My failed checkride

[Gubbins]

I've only done two checkrides (PPL and IR) so I am definitely no expert by any stretch of the imagination, but my impression is that DPE's look at the whole picture and won't necessarily fail you on one particular failure. I was certainly not perfect in my checkrides. Just reading between the lines in your comments, were you disagreeing with the DPE, perhaps even arguing points with him? I was advised to never disagree with a DPE even if he is wrong and that seemed to work for me. Sometimes there is more than one right answer, and if you gave a different one and he disagrees it may be better to say "yes sir, thanks for pointing that out to me". Seems to me that if the examiner takes a dislike to you, then they could fail you on a single item. Anyway, good luck going forward, I'm sure you won't have any problems.

One of the better CFII's that I trained with (and who is now employed by American Airlines) admitted to me over a beer once that he had failed his PPL checkride but sailed through all the rest. So it does happen, but best to just get back on your bike and continue.

 

[flhrci]

One of the better CFII's that I trained with (and who is now employed by American Airlines) admitted to me over a beer once that he had failed his PPL checkride but sailed through all the rest.

I failed my Commercial Multi in a Twin Comanche for landing it too hard, not once, but twice in a row. Everything prior was perfect!

Embarrassing. But it happens.

David

 

[jaybee]

A little tip on the turns around the point. I don't remember it saying anywhere how close to the point you are turning around you have to be. So instead of only being 50 yards ground distance from the point you are turning around try 300 yards. Gives a little more wiggle room and a small mistake doesn't look like a big one.

 

[Clark1961]

A little tip on the turns around the point. I don't remember it saying anywhere how close to the point you are turning around you have to be. So instead of only being 50 yards ground distance from the point you are turning around try 300 yards. Gives a little more wiggle room and a small mistake doesn't look like a big one.

This works. I did my TAP at about 1/4 mile and there was nothing the DPE could say. I think he didn't like it much...

 

[TMetzinger]

50 yards? 300 yards? We're not talking steep turns here! You don't want to be banked more than 45 degrees at the downwind point, and most DPEs will be happy with 30 degrees or so. You want to show that you understand how to constantly correct for the wind and make the ground track come out nice and circular while maintaining your altitude. The ability to divide attention, fly smoothly, and recognize and correct errors is what's being tested along with the knowledge of how to correct for the wind.
1/4 mile is 500 yards. I think that's probably about right, you're describing a circle a mile and a half in circumference, which at 90 knots is one minute, which is twice standard rate. Should be about right.

 

[bbchien]

Be sure to enter DOWNWIND (8083-page 6-8) so that you will know immediately that you max. bank is <=45deg, beyond which is not flying the federal maneuver description.

 

[dell30rb]

Funny my DPE for the private remarked that I showed excellent mastery of the aircraft but that my turn about a point was a little tight, and further advised me to fly a wider pattern with more gentle turns if I was carrying passengers

To the OP - it sounds like you are going to have that ticket pretty soon. Don't be discouraged. I have been flying once a week as safety pilot for a friend who is working on his instrument rating - he is doing very well and impresses me as a competent pilot. Guess what.. He goofed on his PP ride and had to retest too

 

[GCA319]

I'm sure Ron will be around shortly to provide a better commentary, but something tells me your DPE wasn't exactly doing things by the book.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

With the exception of the lack of stalls (which are a required task), nothing sounded unusual to me.

To the OP: Congrats on finishing most of it! Busting a ride isn't the end of the world and can be a great learning experience. Those sound like tough winds for ground reference maneuvers.

 

[GCA319]

I failed my Commercial Multi in a Twin Comanche for landing it too hard, not once, but twice in a row. Everything prior was perfect!

Embarrassing. But it happens.

