What are Your Thoughts About the DPE System?

[Pugs]

My CFI ride was with an ASI out of the Philly FSDO. A stone-breaker of an inspector, well-known around the circuit as such. 7 hour oral, 2 hours in the air.
Passed, but exhausted. (He had a 90% fail rate, so I guess I did ok). All I paid for was the 172RG rental from my school (at the employee rate--this was back in '01); the ASI, as he said, was paid by the taxpayers to do what he does.

IIRC, the DPE fee for my pvt in '88 was $100. It's all relative.

IMO a 90% fail rate is just as bad a warning sign about the competency of an evaluator as a 0% fail rate. I'm not a DPE or even an civilian instructor but I was an instructor and NATOPS evaluator and Aviation Safety Officer in the Navy and the monitoring of instructors and evaluators for adherence to teaching to the standards and evaluating to the standards should keep the pass/fail rate within a fairly narrow range if people are doing it right.

 

[MauleSkinner]

the ASI, as he said, was paid by the taxpayers to do what he does.

Unfortunately checkrides that can be done by a DPE are a very small portion of “what he does”.

 

[Ghery]

Are they not allowed to do that now?

I flew the plane to then examiner for my PPL. It was just 27 nm and almost due west of the home airport, so pretty easy to get there. Fun flying over as a student pilot signed off for the flight by my CFI and then flew back a Private Pilot.

I took my PP check ride at another field and my CFI and I flew up there. Side note, the DPE even invited him to come along. He had to sit in the back seat and keep his mouth shut.

My IR ride(s) were at another field, as well. But as an already certificated PP that wasn't really an issue.

 

[Doc Holliday]

My CFI ride was with an ASI out of the Philly FSDO. A stone-breaker of an inspector, well-known around the circuit as such. 7 hour oral, 2 hours in the air.
Passed, but exhausted. (He had a 90% fail rate, so I guess I did ok).

Just curious, how did you know his fail rate was 90%?

 

[Kevin Eggert]

I believe that being a DPE should be made a part of being a CFI. As I see it, a CFI is supposed to be able to teach you everything you need to know in order to pass a checkride and should make sure you are capable of doing so prior to signing you off for said check ride. If the CFI is capable of training the material, there is no reason they should not have the ability to also administer the examination of the same material. I'm not saying that the same CFI giving instruction should also be doing the checkride, but why aren't all CFI's also DPE's for the purpose of making the system work better. By doing this, two CFI's in an area could check out each other's students and make the process a whole lot easier and cost effective. There is no reason that DPE training and check out could not be made part of becoming a CFI. This would solve the whole problem.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I believe that being a DPE should be made a part of being a CFI. As I see it, a CFI is supposed to be able to teach you everything you need to know in order to pass a checkride and should make sure you are capable of doing so prior to signing you off for said check ride. If the CFI is capable of training the material, there is no reason they should not have the ability to also administer the examination of the same material. I'm not saying that the same CFI giving instruction should also be doing the checkride, but why aren't all CFI's also DPE's for the purpose of making the system work better. By doing this, two CFI's in an area could check out each other's students and make the process a whole lot easier and cost effective. There is no reason that DPE training and check out could not be made part of becoming a CFI. This would solve the whole problem.

Absolutely no way. The problem you think you are solving would have some devastating results.

 

[schmookeeg]

I believe that being a DPE should be made a part of being a CFI. As I see it, a CFI is supposed to be able to teach you everything you need to know in order to pass a checkride and should make sure you are capable of doing so prior to signing you off for said check ride. If the CFI is capable of training the material, there is no reason they should not have the ability to also administer the examination of the same material. I'm not saying that the same CFI giving instruction should also be doing the checkride, but why aren't all CFI's also DPE's for the purpose of making the system work better. By doing this, two CFI's in an area could check out each other's students and make the process a whole lot easier and cost effective. There is no reason that DPE training and check out could not be made part of becoming a CFI. This would solve the whole problem.

Are there DPEs that are not CFIs?

I see DPE as a superset of CFI.

