100 questions written for LATAM / Avianca / Copa’s actual selection process. Below are 5 of them in full — the prompt, what the panel is really probing, a model answer, the red flags that fail it, and the follow-ups that come next. No account, nothing to sign.
Question 1 of 100·technical
Define V1, Vr and V2. How does a high-elevation airport affect each?
What they are really probing: The definitions are standard. The altitude effect is the reason this question is asked here.
Model answer
Define them precisely: V1 is the decision speed — the maximum speed at which the first stopping action must be taken to stop within the distance available, and the minimum speed at which the takeoff can be continued on one engine. Vr is the rotation speed, at which you rotate to achieve V2 by the screen height. V2 is the takeoff safety speed, the minimum speed to be achieved at the screen height with one engine inoperative, which guarantees the certified second-segment climb gradient and adequate control. Then the altitude effect, which is the substance. At a high-elevation airport the air density is lower, so for a given indicated airspeed the true airspeed and therefore the groundspeed are much higher — an aircraft rotating at the same indicated speed at four thousand metres is physically moving far faster over the ground than at sea level. That has three consequences you should name. First, the runway required is far longer, because the aircraft must accelerate to a higher true speed and, in a reject, decelerate from it — and kinetic energy scales with the square of the speed, so brake energy becomes limiting. Second, thrust falls with density, which lengthens the go case as well as the stop case. Third, the climb gradient after failure is degraded exactly where the terrain is highest. Say that the indicated speeds themselves are computed by the performance data and may not look dramatically different — the trap is thinking the takeoff is normal because the numbers on the tape look familiar. Close with the operational reality of the region: at airports such as La Paz, Bogotá or Quito the limiting factor is usually a combination of elevation, temperature and terrain, and the answer is a payload restriction rather than a technique.
What fails this question
- — Definitions with no density reasoning
- — Confusing indicated and true airspeed at altitude
- — Forgetting brake energy in a high-elevation reject
- — No mention of degraded climb gradient with terrain
Follow-ups they ask next
- — Why is a reject worse at La Paz than at sea level?
- — What limits your payload at Bogotá on a hot day?
- — Do the indicated speeds look different?
Question 2 of 100·technical
What is ETOPS, and where does it apply in Latin American operations?
What they are really probing: The obvious answer is over water. The more interesting one is over land with nowhere to land.
Model answer
Define it: ETOPS is the approval permitting a twin to operate beyond a threshold time — commonly sixty minutes — from an adequate alternate at the approved one-engine-inoperative cruise speed, with approvals extending well beyond that for suitably certified aircraft and operators. Then place it in this region, which is the point of the question. The obvious applications are the long over-water sectors: the Pacific crossings to Oceania, the South Atlantic to Europe and Africa, and Caribbean and Central American routings where the alternates are islands with limited capability and weather that changes fast. Then the less obvious one, which is worth raising because it shows regional understanding: parts of South America present the same problem over land. Long stretches of the Amazon basin and the southern cone have very few airfields able to take a widebody, and the Andes present a terrain problem rather than a distance problem — an engine failure that forces a driftdown over high terrain is a performance question before it is an ETOPS question. Say that the two interact: the driftdown level must clear the terrain, and the diversion field must be reachable at that level. Then the planning items: ETOPS-significant systems serviceable, the MEL's ETOPS column, en-route alternates with planning minima higher than landing minima, and the critical fuel scenario assuming an engine failure with depressurisation at the critical point. Close with the practical habit: check the alternates and their weather before the entry point, because after it the decision has already been made for you.
What fails this question
- — Confusing diversion time with distance
- — Only considering over-water application
- — No link between driftdown level and terrain
- — Unaware planning minima differ from landing minima
Follow-ups they ask next
- — How does terrain change a driftdown diversion?
- — What is the critical fuel scenario?
- — Which alternates would you use over the Amazon?
Question 3 of 100·technical
Define a stabilised approach. What changes at a high-elevation airport?
What they are really probing: Same criteria, different energy. Groundspeed is what makes these approaches hard.
Model answer
List the criteria: on the correct lateral and vertical path, in the landing configuration, at the target speed within the operator's tolerance, thrust stabilised above idle, rate of descent within limits, checklists and briefings complete, and only small corrections required — stable by a thousand feet above field elevation in instrument conditions and typically five hundred in visual. Then the gate is a limit, not a target: not stable means go around, and either pilot calls it. Then the high-elevation difference, which is the substance. At the same indicated approach speed the true airspeed and groundspeed are much higher, so on a three-degree path the required rate of descent is significantly greater — a figure that would be a red flag at sea level is normal at altitude, and the crew must know which is which. Everything happens faster over the ground: the turn radius is larger, so a late turn onto final overshoots; the flare and the float consume more runway; and the energy to be dissipated on landing is greater, which matters on a runway that is already long because of the elevation. Then say what you do about it: work from the actual required rate for the groundspeed rather than a memorised number, configure earlier because you have less time, and be more conservative about accepting a short track or a high intercept. Then the terrain: these airports are usually surrounded by it, so the approach may be a procedure with steep segments, circling restrictions or an RNP-AR track, and the missed approach may climb on a specific route that must be briefed. Close with the honest ranking: at high elevation, an unstable approach is harder to recover, so the threshold to go around should be lower, not higher.
