Tricky examiners

B A R R Y wrote:
Ross wrote:


On my commerical checkride, right after completing the unusual
attitudes under the hood, I was given the engine out emergency
immediately. I did all the prep work and set up for an empty field
below me. The examiner asked what was wrong with the airport about 2
miles at my 4 o'clock position. I made the airport.



A better one:

On a mock checkride, the instructor got me out from under the hood with
an airport in sight, just out of glide range, and another below and
slightly behind me. He failed the engine immediately.

I took the bait and tried to reach the obvious of the two!

Man, did I learn a lot from that!

This happened on a BFR. I had the under the hood again and then the
emergency. I took a quick scan and knew where I was and remember there
was a private turf field right near me. I made the approach and then was
told OK and lets go back. That one was lucky.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

Ross wrote:


This happened on a BFR. I had the under the hood again and then the
emergency. I took a quick scan

As I (like anyone else) have gained experience, things seem to happen
slower, so it wouldn't work now.

As ****ed as I was at the time, thinking I'd been tricked, I now realize
it was a terrific lesson.

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 20:54:16 +1100, dVaridel wrote:

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.

I don't know how they do it in Oz, but up here you get to pick your own
examiner. These people derive reasonable income from their exam fees.

If an examiner gets a reputation for being too tough (or being too much of
a dick), the word gets out and nobody uses them.

Pilot examiners have to walk a fine line between being desirable to flight
schools and tough enough to filter out candidates that are not qualified.


--
Dallas

On Jan 5, 8:31 am, Dallas wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 20:54:16 +1100, dVaridel wrote:
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.

I don't know how they do it in Oz, but up here you get to pick your own
examiner. These people derive reasonable income from their exam fees.

If an examiner gets a reputation for being too tough (or being too much of
a dick), the word gets out and nobody uses them.

Pilot examiners have to walk a fine line between being desirable to flight
schools and tough enough to filter out candidates that are not qualified.


When I did my PPL flight test I had a run through with the examiner
who was an "A" Cat who owned the other flying school.
He continued the forced landing exercise right down to the deck to see
if I'd get in.
Take up gliding folks, you get pretty good at forced landings :-)
The actual flight test was a breeze

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?

Asking a candidate to come up with a ground frequency while in a stressful
situation falls under "Cockpit Management" and is a DPE checklist item.

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.

Most candidates don't get a lot of sleep before exam day and to start off
the flight with a sneaky trick like this could have the poor fellow
completely distracted waiting for the next trick. This one just seems
outside the boundaries of fairness and it could jeopardize the candidate's
checkride over an issue that is not required by the PTS.


--
Dallas

Dallas 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!


Not in the least bit unfair. The examiner was attempting to emphasize the
point that you need to look over the aicraft again, if it has been out of
your sight since you completed the preflight. The "embarrasing incident" I
referred to had to do with me loudly revving up an airplane, trying to get it
to move (and drawing quite a crowd). The reason it didn't move was because
someone had put the chocks back in place after I'd done the preflight. I'd
gone into the office to ask my CFI a final question, and some helpful soul
came along and noticed that the plane was not chocked.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200801/1

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:12:57 -0600, Dallas wrote:

What other favorite examiner tricks are out there?

I'll answer my own post.. I forgot I had one :- )

I had been warned that my DPE did like to do one test...

One guy had a nice set up for his engine out and was gliding in nicely
towards an open cow pasture. At that point the examiner said, "Go ahead
and land..."

The poor guy said, "really?" in a meek voice.

He sat up straight and got a good serious look on his face and continued to
land.

At 20 feet AGL she called it off. Afterwards, she told him she was very
pleased with the way he handled it.


--
Dallas

Dallas writes:

I don't know how they do it in Oz, but up here you get to pick your own
examiner. These people derive reasonable income from their exam fees.

If an examiner gets a reputation for being too tough (or being too much of
a dick), the word gets out and nobody uses them.

Pilot examiners have to walk a fine line between being desirable to flight
schools and tough enough to filter out candidates that are not qualified.

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

Dallas wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:12:57 -0600, Dallas wrote:

What other favorite examiner tricks are out there?

I'll answer my own post.. I forgot I had one :- )

I had been warned that my DPE did like to do one test...

One guy had a nice set up for his engine out and was gliding in nicely
towards an open cow pasture. At that point the examiner said, "Go ahead
and land..."

The poor guy said, "really?" in a meek voice.

He sat up straight and got a good serious look on his face and continued to
land.

At 20 feet AGL she called it off. Afterwards, she told him she was very
pleased with the way he handled it.




Really, the better answer would have been, "No, not really." Which was
the exact answer I gave when the DPE on my Helicopter check ride asked
if I would like to take the auto-rotation all the way to the ground.

I knew it wasn't required for Private and though I had had to do an
actual solo during training it wasn't something I enjoyed and there was
just no reason to take the risk.

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.