What you're describing already happens. I put my students to another CFI for pre-checkride stage check and verifying any rough areas or gaps in training. But "passing" that stage check shouldn't replace the checkride.

 

[wayne]

I took my PP check ride at another field and my CFI and I flew up there. Side note, the DPE even invited him to come along. He had to sit in the back seat and keep his mouth shut.

My IR ride(s) were at another field, as well. But as an already certificated PP that wasn't really an issue.

I had a DPE that asked if an FAA person could ride-along on my ME checkride. Apparently his pass rate was a bit high. Oh great, I get a DPE and and FAA person who is checking if the DPE is too lenient. The DPE said I could decline; oh yeah, like that will help my odds of passing.

I accepted, then the FAA person had a conflict. So, just me and the DPE and I had accepted the ride-along, that didn't happen.

 

[falconkidding]

My one complaint about the DPE system is how variant they are. I've done about every checkride for fixed wing of those 2 have been as expected. My commercial ASEL and my type ratings.
My ppl combined maneuvers, my instrument didn't cover the full acs we did 2 approaches VOR and ILS my partial panel was him covering my airspeed and saying its cold out what happened "pitot froze" "okay you turned the heat on and its working now" . The DPE I sent my first ppl students to got way into the weeds on airworthiness, like pulling out the TCDS and verifying sticker placement. My CFI ride got deep into aerodynamics, flow turning, stagnation point, kutta, navier stokes and lord knows what else. The only reason I passed that was because I had a gouge I memorized, I didnt understand a bit of it though lol.

My airline training and beechjet type have all been as advertised. Memory items, limitations, general systems questions then banging out maneuvers. If primary training was like that I wouldn't mind but it seems like every DPE has a gouge and varying standards on the flight portion.

 

[brcase]

IMO a 90% fail rate is just as bad a warning side about the competency of an evaluator as a 0% fail rate. I'm not a DPE or even an civilian instructor but I was an instructor and NATOPS evaluator and Aviation Safety Officer in the Navy and the monitoring of instructors and evaluators for adherence to teaching to the standards and evaluating to the standards should keep the pass/fail rate within a fairly narrow range if people are doing it right.

The DPE I have most of my students use has told me the one time I got called on the carpet about his Pass/fail rate was the year he had about a 30% fail rate. I think he says he is usually about 90% pass rate. He explained why each applicant failed and noted that most of them were recommended by the same instructor, Things like Put me in a spin during stalls, got lost on the cross country portion, nearly ran over a runway light during landing, failing to contact approach before entering class C Airspace.

I recall actually enjoying my CFI checkride with FAA inspector in 1998. The fact the checkride was free probably contributed to that. There was nothing unexpected from the check ride, but by then I had done 4 previous checkrides.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[MauleSkinner]

I believe that being a DPE should be made a part of being a CFI. As I see it, a CFI is supposed to be able to teach you everything you need to know in order to pass a checkride and should make sure you are capable of doing so prior to signing you off for said check ride. If the CFI is capable of training the material, there is no reason they should not have the ability to also administer the examination of the same material. I'm not saying that the same CFI giving instruction should also be doing the checkride, but why aren't all CFI's also DPE's for the purpose of making the system work better. By doing this, two CFI's in an area could check out each other's students and make the process a whole lot easier and cost effective. There is no reason that DPE training and check out could not be made part of becoming a CFI. This would solve the whole problem.

Look at the struggles that applicants have with the flight instructor checkride now, and imagine how much worse it would be if they had to add DPE responsibilities.

Also note the additional oversight that has occurred over the years with flight instructor certification…when I got my flight instructor certificate, things had been bad enough that the FAA removed the ability of DPEs to give initial CFI rides. (I still had a DPE do mine, as the FAA didn’t have anybody qualified.) they have since relaxed that somewhat, but CFIs still get grilled pretty hard just to be instructors.

Beyond that, look at the couple of posts by DPEs here…I believe @tonycondon mentioned 10% of his applicants don’t even qualify to start the checkride. Do you really believe those recommending instructors would be capable of determining that an applicant meets standards on a checkride?

