Failed my checkride
Doug Rinks
to the flight school at 8 AM just to be extra ready, and to be sure
the paperwork, logbooks, etc. was all in order. The examiner showed up
at 9 AM promptly and we began the oral exam once the paperwork was
reviewed, and I paid his fee. He started asking me questions on
airport beacon colors, which I did not know. I told him we could find
the answer in the FAR's and he asked me to show him. I spent 20
minutes looking, then I recalled it would be in the AIM. We moved on
to performance questions which I was able to slip through OK. We
reviewed my cross country planning and we discovered I had confused
true course for magnetic heading. I was able to fix that. The examiner
asked me some questions on regulations, and I was able to do OK on
them, but not great. He then gave me a situation "Your company needs a
part for their mainframe flown from Wichita to Garden City. Can you
jump in your C172 and deliver the part?" I said yes, since it was
incidental to the flight; at that point he warned me that if I missed
one more question on the oral it would be a bust. He then explained
the part 135 rules to me briefly. I was asked some aerodynamics
questions, and I did OK on then. We then ended the oral and he told me
to go pre-flight. As I was walking towards the restroom he told me
"You really need some additional instruction on your oral topics, if
that was with an FAA inspector, you would have busted."
Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work, but that was
his opinion anyway. He asked me to demonstrate a short field takeoff
to him. I did the takeoff OK, except he wanted me to hold the airplane
in ground effect, I simply rotated abruptly and accelerated away from
the field. Again, I think different people have different techniques
for the maneuvers. We then began our cross country, we ended up at the
first fix six minutes late, which the examiner seemed OK with. He
asked me why we were late and I told him it was because I was climbing
at 60 rather than my planned 65 knots, to which he agreed with. We
then diverted to Hayes, and we did our takeoffs and landings there.
The examiner was happy with them. We went up to do a ground reference
maneuver which went fine, but the examiner said I was a bit high. He
asked me to take him back to the airport, and we'd do instrument work
and steep turns and stalls on the way home. He put me under the hood
and I pretty much lost control. I started out at 4,500 and he asked me
to track a radial and descend to 3,500 followed by a climb to 5,500.
Once I began the descent I had to turn about 40 degrees to incercept
the radial. I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
When we got on the ground we debriefed, and he told me that he was
going to pink slip me for instrument work, steep turns (never did
them), stalls (never did them), short field takeoffs, as well as FAR
and AIM knowledge. I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
maneuver. He, in not so many words told me "bullshit." So now I have a
notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
The guy was a prick. I talked to the FSDO manager this evening and he
is going to look into it. I admit that I didnt' do flawless, but by
virtue of him not telling me I'd failed, I thought I passed. Oh well,
hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
Now I need to find a new examiner...
Doug
C J Campbell
flying you back home.
I hope your attitude improves before you kill somebody.
Casey Webster
news:a1473df3.0402...@posting.google.com...
> them, but not great. He then gave me a situation "Your company needs a
> part for their mainframe flown from Wichita to Garden City. Can you
> jump in your C172 and deliver the part?" I said yes, since it was
> incidental to the flight; at that point he warned me that if I missed
the clarification there i believe is that you would actually be transporting
the part, ie, conducting business. If you just needed to fly to garden city
to talk to some clients, or inspect the part, then it would be incidental.
> "You really need some additional instruction on your oral topics, if
> that was with an FAA inspector, you would have busted."
>
> Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
> a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work, but that was
good practice, the field im based at we do runups at the edge of the runway
and if it was then that we discovered the brakes were bad, that could mean a
runway incursion, or on the ramp it could mean rear-ending another plane at
the holding spot, neither of which are attractive options.
> his opinion anyway. He asked me to demonstrate a short field takeoff
> to him. I did the takeoff OK, except he wanted me to hold the airplane
> in ground effect, I simply rotated abruptly and accelerated away from
> the field. Again, I think different people have different techniques
you sure he didnt ask for a soft field? that would make sense to stay in
ground effect until you got to your real rotation speed, but ive never done
that for short field.
> and steep turns and stalls on the way home. He put me under the hood
> and I pretty much lost control. I started out at 4,500 and he asked me
> to track a radial and descend to 3,500 followed by a climb to 5,500.
> Once I began the descent I had to turn about 40 degrees to incercept
one of my first instructions on hood work is every turn is standard rate.
> the radial. I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
> because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
> of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
the examiner is the one who's supposed to setup unusal attitudes :)
> When we got on the ground we debriefed, and he told me that he was
> going to pink slip me for instrument work, steep turns (never did
> them), stalls (never did them), short field takeoffs, as well as FAR
> and AIM knowledge. I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
> now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
my DE told me very plainly that if he had to take control of the plane, that
meant the checkride was bust right then and there.
> maneuver. He, in not so many words told me "bullshit." So now I have a
> notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
> The guy was a prick. I talked to the FSDO manager this evening and he
> is going to look into it. I admit that I didnt' do flawless, but by
> virtue of him not telling me I'd failed, I thought I passed. Oh well,
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
>
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
imo, you lost my sympathy with that last bit. By your own admission you
were just doing "OK", just enough to get by on the oral, and that you "lost
control" as soon as the hood was on. Im also skeptical that you didnt know
you busted when the DE took control and you didnt fly every manuever on the
PTS. I understand that its a frustrating situation, but its not the
examiners fault, but more likely the CFI who signed you off for the ride,
you might want to shop around for another one of those and review your oral
and hood work before completing your checkride with this examiner.
CFLav8r
> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
> a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work, but that was
> his opinion anyway. He asked me to demonstrate a short field takeoff
> to him. I did the takeoff OK, except he wanted me to hold the airplane
> in ground effect, I simply rotated abruptly and accelerated away from
> the field. Again, I think different people have different techniques
> for the maneuvers. We then began our cross country, we ended up at the
> first fix six minutes late, which the examiner seemed OK with. He
> asked me why we were late and I told him it was because I was climbing
> at 60 rather than my planned 65 knots, to which he agreed with.
The flying maneuver mistakes can also happen to anyone.
What I am left wondering is, are you joking or do you really respond
this way to instructions? If your not trolling for responses then I have
to say that you need a major attitude check or as stated in a previous
post, give up flying before you kill someone with your way of thinking.
David
PP-ASEL
Roger Long
technique. They know that you can do all the stuff, otherwise the CFI and
FBO would not have shut off the flow of money from your wallet to theirs by
signing you off for the checkride. If they see the proper attitude, they
will cut you a lot of slack on the maneuvers. They know you are nervous and
didn't sleep very well last night. If they see an attitude they don't like,
which kind of bleeds through between the lines in your post, they will use
lack of knowledge of obscure points or imprecision in flying to pink slip
you in hopes that it will be a maturing experience.
The PIC is like the captain of a ship. All bucks, including the mechanical
condition of the airplane, stop in the left seat. The DE wants to see that
you understand that and are ready to take on the full responsibly of being a
pilot before they turn you loose.
I would call the DE back, tell him that you flew off the handle, you learned
a lot, it was a valuable experience, and that you want to take the ride with
him again instead of looking for someone who will go easier on you. Even if
he didn't do his job exactly according to the book, it was a checkride of
you; not him. You are seeking a license to go out and operate in a
dangerous environment where other pilots do stupid things in the pattern,
ATC gives improper instructions, mechanics hook up control cables backwards,
and graceful recovery from the mistakes every pilot makes is more important
than perfection. Blame of others and anger has no place in the cockpit.
It can kill you and those who have placed their lives in your hands.
The DE was really trying to find out if you have the maturity and attitude
to function safely in this world. Take a good look and ask yourself the
same question. When you are ready, go back and try again.
--
Roger Long
C J Campbell <christopherc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1036390...@corp.supernews.com...
Jim
Would any instructor recommend a student with these major inabilities and
serious attitude problems?
I hope the DE phoned your instructor. You don't need a new examiner, you
need a new instructor, more training, and an attitude adjustment.
--
Jim Burns III
jbu...@nospamuniontel.net
Remove "nospam" to reply
Brien K. Meehan
> The guy was a prick.
No he wasn't, but I'd be a prick if you tried to kill me like that.
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
No, you need to find a new hobby.
Peter R.
> Once I began the descent I had to turn about 40 degrees to incercept
> the radial. I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
> because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
> of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
70 degrees? What were you flying, an Extra 300 aerobatic aircraft?
I'm going to assume that 70 degrees and 3000 fpm are story-teller
exaggerations.
> So now I have a
> notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
> The guy was a prick.
You describe that you lost control of the aircraft, then state that you
didn't know you failed?
