Any last minute tips for an IFR checkride?

[PaulS]

Sorry you didn't pass your checkride. I had mine in February, one of the first things the examiner told me was that he has no leeway on approaches, the FAA wants them correct the first time, no redo if you mess up, the ride gets terminated. He also told me he can't instruct, he said that he will be busy taking notes, that if I screwed up, just fix it and keep flying, shake it off and continue. In other words, don't look for affirmation from him, if he says nothing, keep flying. He said he was required to tell me if the checkride was failed when it happened, and that I would have the option to continue to other tasks to get them completed or stop.

As others have pointed out, you should not make larger than a 90 degree turn to start an approach, you had at least a 120 degree turn, ATC would never start you on an approach like that, nor should you ever allow them to do this with you. You should have started at Dryden and flown the arc. You said that you are flying with a G1000, which should make flying the arc a piece of cake. Then you need to remember, when you get on the final approach course, that you need to fly the approach using the VOR, not the GPS, so you change the CDI to the vor, as you said.

I suspect that your CFII brought you to that VOR from a position that made the turn onto course less than 90 degrees. You need to catch this during your brief. It's your ride, when you are told what to do, take your time and prep for it. You should have a picture in your head of what you are going to do before you accept clearance to start the approach, this includes which direction you are going to turn on a procedure turn. In others words, ask for delay vectors if you need them. If he told you that you had to fly to the VOR and make that turn, you should have refused. I suspect he just told to you fly the full approach, leaving it up to you to pick the IAF. Again, from that direction, fly the arc. It sounds like you got a little flustered, a thorough brief will help with that. Remember, you are PIC, not the dpe, act accordingly and don't be bullied. Fly the approaches correctly, not how you think the dpe wants you to fly it. Question him if it is not clear, or he is asking you to do something that doesn't make sense.

 

[dtuuri]

As others have pointed out, you should not make larger than a 90 degree turn to start an approach, you had at least a 120 degree turn, ATC would never start you on an approach like that, nor should you ever allow them to do this with you.

I don't think you can back up that statement, Paul. Under TERPS, a feeder can be as much as 120° for a straight-in and there's no limit for joining a course reversal, which this is. Besides, you only have a free-hand drawing to determine the OP's actual course. It could have been south of the 75°R, so no arc possible.

 

[bkspero]

Fly-by waypoints are for GPS approaches. There is no such thing as a fly-by waypoint on a VOR approach. Of course your instructor agrees with you, he is the one that apparently taught you incorrectly.

It's acceptable to use a GPS like the OP had for lateral guidance on a VOR approach (no GPS in the title) outside of the FAF at all times, and on the final approach segment as long as the primary VOR was being monitored on another navigation radio (AIM 1-2-3). So, if the GPS gives a fly-by course, then I don't see the error in following the lateral course guidance from an approved navigation device for that approach (the GPS) despite there being no mention of GPS in the approach title.

I agree that if the OP had been flying the approach using one or more VORs only, then he would have had to fly over the waypoint. But not with lateral guidance coming from a qualified and legal GPS. IMO, the DPE was wrong.

I wonder if the OP had been ready to push back with the regulatory basis and the AIM reference, would the DPE have backed off on the critique, or would it simply have antagonized the DPE and caused an immediate DQ. Same with what I believe was the DPE's incorrect critique of the procedure turn (done on the correct, protected, side of the approach course and within the distance limit, but inbound closer to the airport rather than away from the airport).

 

[dmspilot]

As others have pointed out, you should not make larger than a 90 degree turn to start an approach, you had at least a 120 degree turn, ATC would never start you on an approach like that, nor should you ever allow them to do this with you.

The entire purpose of a procedure turn is to reverse course. Where do you get this 90 degree rule from?

 

[PaulS]

I don't think you can back up that statement, Paul. Under TERPS, a feeder can be as much as 120° for a straight-in and there's no limit for joining a course reversal, which this is. Besides, you only have a free-hand drawing to determine the OP's actual course. It could have been south of the 75°R, so no arc possible.

