Commercial add-on bust, need advice...

[cranny]

This week i took my Commercial ASEL add-on coming from Commercial helicopter and it ended with my 1st bust.... Man it feels like a kick to the stomach for me. The standard which I hold myself to is pretty high so I feel pretty upset about it. I have been practicing these maneuvers the same way since i started training and showed the examiner exactly that so if he was not pleased than maybe its worth getting another cfi to observe me now...

The Examiner's comments written on my unsatisfactory letter is- "due to lack of understanding per the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook the applicant did not meet standards" However all the maneuvers were completed within PTS altitudes, airspeeds, bank angles, rollout heading requirements. I challenged the examiner in the debrief on this and he said i didn't follow how it guides you to do it in the Airplane Flying Handbook. I also missed only 1 question which he asked about the three maneuvers i busted. All others were answered correctly.

Numerous people have told me today that it could be a technique thing from person to person. I wonder how the examiner can list the Airplane Flying Handbook as a book which I am graded to as i thought only the PTS was used for determining satisfactory performance? I wish to hear your guys feedback on this. People have mentioned to me that I should talk to the local FSDO regarding this checkride. Not sure what the point would be.

Would you guys advise to get another cfi or stay with mine? I doubt speaking with the FSDO would really do anything. On the fence about what to do.

Thanks

 

[jordane93]

I'm confused how he could have busted you if all maneuvers were performed to PTS standards. Did he not like how you set up the maneuvers?

 

[cranny]

I'm confused how he could have busted you if all maneuvers were performed to PTS standards. Did he not like how you set up the maneuvers?

Lazy 8s - at the 135 degree point i was a bit higher than normal so i allowed the plane to continue to descend into the target altitude rather than begin to pull back on yoke right away. I still was within 100' of entry altitude though. But i busted for that...

Steep turns- i chased around the bank a bit at first and same with trim but ended cleaning up the trim for 90% of maneuver. The bank was held to PTS standards but i busted because he said i didn't set the correct amount of opposite bank. I challenged this on the post flight since is stayed within PTS limits...

Chandelle- he said airspeed needs to not be stationary which it never was. The only thing that was worthy of failure on it was the nose dropped no more than 2-3 degrees to stabilize the airspeed right above stall once i rolled out on the 180 heading. I understand the PTS says constant pitch on 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver so if that was what he busted me for than i accept but my airspeed never stopped, it just slowed down on the 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver. He said busted because my airspeed didnt remain constant from beginning to end.

 

[Lance F]

What is your CFI's take on this? Were you his/her first Commercial Airplane candidate to go to this DPE? The examiner is supposed to tell you you'd busted at the first non conforming event. Your description of this flight includes three maneuvers. On the surface this sounds like a bad bust (yes, the PTS sets the standards, not the AFH.), but some things you've said don't add up to me.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Lazy 8s - at the 135 degree point i was a bit higher than normal so i allowed the plane to continue to descend into the target altitude rather than begin to pull back on yoke right away. I still was within 100' of entry altitude though. But i busted for that...

So you intentionally kept the nose down beyond where you should be starting the pitch up...that sounds like a reasonable bust.

Steep turns-

i chased around the bank a bit at first and same with trim but ended cleaning up the trim for 90% of maneuver. The bank was held to PTS standards but i busted because he said i didn't set the correct amount of opposite bank. I challenged this on the post flight since is stayed within PTS limits...

What do you mean by "the correct amount of opposite bank"?

Chandelle-

he said airspeed needs to not be stationary which it never was. The only thing that was worthy of failure on it was the nose dropped no more than 2-3 degrees to stabilize the airspeed right above stall once i rolled out on the 180 heading. I understand the PTS says constant pitch on 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver so if that was what he busted me for than i accept but my airspeed never stopped, it just slowed down on the 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver. He said busted because my airspeed didnt remain constant from beginning to end.

you contradicted yourself here...

I wonder how the examiner can list the Airplane Flying Handbook as a book which I am graded to as i thought only the PTS was used for determining satisfactory performance?

Since the PTS is no longer shown on the FAA web site, I can only reference the ACS, but I am quite sure the PTS, like the ACS, lists the AFH as a source document, which means the maneuvers need to be done as published there.