 

[brcase]

I had a DPE that asked if an FAA person could ride-along on my ME checkride. Apparently his pass rate was a bit high. Oh great, I get a DPE and and FAA person who is checking if the DPE is too lenient. The DPE said I could decline; oh yeah, like that will help my odds of passing.

I accepted, then the FAA person had a conflict. So, just me and the DPE and I had accepted the ride-along, that didn't happen.

As I understand the new system, due to abuses by a few DPE's, You and the DPE no longer get a say about it. An FAA inspector can now randomly show up to observe any checkride the DPE provides. This is one of the reasons it is harder to schedule checkrides as the DPE's now have much less flexibility in make last minute changes to the schedule, because the FAA has to know when and where and have adequate notice of the checkride so they can observe if they decide to.

Brian

 

[Half Fast]

Absolutely no way. The problem you think you are solving would have some devastating results.

Actually, that's pretty similar to what is already done when a Sport Pilot adds on another type endorsement. If an ASEL sport pilot wants to add a gyrocopter endorsement, for example, he trains under one CFI and then has an evaluation from another CFI.

I haven't yet heard of any devasting results from that process.

 

[Half Fast]

Do you really believe those recommending instructors would be capable of determining that an applicant meets standards on a checkride?

I get your point, but I would contend that those recommending instructors should not be CFIs in the first place. When a CFI endorses someone for a checkride, the CFI is stating that the applicant meets standards. If the CFI isn't capable of making that determination he has no business making that endorsement.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I get your point, but I would contend that those recommending instructors should not be CFIs in the first place. When a CFI endorses someone for a checkride, the CFI is stating that the applicant meets standards. If the CFI isn't capable of making that determination he has no business making that endorsement.

Agreed, but then what checks and balances would you suggest to determine whose certificates to revoke if we remove one of the checks and balances that is currently in place (a more experienced and qualified CFI—the DPE—verifying that the applicant is qualified)?

which also, of course, makes it a requirement for punishment rather than an opportunity for education.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Actually, that's pretty similar to what is already done when a Sport Pilot adds on another type endorsement. If an ASEL sport pilot wants to add a gyrocopter endorsement, for example, he trains under one CFI and then has an evaluation from another CFI.

I haven't yet heard of any devasting results from that process.

How many sport pilots fly IFR or commercial operations? Or are ATP’s?

 

[Half Fast]

How many sport pilots fly IFR or commercial operations? Or are ATP’s?

Let's stick with basic PPL checkrides for the moment. Then the comparison is more apt. And so far I haven't heard a convincing argument that a CFI shouldn't be able to evaluate the skills of a PPL checkride candidate.

We can extrapolate to other cases late, if it seems appropriate, but let's handle the easier case first.

 

[Half Fast]

Agreed, but then what checks and balances would you suggest to determine whose certificates to revoke if we remove one of the checks and balances that is currently in place (a more experienced and qualified CFI—the DPE—verifying that the applicant is qualified)?

which also, of course, makes it a requirement for punishment rather than an opportunity for education.

How we determine the ongoing competence is a separate question. If we assume we have a competent CFI, shouldn't he be able to evaluate the candidate? I contend he already does that when he signs the endorsement.

Now as to the other question, how do we determine the ability of a DPE today? I believe we occasionally send FAA inspectors along on checkrides, but are there other additional checks? It seems like we could apply something similar to CFIs. If today's CFIs are really so bad as to be unable to evaluate their students, we should be doing something to correct that problem anyway.

 

[TCABM]

How many sport pilots fly IFR or commercial operations? Or are ATP’s?

What percentage of all checkrides do all the non-ASEL PP checkrides (that aren’t 121/135 rides) account for annually? Probably the lion’s share…only allowing those under an expanded exam authority could significantly ease today’s DPE burden, allowing them to focus on the remaining advances ratings.

 

[MauleSkinner]

How we determine the ongoing competence is a separate question. If we assume we have a competent CFI, shouldn't he be able to evaluate the candidate? I contend he already does that when he signs the endorsement.

Obviously we can’t assume the CFI is competent.

Now as to the other question, how do we determine the ability of a DPE today? I believe we occasionally send FAA inspectors along on checkrides, but are there other additional checks? It seems like we could apply something similar to CFIs.

