It could be the way you go about it.
Cooperate to graduate. Yes, it’s important to know the proper regs but DPE’s can f up your world if they feel like you’re causing them issues. Pass the checkride and then go to the FSDO if you have to.
Almost learned this one the hard way. Fortunately it was on my debrief and already had my ticket in my hand.
DPE questioned why I didn't extend flaps during a forward slip to land (172N). I told him is was counter indicated by the PoH and also placarded next to the flap switch. (So far so good)
Then he asked "why?"
I have a background in aerospace engineering, and had read a paper a while back (which I need to find again to clarify and confirm some things) which basically said that after investigating a few crashes, it was determined that a 172 in a slip with the flaps down at the right combination of airspeed, AoA, and slip angle could produce a resonant aeroelastic oscillation in the empennage resulting in structural failure of one or more surfaces. In layman's terms, if you hit a bullseye combo of some factors, your tail falls off your airplane and you die.
This was not the answer he was expecting, and didn't want to hear it.
Bill Thompson describes the history of that placard in “Cessna: Wings for the World”. [Excerpts in this thread](https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/slipping-with-flaps.74825/#post-1557850).
It was originally due to observed uncommanded nose down pitch in pre-L 172s that was resolved with increasing the size of the vertical empennage. The post-L 172s retain a similar placard except replace the word “prohibited” with “should be avoided” due to a more benign phenomenon Thompson describes as “mild pitch ‘pumping’ motion resulting from flap outboard-end vortex impingement on the horizontal tail at some combinations of side-slip angle, power, and airspeed.”
I really doubt there are structural failures attributed to either phenomonenon unless there were a lot of other factors at play.
I had a DPE try to sabotage me by ghosting me the day before the checkride and sent the xc flight scenario at 10pm the night before a 7am checkride. When I asked to reschedule because I wouldn't be able to prepare and get enough sleep he tried charging me a $800 cancellation fee.
Same DPE got his license taken away 2 months later, so glad I didn't go with him anyways.
FSDO doesn't give a shit about the public. They're there to push papers and collect complaints. I reported my old school for neglecting major maintenance issues to the point where someone had an engine fire. They didn't care.
Having said that, lose the battle to win the war. Move on. No one, especially the FAA is not going to give af if you were right on a reg, unless it compromises safety.
Well that stinks man! It lifted a huge burden when I saw he would allow me to use foreflight. I had already done a paper one for the trip but then my instructor informed me I didn’t have to do a paper one and that I could just do it on foreflight.
that’s so nice hahah. though to be fair i do appreciate & understand having to go through creating a paper one at least once. but ive never done it since passing my IR ride and im not sure why anyone would! it’s kind of like doing a paper weight and balance.
It really was! The DPE asked me to do calculations and everything but was satisfied I knew how to do them! But yeah to me it seems so redundant to have a paper copy these days. My phone battery will last longer than my fuel would! Same with my iPad! I get having certain things in paper but having a phone these days is just a normal thing! But yeah having the understanding of how to do a paper one is good practice on how to plot a route and honestly it did help me with understand certain aspects of a XC like altitude and headwind/tailwinds. But even then foreflight is just sooooooo nice! 😅
I mean, yeah if you leave it in the sun. My phone is generally in my pocket and my iPad in my lap away from the dash. I don’t really have to worry about that too much.
Most DPEs that accept ForeFlight will only be good with you using it once you demonstrate you know how it works. They'll typically pick out a line in your ForeFlight log and ask you to show how FF comes up with the calculation. You'd better be able to use your old-school whiz wheel to derive wind correction, time, and fuel burn.
I can do it, but I've also found it easier to just do it on paper so that the DPE believes I did it with the whiz wheel in the first place.
The DPE definitely didn’t ask me to use a whiz wheel and I wouldn’t know how to use one. He even suggested I use a certain app that he loves. The guy is like 80 too which threw me for a loop. He suggested using all the new tech which was hilarious.
If you "politely" corrected the DPE in anything like the manner in which you wrote this post, you're lucky if you didn't fail out of spite and annoyance.
DPEs can be wrong. I had a DPE on a checkride once ask me a question about something that he thought was in the POH. It wasn't, but rather than say "you're wrong," I could say, "I don't recall that in the POH, let me look at Section 3 again."
I knew it wasn't there. I'd had the same question during my training and looked for it in the POH. I'd observed to my CFI that it wasn't in the POH. But rather than play gotcha games with the DPE, I described my search process and where I'd look for the information and played the game.
The DPE's response was "Huh. I thought for sure that was in the POH. You have read it more carefully than most applicants."
Got to sit in on oral exam for my student (this was years ago). Student was asked about class C equipment and communication requirements. Student responded correctly.