Assuming you are not simply posting a BS story here just to count the
amount of posts you get in response, you need to seek some serious
instrument work. You think that all VFR flying will be unlimited
visibility and clear skies?
Do you really think after getting into an unusual attitude that quickly
that you are a safe pilot, worthy of taking up your friends or family?
> I admit that I didnt' do flawless, but by
> virtue of him not telling me I'd failed, I thought I passed. Oh well,
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
LOL! Too funny...
--
Peter
--
Peter
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
James M. Knox
> I was scheduled to take my checkride this morning at 9 AM. I showed up
> to the flight school at 8 AM just to be extra ready, and to be sure
> the paperwork, logbooks, etc. was all in order.
That's a good start right there...
> He started asking me questions on
> airport beacon colors, which I did not know. ...We
> reviewed my cross country planning and we discovered I had confused
> true course for magnetic heading.
> He then explained
> the part 135 rules to me briefly.
The part 135 issue is a bit grey, but you should be familiar with the
limitations on you as a private pilot. You should be familiar with the
other items as well. No one expects you to know every little nit of
every regulation and rule... but these are basics.
> I do not find the brake check right off the bat
> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work,
Regardless of when you *need* to check the brakes, the PTS clearly
specifies checking them upon first motion of the aircraft. Had your
instructor gone through the PTS with you? And had he done a mock
checkride by the PTS?
> He asked me to demonstrate a short field takeoff
> to him. I did the takeoff OK, except he wanted me to hold the airplane
> in ground effect, I simply rotated abruptly and accelerated away from
> the field.
This sounds like a mis-communication. You are describing a short field
takeoff. He is describing a soft field takeoff.
> asked me why we were late and I told him it was because I was climbing
> at 60 rather than my planned 65 knots, to which he agreed with.
Hmmm... something doesn't quite match here. To be six minutes late you
would have had to climb for a LONG time. Off the cuff calculation -
wouldn't that make your first checkpoint 78 miles away? And why weren't
you climbing at your planned airspeed? Any requirement to climb at Vx
for a short field takeoff goes away when you clear the obstacles.
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
Under the hood the whole point is that you do not know what your
condition is. If you lost control, even though you may have felt (and
indeed may have been) regaining control, you don't have all the
information available that the safety pilot has.
I hope you take this as encouragement... it's meant that way. But by
your own description of the events, the only real mistake I can see that
the examiner made was in trying to pass you. Technically, you are
correct - he is supposed to tell you as soon as you can no longer pass
the checkride. This would be the first task you do not perform in a
satisfactory manner.
Instead, he *tried* to cut you some slack. He was going to let you
slide on some questionable areas, if everything else went okay. When it
didn't, he wanted to make sure that those areas were retested as well.
Not technically correct procedure, but he was erring on your side. [The
items not performed weren't actually failed, but must be listed as still
required on the retest.]
Actually, my concern here is not with your DE. It's with your
instructor. You should know the PTS cold by now. Doesn't mean every
maneuver is a thing of beauty, or that you know every regulation
verbatim, but no task or area the DE asks to see should come as a
surprise.
You've put a lot of work into it so far... don't let this get you down.
You need review and study before your retest anyway... just take it as a
good chance to fix those weak areas. [And if you don't have a current
PTS, download one today!!!]
-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721 jk...@trisoft.com
-----------------------------------------------
Gerald Sylvester
> to track a radial and descend to 3,500 followed by a climb to 5,500.
> Once I began the descent I had to turn about 40 degrees to incercept
> the radial. I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
> because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
> of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
>I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
> now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
> maneuver. He, in not so many words told me "bullshit." So now I have a
> notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
> The guy was a prick.
I've never said this before but this has got to be a troll. If I'm
wrong, I apologize.
Being at around 3500 MSL (I wonder about AGL)
and in a 3000 FPM downward somewhat signifies "you are dead in
T-minus 55 seconds...50...45..." Were you only fixated on the
alternator current??? I fly a Warrior and an Archer and the
VSI only goes to 1000. Hmmm, maybe the VSI was broken but
you don't need this for VFR as long as it is tagged inop.
Gerald
Jürgen Exner
[...]> because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a
turn
> of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!"
At this moment he told you that you failed. If the examiner if forced to
take the controls then that's it.
> He, in not so many words told me "bullshit." So now I have a
> notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
Him taking the controls is the sign that you failed.
> The guy was a prick.
I am surprised how patient the examiner was.
> I talked to the FSDO manager this evening and he
> is going to look into it. I admit that I didnt' do flawless, but by
> virtue of him not telling me I'd failed, I thought I passed.
That thought could come only from lack of knowledge. Maybe you should learn
a bit more first.
And to be honest: I am glad that you did fail before you kill yourself or
others.
After you calm down just think about it: would you as a passenger be
comfortable flying with someone at the controls, who has as little control
over the airplane as you do?
> Oh well,
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
With your attitude I hope the FAA will keep you out of the airspace for as
long as possible.
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
I would rather be looking into finding a new CFI because he did a lousy job
signing you off for the exam with those knowlegde gaps.
jue
Michael 182
<snip of checkride from hell ... for the DE >
If there ever was an argument for a personality test for flying, this guy is
it. And please, stay out of Colorado...
MIchael
Gene Whitt
A year ago I, too, failed a checkride after 35 years and over 10,000 hours.
I was unhappy when I was told that failure was no big deal. It was a big
deal, the end of my flying life.
I went back to training and passed easily on the next ride with someone
else. What happened to me was a wake-up call to improve and stay safe for
my sake and that of others. You should do likewise. The examiner probably
saved your life and you should thank him for every minute of you flying
life.
Gene Whitt
"Doug Rinks" <dougr...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a1473df3.0402...@posting.google.com...
Ron Natalie
Boy what a mix of stupidity.
> He started asking me questions on
> airport beacon colors, which I did not know.
You should have known this. Are you going to hunt around for 20 minutes
in the plane when you are flying around at night trying to figure out if you
can land at the yellow-and-green beaconed field?
> He then explained the part 135 rules to me briefly.
This was a private pilot checkride? 135 has no bearing here (and frankly as
an employee of the company, it's not even clear that 135 has any meaning here).
> "You really need some additional instruction on your oral topics, if
> that was with an FAA inspector, you would have busted."
There are not seperate standards based on the examiner.
> Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
> a brake check
It is an extemely GOOD idea, but it's not an issue that is serious enough
to make an issue out of. Believe me, in a lot of planes you don't want to
taxi very far until you are sure you have brakes.
> He asked me to demonstrate a short field takeoff
> to him. I did the takeoff OK, except he wanted me to hold the airplane
> in ground effect, I simply rotated abruptly and accelerated away from
> the field.
Something i s very WRONG with this. If you are doing a short field, you
should not need to fly around in ground effect. This is counter to the procedures
for just about every aircraft I've flown in. It's the SOFT field that you lift off
as soon as you can that you MUST stay in ground effect until you accellerate
to climb speed. Applying soft field techniques to short field may INCREASE
the distance needed to clear the obstacle.
As a matter of fact the PTS doesn't say anything about ground effect, it says
rotates at recommended speed and accellerate to Vx.
> We went up to do a ground reference
> maneuver which went fine, but the examiner said I was a bit high.
You should carefully read the PTS. The altitudes are 600-1000'
> He
> asked me to take him back to the airport, and we'd do instrument work
> and steep turns and stalls on the way home. He put me under the hood
> and I pretty much lost control.
This is extrememly bad. You should not have lost control on ANY manouver.
This isn't a minor thing.
> The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
This was also bad. Fighting over control is bad.
>
> When we got on the ground we debriefed, and he told me that he was
> going to pink slip me for instrument work, steep turns (never did
> them), stalls (never did them), short field takeoffs, as well as FAR
> and AIM knowledge. I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
> now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
> maneuver.
Excuse me....he took over control of the airplane and flew you home? The
checkride is discontinued at that point? You failed the PTS requirements for
instrument manouvers and you never finished the rest of the PTS tasks? You
think this merits a pilots license that would let you kill innocent people ?
Why on earth would you think you passed?
Ron Natalie
"Casey Webster" <casey@-nospam-trifocus.net> wrote in message news:EgEYb.2232$J84...@fe1.texas.rr.com...
>
> good practice, the field im based at we do runups at the edge of the runway
> and if it was then that we discovered the brakes were bad, that could mean a
> runway incursion, or on the ramp it could mean rear-ending another plane at
> the holding spot, neither of which are attractive options.