David

You mean there's such a thing as landing a Twin Comanche softly? :wink2:

 

[jaybee]

50 yards? 300 yards? We're not talking steep turns here! You don't want to be banked more than 45 degrees at the downwind point, and most DPEs will be happy with 30 degrees or so. You want to show that you understand how to constantly correct for the wind and make the ground track come out nice and circular while maintaining your altitude. The ability to divide attention, fly smoothly, and recognize and correct errors is what's being tested along with the knowledge of how to correct for the wind.
1/4 mile is 500 yards. I think that's probably about right, you're describing a circle a mile and a half in circumference, which at 90 knots is one minute, which is twice standard rate. Should be about right.

Ummm... fair enough I guess... I have no idea how close the OP is to his point. Merely an attempt to help. The point was illustrated. 300, 500, 700 whatever works no distinction made in PTS as to rate or bank of turn - only "appropriate distance" whatever that is.

Coincidentally though since your brought up 30 degrees as a "happy" bank angle I thought you would be interested to know that at an altitude of 1000 feet a bank angle of 30 would equal roughly 577 yards of horizontal distance and more interestingly that same bank angle would be about 340 yards at 600 feet elevation. Since the PTS defines altitude to be flown at 600 - 1000 feet you can see that my off the cuff guess of 300 yards wasn't too shabby despite your exclamation point

But since I did just throw a number out there to make a point and your numbers gave roughly the same gross errors as mine (and neither of us defined altitude) I won't bore you with using angle of elevation to find the horizontal distance and tangents and all that boring stuff.

 

[Fearless Tower]

You mean there's such a thing as landing a Twin Comanche softly? :wink2:

Yes, but I will admit that it took me at least 10 hrs in type to achieve that feat.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[poadeleted20]

BTW, I just had to try to take a stab. I say the bank will be shallowest when directly upwind and steepest when directly downwind and somewhere in between at all other points.

How'd I do? First right in 30 years or is that wrong too?

You got it. It's all about ground speed -- highest bank needed when at highest GS.

 

[poadeleted20]

This is something the CFI should have briefed the applicant on during the preparation for the exam.

Agreed, but most DPE's brief it during the admin discussion before starting the test.

 

[poadeleted20]

It wouldn't have anything to do with pivotal altitude, would it?

You're thinking of the 8's-on-pylons for Commercial, where altitude is varied to keep alignment. In the PP turn-around-a-point, altitude is held constant and bank angle is varied to maintain constant radius.

 

[poadeleted20]

However, during the retest and at the discretion of the examiner, any TASK may be re-evaluated including those previously passed. Per page 8 of http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/airmen/test_standards/pilot/media/FAA-S-8081-15a.pdf

While that is true, few if any examiners retest items already successfully completed for applicants who did the initial ride with them as long as the time limit is not exceeded (30 days, IIRC). Many will also give credit if they know the other examiner who gave the initial ride.

 

[poadeleted20]

I've only done two checkrides (PPL and IR) so I am definitely no expert by any stretch of the imagination, but my impression is that DPE's look at the whole picture and won't necessarily fail you on one particular failure.

That is not how it works. If you are unsuccessful on any task, the examiner must issue a Notice of Disapproval. Likewise, no matter how rough the ride is, if all tasks are performed successfully, the examiner must pass you unless one of the specific failure items is triggered (like bad judgment, etc). See the criteria in the PTS.

I was certainly not perfect in my checkrides.

You don't have to be perfect -- just up to the standards in the PTS. As they say in the Air Force, "If the minimum wasn't good enough, it wouldn't be the minimum."

 

[poadeleted20]

With the exception of the lack of stalls (which are a required task), nothing sounded unusual to me.

You might want to do a more thorough comparison of the description in the OP's post with the PP-ASEL PTS -- there were other discrepancies. Bonus points to anyone identifying them.

 

[Andrew Sego]

I'll buy your explanation if you can you describe the technique necessary to put the wing tip on my Cessna 180 in the position you describe in the diagram?:wink2:

I'm not going to do all the work for you, Wayne!