We require a certain level of experience, both flying and instructing, we train them for the additional duties, and we examine them in those additional duties.

so yes, we could apply something similar…it’s called becoming a DPE.

 

[Half Fast]

so yes, we could apply something similar…it’s called becoming a DPE.

No, it's called ensuring our CFIs are capable of doing their jobs and are qualified to make the endorsements they already make. You're arguing that most CFIs are incompetent to do that, and I don't think that's really true. Sorry, but that's mostly just a difference of opinion and I doubt there's really any data to back up either viewpoint, mine or yours.

Besides, the idea is that a different CFI would do the checkride. So we'd have to have two incompetent CFIs, one the endorser and the other the examiner, duplicating each other's mistakes. That seems pretty unlikely.

Again, I'll point out that SP endorsements work this way already, and don't seem to be causing problems.

 

[MauleSkinner]

No, it's called ensuring our CFIs are capable of doing their jobs and are qualified to make the endorsements they already make. You're arguing that most CFIs are incompetent to do that, and I don't think that's really true. Sorry, but that's mostly just a difference of opinion and I doubt there's really any data to back up either viewpoint, mine or yours.

Besides, the idea is that a different CFI would do the checkride. So we'd have to have two incompetent CFIs, one the endorser and the other the examiner, duplicating each other's mistakes. That seems pretty unlikely.

Again, I'll point out that SP endorsements work this way already, and don't seem to be causing problems.

I’m not arguing that most CFIs are incompetent…just that enough of them are that the additional experience, training, and checking is necessary.

the statistics are there. We may not have access to them, but every time a DPE schedules a check, he gets online and tells the FAA. He then has to report the result of that check, which would theoretically include the fact that the instructor didn’t properly qualify the applicant. I have no reason to believe that Tony’s experience is dramatically different than any other DPE, which means 10% of checkrides never happen because of instructor incompetence.

The FAA sees that, and has consistently seen that as long as I’ve been in aviation.

 

[Albany Tom]

I like to complain about things, and joke about things, but in my limited experience the DPE/CFI situation isn't bad, in terms of quality. That's based on two checkrides, knowing two different DPE's, and maybe half a dozen different instructors. The feedback I've heard is that when DPE's fail students, they reach out to the CFI's and explain why, and the CFI's become more aware of their potential blind spots. Not a perfect system, but nothing is. Some instructors are just building time, sure, but I've never heard of one that didn't care about their job. If only for the reason that some day they may have to fly around with that person, or for the other that they personally look bad if they endorse someone that is nowhere near ready on something. The only pressures I've seen on the system are anxious students, who are way more confident in themselves than they should be. But I only have a view of .01% of the world.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Let's stick with basic PPL checkrides for the moment. Then the comparison is more apt. And so far I haven't heard a convincing argument that a CFI shouldn't be able to evaluate the skills of a PPL checkride candidate.

We can extrapolate to other cases late, if it seems appropriate, but let's handle the easier case first.

You haven't heard a convincing argument because you lack the experience and expertise that's required to evaluate a person for issuing a FAA pilot certificate at the SP level, RP level or the PP level.

The process is controlled for several reasons. CFI's aren't monitored and evaluated like DPE's. DPE's have a higher accountability to the FAA being that they are given the designation to act on behalf of the Administrator. A CFI can get his certificate, and can renew by taking an online course every two years, or going to a FIRC (there are other methods as well). But the CFI does not have to be evaluated on flight skills, record keeping and maintaining currency training like a DPE must do in order to keep his/her designation.

We currently have CFI's that will do things such as sign off flight reviews by flying out for a $100 hamburger run, and that is the extent of the use of their certificate. We also have many CFI's holding certificates that haven't exercised them in decades. Do we suddenly want to open them up to issue FAA certificates?

 

[Shepherd]

Too few DPEs and way to much "good ole" boy crap in the system.