Sounds to me like you were trying to force certain parts of the maneuvers at the expense of other parts. That indicates to me that you don't have a good handle on what some of these maneuvers are really supposed to look like. Quite honestly, that's a common problem with commercial maneuvers. I'd at least find a second instructor who's very familiar with the commercial maneuvers to critique your technique. Whether you use your original instructor or not to prep you for a retest is up to you.

 

[Topper]

Busting a ride sucks, maybe you should have busted, maybe the dpe was off base. Remember, they have to fail people occasionally or it looks like they are passing unqualified pilots. I busted my instrument ride, actually just the oral, I didn't agree, but I accepted it. Must not have really been a concern to the examiner since he knew my written was about to expire and said if my cfi could sign me off, he was feee the next few days to finish the oral and take the flight. Not to brag (ok, maybe a little), I was ready for the test. I nailed the flying 100%. The only comment on debrief was about some controller confusion that was caused by them being busy and him wanting me to get vectors for a vor approach. The only comment from the FAA guy that was in the back seat (maybe that had a little to do with the bust on the oral) was that I used mt brakes a little too much taxing.

It will sting for a while if you are like me (been about two years), but it gets better. Don't beat yourself up, g get it done and go fly. Commercial is next for me, but since I don't need it, I Harb not been too motivated to work on it.

Jim

 

[cranny]

What is your CFI's take on this? Were you his/her first Commercial Airplane candidate to go to this DPE? The examiner is supposed to tell you you'd busted at the first non conforming event. Your description of this flight includes three maneuvers. On the surface this sounds like a bad bust (yes, the PTS sets the standards, not the AFH.), but some things you've said don't add up to me.

Lance-

CFI has apologized a few times and said he accepted responsibility for checkride due to how we practiced the maneuvers and saying they were passable. During our training flights, especially with the lazy 8s i had asked him numerous times if this is how the maneuver is supposed to look and his reply was always that i was in PTS standards so we kept moving on. He had another commercial student go a few weeks back which passed with supposedly an "easy DPE". I think before that other student it has been a while for him.

(I absolutely hate pushing blame to anyone else since they were not in the plane and they didnt take the checkride, i did. This unfortunately shows that I should have done my own investigating and possibly discussed these concerns with other CFIs.)

 

[cranny]

So you intentionally kept the nose down beyond where you should be starting the pitch up...that sounds like a reasonable bust.

What do you mean by "the correct amount of opposite bank"?


you contradicted yourself here...



Since the PTS is no longer shown on the FAA web site, I can only reference the ACS, but I am quite sure the PTS, like the ACS, lists the AFH as a source document, which means the maneuvers need to be done as published there.

Sounds to me like you were trying to force certain parts of the maneuvers at the expense of other parts. That indicates to me that you don't have a good handle on what some of these maneuvers are really supposed to look like. Quite honestly, that's a common problem with commercial maneuvers. I'd at least find a second instructor who's very familiar with the commercial maneuvers to critique your technique. Whether you use your original instructor or not to prep you for a retest is up to you.

MauleSkinner-

Correct amount of bank in opposite direction to prevent the airplanes over banking tendency. which basically lead to me constantly adjusting bank throughout turn. Although I was within PTS standards, the bank was not "set"

Ok, thank you for the advice.

 

[cranny]

Busting a ride sucks, maybe you should have busted, maybe the dpe was off base. Remember, they have to fail people occasionally or it looks like they are passing unqualified pilots. I busted my instrument ride, actually just the oral, I didn't agree, but I accepted it. Must not have really been a concern to the examiner since he knew my written was about to expire and said if my cfi could sign me off, he was feee the next few days to finish the oral and take the flight. Not to brag (ok, maybe a little), I was ready for the test. I nailed the flying 100%. The only comment on debrief was about some controller confusion that was caused by them being busy and him wanting me to get vectors for a vor approach. The only comment from the FAA guy that was in the back seat (maybe that had a little to do with the bust on the oral) was that I used mt brakes a little too much taxing.