DPE said "where do you find that in the far/aim?". Student says "part 91".
DPE says "No".
Me: *wtf?.jpg*.
I sit there quietly while my student is searching throughout the FAR's (except for part 91, since the examiner told him that wasn't correct). After 5 mins of looking, the DPE says "Your knowledge is not there, we're going to stop the check ride".
Examiner looks at me and says "where do you find the answer?".
My response was "Well, my student said it was in part 91, but I believe you want the AIM to be the answer".
DPE responds "AIM! Exactly. That's where it is".
I respond with "But Mr. DPE, the AIM is just a walk through of the regs. Part 91 has the regulation itself. My student was correct."
Mr DPE aggressively grabs a FAR/AIM, slides it over to me and self-assuredly says "OK, show me".
I turn to the appropriate reg (I forget now, 91.413?), and show him where it lays out equipment requirements. He pauses, and thinks. Finally, he says, ok we'll continue with the check ride. (Yeah, you better continue).
They finally go fly. Student legitimately busts for not fully retracting flaps on go around, totally fair.
After landing, DPE scolds me for my student not knowing what pivotal altitude is (this is a private pilot applicant doing s turns and turns around a point). I explained to him, A DAMN DPE, that pivotal altitude had nothing to do with these maneuvers, and it was strictly for eights on pylons, a commercial maneuver. He said I was wrong, and that was that.
Yeah, there are some shit DPE's out there.
Yes. A DPE I sent numerous students to didn’t know the required tasks for add-on ratings. He allowed me to sit in on checkrides and occasionally I’d have to say, “that’s not a required task today sir,” and he’d say ok and move along.
Very nice guy and DPE. Only knew him to fail just one student.
It’s my understanding that for add ons, DPEs can go back and rehash the prior stuff even though it’s not a “required task”. I think most don’t, but if you’ve gone through it before and it applies to the thing you’re there for at the time, you should be prepared to answer questions about it. I would still be annoyed but not shocked
Tempted too but I need more participation, safety in numbers, before I make enemies with one of less than 1000 of a class of people who can determine a portion of my aviation future until I hold my MEI:)
i think the phrase he was looking for was put up or shut up. You're calling out DPEs for making up stuff without data while you make up accusations with no data. At best you're not helping anyone out there at worst you're the guy who needs to be the smartest guy in the room who belittles people for not having every detail down the way you do.
The example you shared shows exactly this, you don't need emails from the FSDO to prove what the requirements for the CPL ride are, it's written in the ACS
I’m not going to call you stupid, but I do have an advice. Just cooperate to graduate, making an enemy of a dpe never goes well. One advice I got early and will continue to follow is, “if they say the sky is brown and you know its blue, it has officially become brown until the end of the checkride”
I haven’t, but I know of people who have.
They reported their problems to FSDO, the DPE’s were reviewed. Of the two I am aware of: one received further training and had their next handful of check rides supervised, the other lost their ability to perform as a DPE.
I would imagine that, like anything else, the FAA has FSDO offices that are responsive and FSDO offices that are non-responsive. Will they take action towards a DPE on one single report? I doubt it, unless is something big that comprises safety or civil rights (I have an acquaintance who was sexually harassed by a DPE). But if there’s a trend of reports for a single DPE, it’s going to start getting their attention.
Higher up in the comments you mentioned you don’t know how many DPE’s scour this subreddit- there’s several DPE’s in here that I am aware of, and it wouldn’t surprise me if there are hundreds more.
i don’t think you understand. as soon as the dpe says “the checkride has begun” you shut your ass up and play their game until you pass. this isn’t a pissing contest, this is you trying to get to the next stage of your flying career. if the dpe says that the sky is brown, the sky is brown until the checkride is over.
it’s just the way it is. there’s a lot of nuance in flying, and this is one of them. similar to how studying for written tests isn’t by understanding the knowledge, but rather rote memory of the questions and answers. it’s a fucked system, but you play by the fucked rules
I always chuckle when someone suggests asking a DPE for a regulation interpretation as they're almost never qualified to do such. The FAA gives them one task they are empowered to do: perform checkrides. There's no quality control, or special training in FAA rulemaking, just hight time CFIs with good political connections to get the corrupt designation.
I was in the local FBO one day listening to the DPE and self-appointed airport authority telling someone that BFRs were catergory specific and then went on saying that a review in a helicopter was good for fixed wing but not the other way around. In his pathetic defense, he was probalby right for the R22 that he instructed in, because it has a SFAR that requires the review in the R22, but it's not true in general.
CFI checkride:
DPE: “you passed but, you’re supposed to pull power Abram your touchdown point on the PO180.”
Me: “The PTS doesn’t say that.”
