Commercial Oral Prep - Recommendations?

CC268 said:
I won’t let you guys down. I’ve been studying up on the effects of Coriolis Force.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the effects of the Corleone force.

Don-Vito_grande.jpg
 
Ben Diss said:
Just did my commercial check ride a couple weeks ago in a 172. Interesting that the oral didn't include one question on commercial privileges. I talked to someone who had just took the commercial check ride with this DE so I knew what to expect. One surprise was that we did an instrument approach.
Click to expand...

I realize they can make you do an instrument approach, but should they? This is a VFR rating.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Can they? What section of the ACS would that fall under?
Click to expand...

Not to mention there is nothing you have to do to prove you are instrument current for this rating. That's what IPCs are for. Not a check ride.
 
Ben Diss said:
Just did my commercial check ride a couple weeks ago in a 172. Interesting that the oral didn't include one question on commercial privileges. I talked to someone who had just took the commercial check ride with this DE so I knew what to expect. One surprise was that we did an instrument approach.
Click to expand...

One other point. You do have to do an approach in the multi. But you said you were in a 172.
 
BrianNC said:
One other point. You do have to do an approach in the multi. But you said you were in a 172.
Click to expand...
And that's in the instrument ACS, not the commercial...if you held a Private certificate with instrument and multi airplane ratings, you wouldn't need to do an approach for the commercial multi.
 
MauleSkinner said:
And that's in the instrument ACS, not the commercial...if you held a Private certificate with instrument and multi airplane ratings, you wouldn't need to do an approach for the commercial multi.
Click to expand...

But if you have a commercial single and have an instrument rating, you do need to do an engine out approach in the multi under the hood for your multi commercial add-on. That's what I was referring to.
 
BrianNC said:
But if you have a commercial single and have an instrument rating, you do need to do an engine out approach in the multi under the hood for your multi commercial add-on. That's what I was referring to.
Click to expand...
Whatever level (private or commercial) you're getting your first multi rating with instrument privileges at requires the single engine approach. the flight school at my previous airport used to get everybody a private/multi/instrument so they could start building multi PIC sooner, and therefore they didn't have to do the approach for their commercial multi.
 
BrianNC said:
I realize they can make you do an instrument approach, but should they? This is a VFR rating.
Click to expand...

I didn't remember seeing anything in the ACS for this either, but I figured it was easier to just fly an approach than argue during a check ride. He actually told me before we flew he was going to have me do the approach into one airport and then when we were flying he had me fly it into a different airport. It was no big deal, but I wondered if he was mixing up his ACS notes.
 
I think the whole thing is bunch of hooey anyway. The written test questions have nothing to do with real world flying and some of the maneuvers on the check ride are ridiculous. The 180 engine out spot landing has no practical value. I found that flying the approach high and just planting the plane on the spot was the reliable way to meet the conditions of the test. In reality, I would never try to land engine-out that way.
 
Ben Diss said:
I think the whole thing is bunch of hooey anyway. The written test questions have nothing to do with real world flying and some of the maneuvers on the check ride are ridiculous. The 180 engine out spot landing has no practical value. I found that flying the approach high and just planting the plane on the spot was the reliable way to meet the conditions of the test. In reality, I would never try to land engine-out that way.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately most instructors don't seem to understand the maneuvers, so manufactured methods to teach the test have become the norm...much the same way that we are taught to intentionally avoid the intent of the written exams.
 
Ben Diss said:
I think the whole thing is bunch of hooey anyway. The written test questions have nothing to do with real world flying and some of the maneuvers on the check ride are ridiculous. The 180 engine out spot landing has no practical value. I found that flying the approach high and just planting the plane on the spot was the reliable way to meet the conditions of the test. In reality, I would never try to land engine-out that way.
Click to expand...

About to do my commercial check ride. Same here. I make sure I come in high because I don't want to be short. Then I just slip or whatever else I have to do to get it on the spot.
 
BrianNC said:
About to do my commercial check ride. Same here. I make sure I come in high because I don't want to be short. Then I just slip or whatever else I have to do to get it on the spot.
Click to expand...
Examiner: "Time to do the power off 180. Tell me where you're gonna land."

Pilot: "See that 75 foot by 6000 foot rectangle? Somewhere in there."
 
Ben Diss said:
I think the whole thing is bunch of hooey anyway. The written test questions have nothing to do with real world flying and some of the maneuvers on the check ride are ridiculous. The 180 engine out spot landing has no practical value. I found that flying the approach high and just planting the plane on the spot was the reliable way to meet the conditions of the test. In reality, I would never try to land engine-out that way.
Click to expand...