It will sting for a while if you are like me (been about two years), but it gets better. Don't beat yourself up, g get it done and go fly. Commercial is next for me, but since I don't need it, I Harb not been too motivated to work on it.

Jim

Jim-

I appreciate your input. I do agree with you, as there are no retakes. Its like a speeding ticket, once its given out, the officer doesn't take it back! I plan to let it sink in over the weekend and then get another instructors input next week.

 

[RyanB]

To me, it sounds like this DPE is a hard knock examiner. If you caught your mistake and made an effort to fix it than the examiner should have factored that in.

If they were done to PTS standards than they should have passed regardless of you making minor mistakes that you caught yourself on. As Lance said, the examiner should have terminated the checkride at the moment something qualified as a bust, not let you continue flying and then knock you for multiple different errors.

 

[MauleSkinner]

MauleSkinner-

Correct amount of bank in opposite direction to prevent the airplanes over banking tendency. which basically lead to me constantly adjusting bank throughout turn. Although I was within PTS standards, the bank was not "set"

Ok, thank you for the advice.

Ok...here again, your terminology isn't making sense. You don't bank the opposite direction to counter over banking. Sounds to me like you need a pretty thorough brushup on things before you do your retake.

 

[Brad Z]

Does the DPE do instruction as well? It might be worth doing an hour or two of dual, working on maneuvers. As long as he's not recommending you for the practical test he can provide flight training to you outside of the checkride.

 

[Kritchlow]

I feel badly for anyone busting a ride, but please remember we are hearing ONE SIDE of the story here.
Not saying the OP is lying, but reasonable people can look at the same facts and disagree.

 

[cranny]

Ok...here again, your terminology isn't making sense. You don't bank the opposite direction to counter over banking. Sounds to me like you need a pretty thorough brushup on things before you do your retake.

..... "Overbanking Tendency" Airplane Flying Handbook pg. 9-3
As bank angles steepen, the airplane will exhibit the behavior to continue rolling in the direction of the bank unless deliberate and opposite aileron pressure is held against the bank.

 

[Harold Rutila]

My advice is to be honest with yourself and seek out the most thorough assessment of your performance from your DPE. Although nobody can read tone through a forum post, I get the sense that you may not have let the DPE talk very much once the flight was over.

Now if the DPE was incoherent in his assessment or was not evaluating you in good faith, that's another story. But I get the sense that it was a fair checkride and it simply caught you by surprise. It happens.

Another question: Did you only work with one instructor?

 

[denverpilot]

Question: Did the examiner clearly say the first maneuver wasn't passing and ask if you'd like to continue the ride?

There's a big problem there if they didn't.

But...

Whether you want to pursue it via the CFI and FSDO is a whole different ball of wax.

That said...

Lazy 8s: Your description of the Lazy 8 leaves me wondering if you busted the airspeed limitation on the way back down to the entry altitude. It's hard to not speed up too much if you get high in that maneuver. What do you think? It's *really* lazy ... if you don't want to build speed on the way back down.

Steep turns: I would want to see how much back and forth you did if the complaint was that you didn't "set" opposite aileron to counter the over-banking tendency. This is a maneuver that if you really nail it, the bank angle simply doesn't change. You roll in and hold it. In turbulent air you'll be fussing with it a bit, but in smooth air this is a "locked" maneuver really. How close were you to that?

Chandelle: I can't make heads or tails of your version so I'm skeptical but willing to listen. You said he busted for both "airspeed needs to not be stationary" and at the end said he busted because "airspeed didn't remain constant". Those two don't match?

That's all armchair quarterbacking with a LOT of assumptions. You didn't mention anything about power settings in any of those, so there's another facet where we just don't know what happened across the Internet.

My "feel" is that you have the basics of the maneuvers down but they were not done in a manner where the examiner felt you were in command of the aircraft completely. The "constantly adjusting bank throughout the turn" of the steep turn is what's giving me that feel in my mind's eye. While flight conditions don't always allow them to be perfect, these are precision maneuvers in a sense. If you're not correcting anything that's wrong immediately and saying so out loud, you're doing yourself a disservice or you're a little behind the aircraft. Maybe not a lot, but if someone can count to two-potato before you start fixing it, that's too long. IMHO.

