Why does the FAA Part 107 test require learning apparently unnecessary knowledge?

[Dangerly]

I started looking at the Part 107 practice tests, and I was struck by how much "useless" knowledge seems to be required. A good example would be learning that the wrong angle of attack causes a stall for a fixed wing aircraft. Can someone explain to me how this specific knowledge about angle of attack would ever help a drone pilot?

 

[Robert Prior]

AFAIK, Part 107 includes all drones, including fixed-wing models. I could be wrong about that, though.

I know that in Canada our sRPAS license includes all remotely-piloted aircraft, not just quadcopter drones. So our test includes questions like that because they are relevant to some sRPAS pilots.

 

[MS Coast]

I started looking at the Part 107 practice tests, and I was struck by how much "useless" knowledge seems to be required. A good example would be learning that the wrong angle of attack causes a stall for a fixed wing aircraft. Can someone explain to me how this specific knowledge about angle of attack would ever help a drone pilot?

It's that way because the test initially evolved from fixed wing education and testing materials and it's not been modified to be more specific to SUAS. And as @Robert Prior pointed out, Part 107 does include fixed-wing drones. But even considering that, you'll find quite a bit of content that's not really relevant - airport traffic patterns, meteorology reports, aerodynamics, ... The Part 107 test could certainly use an overall revision.

I had a Part 61 certificate from years ago, so most of that content was familiar in my case. If you work through the practice tests you'll find online, you'll probably pick up most of the content that might appear on the test and do just fine. For now, it's just something we have to put up with.

 

[Dangerly]

It's that way because the test initially evolved from fixed wing education and testing materials and it's not been modified to be more specific to SUAS. And as @Robert Prior pointed out, Part 107 does include fixed-wing drones. But even considering that, you'll find quite a bit of content that's not really relevant - airport traffic patterns, meteorology reports, aerodynamics, ... The Part 107 test could certainly use an overall revision.

I had a Part 61 certificate from years ago, so most of that content was familiar in my case. If you work through the practice tests you'll find online, you'll probably pick up most of the content that might appear on the test and do just fine. For now, it's just something we have to put up with.

Mind blown. In all the Youtube videos and training courses I've seen, no one has mentioned getting a Part 107 in order to fly fixed wing UAS. Good to know, and now I'm wondering: How many pilots here fly fixed wing UAS?

 

[philztoy]

Nothing wrong with a little basic aerodynamics. Which would be important for fixed wing operations like the gentlemen above mentioned.

An interesting aside is that there have been reports in the news of sudden unexplained loss of altitudes and the like on commercial passenger flights. They report the symptoms and at least three of them had symptoms of a wing stall. Heavy plane high angle of attack, shuddering, rapid loss of altitude as plane goes nose down for the recovery attempt and then straight and level flight after scaring the crap out of everyone.

Knowing airspace requirement,s meteorrology reports, traffic patterns is all kind of important if we are sharing the skies with and have to avoid general aviation traffic it is good to know how they operate.

Plus, having a commercial license puts you at a much higher standard of care than a recreational pilot so you just should know more than the average guy. It still really isn't as much as a general aviation pilot but it is more.

The FAA always has you prove you learned a bunch of seemingly useless knowledge. But some of it becomes surprisingly important from time to time. Like airline pilots that stall fricking passenger planes trying to climb out too fast with a heavy, edge of CG loaded, jet plane.

 

[pentatony]

Part 107 is outdated and unnecessary and irreleveant to todays drone pilots. A new totally revamped test specific to drone/uas pilots needs to be made. But it's a governmnt worker that would to make it. No money. Lazy

 

[GregS]

I started looking at the Part 107 practice tests, and I was struck by how much "useless" knowledge seems to be required. A good example would be learning that the wrong angle of attack causes a stall for a fixed wing aircraft. Can someone explain to me how this specific knowledge about angle of attack would ever help a drone pilot?

When I fly, I look at the B4UFly app for weather and look at the sky. I don't need to be able to read METAR reports, even though I am a retired Military Pilot and Commercial Part 61 Pilot.

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

Autel Dragonfish is a fixed wing drone so angle of attack and stalling matters.

 

[ImpossibleTom]

If doing a mission near an airport some of the information would be important but it does seem a bit over the top. How many of us are actually flying near airports?