That’s why it’s called (or used to be anyway) an accuracy landing, not a simulated emergency landing.

Who’s teaching you that it’s intended to simulate an emergency? There’s no FAA documentation that calls the Power Off 180 any sort of simulated emergency. It’s about energy management and accuracy in all of their official docs about it.

If someone is teaching you to associate emergencies with Power Off 180s, get it out of your head. It’s a bad association.

BrianNC said:
About to do my commercial check ride. Same here. I make sure I come in high because I don't want to be short. Then I just slip or whatever else I have to do to get it on the spot.
Click to expand...

That’s pretty much the goal. Hit the spot.

Sometimes you have to go the other way and stretch the glide just a touch by forcing the airplane down into ground effect sooner or slightly into ground effect.

Not the best way to go about it, planning-wise, and higher is better, but a wind change will mean you have to “figure out how to make it work”.

That’s all it’s about. Can you hit your spot on multiple wind conditions... the practice for these is harder than the checkride since the wind usually isn’t going to change much in a couple of laps around the pattern. It can, but you’ll see more variety practicing than during the ride.
 
AggieMike88 said:
Examiner: "Time to do the power off 180. Tell me where you're gonna land."

Pilot: "See that 75 foot by 6000 foot rectangle? Somewhere in there."
Click to expand...

That’s called “the first one”. Then you work on getting more accurate. :) :) :)
 
denverpilot said:
That’s called “the first one”. Then you work on getting more accurate. :) :) :)
Click to expand...
Then....

Examiner: "Time to do the power off 180. Tell me where you're gonna land."

Pilot: "See that dime someone dropped just beyond the first stripe past the numbers?"
 
AggieMike88 said:
Then....

Examiner: "Time to do the power off 180. Tell me where you're gonna land."

Pilot: "See that dime someone dropped just beyond the first stripe past the numbers?"
Click to expand...
I’ll give you 6 cents in change!
 
denverpilot said:
Good lord. What’s hard to understand about them?
Click to expand...
That's what I figure, but apparently it happens...if ya gotta make statements like these, somebody's not getting it...

denverpilot said:
That’s why it’s called (or used to be anyway) an accuracy landing, not a simulated emergency landing.

Who’s teaching you that it’s intended to simulate an emergency? There’s no FAA documentation that calls the Power Off 180 any sort of simulated emergency. It’s about energy management and accuracy in all of their official docs about it.

If someone is teaching you to associate emergencies with Power Off 180s, get it out of your head. It’s a bad association.



That’s pretty much the goal. Hit the spot.

Sometimes you have to go the other way and stretch the glide just a touch by forcing the airplane down into ground effect sooner or slightly into ground effect.

Not the best way to go about it, planning-wise, and higher is better, but a wind change will mean you have to “figure out how to make it work”.

That’s all it’s about. Can you hit your spot on multiple wind conditions... the practice for these is harder than the checkride since the wind usually isn’t going to change much in a couple of laps around the pattern. It can, but you’ll see more variety practicing than during the ride.
Click to expand...
 
MauleSkinner said:
That's what I figure, but apparently it happens...if ya gotta make statements like these, somebody's not getting it...
Click to expand...

LOL. Well, you do have a point there. :)

But that one could just be a misunderstanding about it by the student and more of an omission than a misunderstanding by the instructor, as in, they didn’t cover why you do them at all, versus not understanding them.
 
Which examiner are you using, some here treat it like the glorified ppl like some have said above, and others expect you to have knowledge on o2 requirements and high level knowledge or pressurization systems and constant speed props and commercial privileges known pat as well as all the airworthiness stuff. I have a nice study guide based on the ACS I have my students use.
 
bijanmaleki said:
Which examiner are you using, some here treat it like the glorified ppl like some have said above, and others expect you to have knowledge on o2 requirements and high level knowledge or pressurization systems and constant speed props and commercial privileges known pat as well as all the airworthiness stuff. I have a nice study guide based on the ACS I have my students use.
Click to expand...

Hey @bijanmaleki, shot you a PM with my email. Could I get a copy of that? I've been looking from something that follows the ACS directly.
 
denverpilot said:
That’s why it’s called (or used to be anyway) an accuracy landing, not a simulated emergency landing.

Who’s teaching you that it’s intended to simulate an emergency? There’s no FAA documentation that calls the Power Off 180 any sort of simulated emergency. It’s about energy management and accuracy in all of their official docs about it.

