What are Your Thoughts About the DPE System?

MauleSkinner said:
I would respectfully suggest that you tell your congresscritter to properly fund the FAA so they can hire enough people to get things done.
Click to expand...
I respect you back and say yes. But FAA should be doing that as well. Or at least reallocate available resources. Maybe get rid of 3rd class medical, go basic med, release all of those resources :) .
 
MauleSkinner said:
So what you end up with is full-time DPEs who need to charge enough to justify not having a flying job that pays more than they make, or part-time DPEs who can only do limited numbers of checkrides because they have a “real” job. The free market is controlling the rates, but it’s the jet pilot market.
Click to expand...

...and the owner/operator targeted jets see some pretty eye-watering type rating pricing from DPEs (not all that surprising when you think about it but still).
 
Clip4 said:
It depends on proximity the airspace you are located and distance. As with sports, testing at your home airport and flying in your local area has a home court advantage.
Click to expand...

Ok, so still allowed. Oh yeah, home field advantage can be helpful. I was based at a fairly busy Class D airspace airport, so the quiet Class G airport was nicer for doing the landings. Plus, at only 27 nm away it was in the same area.

I certainly get that traveling a long ways for a test puts one in a different area, and the potential for weather issues, on the way home more likely than on the way there.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Perhaps the FAA should create a system in which a request for a check ride goes into a pool and is randomly assigned to a DPE to even out the checks across the board? This would decrease the backlog and get some a quicker check ride. But, as one could imagine, this system would anger many as they would not be allowed to go to the "favorite" DPE by choice.
Click to expand...

Not a bad idea. The burden then is the FAA has to come up with a way that all those DPE's can be scheduled and DPEs can schedule their days off and such. There would also need to be criteria for who get assigned where and such. Seems to me it would be easier to make all the DPE's part time FAA employees and just pay their salaries based on the time spent giving check rides and doing their own DPE training.
 
Pugs said:

Not a bad idea. The burden then is the FAA has to come up with a way that all those DPE's can be scheduled and DPEs can schedule their days off and such. There would also need to be criteria for who get assigned where and such. Seems to me it would be easier to make all the DPE's part time FAA employees and just pay their salaries based on the time spent giving check rides and doing their own DPE training.
Click to expand...

But the public is against the FAA conducting check rides with FAA "employees", hence why we have DPE's that are private citizens and given a designation.
 
wayne said:
Ok, so still allowed. Oh yeah, home field advantage can be helpful. I was based at a fairly busy Class D airspace airport, so the quiet Class G airport was nicer for doing the landings. Plus, at only 27 nm away it was in the same area.

I certainly get that traveling a long ways for a test puts one in a different area, and the potential for weather issues, on the way home more likely than on the way there.
Click to expand...

As a datapoint, the school I attended years ago did not want to use the local DPE - who would come directly to the airport - and we flew 150nm to and from for my checkride.
 
Doc Holliday said:
But the public is against the FAA conducting check rides with FAA "employees", hence why we have DPE's that are private citizens and given a designation.
Click to expand...
Define "public".

By one definition, delegating new airworthiness inspections to Boeing was demanded by the "public" (public being the government agencies that represent the public), until the "public" as defined by the media and Congress demanded that the inspections be done by the FAA (and expressed surprise that Boeing was permitted to do it in the first place).

It's like defining the term "public interest" - is public interest cheap fares? Or a highly regulated airline with fares and routes authorized by the DoT?
 
Doc Holliday said:
But the public is against the FAA conducting check rides with FAA "employees", hence why we have DPE's that are private citizens and given a designation.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen a lot of people choose not to take checkrides over the years because they got wind that an FAA inspector would be around.

I’ve also taken 4 or 5 checkrides that I didn’t actually need because of that.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Because, you know, while demonstrating knowledge about different airspace and stuff on the oral is ok, you certainly don’t want to have to demonstrate actual proficiency in flight. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Test nervousness increases with unfamiliar environment and airspace complexity increases workload decreasing proficiency. Train like you fight applies.
 