Ruh ro, let me look where I got that from, may take a while.

 

[PaulS]

The entire purpose of a procedure turn is to reverse course. Where do you get this 90 degree rule from?

Not talking about the procedure turn, talking about going to the VOR instead of the arc to start the procedure. The way he drew it the arc would have made sense, his sketch looks like he flew right over drydn, which is on the 075 radial for the vor, so he was flying 255, then had to turn to 018. That's a 123 degree turn, not sure if I'm right about atc and the 90 degree turn right now, but regardless, I still would have pushed back, drydn made more sense.

 

[dmspilot]

Not talking about the procedure turn

You stated that proceeding direct to the VOR and performing the procedure turn is not permitted because the heading change at the VOR is more than 90 degrees. So you are saying he isn't allowed to do the procedure turn. How is that "not talking about the procedure turn"?

The arc is optional, not mandatory. The existence of the arc does not preclude you from using the VOR IAF. What if you didn't have DME? It's not a VOR-DME approach. How else would you do the procedure?

 

[PaulS]

You stated that proceeding direct to the VOR and performing the procedure turn is not permitted because the heading change at the VOR is more than 90 degrees. So you are saying he isn't allowed to do the procedure turn. How is that "not talking about the procedure turn"?

The arc is optional, not mandatory. The existence of the arc does not preclude you from using the VOR IAF. What if you didn't have DME? It's not a VOR-DME approach. How else would you do the procedure?

That isn't what I said, read it again. I said you should not start an approach with more than a 90 degree turn, the approach starts at the IAF, not the procedure turn. If I didn't have dme or a substitute is a moot point, he has a g1000, but if I didn't have dme I would ask for a vector to make the turn over the vor 90 degrees or less.

 

[dmspilot]

It's acceptable to use a GPS like the OP had for lateral guidance on a VOR approach (no GPS in the title) outside of the FAF at all times, and on the final approach segment as long as the primary VOR was being monitored on another navigation radio (AIM 1-2-3). So, if the GPS gives a fly-by course

Your premise (green) does not justify your conclusion (red). The AIM states that fly-by waypoints and turn anticipation are used with RNAV/GPS procedures. Also, just because the GPS gives you a certain course, doesn't mean it's the correct one. The AIM lists a bunch of ways the GPS can calculate a holding procedure incorrectly, for example.

 

[dmspilot]

That isn't what I said, read it again. I said you should not start an approach with more than a 90 degree turn, the approach starts at the IAF, not the procedure turn. If I didn't have dme or a substitute is a moot point, he has a g1000, but if I didn't have dme I would ask for a vector to make the turn over the vor 90 degrees or less.

Yes, it is what you said. And you just said it again. You are telling us that he had to do the arc and that he wasn't allowed to arrive at the VOR, turn more than 90 degrees, and execute the procedure turn. I'm not sure how you think I am misreading your statement. It is quite clear what you are saying, and quite clear that you are wrong.

Whether you don't have DME or not is not a "moot point", the arc is optional regardless of what equipment you have. Having DME does not make the arc mandatory. And there is no requirement to be vectored if you don't have it, what if there is no radar coverage either?

 

[Collin Kaufman]

I flew north of 50 checkrides in the Navy and never tanked one and did tank the ILS on my PPL instrument (exceeded 3/4 deflection) but the DPE went ahead and we did all the other items which went fine and I just had to go back a week later and fly the ILS. The check ride isn't meant to be a learning evolution in the airplane but it's surprising to me that he didn't want to help you get better in the debrief.

Oh well, it's a very minor setback, no matter how it feels now and I KNOW how you feel, press on and it will be over before you know it.

Yea of course. The checkride is meant test what you know, but at least in my experience when is a CFI or DPE (that's not just there to build hours), they're there because they love aviation and just want to pass on their knowledge to the next generation. He did not seem like that at all. We did debrief, but I'd barely call it that. It was mostly him just lecturing me and judging me as a pilot for about 15 minutes.