 

[Captain]

I'll buy your explanation if you can you describe the technique necessary to put the wing tip on my Cessna 180 in the position you describe in the diagram?:wink2:

Although I've not proved my therory with practical application I'd bet it could be done if you just flew the TAAP...inverted. (holds one hand palm down and the other, fingers extended, palm up over the first)

 

[wabower]

I'm willing to bet it wasn't gusts, but simply wind velocity that caused the problem for both of you.

Didn't take into account enough for the gusts of wind. I've done ovals ALOT.

 

[GCA319]

You might want to do a more thorough comparison of the description in the OP's post with the PP-ASEL PTS -- there were other discrepancies. Bonus points to anyone identifying them.

I'll take a look tomorrow. Now that I've read it again, I see a few things that could be wrong, but I'll refrain from commenting until I know more.

 

[flyingron]

Didn't do the full preflight airworthiness demonstration.
The engine out didn't seem like it covered the tasks such as field selection..
You're supposed to have three equipment failures simulated. Looks like he only did a single electrical failure.
Don't see a mention of dead reconning (but it may be embedded in the manouvering done after takeoff).
No diversion task

 

[Henning]

With respect to the TAP maneuver, I use it as the oral on every flight review. On a blank sheet of paper, I draw a cross (road intersection) in the middle with a large circle around it representing a circular flight path.
Then I draw a wind vector arrow and ask the following questions:

1. From what direction should you start the maneuver?
2. At which direction along the arc of the circle will the bank be greatest? least? somewhere between?
4. How do the bank angles in a TAP correlate to those used in flying a rectangular pattern?
3. Why should a pilot always select an intersection as the point if one is available?

Got any answers to those questions?

PS: After 30-some years of flight reviews and hundreds of pilots, nobody has answered #2 correctly.

The arcs projected by the plane would be greatest on the windward side and least on leeward transitioning on the sides to make an egg shape pointing down wind. Banks will be opposite arcs.

 

[Henning]

This works. I did my TAP at about 1/4 mile and there was nothing the DPE could say. I think he didn't like it much...

I'm not getting it. The bigger you make the circle your chances of screwing it up grow by Pi with time... Come in upwind tight in and it's much easier to judge your drift and compensate typically by flattening your turn, note how shallow you have to get, you're going to mirror that into steeper than normal when you go through dead down wind at the bottom side. If you have to flatten out to less than 15*, you probably need to open up your circle about 50% for those winds. As you come through the top of the wind you're going to steepen up your turn continuing to do so and add load factor until you come through downwind then the opposite steadily changing bank. For fine control you vary back pressure and load factor to adjust for variations in wind.

 

[zaitcev]

Aren't you guys discussing the wrong thing? Meanie did not fail because his circle was not shaped right. He failed because he could not distribute attention right, so busted the exit heading.

BTW, for some reason I did not have success thinking about the bank angle regarding position in the circle. I just rolled and pulled as necessary to maintain the ground track, and kept one eye on the airspeed just in case. Note that without bumping the power, and airspeed is going bleed, and the bank had to relax or else you bust altitude restrictions. So it's fiendishly difficult to predict precisely the necessary bank, or at least for me it was.

 

[Meanee]

Aren't you guys discussing the wrong thing? Meanie did not fail because his circle was not shaped right. He failed because he could not distribute attention right, so busted the exit heading.

Uhh.. no. Re-read please.

I exited TAP at proper heading, but ended up closer to the point than when I started.

 

[Meanee]

Also, another thing. DPE told me at what heading to enter TAP. That day wind was 340, I was flying directly south to track VOR. Wonder if that had any consequences.

 

[Henning]

Also, another thing. DPE told me at what heading to enter TAP. That day wind was 340, I was flying directly south to track VOR. Wonder if that had any consequences.

Well, it means that you would have had to break into your tightest turn over the next 90*, then ease for the next 180* then tighten back up for the next 90 until you roll out on heading. If you didn't do that, you wouldn't have managed the maneuver.

