Tricky examiners

Dallas wrote in
:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 15:42:40 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Sometime years down the line, one of those
pilots might catch something that saves lives because you and I
traded something together on Usenet.

Usenet might be the next Library of Alexandria... if Google decides
to maintain the database intact, everyone of us could be dead 60 years
from now and people in 2068 could be researching and reading our words
as we write them today.

Your words could be saving lives of pilots 50 years from now.

Actually, I think they'll probably be laughing at us! "Those guys flew
aroudn with high explosives in their wings!

I have an extensive collection of old magazines and books from the earliest
days of aviation through to present day ( imagine what mrs Bunyip makes of
that if you will) There is some very good stuff in there, much of it arcane
but still very handy to know. Some of it is pure crap. There was a two year
discussion in Popular Avaition, the forerunner of Flying, about levitaiton
via mechanical means, for instance. But other bits, especially some
performance and nav articles, are simply excellent. The EAA collated some
of Raoul Hoffman's stuff a few years ago all into one book.
And the nav articles by Weems, who was the guy who advised many of the long
distance flyers of the day, are pure gold.

Bertie

Dallas wrote in
:

On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 10:08:28 +1100, dVaridel wrote:

In the licence test the student is listed as Pilot In Command
for the ride, the test officer is an observer.

Yup, many people write about taking up their "first passenger"... but
the reality is that the examiner is their first legal passenger.



Like the "legal" qualifier.


Bertie

On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 20:11:13 -0800, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

I've only met one in my life. It was an asshole out of Marysville in the
Sacramento area who bounced me on a CFI renewal because I couldn't explain
to him how the nosewheel centering mechanism on a C-172 worked while I was
doing to-the-limits chandelles for him.

He said he had pretty well decided to pink me because I couldn't remember
from memory the tetraethyl lead limits in milligrams per gallon for 80, 100,
100LL, and 115. Like it makes a hell of a lot of difference.


Was he a FSDO employee or DPE?

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dallas wrote in
:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 15:42:40 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Sometime years down the line, one of those
pilots might catch something that saves lives because you and I
traded something together on Usenet.
Usenet might be the next Library of Alexandria... if Google decides
to maintain the database intact, everyone of us could be dead 60 years
from now and people in 2068 could be researching and reading our words
as we write them today.

Your words could be saving lives of pilots 50 years from now.

Actually, I think they'll probably be laughing at us! "Those guys flew
aroudn with high explosives in their wings!

I have an extensive collection of old magazines and books from the earliest
days of aviation through to present day ( imagine what mrs Bunyip makes of
that if you will) There is some very good stuff in there, much of it arcane
but still very handy to know. Some of it is pure crap. There was a two year
discussion in Popular Avaition, the forerunner of Flying, about levitaiton
via mechanical means, for instance. But other bits, especially some
performance and nav articles, are simply excellent. The EAA collated some
of Raoul Hoffman's stuff a few years ago all into one book.
And the nav articles by Weems, who was the guy who advised many of the long
distance flyers of the day, are pure gold.

Bertie

I still have an old Weems plotter around here someplace. If I remember
right it's slightly bent from the day I loaned it to a student and he
parked a Tri-Pacer on the ramp and left it on top of the glare shield in
the sun.
:-)



--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dallas wrote in
:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 15:42:40 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Sometime years down the line, one of those
pilots might catch something that saves lives because you and I
traded something together on Usenet.
Usenet might be the next Library of Alexandria... if Google decides
to maintain the database intact, everyone of us could be dead 60
years from now and people in 2068 could be researching and reading
our words as we write them today.

Your words could be saving lives of pilots 50 years from now.

Actually, I think they'll probably be laughing at us! "Those guys
flew aroudn with high explosives in their wings!

I have an extensive collection of old magazines and books from the
earliest days of aviation through to present day ( imagine what mrs
Bunyip makes of that if you will) There is some very good stuff in
there, much of it arcane but still very handy to know. Some of it is
pure crap. There was a two year discussion in Popular Avaition, the
forerunner of Flying, about levitaiton via mechanical means, for
instance. But other bits, especially some performance and nav
articles, are simply excellent. The EAA collated some of Raoul
Hoffman's stuff a few years ago all into one book. And the nav
articles by Weems, who was the guy who advised many of the long
distance flyers of the day, are pure gold.

Bertie

I still have an old Weems plotter around here someplace. If I remember
right it's slightly bent from the day I loaned it to a student and he
parked a Tri-Pacer on the ramp and left it on top of the glare shield
in the sun.
:-)


He he. I've seen them for sale on Ebay, but never an original.
He developed a strip plotter for long distance trans-oceanic flyers.
I'm not exactly sure how it worked, but Harold Gatty developed it with
him and used it on the round the world flight with Wiley Post. Anna
Lindbergh was one of his students at the insistence of her husband as
well. The articles are excellent.