 

[Collin Kaufman]

Did you get anything else checked off on the ACS or was this literally the first thing you did???

We went to the VOR and turned outbound and then turned home. Thats it.

 

[Collin Kaufman]

That is sad.

Extremely

 

[alfadog]

Yea of course. The checkride is meant test what you know, but at least in my experience when is a CFI or DPE (that's not just there to build hours), they're there because they love aviation and just want to pass on their knowledge to the next generation. He did not seem like that at all. We did debrief, but I'd barely call it that. It was mostly him just lecturing me and judging me as a pilot for about 15 minutes.

I guess you are locked into this program at the school so you just have to suck it up and finish. After graduation, the world awaits. Plenty of time.

 

[PaulS]

Yes, it is what you said. And you just said it again. You are telling us that he had to do the arc and that he wasn't allowed to arrive at the VOR, turn more than 90 degrees, and execute the procedure turn. I'm not sure how you think I am misreading your statement. It is quite clear what you are saying, and quite clear that you are wrong.

Whether you don't have DME or not is not a "moot point", the arc is optional regardless of what equipment you have.

What I said:

As others have pointed out, you should not make larger than a 90 degree turn to start an approach, you had at least a 120 degree turn, ATC would never start you on an approach like that, nor should you ever allow them to do this with you.

Not even close to what you say I said, too much energy to argue with you about stuff I never said, have a good one.

 

[dtuuri]

There's regs that are taught to us that are wrong because that's what chief believes and wants to hear.

Oooh, this sounds interesting. What, pray tell, does "Chief" believe that is wrong?

 

[dmspilot]

What I said:
Not even close to what you say I said, too much energy to argue with you about stuff I never said, have a good one.

It's exactly what you said, unless you're using "should" and "should not" to mean "prefer" and "prefer not" rather than "must" and "can't" — but if that's the case I'm only interested in discussing what can and can't be done, not what you would rather do because it's easier.

 

[PaulS]

Sorry, that is just not true. Why would the AIM actually illustrate a turn with more than 90 degrees?

Yes, I think my statement came from turns on VTF to the final approach course, I would still not do it, but the dpe probably wanted to see the procedure turn, I would have asked him for some vectors to get that to a 90 degree turn.

 

[dmspilot]

Yes, I think my statement came from turns on VTF to the final approach course, I would still not do it, but the dpe probably wanted to see the procedure turn, I would have asked him for some vectors to get that to a 90 degree turn.

"At least one must be flown without the use of autopilot and without the assistance of radar vectors." —ACS

 

[PaulS]

It's exactly what you said, unless you're using "should" and "should not" to mean "prefer" and "prefer not" rather than "must" and "can't" — but if that's the case I'm only interested in discussing what can and can't be done, not what you would rather do because it's easier.

You don't quit, I didn't say he wasn't allowed, I said nothing about procedure turns, I said nothing about the arc being mandatory, chill dude.

 

[PaulS]

"At least one must be flown without the use of autopilot and without the assistance of radar vectors." —ACS

A gps is not an autopilot.

 

[Collin Kaufman]

Oooh, this sounds interesting. What, pray tell, does "Chief" believe that is wrong?

Only one off the top of my head is during lost coms. So if clearance is 3000 expect 6000 in 10 minutes, he wants to hear immediately upon losing coms to climb to 6000 instead of waiting 10 minutes then climbing. I was showed the regs and you're supposed to wait, just can't remember where it was

 

[dmspilot]

A gps is not an autopilot.

Where did I say that it was?

PaulS: "I would have asked him for some vectors"
ACS: "At least one must be flown without the use of autopilot and without the assistance of radar vectors."

 

[dtuuri]

Yes, I think my statement came from turns on VTF to the final approach course, I would still not do it, but the dpe probably wanted to see the procedure turn, I would have asked him for some vectors to get that to a 90 degree turn.