If someone is teaching you to associate emergencies with Power Off 180s, get it out of your head. It’s a bad association.
Click to expand...

I couldn't figure out any other useful reason to be doing it. It just made no sense. Much like the chandelle. I think it's derived from an box canyon escape maneuver, but I don't think in real life that's how you'd do it. It's also so simple I didn't see the point. It's just all a bunch of hooey.
 
bijanmaleki said:
Which examiner are you using, some here treat it like the glorified ppl like some have said above, and others expect you to have knowledge on o2 requirements and high level knowledge or pressurization systems and constant speed props and commercial privileges known pat as well as all the airworthiness stuff. I have a nice study guide based on the ACS I have my students use.
Click to expand...
I too would like to have a copy of the study guide
 
Ben Diss said:
I couldn't figure out any other useful reason to be doing it. It just made no sense. Much like the chandelle. I think it's derived from an box canyon escape maneuver, but I don't think in real life that's how you'd do it. It's also so simple I didn't see the point. It's just all a bunch of hooey.
Click to expand...

It’s NOT a box canyon turn. Not even close. In those you’re trading altitude for an escape route above stall speed.

It’s a PRECISION maneuver with the definition of a 180 turn gaining the most altitude possible, starting at cruise and ending just above the stall.

It’s not “hooey” if you’ve seen how many people CAN’T consistently do it, for one thing. You’d be surprised.

Why? I can’t say, but it has to do with them missing something about energy management and airspeed back in their Private certificate training days. So you re-teach it.

Also recall this is a standard set at the MINIMUM standard as @bbchien points out about most FAA checkride standards. The standard could be much harder than it is. But it’s not.

And there’s applicants who have held a Private certificate for 20 years, haven’t done any significant training for that period of time, and need to have the rust knocked off on precision of airspeed management (and maneuvers) before they go for this checkride.

For someone going straight between the rides, Commercial should be a piece of cake. For someone with 20 years between rides, perhaps not so much...

Are there better things to teach that might save a Commercial pilot’s life? Perhaps. What we have is a standard that’s been around a long time and isn’t being done in poorly behaved aircraft much anymore...

Example: Chandelle in a less stable aircraft, a pilot could spin right out of the top of the thing if they can’t keep their feet coordinated in aircraft of old. Nowadays in the typical docile trainers used for the rating ride, probably not.

In my STOL airplane? Almost impossible. It’ll just mush into a horrendous sink rate if I got too slow, which would still be a “bust” but not nearly as eye-popping for someone not paying attention properly as flipping over into an over the top spin entry to the right.

There IS a reason for this stuff. Our modern aircraft are covering a lot of it up. Most people choose aircraft that cover it up.

Do a perfect Lazy 8 in something aerobatic and twitchy in the stability realm with butt-loads of horsepower and lots of left turning tendencies. That maneuver is about attaching your feet to your brain.
 
bijanmaleki said:
Which examiner are you using, some here treat it like the glorified ppl like some have said above, and others expect you to have knowledge on o2 requirements and high level knowledge or pressurization systems and constant speed props and commercial privileges known pat as well as all the airworthiness stuff. I have a nice study guide based on the ACS I have my students use.
Click to expand...

I don’t have an examiner chosen yet. I haven’t started the commercial flying yet. I’m studying for the written right now. I actually don’t have an instructor chosen yet either. I am going to do it in my Cherokee 140 though (minus the 10 hours in a complex). If you’d like to share that study guide that would be very helpful!

Do you do instruction in other planes or just your own school airplanes?
 
Last edited:
bijanmaleki said:
Which examiner are you using, some here treat it like the glorified ppl like some have said above, and others expect you to have knowledge on o2 requirements and high level knowledge or pressurization systems and constant speed props and commercial privileges known pat as well as all the airworthiness stuff. I have a nice study guide based on the ACS I have my students use.
Click to expand...

Guess I need to read up on pressurization systems
 
Walboy said:
It will take you 15 minutes. Not that big of a deal.

You can get all the FAA handbooks for free off the internet. I thought Gleim's Commercial Flight Maneuvers and Practical Test Prep was a good value as a supplement for the commercial. Good illustrations and explanations for the commercial maneuvers. It also includes things like pressurization and O2 systems.
Click to expand...