Of course, hitting the brakes at taxi speed means nothing about holding yourself
at runup. It takes all the pressure I can muster in my plane to keep the aircraft
from moving at runup power settings. Of course, your first step if you start to
move is to close the throttle.
zip777
Doug:
I'm sorry to hear your checkride story. I guess what you need to do
now is not 'what to do w/ that DE' but to work on your flying skills
rather. You want to fly safe in the future and live longer. Good
luck.
Zip
MH
on earth will i ever pass!! Well i guess with attention to detail and
strong knowledge of the rules, flying safely followed by some average
handling of the aircraft, that ought to do it.
I feel better now that even if i do fail my checkride i can safely think,
well if they can fail Gene Whitt........... anything can happen!
Thanks Gene!
Mike
"Gene Whitt" <gwh...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:MFLYb.9079$WW3....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Michael
> which I did not know.
Bad but not deadly.
> I told him we could find
> the answer in the FAR's and he asked me to show him. I spent 20
> minutes looking, then I recalled it would be in the AIM.
Getting worse. Not knowing something is not too bad, but when you
don't even know where to look it up...
> We reviewed my cross country planning and we discovered I had confused
> true course for magnetic heading.
How did you manage to fly your dual and solo XC's then?
> He then gave me a situation "Your company needs a
> part for their mainframe flown from Wichita to Garden City. Can you
> jump in your C172 and deliver the part?" I said yes, since it was
> incidental to the flight; at that point he warned me that if I missed
> one more question on the oral it would be a bust. He then explained
> the part 135 rules to me briefly.
This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the privileges of a
private certificate. The examiner did you a huge favor (which he
wasn't supposed to) - he instructed you rather than sending you back
to your CFI, which is really what he is required to do by regulation.
> "You really need some additional instruction on your oral topics, if
> that was with an FAA inspector, you would have busted."
He was right. Really, you should have busted on the oral.
> Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
> a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work
Yes - and what will happen if they don't? You should be doing a brake
check when you are still in a position to stop the plane without
hitting anything by shutting off the engine. That means immediately
upon start of taxi unless there is a good reason not to, such as a
soft taxiway.
> He put me under the hood
> and I pretty much lost control. I started out at 4,500 and he asked me
> to track a radial and descend to 3,500 followed by a climb to 5,500.
> Once I began the descent I had to turn about 40 degrees to incercept
> the radial. I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
> because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
> of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down.
Well, it sounds like you entered a graveyard spiral from a normal
hooded turn. That is a classic error, and indicates that you need
additional practice in that area. That's why we have checkrides.
> The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
Well, that was your indication that you not only busted but scared
him. It's right in the PTS - any time the examiner has to take
control to maintain safe flight because you screwed up, that's an
automatic bust. If you somehow managed to get a trainer headed down
at 3000 fpm at cruise power, you were not far from Vne. The examiner
really had no choice at all here.
> When we got on the ground we debriefed, and he told me that he was
> going to pink slip me for instrument work, steep turns (never did
> them), stalls (never did them), short field takeoffs, as well as FAR
> and AIM knowledge.
You're a bit confused. When a pink slip is issued, it notes which
areas of operation were completed successfully (and thus need not be
tested on a subsequent recheck) and which ones were not. If you
didn't do it, it wasn't completed successfully and needs to be covered
on the future check flight.
The issue here is FAR/AIM knowledge. You ostensibly passed this
(though you should not have) and you may have a point that this should
not be included as not being completed successfully on the pink slip.
However, this is a losing battle since the examiner can always recheck
you on any area he feels is necessary, at his discretion - so you're
going to be tested on that area again anyway.
> I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
> now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
> maneuver.
But he did. He took the airplane from you and flew you home. The
only time notification is required is when the examiner offers you the
option of continuing the practical test despite a failure, since you
have the option to refuse to do so. What's more, when you initially
refused to give him control, you probably made him doubt your
rationality, and additional guidance kicks in there. There is a
discussion of this in a designee update, available at
http://av-info.faa.gov/data/designeeupdate/udoct01.pdf
> He, in not so many words told me "bullshit."
Which it is. The ONLY case you may have is that he shouldn't bust you
on FAR/AIM knowledge.
It sounds like the guy bent over backwards for you, let you slide with
a substandard oral, and really didn't bust you until he had absolutely
no choice at all.
> So now I have a
> notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
The fact that you did not know you failed the ride when the examiner
took the plane away from you and would not give it back is further
proof that you were not prepared for the checkride. It's right in the
PTS.
> The guy was a prick. I talked to the FSDO manager this evening and he
> is going to look into it.
You're the prick. This guy bent over backwards to pass you, and now
you're trying to get him in trouble. What's more, you may succeed.
There is no telling what the FSDO will do - those people are
capricious and out of control. Check out
http://www.avweb.com/pdf/brinell_report.pdf for an idea what they do.
Turning someone in to the FSDO is bad news.
If he does get in trouble, though, it won't be for failing you. As
you tell your own story, you certainly deserved to flunk. If he does
get in trouble, it will be for being so lenient with you on the oral.
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
Nah. First you need to hit the books and fly some more under the hood
with an instructor, who will hopefully make sure you are actually
ready before sending you to the ride. This assumes your instructor
will still fly with you (I wouldn't). If the examiner will still ride
with you after you ratted him out to the FSDO for trying his damndest
to pass you, which I doubt, you should go back to him - and apologize.
You may find that you will have to take your checkride with the FAA -
if what you did becomes common knowledge, I suspect you will have a
hard time finding an examiner to ride with you.
Michael
Gregg Germain
:> Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
:> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
:> a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
:> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work
: Yes - and what will happen if they don't? You should be doing a brake
: check when you are still in a position to stop the plane without
: hitting anything by shutting off the engine. That means immediately
: upon start of taxi unless there is a good reason not to, such as a
: soft taxiway.
Question:
I train in a Cessna 152. There is no parking brake - just the wheel
brakes on the rudder pedals.
Normally where the plane is parked there are other planes in front of
it. So there really is no testing the brakes before you could
possibly run into a parked plane (though obviously if the brakes
failed you's shut down and steer away form the parked planes).
In following the starting checklist, you "set the brakes" before
starting, which means that you honk down on the rudder pedals, and
hold them there.
Is this not a brakes test?
Or, if I start to taxi, should I then stop with the brakes as a test,
as well?
thanks
--- Gregg
"Improvise, adapt, overcome."
gr...@head-cfa.harvard.edu
Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Phone: (617) 496-1558
C J Campbell
"Jim" <jbu...@uniontel.net> wrote in message
news:faOdnSCiu_a...@wctc.net...
> Is this a troll??
> Would any instructor recommend a student with these major inabilities and
> serious attitude problems?
> I hope the DE phoned your instructor. You don't need a new examiner, you
> need a new instructor, more training, and an attitude adjustment.
There are some instructors who will send an incompetent student to a check
ride knowing he will fail. Sometimes the students pressure the instructor to
do this, even threatening to sue or report the instructor to the FAA for
some infraction. It is not a far stretch to imagine that Rinks would do such
a thing. Other times the instructor will send the student to the check ride
just to get rid of him, or to finally convince the student he was not ready.
I can't say that I agree with those reasons, but those are the ones that I
have most often heard. If Rinks was my student I would probably have told
him long ago that I am willing to work with him as long as he is willing to
try, no matter how long it takes, but that he should be prepared to spend
far more time and money than he has budgeted. I would also have weeded him
out the moment that he demonstrated an argumentive attitude.
C J Campbell
"Peter R." <prgr...@twcny.rrREMOVE.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a9d48aae...@text-west.newsfeeds.com...
>
> Assuming you are not simply posting a BS story here just to count the
> amount of posts you get in response,
Even if he is a troll, as he may well be, the unfortunate truth is there are
far too many students that are just like him. At PAVCO there are some people
that we will not rent airplanes to. We will not give them flight
instruction. We will even call other flight schools and let them know what
our experience with that individual has been. Doug Rinks would be one of
these people.
Jerry Petrey
Gregg Germain wrote:
>
> In following the starting checklist, you "set the brakes" before
> starting, which means that you honk down on the rudder pedals, and
> hold them there.
>
> Is this not a brakes test?
>
> Or, if I start to taxi, should I then stop with the brakes as a test,
> as well?
>
> thanks
>
> --- Gregg
>
Yes, you should start moving and then test the brakes. Holding the brakes
during startup is testing them to some degree but not conclusively.
It is possible in some conditions to start a plane without it moving even if
the brakes are bad (and you are pressing them down).
