On 4/8/2005 13:37, Michael wrote:

Well, perhaps you understood the original question better than I did,

but I didn't see anyone suggesting that the flight be started when
the weather was threatening an early termination; only that the oral
portion be allowed to be done even if the flight had to be postponed
until later.

But starting the oral portion makes it more likely that a flight will
be made. If the ride is cancelled, there's no pressure. If it's
already started, there will be some pressure to finish it - analogous
to get-home-itis. Therefore, it's safer to just cancel if it's at all
iffy. Why rely on the judgment of the pilots to make a good call with
respect to weather when it actually happens - safer to avoid the whole
situation by cancelling if there is doubt. After all, cancelling for
weather is never a mistake, right?

If the student would push for a flight test in weather that shouldn't
be flown in, the test should be failed. If I were a D.E. (which I am
not) I would think this a great opportunity to see how the pilot
evaluates the situation.

After all, after the test is passed, the pilot will begin making
these decisions on his own.


All the FSDO is doing here is reducing the opportunity for the examiner
to exercise his judgment and thus possibly make a mistake. Surely
there can't be anything wrong with that? Can there?

I think one of the tasks the examiner should be doing is evaluating
the decision making processes of the pilot.

However, I'll agree that if you never take any risks, you'll improve
your chance of survival. I don't want to survive that way, but that's
my personal opinion.


Michael



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL
Sacramento, CA