Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Guest KC10IPTravis
Posted

Yes, it is open book..but you can link to the master question file thru the link on baseops.net or Langley AFB web site, but only from .mil sites. Or leave your e-mail and I'll foward it to you. PS - I wouldn't get caught doing the open book with the MQF next to you..FYI!!!

  • 1 year later...
Posted

IRC test?

You mean the annual IRC test that is open book?

You mean the IRC where the dude giving the test generally leaves the room so all test takers can collaborate for answers?

You mean the IRC that is correctable to 100%?

No, sorry, don't have any gouge.

Posted
Originally posted by Toro:

IRC test?

You mean the annual IRC test that is open book?

You mean the IRC where the dude giving the test generally leaves the room so all test takers can collaborate for answers?

You mean the IRC that is correctable to 100%?

No, sorry, don't have any gouge.

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

HD

[ 15. February 2006, 09:28: Message edited by: HerkDerka ]

  • 1 year later...
Guest AZPilot
Posted

Gentlemen (and Ladies)

I and several of my peers are currently in a pilot transition course (new airframe due to BRAC) and are due to take the ever challenging IRC in the next week. Where can we find the IRC gouge that might be available. We were advised to check Baseops but are not having any luck with locating anything but course (Ugh!) description!

Any help!

thx

azp

Posted
Gentlemen (and Ladies)

I and several of my peers are currently in a pilot transition course (new airframe due to BRAC) and are due to take the ever challenging IRC in the next week. Where can we find the IRC gouge that might be available. We were advised to check Baseops but are not having any luck with locating anything but course (Ugh!) description!

Any help!

thx

azp

I thought the IRC stuff was the AETC ADLS course (online CBT), or at your respetive MAJCOM ADLS website.

Posted

I took the IRC a couple weeks ago at Altus and don't see the need for gouge. I had the list of possible questions, but I didn't bother looking at it since it was a huge list and the test was open book with no time limit anyway. Don't waste your time trying to study for the IRC. All you need to know is how to look up answers in a book.

Posted

assuming you're talking about the Instrument test, and not the IRC, which is NOT a prerequisite for taking the test. The IRC can be taken with 5 hrs of CBT and 1 hr of instruction with an AIS graduate.

The Instrument test, as others have mentioned, is open book, and it's HIGHLY recommended that you take ePubs in there with you and utilize the SEARCH function in Adobe to avoid much pain.

  • 1 year later...
Posted

Taking my yearly test and unfortunatly AFSOC does not allow the use of e-pubs for testing. Not a huge deal and I've looked up all but one question. I'm looking for the online question bank accessible from a non .mil computer. Anyone know where I can locate this info?

Posted

Not having e-pubs sucks, but you can always do the "you have 1-10, you have 11-20...." That'll cut your time by a lot. IRC sucks...not that you didn't already know that.

Posted

Not having e-pubs sucks, but you can always do the "you have 1-10, you have 11-20...." That'll cut your time by a lot. IRC sucks...not that you didn't already know that.

Individual testing here so each person has to look up everything. It's really not that hard once you're familiar with what type of information is located where, which I'm sure you are. Truthfully it's a decent refresher since e-pubs was allowing me to be lazy.

Posted
Truthfully it's a decent refresher since e-pubs was allowing me to be lazy.

Yeah I guess you're right, but it's still a pain. Although I'm sure you probably use this stuff a lot more than I do. I just feel like a lot of the IRC goes so deep into the weeds that part of me does think "well I guess it's good I did this b/c I totally forgot that", but the other part of me realizes I never have applied said subject, rule, etc. while flying and just based on the mission probably never will. There's a ton of little rules out there that really in the big scheme don't make much of a difference...but, I do realize some of the annoying stuff you just have to know and deal with.

Posted

Yeah I guess you're right, but it's still a pain. Although I'm sure you probably use this stuff a lot more than I do. I just feel like a lot of the IRC goes so deep into the weeds that part of me does think "well I guess it's good I did this b/c I totally forgot that", but the other part of me realizes I never have applied said subject, rule, etc. while flying and just based on the mission probably never will. There's a ton of little rules out there that really in the big scheme don't make much of a difference...but, I do realize some of the annoying stuff you just have to know and deal with.

