Tricky examiners

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 21:30:37 -0800, "BT" wrote:


How high was the airplane? I can come down pretty quickly without diving
and increasing airspeed just by slipping.

So he'd have to be in a position where he was too low to do a 360, and too
high to do a controlled slip.
--ron

Yes "you" can "slip it in"... he did not even try to slip..

His head was definitely "up and locked" and he turned into a passenger as it
went through the far fence, no engine for a go around..
BT


Well, I was responding to your statement, "...You get yourself too high..
and you will not make it.. " NOT realizing that you were only referring to
a particular pilot (or perhaps to a group of pilots who don't know how to
slip).

And you may well be correct that there are a lot of pilots who don't know
how to use a forward slip. I don't often fly with other pilots, but when I
do I am amazed at the shallow, power on approaches most opt for (VFR). I'd
rather have that extra altitude until landing is assured.
--ron

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 21:55:38 -0600, Dallas
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:17:32 GMT, JGalban via AviationKB.com wrote:

While I was inside, the examiner reattached the tail tiedown.

That's completely rotten and unfair! That would never happen in real life
and pretty much serves no purpose during a checkride, except to un-nerve
the poor student who is already in a pretty frazzled state already.

I call foul!

Maybe it is unfair, and maybe not. My personal rule is to do a pre-flight
inspection if the airplane has been out of my sight.
--ron

On Jan 3, 12:12*pm, Dallas wrote:
I've been greatly amused by examiner trick stories lately, like Dudley's
story of an examiner bringing in his child to have the CFI candidate teach
him lift. * Or the one where the examiner failed the flaps and asked the
student to find the ground frequency of the airport at the same time to see
the reaction.

I'll also add that on both my private and my commercial checkride the
examiner got really, really, really chatty as we approached the class
D airspace. Their goal was for me to be afraid to interupt them and I
bust the airspace.

-Robert

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 14:08:35 -0600, Dallas
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:46:30 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:

I'll disagree with you. It shows how the student reacts when something
unexpected happens.

But if the student didn't react well to the trick, would that be grounds to
bust the checkride?
..
Looking through the PTS, I don't see anything on the examiner's test
checklist that requires the student to be tested or pass something like
this.

Just playing devil's advocate, how about II.A - Preflight Inspection?
Tiedowns are on the checklists for the aircraft I fly, and I was
always taught to re-check things if I had to go away from the aircraft
for any length of time just because some nice line guy might chock or
tie it back up.

Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:


Obviously they are motivated to not be too tough, but what consequences do
they risk if they just let everyone pass?

I have no doubt that you aren't going to understand this but I'll write
it anyway.

Most people when put in a position of public trust will do what they can
to live up to that trust.

You are correct; not a snowball's chance in hell he will understand
what you are talking about.

Maybe if Microsoft releases an Ethics and Values Simulator he will get
a clue.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jan 3, 12:12?pm, Dallas wrote:
I've been greatly amused by examiner trick stories lately, like Dudley's
story of an examiner bringing in his child to have the CFI candidate teach
him lift. ? Or the one where the examiner failed the flaps and asked the
student to find the ground frequency of the airport at the same time to see
the reaction.

I'll also add that on both my private and my commercial checkride the
examiner got really, really, really chatty as we approached the class
D airspace. Their goal was for me to be afraid to interupt them and I
bust the airspace.

That's why having a pilot isolate setting on the intercom is really
handy, both for checkrides and real life.

If the examiner asks why you went to pilot isolate, you simply say
cockpit management to elimate chatter at a crucial point in the flight.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:49:37 -0600, Gig601XLBuilder wrote:

Most people when put in a position of public trust will do what they can
to live up to that trust.

This is strictly hearsay, but I recall my CFI saying that if one of the
candidates that the DPE passed ruins his whole day due to poor airmanship
it is reflected in that DPE's FAA files.

I have no idea how accurate this statement is.

--
Dallas

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 17:58:39 -0600, Dallas
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:49:37 -0600, Gig601XLBuilder wrote:

Most people when put in a position of public trust will do what they can
to live up to that trust.

This is strictly hearsay, but I recall my CFI saying that if one of the
candidates that the DPE passed ruins his whole day due to poor airmanship
it is reflected in that DPE's FAA files.

I have no idea how accurate this statement is.

I've heard the same, along with the CFI "owning" you for 3 years.

As I hear it, if you screw up, both the CFI and DPE can be interviewed
during a specified time period after the certificate issuance.

Peter Clark wrote:
Just playing devil's advocate, how about II.A - Preflight Inspection?
Tiedowns are on the checklists for the aircraft I fly, and I was
always taught to re-check things if I had to go away from the aircraft
for any length of time just because some nice line guy might chock or
tie it back up.


If I step away for a few moments, how can I possibly not notice the airplane is
tied down again or that a chock has found its way in front of a tire again?
You'd have to be pretty unconscious or distracted beyond your tolerance.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Gig601XLBuilder writes:

Most people when put in a position of public trust will do what they can
to live up to that trust.

Unless, of course, they are being paid to be "not too tough."