You want to verify that they can stop you from moving as soon as possible
before going very far.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Jerry Petrey, CFI - Senior Principal Systems Engineer
-- Navigation (GPS/INS), Guidance, & Control
-- Raytheon Missile Systems - Member Team Ada & Team Forth
-- NOTE: please remove <NOSPAM> in email address to reply
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew P. Cummings
> This is the first, and only, place I've seen an error by the DE. He should have made it
> damned clear at the start that if he said, "MY AIRPLANE", you are to let go
> of the controls immediately.
I know of some DE's that when they say mine you best give it to them
because they have a little something extra for those students who try to
kill them.
Personally, your attitude stinks. If you ever argued with me and I was
the DE, you would fail right then and there.
However, I suspect you're a troll. Nobody could have made as many
mistakes as you said and thought the DE was a prick.
Doug Rinks
beacon colors are in the FAR or the AIM. I am not going to kill
someone because I did a ground reference maneuver a little high. You
fail to see the big picture.
Doug
"C J Campbell" <christopherc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<1036390...@corp.supernews.com>...
> I hope your attitude improves before you kill somebody.
Doug Rinks
briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
this is unsafe." Lastly, he was to take control of the airplane if the
need was there. This is how I briefed my instructor as well, and it
worked quite well. He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and
therefore the aircraft was not his to take. I am going after this
bastard pretty hard. He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit,
and I will not stand for it.
Doug
"CFLav8r" <dart...@evilempire.com> wrote in message news:<gtIYb.28807$B81....@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
Doug Rinks
- 250 hours in a six month period that will lead me to the right seat
of a BE-1900 upon graduation. Just because you have not been subjected
to any formal training does not mean that anything you do is right,
and anything I do is wrong. I feel you need a little bit of an ego
adjustment.
br...@networkgenius.com (Brien K. Meehan) wrote in message news:<bc2d6afa.0402...@posting.google.com>...
Doug Rinks
what I mean -- people are not the most intelligent species around.
Read before you write, please. And coincidently, if the DE did that he
would have known he was REQUIRED to tell me upon me busting my
checkride.
As previously stated, my goal at this time is not to take up family
and friends. I am in an accelerated course which will lead me to the
right seat of a BE-1900 in six months. Yes I had a small lapse in my
instrument scan, but this is my PRIVATE PILOT checkride. My next check
is my instrument ride. I will admit if this happened on my instrument
ride it would be an instant bust, but this is not my instrument rating
and I have no plans to go flying in the clouds without my instrument
rating.
Doug
Peter R. <prgr...@twcny.rrREMOVE.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1a9d48aae...@text-west.newsfeeds.com>...
> 70 degrees? What were you flying, an Extra 300 aerobatic aircraft?
> I'm going to assume that 70 degrees and 3000 fpm are story-teller
> exaggerations.
>
Peter R.
> He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and therefore the aircraft was not
> his to take.
LOL! What a comedian you are.
<snip>
> He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit, and I will not stand for it.
The man (child?) says after he inadvertently put the aircraft in a "70
degree bank and a 3,000 fpm descent."
Michael 182
> Yes I responded the way I indicated to his instructions. My takeoff
> briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
> am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
> this is unsafe." Lastly, he was to take control of the airplane if the
> need was there. This is how I briefed my instructor as well, and it
> worked quite well. He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and
> therefore the aircraft was not his to take. I am going after this
> bastard pretty hard. He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit,
> and I will not stand for it.
Unbelievable. You are in a 70 degree bank, spiraling down at 3000 fpm,
probably approaching Vne (look it up...) and you expect him to go through
three steps in communicating with you? And then you want to go "after this
bastard pretty hard" after he saved you? You are the most clueless person
I've ever come across in aviation. I can't decide if the idea of you in
commercial aviation (as you implied in another post) is more absurd or
frightening. No wait a minute, I've decided. Definitely frightening.
Michael
Peter R.
> 70 degree TURN I said. I did not say 70 degree BANK. This is exactly
> what I mean -- people are not the most intelligent species around.
Starting with the image in the mirror, no doubt.
> Read before you write, please.
It's hard to read when you have tears in your eyes from laughing at the
material.
> I am in an accelerated course which will lead me to the
> right seat of a BE-1900 in six months.
You will not be flying a B1900 in six months. In fact, I will mark my
calendar right now to check the FAA database in six months to see what, if
any, certificates and ratings you have. In fact, I will give you the
benefit of the doubt; I'll check seven months from now.
Enjoy MS flight sim.
Dale
dougr...@excite.com (Doug Rinks) wrote:
> As previously stated, my goal at this time is not to take up family
> and friends. I am in an accelerated course which will lead me to the
> right seat of a BE-1900 in six months. Yes I had a small lapse in my
> instrument scan, but this is my PRIVATE PILOT checkride. My next check
> is my instrument ride. I will admit if this happened on my instrument
> ride it would be an instant bust, but this is not my instrument rating
> and I have no plans to go flying in the clouds without my instrument
> rating.
It might be your private checkride, but the instrument flight skills are
required, you failed, end of story. The people that pass the checkride
did NOT lose control of the airplane.
--
Dale L. Falk
There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.
Dale
> This is no hobby, Brien. I am enrolled in an instensive course from 0
> - 250 hours in a six month period that will lead me to the right seat
> of a BE-1900 upon graduation.
(Hmmm, no more flying in 1900s after August)
> ... I feel you need a little bit of an ego
> adjustment.
Pot callin' the kettle black.
Dale
> Yes I responded the way I indicated to his instructions. My takeoff
> briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
> am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
> this is unsafe."
Much to verbose. The normal, usual term is "My airplane" or "I have the
controls". Short and sweet. Even me, a low time co-pilot simply said
"My airplane" to a 20000+ hour Captain and know what the Captain did,
without question, with hesitation? He let go of the yoke. Since I
didn't have to mutter a bunch of crap before getting control I was able
to avert the midair from the bonehead that was flying formation with us.
>He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit, and I will not stand
>for it.
The sad thing here is you're either to egotistical, inexperienced or
stupid to realize that YOU were the problem in the cockpit.
Dale
Peter R. <prgr...@twcny.rrREMOVE.com> wrote:
> The man (child?) says after he inadvertently put the aircraft in a "70
> degree bank and a 3,000 fpm descent."
The original poster said 70 degrees of turn...where you guys getting 70
degrees of bank?
Peter R.
> In article <MPG.1a9d82d5c...@text-west.newsfeeds.com>,
> Peter R. <prgr...@twcny.rrREMOVE.com> wrote:
>
>
> > The man (child?) says after he inadvertently put the aircraft in a "70
> > degree bank and a 3,000 fpm descent."
>
> The original poster said 70 degrees of turn...where you guys getting 70
> degrees of bank?
Is it really a stretch for you to believe that someone reading those large,
disjointed paragraphs could possibly substitute "bank" for "turn?"
So you caught me slipping into a speed-reading scan. Big deal.
John Harper
replies) and amazement (at the guy's attitude), not having anything
particularly original to add.
This however is truly terrifying. Here we have someone who can't
fly a plane, doesn't realise he can't fly it, hasn't read the PTS,
and now is trying to get his DE in trouble rather than recognise
that he has some fundamental problems. And he still believes he'll
be a commercial pilot in less than six months. That is truly scary.
I hope the "guaranteed right seat" doesn't extend to people who
flunk their CRM on a big scale.
John
"Doug Rinks" <dougr...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a1473df3.04021...@posting.google.com...
Casey Webster
> beacon colors are in the FAR or the AIM. I am not going to kill
> someone because I did a ground reference maneuver a little high. You
> fail to see the big picture.
no, you'll just wait for a moonless night or a cloud to lose sight of the
horizon and bring it in that way.
i think jeppesen devotes a whole section of thier pilot private curriculum
on attitude and the mental aspect of flying (judement and decision making).
your DE was looking for a safe pilot, not someone who can fly an absolute
perfect circle at 1000ft...
SFM
> what I mean -- people are not the most intelligent species around.
> Read before you write, please. And coincidently, if the DE did that he
> would have known he was REQUIRED to tell me upon me busting my
> checkride.
>
>
Wow you really have emotional problems!
This DE saved your bacon and you want to go after him, you are in an
"intensive" course and still are not able to maintain the control of the
aircraft, get mad when it is pointed out to you that you screwed the pooch,
and do not even know simple things like beacon colors!!!??? You simply are
not ready to take on the responsibility of being a pilot yet. Change your
attitude, learn, and things may turn around for you, but until then get used
to failing.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott F. Migaldi, K9PO
MI-150972
PP-ASEL-IA
Are you a PADI Instructor or DM? Then join the PADI
Instructor Yahoo Group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PADI-Instructors/join
-----------------------------------
Catch the wave!
www.hamwave.com
**"A long time ago being crazy meant something, nowadays everyone is
crazy" -- Charles Manson**
-------------------------------------
Ron Natalie
> beacon colors are in the FAR or the AIM.
