Old airplane driver's view of Part 107 test

[Zbip57]

I'm guessing some of you have CDL's. [Commercial Driver's Licence?] Do you have to be a "good" or even a "safe" driver to acquire one. Absolutely not.

We spend a good portion of the year driving on snow and ice, so you'd think there be a requirement for some level of proficiency in basic skid control. Nope. Our driver's licence test places far more emphasis on really important things like parallel parking. Sheesh.

Safety enforcement focuses primarily on speed limits, as though that's the only factor that's important. Yet everywhere you see people driving without even watching the road. They're all busy texting on their phones. Before it became illegal to text-while-driving, people used to balance their phones up on the steering wheel, so they could at least glance past the phone at the road occasionally. But now that we have these new "safety" laws, the unintended result is that everyone drives with their heads bent down to look at their lap where they're hiding their phone while texting. Now everything is so much safer. Sheesh.

 

[Tomk_]

Attempting to do something "better" is always an honorable goal. I guess the real question is = is it feasible or necessary to change the current system. I'm not sure that it is. I believe, given the scope, no one will ever be able to provide a system without flaws. I believe what we have is reasonable.

 

[HeliDog]

A lot of you have hit it head for the safety awareness aspect of the part 107; my next goal after the holidays. Night photography, with all camera types, has been a favorite past time as well as landscape photography.

I took my cross country and in my flying club's 150 Aerobat. When time permitted, practicing limited acrobatics over our local permitted areas was a joy..at a time I never had to worry about meeting a 55 pound drone head on. Just not a thing in the early 1980s.

 

[Mike Drop]

Interesting discussion.

I get the distinct impression that many here have limited experience taking government test for various certifications. I can assure you that ones administered by the FAA are some of the best. It's my opinion that those from ATF+E are the poorest. The "best" example is the explosives handlers license. While it's stated purpose is safetly, there is actually nothing tested about the actual safe handling or use of explosives. They say it tests your knowledge of the regs, but because you actually have access to the regs during testing, it really tests your ability to understand how the regs are put together. You are given 2 hours for the test but it can be completed in 20 to 25 minutes. With an hour of coaching, I could show anyone reading this how to pass this test, and most would get 100% without ever reading the regs from start to finish. I think it's a joke...yet people fail it all the time. Some people are better at taking tests. Some people are better at retaining what they've learned. Some people are good at guessing.

When I got my private pilot certificate, my DE told me "Congratulations! you have demonstrated the minimum required aptitude to be issued a license to learn."

I'm guessing some of you have CDL's. Do you have to be a "good" or even a "safe" driver to acquire one. Absolutely not. Yet there are 100's of professional drivers out there with, perhaps, millions of miles of flat land interstate driving than would not be able to safely haul cattle to summer range in the mountains or even pull a D8 on a lowboy across town.

Most tests are ostensibly about safety. That will always be subjective as that is really not definable because "safe" doesn't exist. All we can do is merely attempt to be safe. The test is a feeble attempt to quantify the unattainable for the purpose of documentation.

I got the same reaction from my CFI. "Now you have a license to learn".

 

[Robert Prior]

I get the distinct impression that many here have limited experience taking government test for various certifications.

I’ve spent three decades as an instructor, which included annual recertifications. Which were contracted out and honestly an embarrassment of trivia and errors.

Certainly the Canadian test needs work. As I said elsewhere, I think we’re on the right track but the implementation is flawed.

 

[NG Wildman]

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.

When I show up for the test they need to have a trophy ready for me just for showing up...LOL. I respect and believe in your outlook. I frequently review things I have completed in the past. There are often things we never learned or things we need to re-learn. Ironically this line of review thinking is a breath of fresh air. Thanks for the rewind !!!

 

[Mike Drop]

When I show up for the test they need to have a trophy ready for me just for showing up...LOL. I respect and believe in your outlook. I frequently review things I have completed in the past. There are often things we never learned or things we need to re-learn. Ironically this line of review thinking is a breath of fresh air. Thanks for the rewind !!!

Thank you, Wildman.

 

[TwoSticks]

Knowing the information 100%, really knowing it, will not make someone a good pilot. It will only make them liable for being a bad pilot. I learned a lot in the process of the 107 and took it without a need to do commercial work. I felt there had to be rules to using something that was able to go the distance my drone can go and once looking into everything decided I’ve come this far in research I should just take the test too. I think the basic level should be the 107 equivalent. It’s really not that difficult and knowing more about manned aviation gives a greater perspective on unmanned. The manned flight is predictable and governed to the point we only need know where we are to know what they are doing so we can operate unmanned around it. Debating how well the test prepares someone is of little use. Even making it 4 times more difficult you will have people pass that are poor pilots. I see poor truck drivers who have a test much harder than operating a car. Having a license does not make you good at a skill. Having a toolbox full of tools does not provide you the ability to fix anything. The exam tries to demonstrate skills a good pilot would use but ultimately provides someone else the ability to say you should have known better.

 

[Deleted member 154956]

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.

The FAA has a duty and obligation to "weed out" those borderline and "barely legal" operators who have no intention of integrating themselves into the legal and SAFE realm of manned and unmanned flight, and by utilizing the Knowledge Tests, this is somewhat achieved. No system is perfect but the KT's have been used for decades and I don't believe it would be in anyone's best interest to say less knowledge is better.