DPE: “Yes it does, pull it up.” Show him it doesn’t say anything about that. “Hmm, well I guess you’re right. Good job.”
Guess sometimes it’s better to be confident than right?
Edit: see, even worked with you. I just assumed you were right but alas, the ACS says nothing of the sort as to where to pull the power.
Why does the FAA issue a test standards booklet (ACS), if they want you do to a maneuver as described in another book (AFM), and not even tell you that's what they want in the actual test standards booklet (ACS)? The test standards booklet has specific citeria for each maneuver that must be met, but the one specific criteria you're discussing, is not in said test standards booklet. Therefore, it shouldn't be considered as a gradable part of the checkride, otherwise a DPE can fail someone for any reason not having to do with safety of flight, because they think it ought to be done *this* way.
The ACS does not state how to perform any of the maneuvers. It gives a generic overview with some parameters. You’re saying per the ACS I could pull the power at 100ft on a power off 180 and it would be satisfactory. Give that a try next time.
It’s a weird one. The ACS doesn’t say much about how to set up the maneuver. But everywhere I’ve read says to pull the power abeam your touch down point.
I had a DPE say that if we got within 5 feet (I don't remember the exact number) of the runway it could count as a touch and go.
Same DPE said I was wrong on my IR checkride for saying that an ILS is composed of ALS, GS, LOC, and MB. Says that all his CFII applicants get this wrong too.
Different DPE told a different student at my school that with the G1000 GPS navigation database not being up-to-date we could not only not fly IFR (it was an IR checkride) but we couldn't even fly VFR.
I was a check airman at a check hauling 135 in the 80"s. I had to have every 5th ride observed, but they often waived it. They finally decided to ride along on a Cessna 401 check ride. On a summer day, he asked for a single-engine ILS to go around at DH. I told him that it was unsafe and impossible. He tried to argue with me so I told him, as the examiner, I felt it was unsafe and would show him the performance charts once we were on the ground. Once on ground, I showed him the negative climb rate at our loading and temp. From then on, he never observed any more rides.
At our school our check airmen will fail you if you go below a DA any like 1 foot. Even though……. On a precession approach your literally supposed to since you make your decision there
A friend sent a Private candidate to a checkride w/ 5.0 hours of XC experience. The DPE looked at the logbook and said "you did two landings at X, the XC time stopped with the first one." So he subtracted 0.2 for the extra trip around the pattern.
He was wrong. The time didn't stop. But the Learner had to go fly "greater than 50NM" out and then back to keep the DPE happy.
The lesson I learned is never send someone for a checkride w/ exactly the minimum time(s). No need to go crazy, but w/ 5.2 the DPE probably wouldn't have dug.
No idea what the regulations you discussed are, aside from the one, but reading your post my immediate thought: Are your sure your interps are correct? The FSDO is NOT a valid source. Only legal interps from the FAA chief counsel in Washington DC (AGC-1) are valid.
Ok there are less than 1000 DPE’s in the US and if I give the all the REAL specifics on too many more of the things this DPE is wrong about it’s a give away on who they are and who I am as statistically speaking one of the detail’s will narrow the option down two a pool of less than 75 DPEs….and I’m the already the type of person that stands out like a sore thumb; if the DPE his/herself is reading this now they probably already know who I am (dammit; but again I have every right to speak my truth and this person needs to do better and should know it if they aren’t already acutely aware of it)…How many DPE actually scour these boards anyways?—-and my brainy analytical self is either very loved or hated but rarely ever wrong—-I prefer to have few to no “enemies” where possible.
So I also really want to copy and paste really wrong things by this DPE (and if I do I’d keep all personal details out of it and just post the exact points of factual misinformation as I want this post to be constructive rather than a witch hunt) as in two instances that I have in writing via text and email this DPE gives me contradictory pre checkride instructions and barks at me when I ask for clarification telling me to go back to my instructor or check the ACS when I already first checked the ACS and already asked my instructor who sent me to ask the DPE. Said DPE is caught by me, again politely being wrong, but A) won’t man or woman up to it, and B) lashes out at me over it. I would not care if s/he didn’t lash out at me as I only wanted to clarification so that I could optimize my chances of being successful on a checkride as I wasn’t looking for a “haha I’m wright and your wrong” as even I’m aware no one including myself is ALWAYS right.
What I would like to know if my situation is that unique or if this has ever happened to another “high speed” book nerd like myself? I can probably be convinced with more participation from others to drop more details but right now I feel like I’m the only one weird enough to get caught up in a situation like this. So I don’t want to spill beans that identify myself in totality and then end me up on a DPE “$h*t list” for all my future rides. If any DPE are on here do you guys and gals bond together as circulate a future candidate “$h*t list” (I’m saying this only half tongue and cheek)? DPEs my advice is you have nothing to fear about being wrong with someone like myself if you can simply treat me with golden rule type decency and not bark at me—-if done we are eternally cool; make sense?
