Tricky examiners

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:42:43 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Actually Dal, I've used the same approach many times when giving
checkouts

Ok... you guy have convinced me it's fair...


--
Dallas

Dallas wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:42:43 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Actually Dal, I've used the same approach many times when giving
checkouts

Ok... you guy have convinced me it's fair...



It's interesting how these things work sometimes.

Someday, and I might be long gone by then, you might be sitting in some
flight office somewhere in Texas discussing preflight with some pilots
and mention this to them. Sometime years down the line, one of those
pilots might catch something that saves lives because you and I traded
something together on Usenet.
Kind of nice to think of things this way when you get a bit older
:-))



--
Dudley Henriques

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:05:03 GMT, wrote:

Human nature is to see what you expect to see unless you are specifically
looking for the unexpected.


I was trained to look at the airplane as I approach it, since if could
have been hit by a ground vehicle while I was gone, something may have
leaked, the tire may have gone flat, etc...

On 05 Jan 2008 16:16:10 GMT, Judah wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
:

unattended (heck, I parked at HPN for 10 minutes to go inside the FBO,
grab some paperwork, and came back out to find their line guys had
towed me to remote parking and chained me down), and if you're not
used to that kind of 'service' you may miss it if you're not really
looking when you come back out.

So which line on the preflight checklist is:

"Plane still there... Check"

#1 overall condidtion, the lack of an aircraft being physically
present being one criterion for fialing?

Peter Clark wrote in
:

On 05 Jan 2008 16:16:10 GMT, Judah wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
m:

unattended (heck, I parked at HPN for 10 minutes to go inside the FBO,
grab some paperwork, and came back out to find their line guys had
towed me to remote parking and chained me down), and if you're not
used to that kind of 'service' you may miss it if you're not really
looking when you come back out.

So which line on the preflight checklist is:

"Plane still there... Check"

#1 overall condidtion, the lack of an aircraft being physically
present being one criterion for fialing?

If the guy could fly it, i'd pass him.


Bertie

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:31:17 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
:

On 05 Jan 2008 16:16:10 GMT, Judah wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
:

unattended (heck, I parked at HPN for 10 minutes to go inside the FBO,
grab some paperwork, and came back out to find their line guys had
towed me to remote parking and chained me down), and if you're not
used to that kind of 'service' you may miss it if you're not really
looking when you come back out.

So which line on the preflight checklist is:

"Plane still there... Check"

#1 overall condidtion, the lack of an aircraft being physically
present being one criterion for fialing?

If the guy could fly it, i'd pass him.

I meant failing the line of the checklist, not a checkride.

Peter Clark wrote in
:

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:31:17 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
m:

On 05 Jan 2008 16:16:10 GMT, Judah wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
m:

unattended (heck, I parked at HPN for 10 minutes to go inside the
FBO, grab some paperwork, and came back out to find their line
guys had towed me to remote parking and chained me down), and if
you're not used to that kind of 'service' you may miss it if
you're not really looking when you come back out.

So which line on the preflight checklist is:

"Plane still there... Check"

#1 overall condidtion, the lack of an aircraft being physically
present being one criterion for fialing?

If the guy could fly it, i'd pass him.

I meant failing the line of the checklist, not a checkride.


Mm, ok.

Bertie

"Denny" wrote
Nope! The examiner failed right then and there... He is not just a
'passenger' and has certificate authority...

I'm guessing things are a little different here in the Land of Oz. In the
licence test the student is listed as Pilot In Command for the ride, the
test officer is an observer. He is not expected to help (or hinder!) but to
observe. Of course, he will initiate the 'ol "I wanna go to Ballarat not
Echuca" diversion and the "Oh look, your engine's failed" gags along the
way.

Seems all students are warned by their instructors to watch out for it so
it's not a real surprise.


Cheers,

David

--
I was reading the dictionary the other day. I thought it was a poem about
everything.

dVaridel wrote:
"Denny" wrote
Nope! The examiner failed right then and there... He is not just a
'passenger' and has certificate authority...

I'm guessing things are a little different here in the Land of Oz. In the
licence test the student is listed as Pilot In Command for the ride, the
test officer is an observer. He is not expected to help (or hinder!) but to
observe. Of course, he will initiate the 'ol "I wanna go to Ballarat not
Echuca" diversion and the "Oh look, your engine's failed" gags along the
way.

Same here, really. FAR 61.47 specifically disclaims PIC responsibility
for the examiner.

Some Other Guy wrote in
:

dVaridel wrote:

One local Test Officer has a reputation of asking PPL candidates to
"keep going, lets see if make it" during the simulated forced landing
to a paddock in the exam. Drop below 500 AGL and BAM ...... test
over.

As the PIC you aren't allowed below 500' (unless taking off, landing,
training for a rating or crashing), and you have shown poor judgement
in allowing your "passenger" to goad you into low flying.

Tough but real worldish.

Where I live, when you take an automobile driving test you are told
clearly at the start "the examiner *will never ask you to do anything
illegal*".

Ine of mine did. i was going too slow to suit him.

He told me I failed, told me i needed more practice. I told him I'd been
driving for years on several continents. He asked me why I was n several
continents and I told him I flew a 737 for a living.
he gave me the licence.

Is this not the case for a PPL exam? If so, I'm astounded.
That could lead to some very dangerous situations.

Hmmm, better not get into those stories!


Bertie