How many in this club?

The DE's point was, don't use
private airfields as waypoints.

That's not what I'd take away from it. I'd take away "don't use
waypoints you can't identify". You in fact did not correctly identify
the waypoint. I bet you'd've passed had you pointed to the grassy
area rather than the paved strip.

Jose
(r.a.student retained, but I don't read that group; I replied from
r.a.piloting)
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I'll have a go. I've flunked two; my multi/commercial and my initial
CFI. They are both kind of funny, and both made me a better pilot, even
tho they were both 'borderline' bogus.

My Multi-Comm was weird. I went to an excellent 'flat-rate' program,
had a great MEI and did fine in the training. I went up with the
crusty, old, and brusque DE. Everything went OK (not great...I
certainly could have done better, but within the specs of the PTS),
until the engine-out localizer approach. I flew the approach reasonably
well (again not great), but when we got down, he said he'd have to fail
me because I didn't drop my gear at the outer marker. Now, I've since
added quite a bit of multi time, and talked to a few MEIs and
experienced multi pilots. All have said they wouldn't drop the gear in
a light twin if they had an engine out until they had the airport in
sight; certainly not at the outer marker. It wasn't in the checklist.
What *was* in the checklist was was he *should* have failed me for...I
forgot to turn on the fuel boost pumps (but he didn't even notice, or
say anything about it). So I didn't complain...just went back for
another lesson, did some time in the mockup and passed the ride the
next day. I later found out that this DE seems to have an interesting
pattern. He does most of the checkrides for this company; when I looked
at their checkride log sheet, I noticed that at the beginning of the
month (when money isn't too tight?) he had a first time pass rate of
about 85%, and a second time pass rate of an additional 10%. In the
last week of the month (when I took my ride, and when presumably money
is tight) he seemed to have a first time pass rate of about 45% and a
second time pass rate of about 35% additionally (totalling 80%), Did I
mention he charged 1/2 of his full checkride fee for a 10 minute retest
of the failed component? I'm sure it was all a coincidence.....

I took my initial CFI ride with DE who is reputed to be *very* tough.
After I passed the retest, he told me that he 'thought' the failure
rate for initial CFI should be over 50%...as it was in the 1960s, when
he said it was up near 90%; he told me he failed his initial CFI ride
(as did the above guy). This DE is very experienced, and had a *great*
knowledge of flying...even thought it was pretty grueling, I really got
a lot out of the 8 hour oral, even though it got kind of heated when we
were diuscussing the general relationship between
power/altitude/pitch/airspeed. I quoted Langeweishe and told him I
believe the throttle was the primary altitude control in normal cruise,
and that I liked the acronym "PAYS" Power-altitute Yoke-speed. He said
that was totally wrong and displayed a total lack of understanding of
how an airplane flys. I told him that that that was based on direct
quotes from 'Aerodynamics for Naval Aviatiors', which is a hugely
respected aerodynamics book. As I said, it got kind of heated...at one
point I offered to go outside into my 172RG with him right now...we'd
go out and establish level flight and trim it out...I'd add in power.
If power doesn't control altitude (yes, of course I *do* know it's a
balance with the relationship between lift and airspeed), then the
plane shouldn't climb...it should just speed up. And then when I
chopped the power, the plane shouldn't descend...it should just slow
down. I told him if we went and did that and the plane didn't descend
and climb, then I'd fail myself and just go home. This was after it
started getting heated. I know I probably could have passed by just
agreeing with what he said, but as an instcutor, if I'm *really* wrong,
I want to know about it...and if I'm not wrong, I'm not going to
pretend I am. We ended up basically leaving it with 'well, they are
clearly interrelated controls and concepts'...which didn't resolve
anything, but let us move on

*Then* I failed. The DE failed me on my lesson plans. LOL. I have never
met *any* CFI who was failed on his lesson plans. Specifically, he
failed me because I was presenting a lesson on '8's on Pylons' to a
putative commercial student. One of the concepts I explained was how to
estimate initial pivotal altitude, using the FAA's method published in
8083-3. He got visably angry and said that was BS. That nobody needed
to know how to calculate pivotal altitude...that you couldn't calculate
'true' pivotal altitude anyway, as that was a function of groundspeed,
which is of course a function of the specific winds wherever you are. I
agreed, but said that you use the initial pivotal altitude to calculate
your initial entry, then modify your altutide visually once in the
maneuver. At that point he told me that I had failed. I told him that
my Commercial DE asked me to calculate pivotal altitude. He said that
DE was wrong. So I asked him how he'd judge a commercial applicant
doing a pylon 8. He said the applicant *should* start out at a
reasonable altitude, and then judge pivotal altitude from the maneuver
itself....you find 'true' pivotal altitude by being able to perform the
maneuver properly. So I asked him what was reasonable. Would he be OK
with a student spiriling down from 12,000 feet in a 172RG to find the
proper altitude? He said I was just being silly. Anyway, I was pretty
furious at all this BS, so I told him I was going, and he told me to
call and reschedule. I told him that I was going to call somebody...the
FSDO and ask to have a checkride from a FSDO representative..and that
this was BS.

