROAD subject. That's how this works.... the UAS Industry is so much more than just flying a mavic around a house/landscape/desert for pretty pictures.

Yes I gave a "special scenario" (One that actually took place and does across the country every day) to emphasize one of the many errors of your post. Should I have included doing Structure Inspections on the ILS towers as an example? Maybe so. Should I have included doing Search-n-Rescue directly under the approach path of an ACTIVE runway? Maybe so. The "special scenarios" that seem to not sit well with you happen all the time day in and day out and they are part of just a sliver of why Part 107 is so broad.

Just because the subject matter is bigger than what you need/use doesn't mean it's not suitable to many others in this industry. Think bigger than just your needs and uses and even bigger than just what you see on Mavic/Phantom Pilots forums. There is a great big world out there not restrained by "just" Mavics and Phantom UAS and they need to be included in Part 107 for the Good and Safety of ALL of us! thinking any other way is being very short sighted!

Creating one test to cover every situation in this “big world” results in these compromises.

The FAA clearly knows this - hence the existence of student, sport, private, commercial, ATP, class ratings, instructor certificates, etc. Imagine if 1 test had to cover ATP pilots operating out of JFK and someone flying a kitfox from a dirt strip in Nebraska. Neither would get a test fully applicable to their experience.

But for drones, 1 test has to cover everything from a casual flight of a Mini where you want to sell a photo, to complex ops with a 55lbs drone - that’s compromising the safety training of everyone. Casual Mini pilots cram to pass the test with a low score, while serious operators are neither challenged nor tested enough.

 

[Robert Prior]

here are too many videos on YouTube from people bragging they passed the online knowledge test having done no studying whatsoever. They simply Googled the answer to every question. So even if they don't understand the question, or don't understand why the correct answer actually is the correct one, they still managed to pass the test.

It does make one question the utility of such a test.

According to a friend who's a lawyer…

Passing the test demonstrates that you know the material. Retaining information you learned is your responsibility. It means you can't use "I didn't know" as a defence if you are sued for a violation. (Which, apparently, may be a factor in civil cases where degrees of culpability are assessed.) There are apparently cases where it is better to be unqualified, because then the expected level of competence is lower.

How much this applies to aviation and drones he wasn't willing to venture — it was a general observation based on past legal experience in liability lawsuits.

 

[Robert Prior]

But for drones, 1 test has to cover everything from a casual flight of a Mini where you want to sell a photo, to complex ops with a 55lbs drone - that’s compromising the safety training of everyone. Casual Mini pilots cram to pass the test with a low score, while serious operators are neither challenged nor tested enough.

So the real solution is multiple classes of drone license?

Sounds like a better solution, but whether there's resources for it is another matter.

 

[Mike Drop]

So the real solution is multiple classes of drone license?

Sounds like a better solution, but whether there's resources for it is another matter.

It sounds good but on the other hand it looks like it would add layers of bureaucracy. Still, I think it bears a resemblance to the endorsements on a private pilot ticket (high performance, tail wheel, seaplane rating, etc).