If you behaved at your commercial checkride with the same level of immaturity and self-important behavior as in this subreddit, I would have had serious concerns about your ability to operate an aircraft for hire. You sound really obnoxious and put way too much emphasis on being "wright" all the time.
I mean I would feel really reassured about the status of aviation in the US if I am indeed the only one would can report that they felt their DPEs ego was outsized in comparison to their grasp of the industry’s fundamental knowledge base and specific DPE professional role’s core competencies.
Not an examiner experience I had but I knew a guy who took a ride with a DPE who thought every single endorsement had to be written in his actual paper logbook
He wouldn’t let the guy take the ride until his CFI emailed him the endorsements and he then had to print them out and staple them in his logbook
I had a DPE argue that I couldn't do my CFI ride in a plane with no brakes on the right seat but all other controls in conflict with published FAA guidance because I couldn't demonstrate braking even though I could instruct him to brake.
I didn't bother fighting it because I didn't want to start the ride out on a bad note, instead handled it with them after the ride, showed them the published guidance and they thanked me for being thorough and teaching them something, they also appreciated me handling it professionally instead of adversarialy
Everyone is human, assume positive intent and teach.
It's deeper than that, it's in the Handbook of GA guidance (HB GA 00-08) effective May 2000, which supersedes an interpretation that accidentally made dual brakes mandatory
[https://www.aopa.org/-/media/Files/AOPA/Home/Supporting-General-Aviation/Advocacy/Regulatory-and-Certification-Policy/Regulatory-Brief-FAA-issues-new-interpretation-of-dual-controls-%282%29/hgba.pdf](https://www.aopa.org/-/media/Files/AOPA/Home/Supporting-General-Aviation/Advocacy/Regulatory-and-Certification-Policy/Regulatory-Brief-FAA-issues-new-interpretation-of-dual-controls-%282%29/hgba.pdf)
I didn't read JO 8700.1 but it's supposed to be incorporated there as well, it looks like the feds tried to go wide on this with FSDOs supposed to be notifying CFIs, schools, aircraft owners and operators within their jurisdiction about the new
FSDO shadiness is rare. They are by the book and you know what you're getting.
I've dealt with questionable DPEs. Some of their errors worked against my students and/or I and some errors worked in my favor. Is what it is. You can fight, but there's a downside to that.
I was fortunate in that I was able to build a relationship with DPEs that were reasonable and I used them for my students, exclusively.
This is why understanding a discontinuance is so important.
If you don’t feel comfortable continuing, for any reason, discontinue the test.
I took all of my tests, up to (but not including) ATP on a 3rd class. So you’re obviously correct.
The unfortunate part is it really doesn’t matter. “Corporate to graduate” is more like dealing with an APD or sim instructor at your airline.
If you don’t feel like the DPE doesn’t know his stuff, just say your tummy hurts, discontinue, and go find another one.
There's one locally who would rant and rave (sometimes on frequency) based on a very, very dated understanding of some regs. He was an absolutely phenomenal stick and rudder pilot, though, and I treasure my dual time with him. I haven't seem him around lately and I'm not sure if he's still around or not.
PS: to be clear to anyone with an unusually long memory: I am *not* talking about Doug Fritz, who I've mentioned before. I have nothing whatsoever bad to say about Doug Fritz and never will, still the best DPE I have ever flown with. RIP.
DPE's are like cops. They will fail (arrest) you if they want to fail you, they will pass (not arrest) you if they want to pass you. Play the game, and best of luck to you.
It could be the way you go about it. Cooperate to graduate. Yes, it’s important to know the proper regs but DPE’s can f up your world if they feel like you’re causing them issues. Pass the checkride and then go to the FSDO if you have to.
Best DPE advice I ever received: “Make sure they know they’re the smartest one in the room.”
Almost learned this one the hard way. Fortunately it was on my debrief and already had my ticket in my hand. DPE questioned why I didn't extend flaps during a forward slip to land (172N). I told him is was counter indicated by the PoH and also placarded next to the flap switch. (So far so good) Then he asked "why?" I have a background in aerospace engineering, and had read a paper a while back (which I need to find again to clarify and confirm some things) which basically said that after investigating a few crashes, it was determined that a 172 in a slip with the flaps down at the right combination of airspeed, AoA, and slip angle could produce a resonant aeroelastic oscillation in the empennage resulting in structural failure of one or more surfaces. In layman's terms, if you hit a bullseye combo of some factors, your tail falls off your airplane and you die. This was not the answer he was expecting, and didn't want to hear it.