So I flew home, and calmed down. I talked with my training CFI and a
couple other CFIs who told me that yeah, it was BS...but I really
needed to go back to this guy and get it done. *Then* I could file a
complaint with the FSDO, and they'd support me.

So I swallowed my pride, and called the guy...rescheduled (no extra
charge). When I went back up, it was a *totally* different guy. He was
super-nice. He explained to me why he failed me...that he thought I'd
be a good instructor, but that I needed to get away from so much 'book'
stuff. I presented a fairly trivial lesson on turns-about-a-point for a
private student (which he didn't even seem to care about much...he
didn't comment at all, except to say 'good job' at the end.)

Then we went flying, and here is where he could have failed me. My
flying that day was lousy. I don't know if it was because I was upset,
but at least one of my maneuvers was not up to commercial standards,
and none were up to my personal standards. He showed me how to do a few
things differently (he was one *hell* of a pilot...the guy had the best
touch with an airplane I've ever seen). When we got down, he told me I
passed. I told him I could fly better than I did, and he said that the
CFI isn't about flying. He knows I can fly...otherwise I wouldn't have
gotten that far. He wasn't worried about my flying at all...he wanted
to see my teaching.

Very odd...he told me he thought I'd be a fine instructor, and that he
failed his initial CFI, as had almost all the other CFIs he knew and to
use this experience with my students, etc...and wrote me out my
temporary ticket. I ended up leaving with a pretty positive feeling,
and didn't even really consider making a complaint (altho my training
CFI wanted to...he was pretty angry). To this day I don't know what
exactly happened...was that all pre-planned as his 'CFI Initiation'?
Did I get him on a *really* bad day, and he turned into everyone's
favourite uncle when he thought I really would try to burn him with the
FAA (doubtful...I later found out he has some serious juice at both the
FSDO and the national level, with the FAA)? DId he really believe all
the stuff he told me? Did he just feel guilty about overreacting? Who
knows....

But when one of my students tanks a checkride someday, I'll certainly
be able to say "Yeah...I know how that feels...let me tell you a
story..."

Cheers,

Cap


Jon Kraus wrote:
Just curious as to how many of us are in the "Flunked a Checkride"
club.
It seems that the fail rate for the IFR checkride is more prevalent
than
the Private. So swallow that false pride and speak up. I'll be first.
I
flunked my IFR checkride by busting on holding pattern entry. Anyone
else? Cecil? Jeff? :-)

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney Owner

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 08:09:22 -0500, Corky Scott
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 20:16:43 GMT, Bob Moore
wrote:

"gatt" wrote

I failed my Private because I used a private field as a
waypoint in my cross-country plan.

WHATTT.... No way! You can use a tree as a waypoint as
long as it can be identified from the airplane in flight.
Maybe you failed because you could not identify the "grass"
field as a waypoint, not because it was a "private" field.

Bob Moore

My feelings exactly. I used private fields for my waypoints on
several cross countries WITH the CFI in the right seat. The only
point he made is that sometimes the private fields are hard to spot.

Hard to spot?
I took my check ride the morning after we had a couple inches of snow.
Almost all of my check points were invisible. I never did find most
of them, but by pointing to the map and finding other references I was
able to show I was where I thought I was.

The only reason I could find the Pinconing airstrip was two airplanes
parked outside and it took a relatively low pass to identify those.
The examiner was happy.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Corky Scott

"gatt" wrote

I failed my Private because I used a private field as a
waypoint in my cross-country plan.

"Private" does not necessarily mean "Grass". Just north of
my location in Tarpon Springs, FL, there were two private
airports, both with 3-4,000' of paved runway. Hidden Lake
and TampaBay Exec which has just recently closed.

Bob Moore

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 19:55:46 GMT, Bob Moore
wrote:

"gatt" wrote

I failed my Private because I used a private field as a
waypoint in my cross-country plan.