 

[BryanAV8R]

Just curious, how did you know his fail rate was 90%?

another ASI in another FSDO commented on it. I'm pretty sure it was because of the number of mills he had to deal with in the area that were trying to crank out CFIs candidates building time on their way to a big iron seat rather than instructors who wanted to teach. Not that the ultimate goal for the youngsters isn't valid, but you have to do the job you're in Right Now, not just show up with credentials in your pocket and punch a time clock.

It was an imperfect system, it's an imperfect system. I didn't see it as a roadblock to overcome, but an incentive to not only know 'what', but internalize and be able to describe the 'why' in what I needed to impart as an instructor.

 

[Doc Holliday]

another ASI in another FSDO commented on it.

Still doesn't make sense. The other ASI was making up a number obviously.

I say that because ASI's pass/failure rate would be very difficult to track, unlike that of a DPE.

 

[WDD]

So if 90% of students who get CFI endorsement to take a DPE check ride for a PPL pass, sounds like the DPE checkride is redundant and not needed.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Maybe just go to a system of mailing in a post card requesting to be issued a license would work better. Of course, the FAA would need to make that a prepaid post card...........

 

[WDD]

Maybe just go to a system of mailing in a post card requesting to be issued a license would work better. Of course, the FAA would need to make that a prepaid post card...........

That’s absurd. An e mail would be all that’s needed

 

[cowtowner]

Supply/Demand. The demand in the DFW area outstrips supply by a large margin, and that's why the costs are so high. Open the dang thing up to add a bunch of supply and the prices and availability will go down.

I ended up using an old grisled DPE that was a former FAA guy. Everybody warned me about him, and while he was very tough (4 hour oral), he was fair.

 

[schmookeeg]

So if 90% of students who get CFI endorsement to take a DPE check ride for a PPL pass, sounds like the DPE checkride is redundant and not needed.

Just in case you were serious with this -- I believe that CFIs need guard rails. Particularly new ones, and PARTICULARLY in the Part 61 instruction world. You'd be amazed at the complete lack of mentoring or structure at some of these schools. I bought one, I have wounds and opinions. CFIs are all out there making it up as they go. By the time they achieve steady competence and value as an instructor, they are off to the airlines, leaving the next 250 hour wonder instructor to fill the void.

To allow a CFI to issue certificates, even at the PPL level, I think that every CFI would need a real evaluation periodically as part of the cert renewal. The reason inactive CFIs take the FIRC every 2 years, even if they have no intention of teaching, is because they know with near-certainty that they couldn't walk in and pass their initial ride again. Not without a LOT of prepwork. Just mention the idea to an inactive CFI and watch the horror.

As an extension of the thought... maybe the real issue is that we should cull these inactive and useless-yet-licensed instructors. Maybe we only accept instructors who we believe have the chops to routinely make and certify a safe pilot who can operate in the bounds of a PPL certificate? Maybe they sit the CFI Initial every 2 years instead of the current crop of online traffic-school-style FIRCs?

So no more DPEs. CFIs are now $199/hr though.

 

[Tantalum]

You ever notice how various places will raise their costs after citing an elastic (variable) change, yet when that variable decreases in price, they don’t lower their prices accordingly? It’s a similar process here.

Indeed

 

[Doc Holliday]

Supply/Demand. The demand in the DFW area outstrips supply by a large margin, and that's why the costs are so high. Open the dang thing up to add a bunch of supply and the prices and availability will go down.

I ended up using an old grisled DPE that was a former FAA guy. Everybody warned me about him, and while he was very tough (4 hour oral), he was fair.

Several DPE's in your area barely make the yearly requirement to hold a designation. Again, everyone wants to flock to the "favorites" when there are others as well.

 

[MauleSkinner]

The reason inactive CFIs take the FIRC every 2 years, even if they have no intention of teaching, is because they know with near-certainty that they couldn't walk in and pass their initial ride again. Not without a LOT of prepwork. Just mention the idea to an inactive CFI and watch the horror.

Even active, successful instructors shudder at the thought of a renewal checkride. That alone tells me that most instructors shouldn’t be able to do checkrides for ratings/certificates.

