• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

709

Just anecdotally re oral exams - When I was teaching high school math, I would occasionally receive an exam that I suspected involved cheating. Of course, usually, the student would deny. About 90 seconds of oral questions would settle the matter. So maybe the prevalence of test-prep materials makes the oral exam the "real" exam.
 
The written exams are easily passed using on-line courses. They teach you what you need to know - it is not cheating.

I too had trouble with students cheating - on law school exams! Ten years ago you could type a sentence into Google, and in a heartbeat it would tell you where that sentence first appeared. It is ok to memorize a passage and put it on an exam, so long as you state where it came from - otherwise it was plagiarism, and subjected you to dismissal or worse.

I still think, like MTV, that in less than an hour you can figure out if an applicant "knows his stuff."

When I met a new first officer, I could tell by the way he/she picked up the clearance and arranged the takeoff data whether I had a good partner or not.

I think the FAA is mandating longer orals. No other reason for it.
 
I’ve yet to see a written or oral exam that would keep a pilot from making a poor decision in his aircraft.
 
I’ve yet to see a written or oral exam that would keep a pilot from making a poor decision in his aircraft.

Oh, decision making is the thing that is very difficult or impossible to evaluate, at least without turning the person loose on their own. They’ll almost always be on best behavior during check rides, eval, or observation......make conservative decisions, etc. But turn them loose and Katie bar the door, at least with some folks.

Another point on FAA check rides, understand that the examiner is required to test the applicant during the oral on AREAS of knowledge in which they had errors in the written. An applicant with an 80% passing score could have missed one question in each of several areas, thus requiring the examiners to dig quite a bit.

And, frankly that’d make me suspicious in any case. As Bob noted, with canned programs that teach the tests, and practice tests to see if you’ve memorized the answers well enough, there’s no excuse for not doing well on written.

MTV
 
Anything longer than an hour is all about the examiner not the recipient of the check!


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
Just a quick update:
I was, at first, confused by the requirement of a 709 ride, based on the review of the incident. I've seen "remedial training" mandated in like, or even worse incidents. Answer: This is the pilot's second incident. In the first one, Remedial training was mandated.....
Why can't the Inspector in the local office, that owns a PA12, give the ride? Answer: he is not an FAA "Qualified" Tailwheel Inspector ... one must follow the FAA required protocol to be "qualified...?? I don't know what that is...
Can a DPE that has given PPL Checkrides in a Taildragger do the ride?? No answer.. I might have opened "Pandora's Box" on that one..That DPE has not even responded... Oops ... Hope my son's PPL is valid..
I flew with the "Subject Pilot" in My SuperCub. He has not flown in several months and he is an "old" guy like me.. He did OK.. We are doing some more time tomorrow..
I appreciate all the input. Thanks!!
 
Final Update: We did 3 "flight lessons" ... they were not to the level I would "recommend" one to go for their Private Pilot Checkride.. (mind you, no recommendation is required for a 709 ride) ... The subject pilot, ultimately decide to give up his certificate.
To say the least, I am disappointed.. Being the "bridge" between "the ground" and the "air" for anyone is an awesome feeling!! Being the "bridge" between an Aviator and the "ground" is extremely difficult...
 
You never mentioned the age or the overall experience level of this pilot. Not that it should make any difference. Sometimes, often people slowly loose their edge for many different reasons. It is the most difficult for that person to recognize this themselves. It sounds from what has been said here, that may be the case. The pilot who damaged his Pietenpol has had time since the incident and after having flown with you to think this situation over. It sounds as though he has recognized something in himself which was emphasized when he damaged his plane and he has accepted it. Using the wisdom of the ancients.

It is just as tough for the instructor, for the student not to achieve the goal the two of you have set for yourselves as you have learned.

While I of course have no knowledge of Mr FAA's thinking, perhaps he recognized something and was dragging his feet on the 709 in hopes the subject pilot would recognize his abilities on his own. Thus saving the pilot from having his license "taken" from him? We have done a good job based upon our own past experiences in bashing the FAA. Perhaps in this case he was doing the subject pilot a favor?
 
Just sent this to SAFE

We are getting a rash of these, seems like. Folks keep asking me for advice.


I think SAFE would be a good resource -

1. When the inspector "asks" for your license verbally, what do you do?
(Hint - if you voluntarily give it up, remember that was probably not required, but now you have no license!)

2. Should we get all communications in writing?

3. Should we volunteer early and often to take the checkride, and have access to an aircraft (taildragger?) to do it in? (Hint - YES, especially during Covid!)

4. If you refuse to give up your ticket and volunteer for the 709 ride, can they legally and involuntarily pull your ticket? (Hint - I do not know - but I suspect not)

5. More and more, CFIs need to know this cold. I never heard of these things until about four years ago, and so far we have had three taildragger and one Varieze ride either accomplished or demanded, just in my admittedly small and select group. It is arbitrary - a ground loop resulting in an almost totaled Cub did not engender any action at all. A wingtip scrape requiring only an inspection did require one. Same FSDO.



Regards - Bob
 
1) The FAA was fair. He tore up two Tailwheel airplanes in 4 years.. I think 709 was warranted..
2) He realized after 3 Flight Lessons, his skills were lacking..
3) He made the decision to walk away, even though I offered to see if we could get him there, at my expense..
4) I think the "system" let him down.. He has been passing Flight Reviews for several years. He took one a month ago.. and got a sign off... That was my dilemma... are my standards too high??
5) I started a "warm up" on a guy today that has not flown much in 15 years. About the same age as the "subject pilot". He did a very good job and I probably would feel comfortable signing his Flight Review (for the flight portion) in one more session..
6) What's the difference? One had a good foundation, quit flying for a while because of health concerns. He seeks out folks that will challenge him.. The other was never been challenged and became complacent.. the road back was more than he wanted to endure..
 
Thanks for your explanations. Gotta respect the both of you - the subject pilot for recognizing his skills were weak rather than becoming belligerent, and you for high expectations blended with generosity.
 
There comes a time for all of us when it’s time to let it go. Bob, as far as wondering if your standards are too high I had a similar experience years ago. I helped start an air taxi in Alaska, and was signed off as a check airman. A local aviation legend who was in his late 60’s was going to fly for us part time, and after giving him more than the required training in a Navajo, I was reluctant to sign him off. I called the FSDO and asked our POI if he could give the ride. He did, came back and walked into my office and closed the door. He asked why I didn’t give the ride and I told him I wasn’t comfortable with his performance but was concerned it was me because of this mans reputation. He told me I was right, that he didn’t pass. He then told me if I wasn’t willing to do the hard thing and fail someone when warranted, I should just turn in my check airman paperwork. He told me to remember that you’re not doing someone a favor by putting them in a position where they could hurt themselves, someone else and leave a bunch of grieving family members. I always remembered that discussion.
 
Back
Top