ASA CX-3 for Canada INRAT Written Test

[aholenstein]

Hello fellow Pilots!
I currenly study for the INRAT written. Got my PPL/CPL in 2005/06. It's been a long time since I've had to really study for something. Anyways. I have an ASA CX-2 that I've barely used. But I see that now there is the new CX-3. Both are in the approved list on TC Website to the used during the ex. Is it worth the upgrade?
Thanks,
Andreas

[photofly]

E6-B is actually preferable.

[Caterpillar]

Answer is no. CX2 is sufficent

[praveen4143]

The CX-3 has a few improvements over the CX-2 with a better screen and scrollable interface which makes you have to move around menus a lot less. If you have a hundred bucks lying around that you can afford to lose then go for it. Not really worth the upgrade tbh.

[aholenstein]

Thanks Guys. Might just stick with what i have.

[7ECA]

E6-B is actually preferable.

How does TC remove the batteries to ensure you haven't got some nefarious program stored in the computers memory?

[revilo]

E6-B is actually preferable.

How does TC remove the batteries to ensure you haven't got some nefarious program stored in the computers memory?

They make you twirl the wheel around a couple times.

[Cessna 180]

CX-2 is fine. I used a Sporty's E6B for all my tests. Some TC invigilators made me remove the batteries, some did not. This was years ago, but I don't see how a E6B is preferable. Especially when you're writing ATP exams or the IATRA, the ability to easily calculate mach numbers is worth its weight in gold. The only calculation I know of that the CX-2 or Sporty's (both approved devices) can't do is true altitude or whatever that's called. Maybe the CX-3 can, I have no idea.

[Bede]

Flight computers are too easy. You should have to use the cosine law to resolve the vectors.

Maybe we could all get into the 21st century and use whatever app/software works best.