Need help in Aptitude Question

Because I believe this technique is new to you AND because you have shown some real effort I'll walk you through this one time:

Write an equation for each traveler's position:

Let Pg=Girl's position (i.e. Distance from 'home') at time T
Let Pb=Boy's position (i.e. Distance from 'home') at time T
Let T = Time elapsed since girl's departure

Equation 1) Pg=T*35
Equation 2) Pb=(T+2.5)*10

Note that we want to know how long the girl has been riding when she catches up to the boy

i.e. Pg=Pb

Thus:

T*35 = (T+2.5)*10
^Girl's Pos^ = ^Boy's Pos^

Now solve for T:
35T=10T+25 ------ (Via. Distributive property of multiplication)
25T=25
T=1

Hence the girl overtakes her brother in 1 hour

This technique will greatly ease your solution of many problems! --- Please study it carefully! Once you have mastered this we will explore more sophisticated (and 'powerful') aproaches...:)

Best regards
HP

PS -- To any concerned parties -- Please note that I supplied the problem - hence all is on the 'up and up':)
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

RRITESH KAKKAR

Joined Jun 29, 2010
2,829
A girl riding a motorcycle at 35 mph left home 2+(1/2) hours after her brother, who was riding a bicycle at 10 mph. How long will it take the girl on the motorcycle to overtake her brother if they are traveling in the same direction?
Ask yourself some sanity check questions.

How far away from home is the brother when the girl starts out?

D=sxt 10x2.5=25miles

How far away from home is the brother one hour after the girl starts out? How far has the girl gotten in this amount of time?
D=sxt 10x2.5=25miles + sxt 10x1 = 35miles in 3.5hrs
girl has travel
D = SxT =35x1= 35miles


How far away from home is the brother two hours after the girl starts out? How far has the girl gotten in this amount of time?
D=sxt 10x2.5=25miles + sxt 10x1 = 35miles in 3.5hrs + sxt 10x1 = 45miles in 4.5hrs

girl has travel
D = SxT =35x2= 70miles
please first tell is this fine?
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
32,866
who is pilot-in-command?
what they do?
First and foremost they are responsible for safety of flight. In fact, in the U.S. and most countries they have explicit authorization to deviate from any regulation and disobey any instruction from anyone else if it is their believe that not doing so endangers safety of flight. Now, they will likely be required to defend their decision once they are back on the ground, but they only have to establish that their action was reasonable given the situation and their actual knowledge at the time their decision was made.
 
First and foremost they are responsible for safety of flight. In fact, in the U.S. and most countries they have explicit authorization to deviate from any regulation and disobey any instruction from anyone else if it is their believe that not doing so endangers safety of flight. Now, they will likely be required to defend their decision once they are back on the ground, but they only have to establish that their action was reasonable given the situation and their actual knowledge at the time their decision was made.
Ah! Yes! Such is the way of federal regulations! À la the (FCC) stipulation that one may use (i.e. transmit on) 'any frequency' in an emergency -- Though, having done so, heaven help them if they cannot demonstrate cause!:eek: All of which is to say -- if one is an aviator, a radio operator or a holder of most any other federally issued license -- mind the restrictions! Unless the prospect of failure to do so is less 'inspiring' than loss of one's license (at very, very least!) Cases in point: violation of military airspace (Re: aviation) or 'chatting' on public safety frequencies (Re: Radio) tend to create their own safety-of-life emergencies - quick-like!:eek::eek::eek::D

With benevolent officiousness
HP:)
 
Last edited:

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
32,866
When I was taking my FAA checkride the examiner asked me if I was authorized to land at a military airport or on a closed runway in the event of an emergency. I told him that I would land anywhere I could physically do so safely (or a safely as I could) and we would discuss the legal fine print in some office somewhere at some later time. He then asked if I would insist on landing at a restricted military airfield even if I were being threatened with being shot down. I said that while I was more than willing to challenge legalities on the ground that I had no intention of challenging weaponry in the air, but that my prior answer still applied since I would have a hard time safely landing an airplane at a military airfield after eating a missile and thus if I believed that they might actually fire I would pick the next best place and hope for the best. I got full marks.

When I did my pre-solo check flight with the owner of the school and we were going through the emergency procedures he asked what steps I would take to minimize damage to the airplane in an emergency landing. I told him that beyond the degree to which minimizing damage to the aircraft also implied minimizing damage to the occupants, that I wouldn't do one damn thing; that if the owner of the airplane wanted it back in one piece, they should have taken better care of it and that, as far as I was concerned, once that propeller stopped turning that airplane was forfeit. He then asked if I was aware that he personally owned the airplane we were flying in. I simply said, "Yeah, and your point would be?" I got full marks.
 
Top