We're more concerned about your acrobatic maneuvers under the
hood. But, what do you think is going to happen when you land at
the white/yellow beaconed airport?
Ron Natalie
> - 250 hours in a six month period that will lead me to the right seat
> of a BE-1900 upon graduation.
Tell me this is Colgan.
Rob Perkins
>I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
>because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
>of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
>examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
>PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
>gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
That's the point where you failed your ride.
>I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
>now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
>maneuver. He, in not so many words told me "bullshit."
A quibble. If he thinks you're not safe, you've failed. Page 8 of the
current PTS: "Failure to take prompt corrective action when tolerances
are exceeded." Losing your instrument scan to a point where the DE
said "My airplane" did you in, not a bad attitude on the part of the
DE, in my opinion.
He didn't take control on a shaky ground reference maneuver. He didn't
take control after you failed to test the brakes.
Just calm down, get humble (important for pilot safety, I think),
review the stuff with your instructor, get recertified, and retake the
test. If it's not your last lesson, it's your next one.
If he really was a prick, you might get your money back, but you're
not going to get your certificate out of it.
Rob
Jim
I've seen instructors sign off students that weren't ready also, but the
thing that disturbs me most is the attitude. That type of attitude doesn't
make for good decision making further down the road. I'm not a full time
instructor, my livelihood doesn't depend on flight instruction, my
reputation isn't supported by my willingness or eagerness to sign students
off for checkrides or knowledge tests, nor the number of them that I sign
off, but I can believe there are those instructors out there that may fall
under those pressures for various reasons (excuses). I've most often heard
of early sign offs occurring when the instructor has an upcoming job
interview and is about to leave the area. As the FAA follows both the DE's
and the instructor's track records of their student's checkride results, a
student's insistence or pressure upon me to sign him off early would
probably be the last straw for me before I passed him along to another
instructor along with a written progress report and evaluation. While I
don't agree with some instructors never ending "you're close, but not quite
ready" milking of a students wallet either, I'd rather see a student over
prepared than under prepared especially if the areas he wasn't proficient in
were unsafe.
I think that every instructor should tell a student, up front, in the
beginning, that he is willing to spend as much time as it takes as long as
the student is also willing, but that the student will not be allowed to
take the checkride before they can demonstrate everything in the PTS to at
least, if not to higher than the PTS standards. A students frustration with
the length of his own learning process as well as the money he's invested
can not be taken into account when an instructor makes his recommendation.
There isn't a single trial lawyer, widow, orphan, or corpse that cares
whether Joe Pilot got his certificate in 40 hours or 400, what they and all
of us should care about is that Joe's a safe and competent pilot. I commend
the DE.
Not jumping on you at all CJ, I agree with what you said. I'm glad spring
is coming, I believe I might be getting just a bit cranky! :)
<rant off>
--
Jim Burns III
jbu...@nospamuniontel.net
Remove "nospam" to reply
Rob Perkins
>Even if he is a troll, as he may well be, the unfortunate truth is there are
>far too many students that are just like him.
Y'know CJ, I have to confess feeling like he does more than once in
training. I think the simple fact is that even in structured teaching
programs, our aviation teachers, IMO, are not consistently good, and
not all individually suited for every student.
But the remedy for *me* was simple forced humility. I found that my
personality was conflicting with every instructor. The CFI might not
be compatible, but if you want his or her knowledge, knuckle under and
eat your humble pie, right?
I think Carnegie had stuff to say about that in a book I once read...
Rob
Jim
(read amateur) instruct a FAA DESIGNATED EXAMINER (read professional) on how
the flight test was going to be conducted and what actions the DE must take.
You need to catch the next shuttle to Mars buddy, there's a rover up there
waiting to take your picture.
"Doug Rinks" <dougr...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a1473df3.04021...@posting.google.com...
Jeff
when he did finally find the airport he lined up on the taxi way and not the runway, when you realized his mistake and
tried to correct he crashed 1000 ft short of the runway.
Its all important. Everything you were taught.
Jeff
Ron Natalie
"Jeff" <Je...@turboarrow3.com> wrote in message news:4033E94E...@turboarrow3.com...
> the aircraft is always his to take, my DE was killed last year by a student while on a checkride.
>
The examiner I did my private ride with had broken his back a couple of years earlier
when a student dropped it in on short final. He was trying to give her the benefit
of the doubt that she'd correct her approach. He wasn't so lenient after that.
My amusing part of the checkride was that something was bothering him as we were
heading back from practice area. I sensed that something was wrong. He finally
asked for me to slow the aircraft down as much as possible. After I had done so, he
took the ashtray and dumped it out the window. Evidently there was some odor
emanating from it that was disturbing him.
John T
news:40338bf3$0$219$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com
>
> Why on earth would you think you passed?
See also: moron
He'd have to be one to think that he'll make right seat of a commercial
outfit with an attitude like his.
--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________
John Galban
> I was scheduled to take my checkride this morning at 9 AM.
<snip>
HaaHaa! Congratulations "Doug". That was one of the more successful
trolls I've seen on this newsgroup. You had me going for the 1st
part, but then it kind of ran right off the deep end. By the way, you
mimic someone with a borderline personality disorder quite well.
You've done your homework!
Unfortunately, as others have pointed out, you had too many
inconsistencies in your tale. My advice is that you keep the troll
simple next time. The bit about training for the BE-1900 was a bit
over the top, as was the part about the 3,000 fpm descent. It would
have also helped your case if we'd seen a post from you before. Next
time, make a few inocuous posts using your chosen pseudonym, just to
give your ID some credibility.
All in all, it was an excellent effort and you should be proud of
the results. As far as I'm concerned, you passed your test :-))
John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)
Dave Stadt
> - 250 hours in a six month period that will lead me to the right seat
> of a BE-1900 upon graduation.
My guess is your association with BE-1900s will involve blue water not the
right seat.
Bob Gardner
unobstructed direction before starting the engine...check behind, as well,
to avoid blowing crap all over the place.
Bob Gardner
"Gregg Germain" <gr...@elway.cfa.harvard.edu> wrote in message
news:4033...@cfanews.cfa.harvard.edu...
> Michael <crwd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> :> Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
> :> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
> :> a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
> :> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work
>
> : Yes - and what will happen if they don't? You should be doing a brake
> : check when you are still in a position to stop the plane without
> : hitting anything by shutting off the engine. That means immediately
> : upon start of taxi unless there is a good reason not to, such as a
> : soft taxiway.
>
> Question:
>
> I train in a Cessna 152. There is no parking brake - just the wheel
> brakes on the rudder pedals.
>
> Normally where the plane is parked there are other planes in front of
> it. So there really is no testing the brakes before you could
> possibly run into a parked plane (though obviously if the brakes
> failed you's shut down and steer away form the parked planes).
>
>
> In following the starting checklist, you "set the brakes" before
> starting, which means that you honk down on the rudder pedals, and
> hold them there.
>
>
> Is this not a brakes test?
>
> Or, if I start to taxi, should I then stop with the brakes as a test,
> as well?
>
> thanks
>
>
>
> --- Gregg
> "Improvise, adapt, overcome."
> gr...@head-cfa.harvard.edu
> Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
> Phone: (617) 496-1558
>
Jay Somerset
that you won't be flying anywhere near my airspace for a while!
You need a major attitude adjustment, as well as a lot more instruction.
That DE might just have saved your life (and possibly others') by his quite
appropriate actions and assessment.
On 17 Feb 2004 22:07:13 -0800, dougr...@excite.com (Doug Rinks) wrote:
> I was scheduled to take my checkride this morning at 9 AM. I showed up
> to the flight school at 8 AM just to be extra ready, and to be sure
> the paperwork, logbooks, etc. was all in order. The examiner showed up
> at 9 AM promptly and we began the oral exam once the paperwork was
> reviewed, and I paid his fee. He started asking me questions on
> airport beacon colors, which I did not know. I told him we could find
> the answer in the FAR's and he asked me to show him. I spent 20
> minutes looking, then I recalled it would be in the AIM. We moved on
> to performance questions which I was able to slip through OK. We
> reviewed my cross country planning and we discovered I had confused
> true course for magnetic heading. I was able to fix that. The examiner
> asked me some questions on regulations, and I was able to do OK on
> them, but not great. He then gave me a situation "Your company needs a
> part for their mainframe flown from Wichita to Garden City. Can you
> jump in your C172 and deliver the part?" I said yes, since it was
> incidental to the flight; at that point he warned me that if I missed
> one more question on the oral it would be a bust. He then explained
> the part 135 rules to me briefly. I was asked some aerodynamics
> questions, and I did OK on then. We then ended the oral and he told me
> to go pre-flight. As I was walking towards the restroom he told me
> "You really need some additional instruction on your oral topics, if
> that was with an FAA inspector, you would have busted."