 

[spsphotos]

If you take Pilot Institutes training (highly recommended by me and many others) he will teach you way more than you need. Why? Because just knowing the basic rules is fine but UNDERSTANDING how it all fits together and what other forms of aviation are required to know is a plus and makes for better pilots. Just like driving. You only need to know some basic rules and how to steer and brake, but that does not make you a good driver.

 

[Grandpa]

I took my 107 for grits and shins and was amazed at how much confidence I gained just from the experience. Definitely made me a better pilot.

 

[Dangerly]

If you take Pilot Institutes training (highly recommended by me and many others) he will teach you way more than you need. Why? Because just knowing the basic rules is fine but UNDERSTANDING how it all fits together and what other forms of aviation are required to know is a plus and makes for better pilots. Just like driving. You only need to know some basic rules and how to steer and brake, but that does not make you a good driver.

Thanks and I get your point. I actually find it interesting to learn all this probably useless knowledge and I feel like I'm plugging into the history and culture of the FAA.

To carry your analogy further, I think it it would be more like if the automobile driver's test forced you to learn how to drive a motorcycle when all you're ever going to drive is your Tesla.

 

[Big Bro]

How many pilots here fly fixed wing UAS?

I have for many years!

 

[Big Bro]

If doing a mission near an airport some of the information would be important but it does seem a bit over the top. How many of us are actually flying near airports?

I do almost daily!

 

[Dangerly]

I took my 107 for grits and shins and was amazed at how much confidence I gained just from the experience. Definitely made me a better pilot.

Hey Grandpa, same here. May I ask what are a few of the top things you learned from the 107 that made you a better pilot? I've been flying recreationally for years and intend to continue to remain purely recreational after I get the 107. I've tried my best to stay within the bounds of "recreational" and so I'm especially interested in finding out if the 107 makes you a better recreational pilot?

 

[Robert Prior]

How many of us are actually flying near airports?

I'm often flying within the control zone for one of the airports in my city. That's why I bought a Mini 3 — so I could fly without having to drive a fair distance.

 

[AlanL]

Hey Grandpa, same here. May I ask what are a few of the top things you learned from the 107 that made you a better pilot? I've been flying recreationally for years and intend to continue to remain purely recreational after I get the 107. I've tried my best to stay within the bounds of "recreational" and so I'm especially interested in finding out if the 107 makes you a better recreational pilot?

I would rephrase that to be it makes you a more aware recreational pilot. I got my 107 for exactly that reason and do not intend to do commercial work.

 

[pentatony]

Autel Dragonfish is a fixed wing drone so angle of attack and stalling matters.

If your flying a dragon fish, it will immediately revert to quad mode if a stall occured, even if that possible with a drogon fish. It's an electric motor, it won't stall. Regardless, if you talk fixed wing, then let the fixed wing flyers take the 107. Quad pilot's need and should have a different exam.

 

[Dangerly]

I'm going to reply to my own posting here by telling the story of the worst near-disaster I had with my drone. I'll explain that the one thing I needed to know that would have helped me, is not taught on the Part 107.

I was flying in class G airspace, did my B4YouFly, far from any airport, was flying over water at about 100 feet altitude and 300 feet distance, when a Navy Coastguard helicopter came up over a nearby hill on the other side of the water. No ADS-B signal. It was flying low and fast and straight towards my drone and me so I had what seemed like seconds to decide what to do. Me, the drone, and the helicopter were almost in a straight line. The helicopter came so close I could recognize the individual faces of the people in the helicopter.

What I should have done was an emergency CSC power shut off and lost the drone in the water. But at the time I'd never heard of a CSC power shut off. That's the advice that I haven't seen taught by the FAA that I wish I'd known. (If they do teach this, my bad! I missed it so far in my studies.) What I did was the best I could do at the time, which is dive the drone down and sideways as fast as I could. Fortunately it was a miss.

I had no idea what to do afterwards. I stopped by my local Coast Guard office to ask how I could prevent this in the future and they had no ideas.

 

[Zbip57]

Can someone explain to me how this specific knowledge about angle of attack would ever help a drone pilot?

Angle of attack also applies to propeller blades, which are essentially rotating wings and thus are equally susceptible to stalling under conditions of excessive angle of attack.

That said, our RPAS tests here in Canada also include some questions which are ridiculously inapplicable to drone flying, like the one about scuba diving.