Thats a gateway into a long conversation. I agree with you that it gets deep in the weeds, but at the same time thats not a bad thing for a yearly refresher. When I flew 130s I got pretty nit-noid about knowing all I could, partly because I did in fact find myself at several unique locations where that knowledge helped; but also because the more you know the more confidence you have, and that confidence helps me fly better. Maybe its just me, but when I step to the aircraft with the feeling that I know my shit cold, I just end up performing better.

Having said that I totally understand why a Viper guy doesn't care about NDB intercepts or low close in obstacle TERPs criteria. I'm suprised they don't let you guys take the test with the non -16 info filtered out. I'm still getting used to the single engine mindset, but it definitely makes calculating climb gradiets easier; you can either make what is published or you can't, end of story. no SDPs no subtracting from OCS, etc. And in your case you can probably always make the climb, so who cares about the stuff that doesn't apply to you? It's just more brain bites you can save for mission memory items that matter.

Posted (edited)
I totally understand why a Viper guy doesn't care about NDB intercepts or low close in obstacle TERPs criteria.

It's stuff like that I'm referring to. Realistically the "craziest" IAP I'll do is a TACAN pen with an arc...holy crap, watch out. NDB what? Teardrop...how bout vectors buddy? And as far as climb stuff...exactly, we either can make it or we can't (eject). There isn't any figuring into single engine only and all that. I know it's a thin line and I don't want to come off as sounding like instruments stuff isn't important b/c it is, there's just a lot of stuff that doesn't really apply much, if at all, to us. I can completely see all this stuff applying to flying a C-130 into multiple austere fields around the world.

Regardless, I'll continue to hate the IRC, but admittedly I will gain at least some little amount of knowledge every year that I forgot from the previous test. It's not all bad, just 95% bad! :thumbsup:

Edited by brabus
Posted

IRC stands for Instrument Refresher COURSE. The Instrument TEST you take associated with your checkride has NOTHING to do with IRC. The two are NOT linked together. IRC is a currency item, not a test.

And that stupid Instrument test is completely BS for helicopter pilots. I could care less about a HI ILS, have no idea what an MLS is, don't think I'll ever reach 250 kts to hold, and our approach minima are completely different.

Posted

If your instrument test has bogus questions that don't apply to your airframe, talk to your group stan/eval. They're the ones who determine which questions off the MQF (and local, airframe specific questions) get tested. If they're using PEX, they may use the "random" question generator, which has the dual bonus of testing irrelevant stuff and never hitting the same question enough to develop any meaningful trend data. If not, you can tell them to leave out HI TACAN questions or NDB station passage indications as applicable.

Same goes for the IRC -- there's stuff that instructors must cover, but a lot of it is at their discretion. If it sucks, tell them so, and figure out how to make it better. I personally feel that the CBT is a big cop-out. Our IRC, for instance, walked through several scenarios that might be encountered on a multi-day trip from homestation to a deployed location, with stuff like departure alternates, Jepps approaches, 1801 filing, etc. It can be a very productive, useful tool that generates discussion and real learning. Or, it can be a waste of six hours. This is one professional training course you can actually influence, so make it worthwhile.

  • 6 months later...
Posted

Does anyone have the link to the IRC hot topics webpage (or AFFSA IRC / AIS webpages)? All the links in my regs are broken and my web searches are going in circles.

V/R, Chuck

Posted (edited)

Does anyone have the link to the IRC hot topics webpage (or AFFSA IRC / AIS webpages)? All the links in my regs are broken and my web searches are going in circles.

V/R, Chuck

I had a lot of old bookmarks and links that are no good now too. I think (not 100% sure) that they've moved a lot of that stuff onto the portal. I think I remember seeing an AFFSA Community of Practice on the portal too.

Edited by FireMission
Posted

Look no further than Baseops.net

24njqpu.jpg

I have looked and found no links to the AIS webpage nor the hot topics page, only the master test bank.

The COP is a pain in the a$$ program. Guess I'll have to try muddle through it though. Thanks, FireMission.

If anyone can give more direct routing, I'd appreciate it.

  • 1 year later...
  • 2 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...