>
> Finally we get out to the airplane, and get in. I startup and we taxi
> to do a runup. The examiner faults me because I did not immediately do
> a brake check. I do not find the brake check right off the bat
> necessary since I will soon find out if the brakes work, but that was
> his opinion anyway. He asked me to demonstrate a short field takeoff
> to him. I did the takeoff OK, except he wanted me to hold the airplane
> in ground effect, I simply rotated abruptly and accelerated away from
> the field. Again, I think different people have different techniques
> for the maneuvers. We then began our cross country, we ended up at the
> first fix six minutes late, which the examiner seemed OK with. He
> asked me why we were late and I told him it was because I was climbing
> at 60 rather than my planned 65 knots, to which he agreed with. We
> then diverted to Hayes, and we did our takeoffs and landings there.
> The examiner was happy with them. We went up to do a ground reference
> maneuver which went fine, but the examiner said I was a bit high. He
> asked me to take him back to the airport, and we'd do instrument work
> and steep turns and stalls on the way home. He put me under the hood
> and I pretty much lost control. I started out at 4,500 and he asked me
> to track a radial and descend to 3,500 followed by a climb to 5,500.
> Once I began the descent I had to turn about 40 degrees to incercept
> the radial. I entered this turn and apparently lost track of my scan
> because when I looked back down the heading indicator indicated a turn
> of about 70 degrees and the VSI was pegged at 3,000 FPM down. The
> examiner said "MY AIRPLANE" to which I told him absolutely not, I am
> PIC and I am recovering. He once again said "MY AIRPLANE -- NOW!" I
> gave him the airplane and he said he'd fly us home.
>
> When we got on the ground we debriefed, and he told me that he was
> going to pink slip me for instrument work, steep turns (never did
> them), stalls (never did them), short field takeoffs, as well as FAR
> and AIM knowledge. I explained to him that he could not pink slip me
> now since he did not tell me that I had failed as soon as a blew a
> maneuver. He, in not so many words told me "bullshit." So now I have a
> notice of disapproval, and I never even knew I failed the checkride.
> The guy was a prick. I talked to the FSDO manager this evening and he
> is going to look into it. I admit that I didnt' do flawless, but by
> virtue of him not telling me I'd failed, I thought I passed. Oh well,
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
>
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
>
> Doug
Jay Somerset
> Yes I responded the way I indicated to his instructions. My takeoff
> briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
> am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
> this is unsafe." Lastly, he was to take control of the airplane if the
> need was there. This is how I briefed my instructor as well, and it
> worked quite well. He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and
> therefore the aircraft was not his to take. I am going after this
> bastard pretty hard. He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit,
> and I will not stand for it.
This is either a troll, or you are an arrogant young asshole that should
never be allowed at the controls of an airplane again!
'Vejita' S. Cousin
Roger Long <rwlong.take.out.obv...@maine.rr.com> wrote:
>I agree. The examiners are almost always looking for attitude, not
>technique. They know that you can do all the stuff, otherwise the CFI and
>FBO would not have shut off the flow of money from your wallet to theirs by
>signing you off for the checkride. If they see the proper attitude, they
>will cut you a lot of slack on the maneuvers.
I think so too. I made 3 mistakes on my checkride (that I recall
and/or am aware off at least). The biggest was when I was setting up to
land at RNT I was 1000ft above pattern alt. I had just got over loaded,
so I said 'sorry my fault' called ATC circled down to TPA. The DE said
nothing (and I was told if I fail he'll tell me so I just keep going).
Then on my simulated soft field landing (all my soft field work is sim
never been on a real one). He basically said that landing sucked.
During the debrief he said 'you made some mistakes, caught and
corrected them, I think your safe enough not to kill yourself or
passengers but you should work on X, Y and Z." That seems pretty typical
for most people I talk too.
In the end you made the mistakes, and a&&hole or not (I wasn't there)
that's why you failed. Don't worry about it, it happens. Just correct
the mistakes and do it again.
C J Campbell
> beacon colors are in the FAR or the AIM. I am not going to kill
> someone because I did a ground reference maneuver a little high. You
> fail to see the big picture.
I said it was your attitude that will kill you. Your anti-authority,
arrogant attitude. Your attitude that it is all right to blame other people
(like your examiner) for your problems. Well, you had your examiner along
for the ride this time, and he saved your life. You thanked him by
complaining about him to the FAA and calling him a prick.
What are you going to do next time? Get into another fight with the examiner
while you are in the plane and maybe lose control for good?
You can blame other people all you like, but you are the one who is going to
die when you screw up like you did on your check ride. Unfortunately, you
might just take some innocent people with you.
Gary Drescher
It was a large lapse. You lost control of the plane. It was diving. In
real life, you might have hit the ground before you noticed your mistake.
> but this is my PRIVATE PILOT checkride. My next check
> is my instrument ride. I will admit if this happened on my instrument
> ride it would be an instant bust, but this is not my instrument rating
> and I have no plans to go flying in the clouds without my instrument
> rating.
Private pilots often enter clouds without planning to. And there are VFR
conditions that require instrument flight to keep the plane upright (flying
over water or unlit land on a moonless night, for example). Whether or not
you plan to encounter such conditions, you need to be competent to deal with
them if you find yourself in them. Having redundant layers of safety (such
as avoiding clouds, and also being competent to fly in them) is crucial to
responsible flying. You need to understand why the redundancy is important,
and to have the skills necessary to implement it. Your lack of the
necessary skill here is more easily remedied, and therefore less scary, than
your failure to appreciate *why* it's a necessary skill.
--Gary
> Doug
C J Campbell
> briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
> am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
> this is unsafe." Lastly, he was to take control of the airplane if the
> need was there. This is how I briefed my instructor as well, and it
> worked quite well. He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and
> therefore the aircraft was not his to take. I am going after this
> bastard pretty hard. He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit,
> and I will not stand for it.
We would like to know the name of your examiner. A lot of us would like to
write to the FSDO on his behalf, with a copy of your posts.
C J Campbell
"John Harper" <jha...@cisco.com> wrote in message
news:1077133600.256288@sj-nntpcache-5...
> I've been following this thread with a mixture of amusement (at the
> replies) and amazement (at the guy's attitude), not having anything
> particularly original to add.
>
> This however is truly terrifying. Here we have someone who can't
> fly a plane, doesn't realise he can't fly it, hasn't read the PTS,
> and now is trying to get his DE in trouble rather than recognise
> that he has some fundamental problems. And he still believes he'll
> be a commercial pilot in less than six months. That is truly scary.
>
> I hope the "guaranteed right seat" doesn't extend to people who
> flunk their CRM on a big scale.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. He has about as much chance of passing
an airline interview as he has of passing his check ride.
Bob Gardner
Bob Gardner
"Doug Rinks" <dougr...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a1473df3.0402...@posting.google.com...
Jim Buckridge
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
>
No, you need new material and a new audience. Troll troll troll.
C J Campbell
> This is no hobby, Brien. I am enrolled in an instensive course from 0
> - 250 hours in a six month period that will lead me to the right seat
> to any formal training does not mean that anything you do is right,
> and anything I do is wrong. I feel you need a little bit of an ego
> adjustment.
Now you are making some unreasonable assumptions about the training of
others. I would be very interested in the name of your school.
John Harlow
> Your anagram is DRUNKS GO I.
That's funny; I was just composing this:
-------------------------------
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
Were you aware a palendrome for "Doug Rinks" is "DORK SUING"?
Blanche
Blanche
>Is this a troll??
>Would any instructor recommend a student with these major inabilities and
>serious attitude problems?
>I hope the DE phoned your instructor. You don't need a new examiner, you
>need a new instructor, more training, and an attitude adjustment.
Nah...he needs to quit flying and take up RC airplanes.
Blanche
>As previously stated, my goal at this time is not to take up family
>and friends. I am in an accelerated course which will lead me to the
>right seat of a BE-1900 in six months. Yes I had a small lapse in my
>instrument scan, but this is my PRIVATE PILOT checkride. My next check
>is my instrument ride.