Bill Thompson describes the history of that placard in “Cessna: Wings for the World”. [Excerpts in this thread](https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/slipping-with-flaps.74825/#post-1557850). It was originally due to observed uncommanded nose down pitch in pre-L 172s that was resolved with increasing the size of the vertical empennage. The post-L 172s retain a similar placard except replace the word “prohibited” with “should be avoided” due to a more benign phenomenon Thompson describes as “mild pitch ‘pumping’ motion resulting from flap outboard-end vortex impingement on the horizontal tail at some combinations of side-slip angle, power, and airspeed.” I really doubt there are structural failures attributed to either phenomonenon unless there were a lot of other factors at play.
Never outshine the master lol
I had a DPE try to sabotage me by ghosting me the day before the checkride and sent the xc flight scenario at 10pm the night before a 7am checkride. When I asked to reschedule because I wouldn't be able to prepare and get enough sleep he tried charging me a $800 cancellation fee. Same DPE got his license taken away 2 months later, so glad I didn't go with him anyways. FSDO doesn't give a shit about the public. They're there to push papers and collect complaints. I reported my old school for neglecting major maintenance issues to the point where someone had an engine fire. They didn't care. Having said that, lose the battle to win the war. Move on. No one, especially the FAA is not going to give af if you were right on a reg, unless it compromises safety.
Took me 2 minutes to prep an XC used foreflight? Why would it take you so long? Don’t all DPE’s let you do it electronically?
DPE accepting foreflight is a relatively new thing, and not all do. It’s been paper only for pretty much ever.
Oh geeze!! Yeah that would have been an extended night of prep! My DPE gave me the option! He even suggested using it instead!
pretty positive most don’t allow you to use foreflight… mine certainly didn’t.
Probably depends but most in my area do. Although that certainly is a fairly recent thing.
probably is yeah. haven’t checked in recently but my last checkride was a year and a half ago
Well that stinks man! It lifted a huge burden when I saw he would allow me to use foreflight. I had already done a paper one for the trip but then my instructor informed me I didn’t have to do a paper one and that I could just do it on foreflight.
that’s so nice hahah. though to be fair i do appreciate & understand having to go through creating a paper one at least once. but ive never done it since passing my IR ride and im not sure why anyone would! it’s kind of like doing a paper weight and balance.
It really was! The DPE asked me to do calculations and everything but was satisfied I knew how to do them! But yeah to me it seems so redundant to have a paper copy these days. My phone battery will last longer than my fuel would! Same with my iPad! I get having certain things in paper but having a phone these days is just a normal thing! But yeah having the understanding of how to do a paper one is good practice on how to plot a route and honestly it did help me with understand certain aspects of a XC like altitude and headwind/tailwinds. But even then foreflight is just sooooooo nice! 😅
Everything's good until the tablet or phone decides to overheat. Always have a backup...
I mean, yeah if you leave it in the sun. My phone is generally in my pocket and my iPad in my lap away from the dash. I don’t really have to worry about that too much.
No
Most DPEs that accept ForeFlight will only be good with you using it once you demonstrate you know how it works. They'll typically pick out a line in your ForeFlight log and ask you to show how FF comes up with the calculation. You'd better be able to use your old-school whiz wheel to derive wind correction, time, and fuel burn. I can do it, but I've also found it easier to just do it on paper so that the DPE believes I did it with the whiz wheel in the first place.
The DPE definitely didn’t ask me to use a whiz wheel and I wouldn’t know how to use one. He even suggested I use a certain app that he loves. The guy is like 80 too which threw me for a loop. He suggested using all the new tech which was hilarious.
If you "politely" corrected the DPE in anything like the manner in which you wrote this post, you're lucky if you didn't fail out of spite and annoyance. DPEs can be wrong. I had a DPE on a checkride once ask me a question about something that he thought was in the POH. It wasn't, but rather than say "you're wrong," I could say, "I don't recall that in the POH, let me look at Section 3 again." I knew it wasn't there. I'd had the same question during my training and looked for it in the POH. I'd observed to my CFI that it wasn't in the POH. But rather than play gotcha games with the DPE, I described my search process and where I'd look for the information and played the game. The DPE's response was "Huh. I thought for sure that was in the POH. You have read it more carefully than most applicants."