What do you think? This is difficult to assess over text online and my smile doesn't come across as I'm saying the above, either.

So let me add a little sage wisdom a friend of mine taught me...

Checkride busts aren't so bad. The penalty is that you have to go fly more.

And if it helps, the above is coming from a guy who busted his SE add on Commercial not because of any of maneuvers -- those were freaking nailed -- but because I went completely brain dead at landing MY OWN AIRPLANE! God that both hurt bad and also made me laugh harder than I have in years.

The examiner, after I did my best impression of Captain Kangaroo bouncing between all three tires on my own 182 I have hundreds of hours and landings in, almost sheepishly says, "You know I can't accept that, right?"

I got the airplane under control and stopped and said, "I don't blame you, *I* can't accept that. Holy hell!"

He PROPERLY asked me if I wanted to continue the ride and get credit for items I got right, and I happily accepted and we zipped out to the practice area where I completely nailed the maneuvers, and then made a barely passable soft field landing when we got back... so I got credit for that.

But we had to reschedule for Easter Sunday to just go up and do landings. Which I then proceeded to even surprise myself on after a couple of days of just hammering on them to work out whatever the problem was with the CFI and also solo. Basically I had just strangely changed my flare point and where I was looking. By the re-ride, I made the most beautiful power off 180 with the softest touchdown right on my announced spot that I've ever made. Just floated right to it like the airplane was on rails thinking I almost didn't have the energy to make it... juuuuuuust another twenty feet baby... keep gingerly pulling... feel the remaining lift start to fade.... kiss. Freaking gorgeous. I probably couldn't do one that nice one in ten times even when doing it all right.

So...

Get up. Get back in the saddle. Never any harm with getting another instructor's opinion too. If your instructor is rusty, grab one who's done a bunch of commercial rides lately. And ask them to demo the maneuvers and talk about what they're fixing and when.

And smooth it all up. You'll nail it.

It's all about complete command of the aircraft and control. My gut feel is the examiner was left with a question in their head or whether you had that level of command. I know that's vague, but you'll know the level when you see it. No oscillating, no chasing, just put the aircraft exactly where you want it and it should be.

Another tip. I personally cut the standards in half when practicing. If the standard is 100', I'm considering the maneuver a mess if I don't do it within 50'. This way, my personal standard is well inside the PTS/ACS for the maneuver. If the landing has to be within 200', I want it at 100' consistently. Because under stress if I "botch" MY standard, I'm still likely to be well within the ride standard.

Get a little mad and kick the standard's butt. LOL.

It was Doc Bruce who gave the phrase I like to apply to checkride standards, here once. And he was referring to other things, but I know he applies it in many aspects of his life...

"Don't accept minimum standards."

Remember. See me smiling. See me ready to go up and show ya. Positive. The above reads negative in text online. No intent at that. At all. Think "tough pep talk".

Go fly. Make that airplane do what you want it it! Pilot in COMMAND baby!

Edits: Fixed typos.

 

[MauleSkinner]

..... "Overbanking Tendency" Airplane Flying Handbook pg. 9-3
As bank angles steepen, the airplane will exhibit the behavior to continue rolling in the direction of the bank unless deliberate and opposite aileron pressure is held against the bank.

Exactly..."aileron pressure" not "opposite bank".

If you can't communicate clearly, understanding what is explained about maneuvers, sat or unsat, becomes quite difficult.

 

[BrianNC]

Another tip. I personally cut the standards in half when practicing. If the standard is 100', I'm considering the maneuver a mess if I don't do it within 50'. This way, my personal standard is well inside the PTS/ACS for the maneuver. If the landing has to be within 200', I want it at 100' consistently. Because under stress if I "botch" MY standard, I'm still likely to be well within the ride standard.

"Don't accept minimum standards."

Great tip, which I will heed as I start my commercial training.

 

[TheGolfPilot]

On my commercial checkride I told him step by step how I was going to do the maneuver before I did it as if I was teaching it to him, figured if he was going to have an issue with my method he would intervene there. From that point I would do it exactly like I said. On the eights around pylons he shared his opinion on how what I explained wasn't 100% right, told me to do the maneuver my way, we did, then he showed me his way which I admitted was better. I don't really recall what it was but it involved how the "gunner" reason for the maneuver was bs.