 

[Jaybird180]

You might want to do a more thorough comparison of the description in the OP's post with the PP-ASEL PTS -- there were other discrepancies. Bonus points to anyone identifying them.

I'll take a stab, but the OP has to promise not to be offended.....

I'll try to keep the typing to a minimum since it's almost time to go home

The DPE did not allow the applicant to demonstrate that he knew and could interpret airworthiness with a records inspection. A point of style is that the DPE did not allow the applicant to be PIC when he suggested another altitude without an explanation from the applicant. He also subverted his authority as PIC by telling him to 'consider me briefed'. This is actually a regulations bust on both.

If I were a DPE, I may have strongly considered busting the applicant for questionable decision making for flying in winds beyond his comfort level. I find it difficult to accept that his CFI allowed him to fly 25G30 conditions.

During the XC portion, the DPE needed to let the applicant get to the 1st checkpoint. IIRC 2 are required. Class C operations were a mess. The DPE created a distraction that COULD have resulted in safety issues.

The DPE also seemed to show a prejudicial attitude, in terms of overconfidence in the CFI and/or applicant. That could show that his mind was already made up prior to the checkride.

I also did not think it was proper demonstration of engine out procedures for the DPE to designate a location to land. The applicant is PIC and perhaps should have suggested an assertion of authority. It's possible the DPE wanted to know if he had it in him. There was no indication that command presence was in this applicant (sorry, no offense - just my impression).

Then the paperwork was questionable. The applicant was failed for a specific task, but the documentation says otherwise.

In less than 400 words...

 

[Meanee]

I'll take a stab, but the OP has to promise not to be offended.....

I'll try to keep the typing to a minimum since it's almost time to go home

The DPE did not allow the applicant to demonstrate that he knew and could interpret airworthiness with a records inspection. A point of style is that the DPE did not allow the applicant to be PIC when he suggested another altitude without an explanation from the applicant. He also subverted his authority as PIC by telling him to 'consider me briefed'. This is actually a regulations bust on both.

If I were a DPE, I may have strongly considered busting the applicant for questionable decision making for flying in winds beyond his comfort level. I find it difficult to accept that his CFI allowed him to fly 25G30 conditions.

During the XC portion, the DPE needed to let the applicant get to the 1st checkpoint. IIRC 2 are required. Class C operations were a mess. The DPE created a distraction that COULD have resulted in safety issues.

The DPE also seemed to show a prejudicial attitude, in terms of overconfidence in the CFI and/or applicant. That could show that his mind was already made up prior to the checkride.

I also did not think it was proper demonstration of engine out procedures for the DPE to designate a location to land. The applicant is PIC and perhaps should have suggested an assertion of authority. It's possible the DPE wanted to know if he had it in him. There was no indication that command presence was in this applicant (sorry, no offense - just my impression).

Then the paperwork was questionable. The applicant was failed for a specific task, but the documentation says otherwise.

In less than 400 words...

OMG I am going to go cry!!! Nah, it's all good.

So anyway, I believe you are correct on most points, but let me reply.

The airworthiness of the aircraft was puzzling to me. I spent about an hour going through inspections, ADs, and all, but DPE was there, saw me do it. Still, it's not an excuse not to ask me. I could be simply making a smart face and pointlessly flipping through pages.

The "Consider me briefed" comment surprised me too. I had passengers with me during my dual, and I briefed them myself. Even after he said it, I asked him "So, your belts are fastened, and you know how to open the aircraft doors?"

For the wind, he told me, and I quote "Winds are a bit strong today, but I believe you will do just fine", and at the point, I had a case of "get-there-itis", thinking that it's blowing straight down the runway at my home field. So yes, definitely a lapse of judgement there on my part.

Also, agreed on XC. I deviated from my original plan to avoid airspace, but quickly got back to the route, stated the timer. I guess that was enough for the DPE. Still does not explain not going to at least 1st checkpoint.