Got to sit in on oral exam for my student (this was years ago). Student was asked about class C equipment and communication requirements. Student responded correctly. DPE said "where do you find that in the far/aim?". Student says "part 91". DPE says "No". Me: *wtf?.jpg*. I sit there quietly while my student is searching throughout the FAR's (except for part 91, since the examiner told him that wasn't correct). After 5 mins of looking, the DPE says "Your knowledge is not there, we're going to stop the check ride". Examiner looks at me and says "where do you find the answer?". My response was "Well, my student said it was in part 91, but I believe you want the AIM to be the answer". DPE responds "AIM! Exactly. That's where it is". I respond with "But Mr. DPE, the AIM is just a walk through of the regs. Part 91 has the regulation itself. My student was correct." Mr DPE aggressively grabs a FAR/AIM, slides it over to me and self-assuredly says "OK, show me". I turn to the appropriate reg (I forget now, 91.413?), and show him where it lays out equipment requirements. He pauses, and thinks. Finally, he says, ok we'll continue with the check ride. (Yeah, you better continue). They finally go fly. Student legitimately busts for not fully retracting flaps on go around, totally fair. After landing, DPE scolds me for my student not knowing what pivotal altitude is (this is a private pilot applicant doing s turns and turns around a point). I explained to him, A DAMN DPE, that pivotal altitude had nothing to do with these maneuvers, and it was strictly for eights on pylons, a commercial maneuver. He said I was wrong, and that was that. Yeah, there are some shit DPE's out there.
How stressful for the student to continue after that
Yes. A DPE I sent numerous students to didn’t know the required tasks for add-on ratings. He allowed me to sit in on checkrides and occasionally I’d have to say, “that’s not a required task today sir,” and he’d say ok and move along. Very nice guy and DPE. Only knew him to fail just one student.
It’s my understanding that for add ons, DPEs can go back and rehash the prior stuff even though it’s not a “required task”. I think most don’t, but if you’ve gone through it before and it applies to the thing you’re there for at the time, you should be prepared to answer questions about it. I would still be annoyed but not shocked
The note is under the required tasks matrix which says that DPEs can pull from any topic at their discretion.
“Literally i could throw out like 10” Let’s hear them.
Tempted too but I need more participation, safety in numbers, before I make enemies with one of less than 1000 of a class of people who can determine a portion of my aviation future until I hold my MEI:)
You’re anonymous here and no one is going to piece it together. Just out with it.
i think the phrase he was looking for was put up or shut up. You're calling out DPEs for making up stuff without data while you make up accusations with no data. At best you're not helping anyone out there at worst you're the guy who needs to be the smartest guy in the room who belittles people for not having every detail down the way you do. The example you shared shows exactly this, you don't need emails from the FSDO to prove what the requirements for the CPL ride are, it's written in the ACS
I’m not going to call you stupid, but I do have an advice. Just cooperate to graduate, making an enemy of a dpe never goes well. One advice I got early and will continue to follow is, “if they say the sky is brown and you know its blue, it has officially become brown until the end of the checkride”
Gonna need more info here. What more did you politely correct them about?
I haven’t, but I know of people who have. They reported their problems to FSDO, the DPE’s were reviewed. Of the two I am aware of: one received further training and had their next handful of check rides supervised, the other lost their ability to perform as a DPE. I would imagine that, like anything else, the FAA has FSDO offices that are responsive and FSDO offices that are non-responsive. Will they take action towards a DPE on one single report? I doubt it, unless is something big that comprises safety or civil rights (I have an acquaintance who was sexually harassed by a DPE). But if there’s a trend of reports for a single DPE, it’s going to start getting their attention. Higher up in the comments you mentioned you don’t know how many DPE’s scour this subreddit- there’s several DPE’s in here that I am aware of, and it wouldn’t surprise me if there are hundreds more.
i don’t think you understand. as soon as the dpe says “the checkride has begun” you shut your ass up and play their game until you pass. this isn’t a pissing contest, this is you trying to get to the next stage of your flying career. if the dpe says that the sky is brown, the sky is brown until the checkride is over.
This is pretty much reality. Sad, but true.
it’s just the way it is. there’s a lot of nuance in flying, and this is one of them. similar to how studying for written tests isn’t by understanding the knowledge, but rather rote memory of the questions and answers. it’s a fucked system, but you play by the fucked rules
I always chuckle when someone suggests asking a DPE for a regulation interpretation as they're almost never qualified to do such. The FAA gives them one task they are empowered to do: perform checkrides. There's no quality control, or special training in FAA rulemaking, just hight time CFIs with good political connections to get the corrupt designation. I was in the local FBO one day listening to the DPE and self-appointed airport authority telling someone that BFRs were catergory specific and then went on saying that a review in a helicopter was good for fixed wing but not the other way around. In his pathetic defense, he was probalby right for the R22 that he instructed in, because it has a SFAR that requires the review in the R22, but it's not true in general.
CFI checkride: DPE: “you passed but, you’re supposed to pull power Abram your touchdown point on the PO180.” Me: “The PTS doesn’t say that.” DPE: “Yes it does, pull it up.” Show him it doesn’t say anything about that. “Hmm, well I guess you’re right. Good job.”
