Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

The horror - 11 years worth of checkrides invalidated

There seems to be quite a bit of confusion here as to how the FAA system works, so let me explain.

Examination for a FAA license or rating (except the multi-engine which does not have a written portion) comes in three parts:
- written
- oral
- practical

In 99% of all cases the oral and practical are done on the same day and that process is usually referred to as ‘checkride’. They don’t have to be done on the same day however, e.g. wx can prevent the practical portion.

The written test is done at a testing center and is a multiple-choice test to be completed in a defined time. You must pass this before being able to proceed to the oral and practical parts.

The oral test is done before the practical and again, you have to pass before proceeding. At the beginning of the exam, the DPE checks your info in the IACRA online system and enters the pertinent info. The oral exam typically lasts 3-4 hours and in the new ‘scenario based’ system you plan and then verbally conduct a flight during which the DPE comes up with all sort questions, poking your knowledge. You can expect to be grilled on every conceivable aspect of the flight.

Before proceeding to the actual flight, the DPE will examine the airplane paperwork and you must be able to show the various mx entries, explain placards, show a w&b and then conduct a thorough preflight.

Then you finally go flying. The duration of the flight depends on the license / rating, AFAIK the longest being the initial CFI ride. The spin training portion is now separated out from the checkride and you need to show a course completion certificate. According to a newly minted CFI friend, this course includes fully developed spins.

Once you passed all of the above, the DPE will enter your info (passed) in IACRA and issue a temporary certificate which is valid for 60 days.

At some point during these 60 days there will be a little plastic card in the mail and that’s your new license.

DPEs are not FAA employees, but independent contractors. They are overseen by the local FSDO and the FAA examiners who conduct this oversight can and do show up to ride along on a checkride and sit in on the oral portion. This is a small world and everyone knows everyone. IMO the only way to game the system as apparently Mr. Puehler did you have to be one of the DPEs that are employed by a flight school with overseas students who will have left the country immediately after their checkride, real or otherwise.

More info on FAA testing can be found here: https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/

employed by a flight school with overseas students who will have left the country immediately after their checkride, real or otherwise.

I don’t doubt this event is likely connected with this and, like the 737 MAX business, the FAA is reacting all over the place.

But… what are the typical 3rd World markets for FAA licenses?

FWIW, the DPE I had for the IR in Arizona, John Walkup, told me that the CFII checkride is the hardest. He said the ATP is a “walk in the park” in comparison.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

But… what are the typical 3rd World markets for FAA licenses?

China, Indian subcontinent, some Middle East.

alioth wrote:

The intersection between ‘complex’ and approved for intentional spins is very small

That would make AS202 Bravo (or later SIA Marchetti) and Bonanza T34 Mentors (SEP not SET) the dream aircrafts for advanced FAA checkrides

Last Edited by Ibra at 24 Jul 19:03
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

There was also an act of Congress in 2010 to do with airmen records, of holders of commercial and ATP certs, after the crash of Iirc a regional turbo prop. The pilots did not have the best records.

There is private database available to all usa aircrew employers that lists all your check rides fails, Infringements etc. i.e. part 121 and 135 employers.

Last Edited by Ted at 24 Jul 21:26
Ted
United Kingdom

Ibra wrote:

AS202 Bravo (or later SIA Marchetti)

I think you will find this is fixed gear, so perhaps not…

TB30 would work though…

Tb30 would be great, but not certified

I heard most take the spin training as an endorsement, before the CFI check ride.

LFOU, France

It seems unlikely this chap was doing CFI/CFII checkrides – if his clients were non US based and going back to their countries afterwards.

Also the ME ATP can’t be easily done anymore, so he would have been doing the usual “airline pilot sausage machine” stuff i.e. CPL/IR. In the US system you need the PPL to do the CPL, so potentially private, commercial and instrument checkrides.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

But there is no way for a test candidate to do due diligence on any examiner – FAA or EASA. Practically speaking it would really p1ss him off if you asked him to show his paperwork

I have always asked my examiners for actual copies of their paperwork. Reason is that my PPL is issued by the UK CAA, and my examiners typically have Dutch-issued licenses. You have to submit a copy of the examiners papers in that case.

In fact, I got caught up in a discussion between the UK CAA and the Dutch ILenT about an ambiguity in the rules lately, which would or would not render the examiners paperwork invalid. My IR examiner is type-rated for the B737, and is an IRE for SEP. According to the Dutch interpretation of the rules, you only need to renew an IR on the largest aircraft you hold licenses for (in his case a 737), whereas the UK CAA interprets the rules differently and requires an IR renewal for every class of airplane. So under the Dutch rules the examiner (who revalidated his IR on the 737 a few months before), held an IR valid for SEP so he could do my IR exam. But the UK CAA would have none of it – they required an actual IR renewal on SEP before the examiner could do my exam. Fortunately I was taken out of the loop of that discussion and I received my IR papers with just a slight delay. But it’s one of those things that can turn very nasty very quickly indeed.

But I agree with earlier points. If you don’t know these nuances and interpretation differences, you have no way of knowing if an examiners paperwork is valid, even if you do have full access to the examiners licenses and ratings.

Last Edited by BackPacker at 25 Jul 08:50

alioth wrote:

- you had to show up with 2 planes – one with retract gear/CS prop, and another which was approved for intentional spins. (I suppose you could have turned up with an F33C, the aerobatic version of the Beech Debonair, but good luck finding one if you don’t already own it)

General Avia F22C. Both complex and aerobatic.

Sign in to add your message

Back to Top