How's Class C a mess? Yes, I forgot to get ATIS, but approach asked me to return with ATIS. Did that, and all was ok. There was a bit of a miscommunication/misunderstanding with DPE who originally wanted me to park, get clearance and go up again. When I touched down and told the tower my intentions of going to a GA ramp, this is when DPE gave me his WTF face and told me not to do it. Other than ATIS, I believe my class C work was good. If you see problems there, please let me know, I am curious as to what could've been done differently.


I believe for engine out, he selected the field mostly because of the area. And at the point, I did not want to tell the guy who has "keys to the plane" that "No, I will land here, not there". Where that part took place, you could land ANYWHERE. Lots of open fields, bunch of rarely used roads, I could literally point the plane to any point in the ground and land successfully. I guess he wanted to simulate something other than that. When I saw that I will have difficulty making the field that he pointed out, I told him that I can simply land at any other place here. And yes, PTS does say that applicant needs to select the field.

For paperwork, there are 3 things listed.
Emergency Procedures - He wants to see me do it again. He didn't tell I busted on it, just wants to see it.
Ground reference maneuvers - Busted part.
Takeoffs and landings - Was my choice not to do it, because wind started to shift a little bit

 

[Legiox]

man you guys are making me nervous about the final checkride. I have thrown so much money down for my PVT pilot. Don't wanna waste 400 then have to do it all over again.

 

[Henning]

If I were a DPE, I may have strongly considered busting the applicant for questionable decision making for flying in winds beyond his comfort level. I find it difficult to accept that his CFI allowed him to fly 25G30 conditions.

Never lived in TX or OK I take it? Those are normal winds summer or winter. If you want to wait for less every time you fly, it'll take years to do a PP.

 

[wabower]

What radial were you attempting to track while flying south? Was the surface wind 340? If so, what direction would you expect at the altitude at which you were doing the GRM's?

Also, another thing. DPE told me at what heading to enter TAP. That day wind was 340, I was flying directly south to track VOR. Wonder if that had any consequences.

 

[Meanee]

It was big fat S on my DG when I went to VOR. It was directly south of me when I was told to go to it. The altitude was about 1000 AGL, and surface wind was 340 at KABE, which is about 5-10 miles from the VOR. And I was about 5 miles from the VOR myself.

 

[wabower]

When you see a 340 deg surface wind, what wind direction do you normally expect at 1000' AGL?

It was big fat S on my DG when I went to VOR. It was directly south of me when I was told to go to it. The altitude was about 1000 AGL, and surface wind was 340 at KABE, which is about 5-10 miles from the VOR. And I was about 5 miles from the VOR myself.

 

[Meanee]

When you see a 340 deg surface wind, what wind direction do you normally expect at 1000' AGL?

I would expect 160. But at that point, I did not know exact wind, because ATIS came after TAP.

 

[Jaybird180]

Never lived in TX or OK I take it? Those are normal winds summer or winter. If you want to wait for less every time you fly, it'll take years to do a PP.

Sorry Henning, but your theory doesn't hold water. OP wasn't in that part of the country.

 

[Henning]

Sorry Henning, but your theory doesn't hold water. OP wasn't in that part of the country.

You made it as a blanket statement.

 

[Henning]

I would expect 160. But at that point, I did not know exact wind, because ATIS came after TAP.

Not often does one see a 180* windshear, I'm not totally sure it's even possible. No, the effect of surface friction and Coriolis effect is not that severe.

 

[Meanee]

Sorry Henning, but your theory doesn't hold water. OP wasn't in that part of the country.

Kind of agree and disagree with you.

For where I am, these winds are high. We do not usually get these. However, unless the wind is completely T-boning me at landing, I believe I should be able to fly in wind like this.

The only thing is that it would be better idea to do a checkride at more calm condition. I do not need to show that I can manage to do a task (poorly) at strong wind. I need to show that I can do the task properly. And if wind was in the way, I need to plan for a date/time where wind won't be that much of a factor anymore.