Clip4 said:
Test nervousness increases with unfamiliar environment and airspace complexity increases workload decreasing proficiency. Train like you fight applies.
Click to expand...
So don’t ever go there unless you trained there?
 
Doc Holliday said:
But the public is against the FAA conducting check rides with FAA "employees", hence why we have DPE's that are private citizens and given a designation.
Click to expand...

They are?

When we ran the flight school, we had a few students of limited means attempt to do checkrides with the FSDO. They were told "yeah maybe in six months"

The one stubborn kid that did go through with a FSDO ride was... unpleasant for the student. The re-ride was done with a DPE.

So, "point made" by the FSDO? That they don't want to be bothered? But I've never heard of the public being against FSDO rides. They might be against grumpy a-holes.

==

For the OP -- I can't think of a better system than what we have. I know I wouldn't want to give PPL checkrides for darn near any amount of coin. Ref the above, I sort of see the fed point of view of not wanting to either if the management is lax enough to let them wriggle out of a responsibility.
 
Clip4 said:
Or at least did some prep in the area if you have trained over grain fields and are testing in an urban environment.
Click to expand...
Yup…test anxiety is real, but more often than not it’s just an excuse to perform poorly, as most people don’t do anything to mitigate it.
 
I like the current system.

Motivation makes a difference. Many DPEs are motivated by a passion for aviation and an enjoyment in seeing new pilots get started safely. If instead they’re apathetic or nasty, they won’t see much activity.

On the other hand, government employees are not always motivated much by passion and enjoyment. They’re already getting a steady paycheck.
 
Personally, any "insulation" you can get from direct contact with the FAA (or any other government agency) is a good thing, that's just me. I was not aware that the FAA could limit the number of DPE's for an area, which doesn't really surprise me.
 
NoHeat said:
On the other hand, government employees are not always motivated much by passion and enjoyment. They’re already getting a steady paycheck.
Click to expand...
Well, they sit at home for a couple of months every few years without pay, but I think they get back pay for it when they go back to work.
 
schmookeeg said:
They are?

When we ran the flight school, we had a few students of limited means attempt to do checkrides with the FSDO. They were told "yeah maybe in six months"

The one stubborn kid that did go through with a FSDO ride was... unpleasant for the student. The re-ride was done with a DPE.

So, "point made" by the FSDO? That they don't want to be bothered? But I've never heard of the public being against FSDO rides. They might be against grumpy a-holes.

==

For the OP -- I can't think of a better system than what we have. I know I wouldn't want to give PPL checkrides for darn near any amount of coin. Ref the above, I sort of see the fed point of view of not wanting to either if the management is lax enough to let them wriggle out of a responsibility.
Click to expand...


Back before DPE's were doing all the check rides I chose to go with the FAA. Quicker scheduling and no cost.

Unfortunately now it's 100% DPE. You would think people would be happy with that, but here we are once again with people complaining about fees and availability.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Back before DPE's were doing all the check rides I chose to go with the FAA. Quicker scheduling and no cost.

Unfortunately now it's 100% DPE. You would think people would be happy with that, but here we are once again with people complaining about fees and availability.
Click to expand...

I think the idea is that one feeds the other. Limited availability => higher fees. At least that's what I think the OP is trying to suss out and improve. It's not 100% clear to me :D

Any reform proposed will be stymied by the bad DPEs that already exist in the system -- the Fast Eddie Lanes of the world -- so I don't see what possible change could work. Loosening DPE standards will make more Fast Eddies, and tightening them will send checkride prices soaring.

But considering that we tolerate a few more bad apples... why are DPE's re-certified annually? Do they forget how to give an exam? Can we suspend a DPE if one of their candidates crashes in the first year after checkride? (Fine them? Give them a DPE 709 ride?) Then they can self-police a bit?