No it isn't. Your next checkride will still be the Private.
Blanche
of airmen.
So -- you were attempting to take the Private checkride without
any medical cert?
curiouser and curiouser...
go away, troll.
and not even a good troll!!
Blanche
the term "verbal"? Oral exam reminds me too much of root canal!)
I completely spaced out sectional colors of towered v non-towered airports.
Not remembering colors of beacons isn't a crisis.
Unless, of course, you're about to land someplace where the
tower is flashing white-green-white.
C J Campbell
"Blanche" <bco...@blackhole.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:10771565...@irys.nyx.net...
> Well, there's no Doug Rinks or Douglas Rinks in the FAA database
> of airmen.
>
That means nothing by itself. However, we will let Mr. Rinks tell us why.
C J Campbell
Are you kidding?!? Those things are dangerous!
KG
> Doug Rinks (dougr...@excite.com) wrote:
>
> > 70 degree TURN I said. I did not say 70 degree BANK. This is exactly
> > what I mean -- people are not the most intelligent species around.
>
> Starting with the image in the mirror, no doubt.
>
> > Read before you write, please.
>
> It's hard to read when you have tears in your eyes from laughing at the
> material.
>
> > I am in an accelerated course which will lead me to the
> > right seat of a BE-1900 in six months.
>
> calendar right now to check the FAA database in six months to see what, if
> any, certificates and ratings you have. In fact, I will give you the
> benefit of the doubt; I'll check seven months from now.
>
> Enjoy MS flight sim.
>
> --
> Peter
Check now. There isn't a Doug Rinks even listed with a Student Certificate.
Blanche
>
>"Blanche" <bco...@blackhole.nyx.net> wrote in message
>> of airmen.
>
>That means nothing by itself. However, we will let Mr. Rinks tell us why.
On the other hand, I just looked for me. I'm not there using
just my initials. Nor with my entire name.
Wonder if the FAA's database is hosed?
John Harper
too, with obviously the same result). If he is really on a six-month
course to get his commercial, then he would certainly be going for his
PPL before the FAA had his medical in the system.
I have to say that this thread is unique in my fairly lengthy experience
of usenet. I've never seen before such total unanimity, lack of
responses flaming each other, etc (apart from Mr Dork Suing
himself). Just goes to show that you can get people to agree with
each other if the common cause is sufficiently compelling. Quite
reaffirms my faith in human nature...
John
"Blanche" <bco...@blackhole.nyx.net> wrote in message
news:10771565...@irys.nyx.net...
Blanche
isn't.
John Harper
surfing around trying to find the true story etc etc. Reading the
CAA report of the accident that killed, it seems that he could
well have been a victim of Mr Rinks' grandfather. It seems that
the pilot lost control of the plane in marginal night VFR conditions
(total darkness over rural area, falling snow) - not helped by the
transition from old fashioned attitude indicators that work the
opposite way round from modern ones. (I didn't even know about
that until I tried to fly the DC3 on MS FS and couldn't figure out
why I kept going the wrong way...).
John
"C J Campbell" <christopherc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10387nm...@corp.supernews.com...
'Vejita' S. Cousin
>70 degrees? What were you flying, an Extra 300 aerobatic aircraft?
>I'm going to assume that 70 degrees and 3000 fpm are story-teller
>exaggerations.
That's a mis-read, the original post said he was 70degrees OFF HEADING
(not bank) and decending at 3300fpm. Both of which are possible.
Although I've never gotten above 2500fpm (that was during aerobatic work
^_^).
Bryan Burchfield
> Were you aware a palendrome for "Doug Rinks" is "DORK SUING"?
Aww, ya beat me to it. So I'll just say to you: KUDOS, GRIN. :)
Peter R.
> That's a mis-read, the original post said he was 70degrees OFF HEADING
> (not bank) and decending at 3300fpm.
What non-military trainer aircraft has a VSI that indicates greater than
3,000 fpm?
--
Peter
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Michael 182
"John Harlow" <sirsa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8bqdnePiV6_...@comcast.com...
OK, I hate to be such a nerd, but I was an English major long ago. A
palindrome is a word or phrase that reads the same forward or backward -
like "sex at noon taxes". An anagram is a word or phrase created by
reordering the letters.
Michael
'Vejita' S. Cousin
> HaaHaa! Congratulations "Doug". That was one of the more successful
>trolls I've seen on this newsgroup. You had me going for the 1st
>part, but then it kind of ran right off the deep end. By the way, you
>mimic someone with a borderline personality disorder quite well.
>You've done your homework!
Normally trolls just post once and never follow up. I'm not 100% sure
that the guys a troll, only because I've seen a lot of people do a lot of
really stupid stuff over the years (and I'm only 29!).
Reading NTSB reports of people that have passed the checked ride then
done X (eg. taken off in zero/zero conditions with ice on the wings, or
strapped a deer to the top of a cessna and tried to takeoff) anything is
possible.
'Vejita' S. Cousin
Blanche <bco...@blackhole.nyx.net> wrote:
>In all fairness, during the oral exam (could we please start using
>the term "verbal"? Oral exam reminds me too much of root canal!)
OT - the first thing that comes to mind when you hear 'oral' is the
denist?! What do you only fly low wing planes :)
'Vejita' S. Cousin
> I train in a Cessna 152. There is no parking brake - just the wheel
> brakes on the rudder pedals.
If you read the PTS (this is from memory) it basically states that you
should check the brakes right after you start rolling.
Dudley Henriques
performance myself.
In fact, after reading what you've written here and assessing the attitude
with which you wrote it, I'm enclosing a tutorial for you on how to pass a
check ride pasted in below; with little hope that it will do any good at all
until you get things a bit more straightened out in your mind about what's
important and relevant to flying an airplane.
I'll wish you the best of luck however, and I sincerely hope that you
acheive this change of attitude and pass the test, but to be quite frank
with you; the way you are at this moment, I just don't know if you're going
to make it!
How To Pass A Checkride
Dudley Henriques CFI (retired)
Let's talk checkrides for a moment shall we? It's an interesting and
important issue to all of us who fly, and I believe it deserves some special
attention.
I've noticed through the years that this issue comes up many times when
pilots get together to talk shop, and it's been an issue on the student
newsgroup as well .It's an issue that all of us, from our pre-solo checks
through our ATP route checks have to deal with sooner or later if we intend
to remain pilots. We'll have phase checks, flight tests, checkout flights,
and continuing proficiency checks to deal with sooner or later in our
careers. I've been both taking and giving checkrides in airplanes for about
fifty years now, and I believe I've learned a few things about both ends of
the spectrum. With your indulgence, I'd like to pass some of what I've
learned on to you, especially those of you just starting out on your long
aviation journey,
Let's concentrate on the flight test check flight for a Private Certificate
as an example. I choose this scenario because it's really the first
"serious" flight check you will receive as a pilot, and as such, many have a
tendency to bring unneeded fear and apprehension into this equation. I'd
like to address these possible fears and apprehensions, and perhaps steer
you into a proper state of mind for taking on this all important
checkride.....the one you have worked so long and hard to pass!
Lets talk for a moment about attitude, then we'll take a short look at the
checkride itself, and how you should interface with the examiner during the
test. You will notice immediately that I am shying completely away from
maneuver technicalities and maneuver discussion. I think we can all assume
that prior to taking a checkflight for a certificate that you have been
properly trained and recommended for the flight test. What I'm getting at
here is above and beyond this. It concerns the attitude and mental
preparation you take with you when you get into the airplane with the check
pilot or examiner.
First, and this is probably the most important single factor involved in a
flight test; RELAX! Realize that the examiner doesn't expect you to be
perfect; the examiner expects you to be SAFE!!!!! Now, what does this mean
to you? You should arrive for the test as prepared as possible. This doesn't
mean you have to know the answer to every question you will be asked. It
means that if you don't know the answer, you DO know exactly where to find
it. It also means you should expect to make mistakes.This is extremely
important so remember it; the examiner EXPECTS you to make mistakes. In
fact, the examiner WANTS you to make mistakes so he/she can immediately see
if you can both recognize that you have made that mistake, and as well
CORRECT the mistake within safe parameters.
Now this point deserves a bit more attention, so listen up a moment here.