Paul, you seem to have some self-imposed limitations which are not really practical. That key-hole is really pretty big. You might like to view my tutorial on procedure turn airspace here to see how to make sure you stay within obstacle clear airspace: http://www.avclicks.com/Flash2/To_the_Rear_March/index.html

 

[PaulS]

Where did I say that it was?

PaulS: "I would have asked him for some vectors"
ACS: "At least one must be flown without the use of autopilot and without the assistance of radar vectors."

Oh, so you see what I did there, lol.

 

[Collin Kaufman]

@dmspilot @PaulS I saw y'all talking earlier about stuff and I just wanted to clear it up. I was on the 075 radial and flew directly over DRYDN so the arc would have made a ton more sense. In my initial IFR clearance I was cleared to 06A via direct DRYDN V20 (which is the 075 radial) and then direct TGE (VOR and IAF) and then I was cleared full procedure VOR A into 06A with TGE as the IAF. I agree with both of y'all that its bit obnoxious of a turn but I'm pretty sure it is perfectly legal

 

[flyingron]

Eh? There's no requirement to make less than 90 degree turns on an approach. If is expected that you fly over the IAF and then make the turn to the published course. If there are reasons why this isn't safe, there will be restrictions on the approach plate. While you could certainly ask for vectors to take a shallower cut at the turn, you can expect to get cleared for such entries int o the approach. This is distinct from the PT. Once you enter the approach at an IAF that isn't marked NoPT, then you have to make the PT. His PT was not incorrect. While people have strong feelings about the matter, there's no reason why you have to make turn towards the airport to reintercept the course. There are times when that isn't even advisable.

As to whether to enter at the arc or the VOR, that is determined by what the (possibly simulated) clearance was.

 

[PaulS]

There are times in "fly over" country and also other locations where you could be on a cruise clearance...which as you recall includes authorization to fly an approach. ATC basically turns you loose to do your own thing. They won't be available to vector you around. I think this is fair game on an instrument checkride.

If I'm on my own, I'm definitely not doing it. Look I can see if you have a vor and that's it, but fortunately, that's not what I'm flying and I won't be flying an airplane like that in IMC.

 

[PaulS]

@dmspilot @PaulS I saw y'all talking earlier about stuff and I just wanted to clear it up. I was on the 075 radial and flew directly over DRYDN so the arc would have made a ton more sense. In my initial IFR clearance I was cleared to 06A via direct DRYDN V20 (which is the 075 radial) and then direct TGE (VOR and IAF) and then I was cleared full procedure VOR A into 06A with TGE as the IAF. I agree with both of y'all that its bit obnoxious of a turn but I'm pretty sure it is perfectly legal

Collin, didn't mean for that to blow up, he probably wanted to see the procedure turn. You definitely have to fly over the IAF in this situation, which you found out. The procedure turn, stuff happens, you'll nail it next time.

 

[PaulS]

Paul, you seem to have some self-imposed limitations which are not really practical. That key-hole is really pretty big. You might like to view my tutorial on procedure turn airspace here to see how to make sure you stay within obstacle clear airspace: http://www.avclicks.com/Flash2/To_the_Rear_March/index.html

Why isn't it practical? Ask ATC for accommodation, and 9 times out of 10 you'll get it. If I need to fly it that way then I will, but never hurts to ask. Collin is on a check ride here, but were it me, I would've told the guy we're flying over a perfectly acceptable DME arc here, this is what I would do in real life.

I don't need a refresher on protected space, that's not my issue. My issue is why basically reverse direction so you can go and reverse direction again? Check ride aside.

 

[Collin Kaufman]

Collin, didn't mean for that to blow up, he probably wanted to see the procedure turn. You definitely have to fly over the IAF in this situation, which you found out. The procedure turn, stuff happens, you'll nail it next time.

No worries lol. We're just passionate about flying!