Bertie

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...

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.

Well, your premise is incorrect. As the PIC you are allowed to fly from
California to Maine with your wheels an inch above the terrain so long as
you 91.119(c) stay 500' away from any person, vessel, vehicle, or
structure.

And they aren't a "Test Officer". They are a Designated Examiner.
Somehow I think this is a troll thread. Name the guy. Name the FSDO from
which he operates.


California and Main are in the US. CFR 91.119(c)applies only to the US.
FDSO's only exist in the US and D.E is US terminology. If I recall correctly
the person you are quoting is from some other country where they are likely
to use other terminonolgy for things like this and the regulations are
likely to differ somewhat.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dallas wrote in
:

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 15:42:40 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Sometime years down the line, one of those
pilots might catch something that saves lives because you and I
traded something together on Usenet.
Usenet might be the next Library of Alexandria... if Google decides
to maintain the database intact, everyone of us could be dead 60
years from now and people in 2068 could be researching and reading
our words as we write them today.

Your words could be saving lives of pilots 50 years from now.

Actually, I think they'll probably be laughing at us! "Those guys
flew aroudn with high explosives in their wings!

I have an extensive collection of old magazines and books from the
earliest days of aviation through to present day ( imagine what mrs
Bunyip makes of that if you will) There is some very good stuff in
there, much of it arcane but still very handy to know. Some of it is
pure crap. There was a two year discussion in Popular Avaition, the
forerunner of Flying, about levitaiton via mechanical means, for
instance. But other bits, especially some performance and nav
articles, are simply excellent. The EAA collated some of Raoul
Hoffman's stuff a few years ago all into one book. And the nav
articles by Weems, who was the guy who advised many of the long
distance flyers of the day, are pure gold.

Bertie
I still have an old Weems plotter around here someplace. If I remember
right it's slightly bent from the day I loaned it to a student and he
parked a Tri-Pacer on the ramp and left it on top of the glare shield
in the sun.
:-)


He he. I've seen them for sale on Ebay, but never an original.
He developed a strip plotter for long distance trans-oceanic flyers.
I'm not exactly sure how it worked, but Harold Gatty developed it with
him and used it on the round the world flight with Wiley Post. Anna
Lindbergh was one of his students at the insistence of her husband as
well. The articles are excellent.

Bertie
I remember him as being involved in some way with the US Navy; a very
talented guy I'm sure. In fact, the modern Jepp plotters sold today in
student pilot kits is I believe almost a direct copy of his original
plotter.


--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:


I remember him as being involved in some way with the US Navy; a very
talented guy I'm sure.


Yeah, that's right. He was. I think he might have had something to do with
Wings field as well, but I'm not sure.

In fact, the modern Jepp plotters sold today in
student pilot kits is I believe almost a direct copy of his original
plotter.


Probably. Between himself,Taylor ( can't remember his first name but he was
Kingsford Smith's nav) and Harold Gatty, they quite literally wrote the
book on navigation. Called Avigation by Weems, I bleive.

Bertie

He said he had pretty well decided to pink me because I couldn't
remember from memory the tetraethyl lead limits in milligrams per
gallon for 80, 100, 100LL, and 115. Like it makes a hell of a lot of
difference.


What? Who the hell knows that?

Um, I do except for 115 (purple gas). 80 (red gas) is 0.5 ml/gallon (do you
like the mixed measurement system), 100 (green gas) is 4 ml/gallon, and
100LL (blue gas) is 2 ml/gallon (from memory, without looking it up in the
regs). I doubt sincerely that I could even FIND the spec for 115 in any
currently printed document, and that's the one I missed.

Jim

DPE. The Feds I've ridden with were/are top of the line. My first Fed was
my original CFI in 1970. Big old cigar chomping ex-AAF with a remarkable
resemblance in all ways to Curtis LeMay. Did the usual maneuvers, then he
put me under the hood (with that g.d. cigar smoke swirling around me) and
gave me vectors. Then took the hood off and asked me to show him steep
turns to the left. Steep turn, steep turn, steep turn (nearly tossed
cookies with smoke) steep turn, stee...haven't we done enough? Two more,
steep turn, steep turn.

Got back and he told me I might make a pretty good instructor some day and
signed me off. I asked him what that steep turn stuff was and he told me
they were digging his swimming pool that day and he wanted to watch for a
while.

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 20:11:13 -0800, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

I've only met one in my life. It was an asshole out of Marysville in the
Sacramento area who bounced me on a CFI renewal because I couldn't explain
to him how the nosewheel centering mechanism on a C-172 worked while I was
doing to-the-limits chandelles for him.

He said he had pretty well decided to pink me because I couldn't remember
from memory the tetraethyl lead limits in milligrams per gallon for 80,
100,
100LL, and 115. Like it makes a hell of a lot of difference.


Was he a FSDO employee or DPE?