What fails this question
- — Applying a sea-level rate-of-descent figure
- — No awareness of the larger turn radius
- — Treating the gate as a target
- — Ignoring the terrain-driven missed approach
Follow-ups they ask next
- — What rate of descent would you expect at Bogotá on a 3-degree path?
- — Why is a late turn onto final worse here?
- — How does the go-around differ?
Question 4 of 100·technical
What is RNP-AR, and why is it used so much in this region?
What they are really probing: Terrain. The answer is that some of these approaches cannot exist any other way.
Model answer
Start with the definition: required navigation performance with authorisation required. RNP means the aircraft monitors its own navigation performance and alerts the crew when it cannot meet the required accuracy — that monitoring and alerting is what separates RNP from RNAV. AR means the procedure is demanding enough that the operator, the aircraft and the crew must each be specifically authorised, because it may use accuracy values below the standard, may require curved radius-to-fix legs, and has obstacle clearance that depends on the aircraft staying inside a narrow corridor. Then the regional answer, which is the point: many airports in the Andes and in Central America sit in valleys or basins surrounded by high terrain, where a straight-in procedure with conventional obstacle clearance is geometrically impossible. An RNP-AR procedure can curve through a valley, follow terrain, and deliver an aircraft to a runway that would otherwise need a visual manoeuvre in conditions that are frequently not visual. So the approach exists because the terrain demands it, which also explains the strictness: there is no reversion. A loss of the required performance inside the final segment is a go-around, not a downgrade, and the missed approach may itself be RNP, climbing on a specific track because that is the only direction that clears. Then the crew implications: specific training, knowing which failures invalidate the approach, an inability to fly it raw data, and a briefing that covers the loss case before you start. Close with the honest point about satellite interference and database currency — an approach whose safety depends entirely on position accuracy deserves a crew who know what would make that accuracy wrong.
What fails this question
- — Cannot expand 'AR'
- — No mention of monitoring and alerting
- — Thinking you can downgrade during the approach
- — No understanding of why terrain drives its use here
Follow-ups they ask next
- — You lose the required RNP on final. Actions?
- — Why can the missed approach not be straight ahead?
- — What would make the position inaccurate?
Question 5 of 100·technical
Explain ground effect and how it affects a takeoff at high elevation.
What they are really probing: A trap question: the aircraft can fly in ground effect at a speed it cannot sustain out of it.
Model answer
Define it: within roughly one wingspan of the surface, the ground interferes with the wingtip vortices and the downwash, which reduces induced drag and effectively increases the lift produced at a given angle of attack. The aircraft feels as though it has more performance than it does. Then the hazard, which is the reason the question exists: an aircraft can become airborne in ground effect at a speed at which it cannot climb once it leaves it, and the transition out of ground effect brings an increase in induced drag and an apparent sink. At high elevation and high temperature, where the true airspeed is high and the excess thrust is small, that margin is at its thinnest, and a rotation made early or too fast is exactly how an aircraft gets airborne and then settles. So the technique matters: rotate at the computed speed, at the normal rate, to the target attitude — not earlier because the runway is disappearing, and not faster because it feels slow. Say that the computed speeds already account for the conditions, and that the temptation to help the aeroplane off is the error. Then the other ground effect consequences worth naming: on landing it produces float, which at high elevation and high groundspeed is expensive in runway, so the technique is a firm arrival in the touchdown zone rather than a held-off landing. And in an engine-out case, the reduced climb gradient means the aircraft may spend longer near the surface, which is where the terrain around these airports becomes the issue. Close with the operational answer: performance is calculated, not felt, and the aircraft flies the numbers rather than the impression.
What fails this question
- — Describing ground effect as extra thrust
- — Suggesting early rotation on a short runway
- — No mention of the sink when leaving ground effect
- — Ignoring the float problem on landing
Follow-ups they ask next
- — Why is early rotation dangerous here specifically?
- — What does ground effect do on landing?
- — How far above the runway does it act?
Same depth as the 5 above — model answer, red flags and follow-ups on every one. You just read a twentieth of the pack; if those five were not worth your time, the rest will not be either, and you should not buy it.
— Define QNH, QFE and QNE, and explain the errors that matter in this region.
— What is RVSM and what altimeter checks does it require?
— Define a TCAS resolution advisory and a traffic advisory. What is your action on each?
— What are the memory items for a rapid decompression, and what changes over the Andes?
— How do you compute landing distance on a contaminated runway?
— Give me an MEL example and explain what a deferral actually commits you to.
— What are SIDs and STARs, and what makes arrivals into the region's dense hubs demanding?
— Decision altitude versus decision height — which do you use and when?
— Brief the windshear escape and say what would stop you being in that position.
— Describe how a centralised alerting and checklist system should be worked in a failure.
Not affiliated with LATAM / Avianca / Copa. Process details are sourced and dated; candidate-reported detail is labelled as reported.