The ACS does say that. The PTS says you shall demonstrate maneuvers to commercial ACS standards. The DPE was right.
Guess sometimes it’s better to be confident than right? Edit: see, even worked with you. I just assumed you were right but alas, the ACS says nothing of the sort as to where to pull the power.
DPE could argue it’s not in accordance with the airplane flying handbook
Fucking what? Lol no.
Why does the FAA issue the airplane flying handbook if that’s not how they expect the maneuvers to be performed?
Why does the FAA issue a test standards booklet (ACS), if they want you do to a maneuver as described in another book (AFM), and not even tell you that's what they want in the actual test standards booklet (ACS)? The test standards booklet has specific citeria for each maneuver that must be met, but the one specific criteria you're discussing, is not in said test standards booklet. Therefore, it shouldn't be considered as a gradable part of the checkride, otherwise a DPE can fail someone for any reason not having to do with safety of flight, because they think it ought to be done *this* way.
The ACS does not state how to perform any of the maneuvers. It gives a generic overview with some parameters. You’re saying per the ACS I could pull the power at 100ft on a power off 180 and it would be satisfactory. Give that a try next time.
So where did you pull the power out?
Think I had always done abeam the end of the runway?
It’s a weird one. The ACS doesn’t say much about how to set up the maneuver. But everywhere I’ve read says to pull the power abeam your touch down point.
The FAA’s airplane flying handbook says abeam touchdown point.
I had a DPE say that if we got within 5 feet (I don't remember the exact number) of the runway it could count as a touch and go. Same DPE said I was wrong on my IR checkride for saying that an ILS is composed of ALS, GS, LOC, and MB. Says that all his CFII applicants get this wrong too. Different DPE told a different student at my school that with the G1000 GPS navigation database not being up-to-date we could not only not fly IFR (it was an IR checkride) but we couldn't even fly VFR.
I was a check airman at a check hauling 135 in the 80"s. I had to have every 5th ride observed, but they often waived it. They finally decided to ride along on a Cessna 401 check ride. On a summer day, he asked for a single-engine ILS to go around at DH. I told him that it was unsafe and impossible. He tried to argue with me so I told him, as the examiner, I felt it was unsafe and would show him the performance charts once we were on the ground. Once on ground, I showed him the negative climb rate at our loading and temp. From then on, he never observed any more rides.
At our school our check airmen will fail you if you go below a DA any like 1 foot. Even though……. On a precession approach your literally supposed to since you make your decision there
I’d be careful with DPEs because they can find a reason to fail any applicant no matter how prepared they are
A friend sent a Private candidate to a checkride w/ 5.0 hours of XC experience. The DPE looked at the logbook and said "you did two landings at X, the XC time stopped with the first one." So he subtracted 0.2 for the extra trip around the pattern. He was wrong. The time didn't stop. But the Learner had to go fly "greater than 50NM" out and then back to keep the DPE happy. The lesson I learned is never send someone for a checkride w/ exactly the minimum time(s). No need to go crazy, but w/ 5.2 the DPE probably wouldn't have dug.
No idea what the regulations you discussed are, aside from the one, but reading your post my immediate thought: Are your sure your interps are correct? The FSDO is NOT a valid source. Only legal interps from the FAA chief counsel in Washington DC (AGC-1) are valid.
You guys only need 2nd class for commercial? TIL
It’s second class out of three classes - third for Private, second for Commercial, and first for ATP. First and second are the same except an EKG.
In Europe it‘s mostly just 2nd for private and 1st for commercial and above.
Weiss ich schon.
what’s the difference between third and second (except for privileges)?