I bought the ASA Oral Exam guide just now. I suppose I could order that Gleim book as well. I have most the FAA handbooks downloaded and have read through the following at some point in my training:
-PHAK
-AFH
-Instrument Flying Handbook
-Instrument Procedures Handbook (I didn't read all of this)
-Risk Management
-AIM (most of it)

That said, I have to admit, I don't retain info from reading like I do watching or listening. I am also a bit of a slow reader. I guess it is something I need to do more of ha.

This might be a good option as well: https://www.gleimaviation.com/shop/cpacs/
 
Walboy said:
The only "new" material you're really going to see is the commercial manuevers and some regs. The Gleim manuever book would be a better use of money IMO since you've already ordered the ASA book. I also have a copy of the King Commercial/CFI Maneuver DVD that is 100% visual and somewhat helpful. I "might" loan that out. As an engineer, I suspect weight and balance is a no brainer for you. Just be able to calculate a shift of CG in flight as fuel burns, gear retracts etc.
Click to expand...

Yea I have the King Commercial Practical Test Video as well as the Commercial/CFI Maneuver Video. I ordered both Gleim books just to make sure I cover my bases. Going on Commercial Sabbatical soon.

Yea the ole weight shift problems are a fun reminder of my freshmen year Statics class. Those are easy!
 
Last edited:
BrianNC said:
Hey @bijanmaleki, shot you a PM with my email. Could I get a copy of that? I've been looking from something that follows the ACS directly.
Click to expand...

Ill send that shortly

AggieMike88 said:
I too would like to have a copy of the study guide
Click to expand...

Whats your email

CC268 said:
I don’t have an examiner chosen yet. I haven’t started the commercial flying yet. I’m studying for the written right now. I actually don’t have an instructor chosen yet either. I am going to do it in my Cherokee 140 though (minus the 10 hours in a complex). If you’d like to share that study guide that would be very helpful!

Do you do instruction in other planes or just your own school airplanes?
Click to expand...

I can send it. I can do your ten hours complex if you need(maybe knock out the dual xc day and night at the same time) and I do instruction in other peoples planes but timing can be challenging (im near capacity at the moment), I could have one of my other guys do it for you or recommend someone up at DVT if you need.
 
bijanmaleki said:
Ill send that shortly



Whats your email



I can send it. I can do your ten hours complex if you need(maybe knock out the dual xc day and night at the same time) and I do instruction in other peoples planes but timing can be challenging (im near capacity at the moment), I could have one of my other guys do it for you or recommend someone up at DVT if you need.
Click to expand...

I understand if your near capacity! Your up at Stellar too, which is probably not very convenient for either of us I guess. I may be interested in doing the ten hours complex. I am always looking for good recommendations, so I would really appreciate any feedback on instructors. Someone with good availability is very important since I have to work around my work schedule.
 
These HSI questions on the commercial king course are the worst.
 
CC268 said:
These HSI questions on the commercial king course are the worst.
Click to expand...
yeah.... fortunately, there are just six or 8 questions in the bank to be asked.

So MAFO .... Memorize, and fly on
 
AggieMike88 said:
yeah.... fortunately, there are just six or 8 questions in the bank to be asked.

So MAFO .... Memorize, and fly on
Click to expand...

I need to watch some YouTube vids on these or something. Idk why but they are tricky to me. And I have an HSI in my airplane! LOL
 
Ben Diss said:
I think the whole thing is bunch of hooey anyway. The written test questions have nothing to do with real world flying and some of the maneuvers on the check ride are ridiculous. The 180 engine out spot landing has no practical value.
Click to expand...

I'll add on to what @denverpilot stated a few posts ago. The purpose of the maneuvers is NOT to have a practical application, it's to develop skills that are applicable in other ways. If you are able to do the maneuvers, it means you have developed a certain level of hand/eye coordination, knowledge of energy management, rudder coordination, planning ahead, adjusting for changes in altitude/attitude/performance, etc. If you cannot do them, you haven't developed those skills yet.

There are many other activities in life where we do the same type of thing. No musician learns an instrument just to play scales, but they learn scales because it's the basis of music. And if they can't play scales then they probably aren't a very proficient musician.
 
RussR said:
I'll add on to what @denverpilot stated a few posts ago. The purpose of the maneuvers is NOT to have a practical application, it's to develop skills that are applicable in other ways. If you are able to do the maneuvers, it means you have developed a certain level of hand/eye coordination, knowledge of energy management, rudder coordination, planning ahead, adjusting for changes in altitude/attitude/performance, etc. If you cannot do them, you haven't developed those skills yet.

There are many other activities in life where we do the same type of thing. No musician learns an instrument just to play scales, but they learn scales because it's the basis of music. And if they can't play scales then they probably aren't a very proficient musician.
Click to expand...