"Private" does not necessarily mean "Grass". Just north of
my location in Tarpon Springs, FL, there were two private
airports, both with 3-4,000' of paved runway. Hidden Lake
and TampaBay Exec which has just recently closed.

What'd they do with all the planes out at the Exec? That place was
really handy when the weather turned to crap when we were heading home
between Christmas and New years a few years ago.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Bob Moore

Roger wrote

What'd they do with all the planes out at the Exec?

Many went over to Zephyrhills and a few (me) to Pilot
Country. I thought that a lot would wind-up at Tampa
North, but they don't seem to have the necessary facilities.
The State appropriated funds to provide facilities at the
surrounding airports to accommodate the relocation.
I don't hold much hope for Tampa North and Clearwater Exec
due to residential development surrounding them.

Bob Moore

"Jon Kraus" wrote in message
...
Wow!! There are really some distinguished names appearing in this club.
I guess it really isn't a big deal after all...

Well, if there is anything I have learned about check rides: don't try to
take three check rides in as many days while running a temperature of 103.
Unfortunately, when you are that sick your judgment is the first thing that
goes out the window. Given some scheduling pressure and peer pressure to get
it done and you can do all kinds of crazy things.

Peter Duniho wrote:

"gatt" wrote in message
...
[...] Because I
misidentified the airport by thinking the strip across the street was
[whatever the private field was called], he busted me.

Well, to be fair, that's different than you first described it. You
failed
your checkride because you misidentified a waypoint. Not "because [you]
used a private field as a waypoint".

Hmm. I don't see it quite this way. He called the waypoint the wrong
thing, but that's not a lot different than the "onion fields" north of CDW
that might in fact be tomatoe, grapes, or who knows what else.

He should have called it "road across street from farm with transient
runway", I suppose, but if he did spot the road, does it matter what it was
called?

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
gonline.com...
Hmm. I don't see it quite this way. He called the waypoint the wrong
thing, but that's not a lot different than the "onion fields" north of CDW
that might in fact be tomatoe, grapes, or who knows what else.

Huh? No...seems you misunderstood what he said. He picked airport A for
his waypoint, and then identified airport B as airport A.

It's kind of like if I'd picked Boeing Field in Seattle as my waypoint, and
then pointed out SeaTac (the Class B airport a few miles away), claiming it
was Boeing Field.

Had he selected a private airport, and then upon flying over it, correctly
identified the waypoint, but called it a public airport, that would be akin
to what you describe with respect to "onion fields" versus "tomatoes,
grapes, or who knows what else".

He should have called it "road across street from farm with transient
runway", I suppose, but if he did spot the road, does it matter what it
was
called?

He wasn't using the "road" as his checkpoint (which was actually another
airport, not a road). He was using an airport that he did not actually
find, even though he claimed to have to the examiner.

It's an unfortunate way to bust a checkride, as in this particular case it
would have had no significant effect on the outcome of the flight. But as a
technicality, it's perfectly valid, and had the other airport not been
there, a pilot trying to use the private airport as a waypoint may have
flown right past it without EVER having seen it. And it's not like he
picked the private airport knowing that there was a paved airport for him to
misidentify as the private airport.

As I said before, it's a very good example of why one needs to learn at
least some basic things about an airport to be used as a waypoint. In this
case, it's debatable whether the private airport is really all that suitable
as a waypoint anyway (since it sounds like it's hard to distinguish from all
the other rural property in the area), but for sure, a person using that or
any other airport as a waypoint needs to know whether the airport they are
looking for is paved or not.

Since from the air, many airports very similar to many others, it would be
much better to know not only whether the airport is paved, but also the
runway direction, location of any windsocks, location relative to any major
roads in the area, among the many distinguishing characteristics an airport
might have. Even knowing just "paved" versus "unpaved" might not be enough,
but for sure one ought to know THAT.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message

Well, to be fair, that's different than you first described it. You
failed
your checkride because you misidentified a waypoint. Not "because [you]
used a private field as a waypoint".

Sort of. Specifically, he told me not to use a private field as a waypoint.
Whether it or the other is what he based the failure on, I don't really
know. Went I went back for the retest, I used a VOR intersection and that
settled it. In fact, we didn't even go all the way to the waypoint.

Sounds like a fair bust to me.

I agree. My instructor didn't. That's when I discovered I was his first
student since he graduated from flight school, so I think it hurt his pride
a little, and embarrassed him because he approved of a checkpoint that the
examiner didn't.

-c