Why are mistakes important to an examiner? Here's the answer. The examiner
is constantly asking him/herself all through your flight, "How safe is this
applicant" "How would this applicant react to this or that if I wasn't
here?" These are important and pertinent questions. How does the examiner
deal with this? ERROR ANALYSIS!!! That's how! There is absolutely no better
way to evaluate a pilot in flight than allowing that pilot to fly into an
error; then view EXACTLY how long it takes for the pilot to recognize that
error, and EXACTLY how long it takes to initiate corrective action, and most
importantly, EXACTLY what that corrective action is!!! What I have described
here is not only what a good examiner is doing, but also the formula for
teaching someone to fly an airplane properly. A good instructor NEVER rides
the controls on a student. A good instructor knows EXACTLY how far to allow
the student into an error and makes every effort to talk the student through
a correction without grabbing control from the student. Doing this correctly
is the mark of both a good CFI, and a good checkpilot......so remember this.
Back to the examiner; they want to observe your errors, so if you make them,
and you most certainly will make them, face the error immediately; state the
error; and begin correction immediately. Nothing impresses an examiner more
than a pilot who faces a mistake immediately by recognition and correction.
Remember this!
You will probably discover somewhere in any check flight that the pilot
giving you the check does things a bit differently than you do, or how you
were taught to do it. In almost every instance, you will find that you can
do it BOTH ways correctly, so demonstrate it as the examiner suggests.
In closing, let me say that it really all boils down to keeping
calm.....being relaxed......and giving the examiner a SAFE, HONEST, flight.
Recognize those errors.....correct them immediately....and when in
doubt....take the SAFE option.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
"Doug Rinks" <dougr...@excite.com> wrote in message
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
>
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
>
> Doug
'Vejita' S. Cousin
>> That's a mis-read, the original post said he was 70degrees OFF HEADING
>> (not bank) and decending at 3300fpm.
>
>What non-military trainer aircraft has a VSI that indicates greater than
>3,000 fpm?
I don't know, I was just corrected 70degrees off desired heading vs.
70 decgrees of bank. The 3300fpm decend is taken by some posters to mean
the guy was trolling, again I don't know.
C J Campbell
"KG" <freakfl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:edbbd354.04021...@posting.google.com...
>
>
> Check now. There isn't a Doug Rinks even listed with a Student
Certificate.
The FAA does not list all certificates publicly. Given Mr. Rinky Dinky's
personality problems, perhaps he requested that hid name not be listed.
Paul Folbrecht
This may be the most generous post I've ever seen out of you given the
circumstances. ;-)
L Smith
the responses
to your original post. Otherwise, you would not have made the most
asinine statement
I have ever seen on this forum. Someone in this thread is failing to see
the big picture,
but sadly, you don't seem to be figuring out who that someone is.
Rich Lemert
Doug Rinks wrote:
>I am not going to kill someone because I didn't know whether the
>beacon colors are in the FAR or the AIM. I am not going to kill
>someone because I did a ground reference maneuver a little high. You
>fail to see the big picture.
>
>Doug
>
>"C J Campbell" <christopherc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<1036390...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>
>
>>I hope your attitude improves before you kill somebody.
>>
>>
Paul Folbrecht
licence to act as PIC of an aircraft.
Doug Rinks wrote:
> Yes I responded the way I indicated to his instructions. My takeoff
> briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
> am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
> this is unsafe." Lastly, he was to take control of the airplane if the
> need was there. This is how I briefed my instructor as well, and it
> worked quite well. He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and
> therefore the aircraft was not his to take. I am going after this
> bastard pretty hard. He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit,
> and I will not stand for it.
>
> Doug
Dudley Henriques
news:S_VYb.11148$hm4...@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Dudley,
>
> This may be the most generous post I've ever seen out of you given the
> circumstances. ;-)
It's my wife and my doctor Paul. They got together last week and said I
can't use the computer for Usenet anymore unless I take 3 valiums and a
dozen seconals between reading some of this crap and answering it!! :-))
Dudley
Paul Folbrecht
C J Campbell wrote:
> We would like to know the name of your examiner. A lot of us would like to
> write to the FSDO on his behalf, with a copy of your posts.
>
>
John Harlow
>>> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the
>>> bastard.
>>
>>
>> Were you aware a palendrome for "Doug Rinks" is "DORK SUING"?
>
>
> OK, I hate to be such a nerd, but I was an English major long ago. A
> palindrome is a word or phrase that reads the same forward or
> backward - like "sex at noon taxes". An anagram is a word or phrase
> created by reordering the letters.
Dammit - and I knew that too. I hate doing that! Thanks for the
correction.
Paul Folbrecht
daunting as full-scale (what RC'ers call "real airplanes" :-).)
In the last year or so I'd heard of a main killed in AZ, I think, by a
pretty small one and a little girl killed somewhere in England.
Paul Folbrecht
Nobody's ever asked for it more here!
Paul Folbrecht
so stupid as to think losing control of the aircraft under the hood is
not sufficient cause for the DE to take control?
Doug? Are you out there? Are you really that stupid?
Jim Buckridge wrote:
> dougr...@excite.com (Doug Rinks) wrote in message
>
>
>>Now I need to find a new examiner...
>>
>
>
> No, you need new material and a new audience. Troll troll troll.
Richard Hertz
Do yourself (and us) a favor, get an attitude adjustment, get some better
training and study the FARs and AIM. You need to find a better flight
school or instructor as well. You also should probably not have gone on the
offensive against the DE. I can't imagine any other DE doing something
different. He saved your life and the life of some passengers.
Relax, take some time off from flying and then go back to it with an open
mind and better attitude.
> hopefully the FSDO will take adminstrative action against the bastard.
>
> Now I need to find a new examiner...
>
> Doug
Richard Hertz
arrogance that at the least probably started you off with two strikes
against you with the DE. All those things also put you in a better position
to kill yourself and ruin a good plane.
"Doug Rinks" <dougr...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:a1473df3.04021...@posting.google.com...
Brien K. Meehan
> This is no hobby, Brien. I am enrolled in an instensive course from 0
> - 250 hours in a six month period that will lead me to the right seat
> of a BE-1900 upon graduation.
LOL!
> Just because you have not been subjected
> to any formal training ...
<puzzled look>
> ... does not mean that anything you do is right,
> and anything I do is wrong.
Here's a short list of things I (and most of us here) do right that you do wrong:
1) I can safely fly an airplane.
2) I've never failed a checkride.
3) I've never tried to kill a designated examiner.
4) I've never tried to piss off the FAA by blaming someone else for my stupidity.
> I feel you need a little bit of an ego adjustment.
You were right. I was being too humble.
Judah
positive control in a descending turn at 3000 fpm, and your DE/safety
pilot requested immediate control of the airplane. You refused because
you wanted to "show him you could recover". How do you know he didn't
want to divert the plane from an obstruction or an oncoming plane? How do
you know that your ego didn't nearly cost you your own life already?
Seems to me like you had blinders, not foggles on. And flying with
blinders on is what seems to get pilots into trouble.
And like it or not, landing at a heliport or military base because you
don't know the beacon colors could very well get you killed, or shot...
Especially these days.
The big picture is indeed bigger than being a little high in a ground
reference manuever.
dougr...@excite.com (Doug Rinks) wrote in
news:a1473df3.04021...@posting.google.com:
Jürgen Exner
> In all fairness, during the oral exam (could we please start using
> the term "verbal"? Oral exam reminds me too much of root canal!)
> airports. Not remembering colors of beacons isn't a crisis.
>
> Unless, of course, you're about to land someplace where the
> tower is flashing white-green-white.
Well, even then I would argue that it's not a major deal. You may spend some
uncomfortable time with some grufty people, but at least the plane is safely
on the ground.
Green-yellow would probably be a bit more problematic.
jue
Jürgen Exner
> I am not going to kill someone because I didn't know whether the
> beacon colors are in the FAR or the AIM.
You weren't failed for that.
> I am not going to kill
> someone because I did a ground reference maneuver a little high.
You weren't failed for that, either.
> You fail to see the big picture.
Which picture? The one you painted about your own attitude?
jue
Jürgen Exner
> Yes I responded the way I indicated to his instructions. My takeoff
> briefing with him was very clear. I told him that he was to tell me "I
> am concerned about your handling of the airplane." Second was "I feel
> this is unsafe." Lastly, he was to take control of the airplane if the
> need was there. This is how I briefed my instructor as well, and it
> worked quite well. He failed to use the pre-briefed method, and
> therefore the aircraft was not his to take. I am going after this
> bastard pretty hard. He caused a very unsafe situation in my cockpit,
> and I will not stand for it.
Ok, you win. But only for three postings.
A good troll can keep this game going for muuuuuch longer.
jue