It has been suggested that since the FAA allows a Sport Pilot instructor to give checkrides, that must mean it works. Those are not checkrides for certificates or ratings, but rather an endorsement process that requires an 8710…it’s actually more restrictive than the endorsement process at other pilot levels, as I can sign a Private Pilot off to fly a high performance, complex, pressurized airplane without anyone looking over my shoulder. But it’s still an endorsement, not a certificate or rating.

 

[murphey]

How we determine the ongoing competence is a separate question. If we assume we have a competent CFI, shouldn't he be able to evaluate the candidate? I contend he already does that when he signs the endorsement.

Now as to the other question, how do we determine the ability of a DPE today? I believe we occasionally send FAA inspectors along on checkrides, but are there other additional checks? It seems like we could apply something similar to CFIs. If today's CFIs are really so bad as to be unable to evaluate their students, we should be doing something to correct that problem anyway.

How do you correct the problem? What is the motivation to correct the problem?

Candidly, most of the private CFI's I studied with should never have been allowed to teach. Can they pass the CFI exam? Sure. Can they pass the FOI? Sure. But do they really understand how to teach? Those few are rare and far between.

I've been teaching high-tech for more than 30 years, understand how to recognize when students are having a problem and how to present the material in multiple ways - at some point they understand or change their major to Art History.

I really wanted to shove my last CFII out the door but didn't. I wouldn't have been able to close the door of the cherokee at 3000 agl.

 

[X3 Skier]

Maybe just go to a system of mailing in a post card requesting to be issued a license would work better. Of course, the FAA would need to make that a prepaid post card...........

Just like getting a LODA.

One LODA per Airplane, one Certificate per pilot.

Cheers

 

[WDD]

Just in case you were serious with this -- I believe that CFIs need guard rails. Particularly new ones, and PARTICULARLY in the Part 61 instruction world. You'd be amazed at the complete lack of mentoring or structure at some of these schools. I bought one, I have wounds and opinions. CFIs are all out there making it up as they go. By the time they achieve steady competence and value as an instructor, they are off to the airlines, leaving the next 250 hour wonder instructor to fill the void..

Yes I was indeed poking the bear a bit here.

But to be serious for a second, I agree with the idea that there needs to be checks and balances. I would also agree that there are some CFI's (as well as some DPE's) who aren't qualified to give / should not be giving check rides.

But there is a kernel of truth that can be further refined into a new idea concept here. There is IMHO a middle ground. For example, a CFI could get a "gold seal approval" if he/she has had 20 (?) students take checkrides and 90% of them pass on the first try, and then that person could be a "CFI/DPE", who is now authorized to do ONLY PPL check rides. With the amount of money being charged for check rides, it would be attractive for them to do that. Afterall, they already are up to speed with giving mock oral and mock check rides. A CFI/DPE could not give his own student a checkride, maybe not students of his/her school, etc. Maybe require 500 hours of teaching under their belt.

That would free up the "regular DPE's" to do commercial, instrument, what not. And of course DPE's could still do PPL checkrides.

 

[MauleSkinner]

For example, a CFI could get a "gold seal approval" if he/she has had 20 (?) students take checkrides and 90% of them pass on the first try, and then that person could be a "CFI/DPE", who is now authorized to do ONLY PPL check rides. With the amount of money being charged for check rides, it would be attractive for them to do that. Afterall, they already are up to speed with giving mock oral and mock check rides. A CFI/DPE could not give his own student a checkride, maybe not students of his/her school, etc. Maybe require 500 hours of teaching under their belt.

That also sounds suspiciously like becoming a DPE…you’ve got a good reputation in the industry, you’ve got a certain experience level as an instructor, and you’re going to start off with just Private Pilot checkrides.

But the training and oversight requirements are still necessary, which takes us back to how many DPEs the FSDO has time to supervise.

 

[WDD]

Same purpose - get qualified people giving check rides

An analogue would be Basic Med vs 3rd class. Basic Med accomplishes the same goal as 3rd class - but by passes the administrative constraints.

The oversight would be the CFI’s student pass record. If it drops, or doesn’t have the required number of students, he/she isn’t current to give check rides.

it wouldn’t be dependent upon the DPE system which limits the DPEs.