In order to complete all those tasks satisfactorily, you need knowledge of a lot more material than the AFH and FAR's. Throw in the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, the Aeronautical Information Manual, the Aviation Weather and Aviation Weather Services AC's, and your aircraft's POH/AFM, and you're more in the ballpark.
FIFY
As I said above, "random questions" is not how the checkride is supposed to work these days. The questions are supposed to be organized and relate to a scenario assigned by the examiner and supported by the actual weather and other data on the day of the test. Having someone just read random questions out of one of those oral test books will not prepare you for that.
There's a lot involved in checkride practice, and while XC flying is part of it, it's not all XC flying. All the maneuvers, landings, etc, need to be covered. I suppose you can do that on a cross country by dropping down to do some ground reference maneuvers en route, or stopping in the practice area for some slow flight and stalls before landing at home, but that interferes with some of the training objectives of the XC flights and seriously complicates the nav problem for the trainee. Much of the ground portion involves things which require all your attention, and can't be practiced on an XC flight unless you land somewhere, shut down, go inside, and talk over a table.
If a DPE is going to put it on video in public (i.e., where his/her POI at the FSDO can review it), you can be sure s/he will make it absolutely complete. I didn't have an hour and a half to view it all, but at least the beginning is in the situationally-based style the FAA wants.
That's a good examiner. In my book, the ability to put the applicant at ease is my #1 criterion of which examiners I want to use again.
Remember, this one was for the video which any FAA Inspector in the country might see, so it has to be a "textbook" demonstration. I'm sure the "kid in the video" was appropriately warned about this in advance and agreed to the process. I'm guessing that the usual fee was waived in return for that consideration.
It's usually a lot more relaxed than the part I watched.
PHEW!
FIFY
Mine was not so thorough, I guess, but the same basic points were covered, and my examiner was also pretty officious, as opposed to making it like a friendly chat. But he basically took the approach of presenting a topic, then gauging my knowledge based on the first response or two. He didn't really give me "exercises" to do. This examiner seems unwilling to leave any stone unturned, which from my own experience and what I've heard, is unusual... especially if the applicant comes prepared, starts off well, and doesn't ramble or seem clueless on a given topic. But as you can see, he's not trying to fail the applicant, he's just being thorough. And the applicant is up to it. this oral is a lot like a ground school session, really. Like a flight review, it's not a pass/fail thing so much as an opportunity to show what you know, patch up any weak spots, and maybe learn something new.
I had been warned to answer only with "yes" or "no" whenever possible... after all that hard studying, it seemed outrageous to hide my abundance of knowledge, so I didn't heed the warning.... a bad idea. If the DE holds up a pen and keeps asking you if you know what it is until you answer "yes", you will understand.
Even if you are 100% right with everything you say, the oral will take a lot longer if you start lecturing. And if you are wrong... it will take even longer.
That should be interesting; you'll probably learn something.