In a world of $15,000 PPLs, I don't see the $700 checkride as irksome. Inefficient maybe -- the exam shouldn't cost 5% of the training that preceded it. But it's not hideous compared to anything else in GA -- in my opinion.
 
They might be complaining about availability because it isn’t meeting the needs.

Double the number of FTEs by opening it up to be more of a rating that you keep current and it would work better.

Now it is more like a city selling a small number of taxi medallions to limit the number of cabs vs Uber.

With a higher number of DPEs the bad ones won’t get business and be eased out. Good ones with availability, fairness, and not being an axxxxxhole will get the business.
 
Last edited:
schmookeeg said:
But considering that we tolerate a few more bad apples... why are DPE's re-certified annually? Do they forget how to give an exam? Can we suspend a DPE if one of their candidates crashes in the first year after checkride? (Fine them? Give them a DPE 709 ride?) Then they can self-police a bit?
Click to expand...

Designated Pilot Examiners are appointed by the Administrator to act on his behalf, to administer flight test and issue FAA certificates. The annual surveillance done by an ASI is to see if the DPE is complying with all applicable orders and still performing to the standard set forth by the Administrator.

DPE's are monitored for their performance by FSDO personnel. On occasion hotline complaints are made against the DPE, which must be investigated. And when an accident happens, especially involving a pilot with a relatively fresh certificate, the the FAA will investigate the DPE for compliance. And yes, on occasions the FAA will remove a DPE designation for poor/improper performance and other causes.

schmookeeg said:
In a world of $15,000 PPLs, I don't see the $700 checkride as irksome. Inefficient maybe -- the exam shouldn't cost 5% of the training that preceded it. But it's not hideous compared to anything else in GA -- in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Food for thought. Part 141 allows a school to apply for examining authority. Why can’t that model he extended to Part 61?

Doesn’t solve all the problems but we won’t know until we try.
 
TCABM said:
Food for thought. Part 141 allows a school to apply for examining authority. Why can’t that model he extended to Part 61?

Doesn’t solve all the problems but we won’t know until we try.
Click to expand...

Well, at first thought, for Part 61 there is no real difference in the regulations between "schools" and "independent instructors". So where would you draw the line?

If a school has to apply to be approved for self-examining authority, then well, that's pretty much what 141 is now.

Or, if I as an independent instructor can apply for self-examining authority, (for example, if I have another CFI sign the applicant off), how is that different than just calling me a DPE?
 
Wait - if a part 141 school can give check rides, could one not get the check ride from the school? If the person Is qualified to do that for school students no reason not qualified for anyone else.
 
MauleSkinner said:
How about actually respecting me back and making the call? Let us know how your congress critter decides to reallocate his time.
Click to expand...

You disparage my respecting? Meet me on the field of honor at dawn. We dual by reading arcane parts of the FarAim until one cracks.


In any case- I can’t contact my representative or senators. The parole officers only allow them outbound calls at this point.
 
Last edited:
WDD said:
Wait - if a part 141 school can give check rides, could one not get the check ride from the school? If the person Is qualified to do that for school students no reason not qualified for anyone else.
Click to expand...

I think the idea behind self-examining authority is that the applicant has gone through a structured, approved training program with periodic phase checks with assistant chief instructors and all of that. So the checkride at the end is, while still a checkride, more of a formality if they've reached that point. The same wouldn't apply to someone who came in "off the street" and just needed an examiner.
 
WDD said:
Wait - if a part 141 school can give check rides, could one not get the check ride from the school? If the person Is qualified to do that for school students no reason not qualified for anyone else.
Click to expand...

Under Part 141 Self Examining Authority, the school can issue a certificate upon graduation for their enrolled students. It's not the same function of a DPE.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Under Part 141 Self Examining Authority, the school can issue a certificate upon graduation for their enrolled students. It's not the same function of a DPE.
Click to expand...

I read it as @WDD asking if a change to that policy would be a reasonable change, i.e. using the examining authority at the school to boost the numbers of "Checkride-givers" without increasing the FSDO oversight workload.
 