 

[Z06_Mir]

I don't have the PTS (or ACS) in front of me, but if I remember correctly the examiner should have only picked on maneuver, Chandelles OR Lazy 8's. Kind of strange you had to do both and were busted on both.

 

[dtuuri]

As someone who's sat in the examiner's seat, I'd like to say that the idea an examiner should bust an applicant the first time they don't come up to standards sounds good in theory, but if they did that hardly anybody would ever pass. I'm sorry, but in real life examiners let some things slide--up to a point. In this case the OP is mechanically controlling the plane, however it took a while for the examiner to spot the trend. I don't fault him for that.

Lazy eights are impossible to do according to the book, imo. You start them in cruise and for the duration of the first course reversal are flying at a more favorable L/D ratio, except for a short time near the top. The result is--you're either going to gain altitude or airspeed when you pass back through cruise again. Remedy? Pull off a couple inches of manifold pressure (trial by error) as you go into it.

Steep turns are laid over on the side and pulled around with constant elevator pressure. Sounds like you were making an instrument procedure out of it. Go practice solo. Keep your eyes outside.

Same with chandelles--eyes outside, watch your low wing from the 90°point come smoothly up the section lines (you DO have section lines I hope ) back to the horizon. No need to watch your airspeed. Practice solo. A lot.

Don't retake until YOU are satisfied, never rely on your CFI for that determination, BTDT.

dtuuri

 

[Clip4]

Lazy 8s - at the 135 degree point i was a bit higher than normal so i allowed the plane to continue to descend into the target altitude rather than begin to pull back on yoke right away. I still was within 100' of entry altitude though. But i busted for that...

Steep turns- i chased around the bank a bit at first and same with trim but ended cleaning up the trim for 90% of maneuver. The bank was held to PTS standards but i busted because he said i didn't set the correct amount of opposite bank. I challenged this on the post flight since is stayed within PTS limits...

Chandelle- he said airspeed needs to not be stationary which it never was. The only thing that was worthy of failure on it was the nose dropped no more than 2-3 degrees to stabilize the airspeed right above stall once i rolled out on the 180 heading. I understand the PTS says constant pitch on 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver so if that was what he busted me for than i accept but my airspeed never stopped, it just slowed down on the 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver. He said busted because my airspeed didnt remain constant from beginning to end.

I have read what you posted and agree with the examiner - you do not know the maneuvers.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Lazy 8s - at the 135 degree point i was a bit higher than normal so i allowed the plane to continue to descend into the target altitude rather than begin to pull back on yoke right away. I still was within 100' of entry altitude though. But i busted for that...

I have to ask - Were you talking throughout the maneuvers?

DPE's aren't mind readers. If you were actively talking throughout the maneuver and verbally said "I'm a bit high here, correcting" at a minimum, and saying what you're doing to correct and why would be even better, then you'd probably be OK. If you were just flying the maneuver and made that decision yourself, it's quite easy for the DPE to conclude that you didn't know how to fly the maneuver and you just got lucky if you were within standards at the 180º point.

So, talk. All the time, the entire flight, almost as if you were instructing. If the DPE knows your thought process, they'll be much more comfortable with a couple of slips. Nobody's perfect, and being able to recognize and correct is as important, if not more so, than actually just flying the maneuver.

 

[mtuomi]

I don't have the PTS (or ACS) in front of me, but if I remember correctly the examiner should have only picked on maneuver, Chandelles OR Lazy 8's. Kind of strange you had to do both and were busted on both.

I did both on my ride. I did a steep spiral, lazy 8, chandelle and 8's on pylons.

ACS does say to choose one, but I didn't mind - I like doing them
"V. Performance and Ground Reference Maneuvers
For ASEL and ASES applicants, the evaluator must choose:
• Task A, Steep Turns, or Task B, Steep Spiral;
• Task C, Chandelles, or Task D, Lazy Eights; and
• Task E, Eights on Pylons."