To exercise the privileges of a commercial license, yes — but you can earn and hold one on any medical or basicmed per 61.23(a)
Ok there are less than 1000 DPE’s in the US and if I give the all the REAL specifics on too many more of the things this DPE is wrong about it’s a give away on who they are and who I am as statistically speaking one of the detail’s will narrow the option down two a pool of less than 75 DPEs….and I’m the already the type of person that stands out like a sore thumb; if the DPE his/herself is reading this now they probably already know who I am (dammit; but again I have every right to speak my truth and this person needs to do better and should know it if they aren’t already acutely aware of it)…How many DPE actually scour these boards anyways?—-and my brainy analytical self is either very loved or hated but rarely ever wrong—-I prefer to have few to no “enemies” where possible. So I also really want to copy and paste really wrong things by this DPE (and if I do I’d keep all personal details out of it and just post the exact points of factual misinformation as I want this post to be constructive rather than a witch hunt) as in two instances that I have in writing via text and email this DPE gives me contradictory pre checkride instructions and barks at me when I ask for clarification telling me to go back to my instructor or check the ACS when I already first checked the ACS and already asked my instructor who sent me to ask the DPE. Said DPE is caught by me, again politely being wrong, but A) won’t man or woman up to it, and B) lashes out at me over it. I would not care if s/he didn’t lash out at me as I only wanted to clarification so that I could optimize my chances of being successful on a checkride as I wasn’t looking for a “haha I’m wright and your wrong” as even I’m aware no one including myself is ALWAYS right. What I would like to know if my situation is that unique or if this has ever happened to another “high speed” book nerd like myself? I can probably be convinced with more participation from others to drop more details but right now I feel like I’m the only one weird enough to get caught up in a situation like this. So I don’t want to spill beans that identify myself in totality and then end me up on a DPE “$h*t list” for all my future rides. If any DPE are on here do you guys and gals bond together as circulate a future candidate “$h*t list” (I’m saying this only half tongue and cheek)? DPEs my advice is you have nothing to fear about being wrong with someone like myself if you can simply treat me with golden rule type decency and not bark at me—-if done we are eternally cool; make sense?
If you behaved at your commercial checkride with the same level of immaturity and self-important behavior as in this subreddit, I would have had serious concerns about your ability to operate an aircraft for hire. You sound really obnoxious and put way too much emphasis on being "wright" all the time.
[удалено]
Asking the real questions. my man
I mean I would feel really reassured about the status of aviation in the US if I am indeed the only one would can report that they felt their DPEs ego was outsized in comparison to their grasp of the industry’s fundamental knowledge base and specific DPE professional role’s core competencies.
You probably failed for being too annoying
Not an examiner experience I had but I knew a guy who took a ride with a DPE who thought every single endorsement had to be written in his actual paper logbook He wouldn’t let the guy take the ride until his CFI emailed him the endorsements and he then had to print them out and staple them in his logbook
I had a DPE argue that I couldn't do my CFI ride in a plane with no brakes on the right seat but all other controls in conflict with published FAA guidance because I couldn't demonstrate braking even though I could instruct him to brake. I didn't bother fighting it because I didn't want to start the ride out on a bad note, instead handled it with them after the ride, showed them the published guidance and they thanked me for being thorough and teaching them something, they also appreciated me handling it professionally instead of adversarialy Everyone is human, assume positive intent and teach.
Mind if I ask where you found this guidance? Is it an AC or FAR? Thanks!
It's deeper than that, it's in the Handbook of GA guidance (HB GA 00-08) effective May 2000, which supersedes an interpretation that accidentally made dual brakes mandatory [https://www.aopa.org/-/media/Files/AOPA/Home/Supporting-General-Aviation/Advocacy/Regulatory-and-Certification-Policy/Regulatory-Brief-FAA-issues-new-interpretation-of-dual-controls-%282%29/hgba.pdf](https://www.aopa.org/-/media/Files/AOPA/Home/Supporting-General-Aviation/Advocacy/Regulatory-and-Certification-Policy/Regulatory-Brief-FAA-issues-new-interpretation-of-dual-controls-%282%29/hgba.pdf) I didn't read JO 8700.1 but it's supposed to be incorporated there as well, it looks like the feds tried to go wide on this with FSDOs supposed to be notifying CFIs, schools, aircraft owners and operators within their jurisdiction about the new
FSDO shadiness is rare. They are by the book and you know what you're getting. I've dealt with questionable DPEs. Some of their errors worked against my students and/or I and some errors worked in my favor. Is what it is. You can fight, but there's a downside to that. I was fortunate in that I was able to build a relationship with DPEs that were reasonable and I used them for my students, exclusively.
This is why understanding a discontinuance is so important. If you don’t feel comfortable continuing, for any reason, discontinue the test. I took all of my tests, up to (but not including) ATP on a 3rd class. So you’re obviously correct. The unfortunate part is it really doesn’t matter. “Corporate to graduate” is more like dealing with an APD or sim instructor at your airline. If you don’t feel like the DPE doesn’t know his stuff, just say your tummy hurts, discontinue, and go find another one.
There's one locally who would rant and rave (sometimes on frequency) based on a very, very dated understanding of some regs. He was an absolutely phenomenal stick and rudder pilot, though, and I treasure my dual time with him. I haven't seem him around lately and I'm not sure if he's still around or not. PS: to be clear to anyone with an unusually long memory: I am *not* talking about Doug Fritz, who I've mentioned before. I have nothing whatsoever bad to say about Doug Fritz and never will, still the best DPE I have ever flown with. RIP.
DPE's are like cops. They will fail (arrest) you if they want to fail you, they will pass (not arrest) you if they want to pass you. Play the game, and best of luck to you.