RussR said:
Well, at first thought, for Part 61 there is no real difference in the regulations between "schools" and "independent instructors". So where would you draw the line?
Click to expand...
Dunno. Beers and bar napkins could solve that though.

RussR said:
…
If a school has to apply to be approved for self-examining authority, then well, that's pretty much what 141 is now.
Click to expand...
I don’t think examining authority comes automatically with 141 program approval.

RussR said:
Or, if I as an independent instructor can apply for self-examining authority, (for example, if I have another CFI sign the applicant off), how is that different than just calling me a DPE?
Click to expand...
Again, beers and bar napkins can solve that.

Honestly, other than repeating verbatim what one of my favorite DPEs said in a conversation with him on this topic, I haven’t really put much thought to it.
 
RussR said:
I read it as @WDD asking if a change to that policy would be a reasonable change, i.e. using the examining authority at the school to boost the numbers of "Checkride-givers" without increasing the FSDO oversight workload.
Click to expand...
Yes.

And let me pre-empt a related topic. It would be slick to have a "loop hole" to "enroll" at a 141 school, take a 3 hour test prep training, and then use their DPE. And not a snow ball's chance .......
 
RussR said:
I read it as @WDD asking if a change to that policy would be a reasonable change, i.e. using the examining authority at the school to boost the numbers of "Checkride-givers" without increasing the FSDO oversight workload.
Click to expand...

That would mean the Part 141 school Chief Instructor would have to met the same criteria as a DPE.

The reason a Part 141 can get self examining authority is they are structured with a training curriculum, have stage checks and also have oversight not only of the FAA but also have Chief Instructors and Assistant Chief Instructors which must be accepted and take checks with the FAA. The self examine part of the school's course means the enrolled person has completed the entire course satisfactorily, not just the end check.

The FAA does not grant self examine authority to every Part 141, few have it.

Back to DPE availability. Here's the problem, each district does have enough DPE's.

Say you have 10 DPE's assigned. Four out of the ten become very popular among the aviation community, so naturally people want those four for their check. The other six, while not as popular, get what's left over split among them.

So now you bring in more DPE's. Will people start going to the new guys over the favorite four? Maybe, maybe not.
 
TCABM said:
I don’t think examining authority comes automatically with 141 program approval.
Click to expand...

It does not. My point was that, there would have to be an approval process for a Part 61 school to apply for self-examining authority. And that approval process would probably look a whole lot like Part 141 approval does now. Meaning if they're going to put in that level of work, might as well become a 141 school anyway, and apply for self-examining authority through the existing process.
 
RussR said:
I think the idea behind self-examining authority is that the applicant has gone through a structured, approved training program with periodic phase checks with assistant chief instructors and all of that. So the checkride at the end is, while still a checkride, more of a formality if they've reached that point. The same wouldn't apply to someone who came in "off the street" and just needed an examiner.
Click to expand...

Wish I would have read to this part before I replied.

All that overhead w/ a 141 program is what allows reduced experience requirements and a other things like being part of a regionally accredited program. The ACS is still the ACS and a 141 student (theoretically) still must perform to those standards, just like a part 61 student does.

ETA: 141 exam authority doesn’t grant the school blanket authority to conduct all flavors of checkrides, they may only get PP-ASEL only, even if they have IRA and CSEL syllabi.
 
So far in 2021, 10% of the checkrides I've scheduled have resulted in a disqualification. Sometimes it's been for someone who doesn't meet an aeronautical experience requirement. Perhaps claiming <50 mile flights as XC's or trying to use flights that obviously were not solo towards solo requirements. Plenty of airplane issues too, most commonly AD Compliance and missing paperwork. Expired temporary registration or photocopies of the Airworthiness Certificate anyone?
 
Doc Holliday said:
The answer is not more examiners.

***DELETIA***

Remember, it was public demand to shift more check rides to DPE's to avoid taking a check ride with an ASI, which BTW, was a public service and free.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top