 

[dtuuri]

Only one off the top of my head is during lost coms. So if clearance is 3000 expect 6000 in 10 minutes, he wants to hear immediately upon losing coms to climb to 6000 instead of waiting 10 minutes then climbing. I was showed the regs and you're supposed to wait, just can't remember where it was

When you know your stuff even a DPE can't argue against it. Of course, you have to be very diplomatic. Knowing where to find the right answer quickly is your defense against ignorance. When you do, there's no need to be belligerant about it and risk offending an examiner for no good reason and to your ultimate detriment. Never start by saying, "I was taught..." You want to have your facts straight and know where to find them. Then sit back and wait for the DPE to come to the same conclusion. S/he wants to do things the right way too.

 

[dtuuri]

Why isn't it practical? Ask ATC for accommodation, and 9 times out of 10 you'll get it. If I need to fly it that way then I will, but never hurts to ask. Collin is on a check ride here, but were it me, I would've told the guy we're flying over a perfectly acceptable DME arc here, this is what I would do in real life.

I don't need a refresher on protected space, that's not my issue. My issue is why basically reverse direction so you can go and reverse direction again? Check ride aside.

IF you were over the arc IAF. But the OP just said he left the airport and went direct to the VOR. It's quite conceivable his drawing was not precise. The "practical" comment was directed at your intercept limit of 90° anyway.

 

[PaulS]

No worries lol. We're just passionate about flying!

Is there any chance your turn put you inside or too close to the VOR? 1.4 miles is not a lot of distance to lose 1200 to 1300 feet.

 

[Collin Kaufman]

IF you were over the arc IAF. But the OP just said he left the airport and went direct to the VOR. It's quite conceivable his drawing was not precise. The "practical" comment was directed at your intercept limit of 90° anyway.

I mentioned a few posts ago I went direct DRYDN then direct TGE

Is there any chance your turn put you inside or too close to the VOR? 1.4 miles is not a lot of distance to lose 1200 to 1300 feet.

Nope. I flew out bound for about two minutes so I'd have time to get situated and make sure I didn't forget anything

 

[PaulS]

IF you were over the arc IAF. But the OP just said he left the airport and went direct to the VOR. It's quite conceivable his drawing was not precise. The "practical" comment was directed at your intercept limit of 90° anyway.

Yeah, a lot of things are conceivable.

 

[PaulS]

I mentioned a few posts ago I went direct DRYDN then direct TGE

Nope. I flew out bound for about two minutes so I'd have time to get situated and make sure I didn't forget anything

Man, I would call the guy up, tell him you are working on this, that you were bummed at not passing and would like him to explain exactly why he busted you so you get it right on the retest. Wouldn't hurt.

 

[dtuuri]

Yeah, a lot of things are conceivable.

Well there's nothing wrong with taking the arc, so I'm surprised you'd think I would say there is. I'm only saying asking for vectors to get a smaller intercept where it isn't called for is not a practical way to fly. If that is what you were saying.

 

[dtuuri]

I mentioned a few posts ago I went direct DRYDN then direct TGE

I missed that. When you went to TGE, were you in GPS mode with the VOR approach selected? I have no G-1000 experience, but if the unit has a VOR overlay in the database and it executes a fly-by I don't see an argument against following it. If you were in VOR mode, though, and did an ad-hoc early turn of your own invention that's another issue.

 

[PaulS]

Well there's nothing wrong with taking the arc, so I'm surprised you'd think I would say there is. I'm only saying asking for vectors to get a smaller intercept where it isn't called for is not a practical way to fly. If that is what you were saying.

Practical for whom? Why? I was taught to ask for what you want. Why not make it easier on myself? Unless there is conflicting traffic or terrain the controller won't care, I'm a blip on his/her screen. Impractical? Is it going to take me an extra minute or two to get on the ground? It's conceivable that if I fly past the arc and do a standard rate 120 degree turn in IMC my passenger yaks all over me. I wouldn't do a 120 degree turn back with an arc there, I would ask for the arc. The controller can say yes or no.

Edit, clarified.