Yea, I get it now that you two have explained this a bit. I'm one that took this test 20 years after the PPL. I guess my point is that I don't think it applies to any kind of real world flying. When I got my PPL, I understood that the check ride was a way to determine that I was not likely to get someone killed if they flew with me. It was not that I had ascended to any kind of high-water mark in flying skills, only that I wasn't below the low-water mark. When I passed the IFR check ride I figured I had leveled up and in one aspect of flying, was further away from the low-water mark.

If sounds like you and @denverpilot are saying the Commercial is supposed to be another rung up that ladder, climbing a little higher away from the low-water mark. That makes sense, I just think it misses the mark. The only maneuver that I had to work on was the 180 power off. All the others were understanding the standards of the maneuver and executing it the way the DE is expecting it. The written was a complete joke.
 
Ben Diss said:
If sounds like you and @denverpilot are saying the Commercial is supposed to be another rung up that ladder, climbing a little higher away from the low-water mark. That makes sense, I just think it misses the mark.
Click to expand...

So honest question, you’re “King for a Day”. What maneuvers would you replace the current ones with for a freshly minted Commercial certificate?

Remember this pilot is going to go do jumper dumping, banner towing, glider towing, SIC in a 135 operation (where they have their own approved rules and training over and above the Certificate) or any of the “usual” 250 hour fresh Commercial jobs out there.

What skill set would you recommend that would save Commerical pilot’s lives and increase safety over the current requirements?

Personally I’d say to bring back mandatory spin training myself, but the FAA is cow-towing to the fact that many of the aircraft that will be used under the new TAA rule and not be old complex aircraft, aren’t certified for spins.

The pipeline patrol industry (a common starting point for a freshly minted Commercial) has seen a number of stall/spin fatalities in the last decade. Enough to call it a pattern, IMHO.

As relates to the TAA thing, I haven’t even seen a standard of what the pilot needs to show they learned from operating a TAA yet, either. Do they need to show they can properly dial in a localizer back course approach with a hold to start it, into their shiny new Whiz Bang 8000 in the panel and couple it to the autopilot?

They had to come up with something that was flyable in the majority of aircraft out there that showed a minimum demonstrated pilot skill.

Focusing only on those maneuvers is also a mistake since the oral and general observation by the DPE throughout the ride is supposed to assess a demeanor and approach and attitude toward flying “professionally” versus flying for “recreation” so to speak. That’s happening concurrently with the maneuvers, you just don’t see it spelled out completely, but the DPE is looking to see if you’re taking the whole thing seriously enough to be entrusted with stranger’s lives. Well, the good ones are, anyway.

But I’m interested. What maneuvers would you have them test, since in your opinion, these are deficient in some way, or as you say, this standard, “misses the mark”?

It’s actually a difficult question. I’ve thought about it myself.

And remember, plenty of people still flunk the Commercial ride.

Just for openness, I did, but that had to do with me deciding to not be able to land my own freaking airplane I have hundreds of hours in that day. Ha. Passed everything else, but made a landing I haven’t seen the likes of since I was a Private trainee. Was so funny. Examiner says, “You know I can’t accept that...” I’m laughing so hard on the go-around I can barely answer back, “Neither can I!”

But plenty of people fail it due to flat out lack of skill or preparedness, whatever you want to call it, besides just having a one day brain fart like I did.

So where your instructor properly prepped you and made sure your skill set easily passed that list of items, some people do actually struggle. And fail. And rightly so.

Look above in the thread where people here almost got to the point of complaining that SINGLE instrument approach is needed engine-out in the multi-Commerical ride. Shouldn’t a single engine approach be a near no-brainer by the time someone is applying to carry passengers who they don’t know, around in IMC? That shouldn’t be difficult at all. But people whine about how hard it is.

Side-note both of my Commerical rides had weirness. The SE add on (I did the multi first) was the landing stupidity I mentioned above.

On the multi we were set up for the single engine ILS and told the controllers we needed a full stop out of it and 300’ AGL the tower controller didn’t get the message from approach or forgot about it and told us to break it off and head southeast. Hahahahaha. I tried to get a word in to request the full stop and couldn’t so I asked the examiner for the right engine back. Haha. He agreed... :)

**** happens. But my Commercial rides were both weird. :)

Anyway, what maneuvers would you want them to test, remembering that once the candidate passes they’re doing the few non-135 and non-121 commercial flying jobs out there. Something specific you’d like to see FAA test for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top