 

[mtuomi]

Lazy 8s - at the 135 degree point i was a bit higher than normal so i allowed the plane to continue to descend into the target altitude rather than begin to pull back on yoke right away. I still was within 100' of entry altitude though. But i busted for that...

Steep turns- i chased around the bank a bit at first and same with trim but ended cleaning up the trim for 90% of maneuver. The bank was held to PTS standards but i busted because he said i didn't set the correct amount of opposite bank. I challenged this on the post flight since is stayed within PTS limits...

Chandelle- he said airspeed needs to not be stationary which it never was. The only thing that was worthy of failure on it was the nose dropped no more than 2-3 degrees to stabilize the airspeed right above stall once i rolled out on the 180 heading. I understand the PTS says constant pitch on 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver so if that was what he busted me for than i accept but my airspeed never stopped, it just slowed down on the 2nd 90 degree part of maneuver. He said busted because my airspeed didnt remain constant from beginning to end.

Perhaps your CFI puts too much weight on the PTS/ACS criteria, and not enough in fully explaining and understanding what the maneuver should look/feel like.

Your lazy 8 wasn't a real lazy 8, you need to let the plane do more of the work. It sounds like you started the maneuver with too much energy, got high and forced the plane down before the 180 degree point. This is not a lazy 8 as described in the Airplane Flying Handbook (which is a reference material for the ACS). The key for successful L8's is energy management. You can fly a climbing turn followed by a descending turn and be within ACS at every point, but it still wouldn't be a lazy 8.

Steep turns, no comment. Sounds like you didn't get the maneuver stabilized enough to show "mastery" of the task. The bank can be +-5deg, so even the slightest "chase" is often a bust.

Chandelle - you busted it because you let the airspeed climb after completing the turn by dropping the nose down. The "correct" way to finish the chandelle is with stall warner blaring at minimum airspeed and full power, with nose up at the same pitch you set it during your first 90 degree turn. The airspeed should drop throughout the turn, and be stabilized at completion. If you had to drop the nose to avoid stall, you didn't perform it correctly. It's a tricky maneuver to do right. Again, energy management is the key.

"Complete rollout at the 180° point, ±10° just above a stall airspeed, and maintaining that airspeed momentarily avoiding a stall."

You'll get it next time, I'd suggest getting a second opinion from another CFI. The good thing is - the maneuvers are the fun part of the training, and you get to fly more of them

 

[dmspilot]

Not sure where in the description of a lazy 8 you should be at a certain altitude at the 135° point. "I was too high at the 135° point" doesn't really make sense to me. Do you mean you didn't lower the nose fast enough between the 90 and the 135? If so, then the maneuver was flawed.

 

[mtuomi]

Not sure where in the description of a lazy 8 you should be at a certain altitude at the 135° point. "I was too high at the 135° point" doesn't really make sense to me. Do you mean you didn't lower the nose fast enough between the 90 and the 135? If so, then the maneuver was flawed.

There's no altitude requirement for it, I think what he's trying to say is, that he started the maneuver with too much energy and didn't get rid of it at a correct rate. That way you'll end up fast or high in the first turn, which means you'll have to force it down to keep within ACS/PTS standards at the 180deg point. Just like you say - that's not a lazy 8 though.

When the L8 is done "correctly", you actually don't really have to lower the nose, gravity takes care of that. Forcing the maneuver means you're doing it wrong.

Based on the description, I'm not sure whether the OP really knows what the maneuver should look like. Like I said - you can fly it "forced" and be within PTS/ACS, but it's not a lazy 8 and it will be a bust.

 

[denverpilot]

Lazy eights are impossible to do according to the book, imo. You start them in cruise and for the duration of the first course reversal are flying at a more favorable L/D ratio, except for a short time near the top. The result is--you're either going to gain altitude or airspeed when you pass back through cruise again. Remedy? Pull off a couple inches of manifold pressure (trial by error) as you go into it.

That's a fascinating point. I had some early trouble with that but hadn't figured out a good way to describe it. The result was the higher airspeed back at cruise but it took me a few flights to figure it out.

My CFI can be a little understated so I think he saw I was figuring it out and let me work on it without saying much. But it worked!

I like having read that above to tie the knot back to the head knowledge. Thanks.