|
|
 |
|
What's Happening?
Want to add your own something
to my web page? Now you can! Just click on the link below and I'll add your message to this page. Got something
you want to say about flying technique, maintenance, a news item, stories, pictures, got a question or just want to tell the
world about that great flight you just made to Alaska or about a recent fly-in or how you scared yourself silly? Speak
UP!
Just click here and get
to it! Wild Blue Blogosphere
|
|
|
|
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Bud Granley gets another year Old(er)
Yep, happens to all of us. Sometimes you can't wait, sometimes you wish you could. Anyway, time don't wait
for nobody and Bud Granley is no exception. One of the best airshow and all 'round stick and rudder types anywhere and
a great guy (and one of my favorite "students"), Bud had another birthday so we had to have a party. Everybody loves
parties. We all got together at Amici, a great little restaurant in Mukilteo near Paine Field (KPAE) run by Gianni and
wife for a bit of celebration and good times. Present were Bud, wife Carol, son Ross and wife Sheri, Charlie Wright
(fresh back from watching the final Space Shuttle launch in Florida), Rick Davis, Bill Ammirrato, Keith McMahon and wife Debbie,
Curtis Thompson, Tom Cathcart and many more. Happy birthday Bud!
FAA Inspector/DPE Evaluations?
Over the course of time I have been receiving and providing flight instruction there have been numerous changes,
major and minor, to FAR, flight training standards, FAA training publications and the way in which Examiners conduct
flight tests. However, with the exceptions of avionics improvements and many of us getting bigger and fatter, the airplanes
have pretty much stayed the same, though we now mostly train in 172's instead of Cubs or 150's so we can squeeze
our bigger, fatter selves in. A G1000 172 is still a 172 and they still fly about the same as they did in 1956,
regardless of pilot size, changes in electronics, regulations or airspace designations.
We've all met pilots who claim to have soloed and completed their training in miraculously low times, who've
had little if any further training and yet are knowledgeable, safe and competent. They even used to do flight tests
(maybe they still do) with the Examiner watching from the ground! And they also say you can train a Sport Pilot
in only 20 hours (maybe they can, but I can't, not with a clear conscience, and not in 35 or even 40 hours,
either, with very rare exceptions). On the other hand, we've all given checkouts and Flight Reviews to folks who were ignorant,
unsafe and incompetent, regardless of experience. I'm not sure training changes or Flight Review requirements have
made much of a dent in that population.
Written tests still cover mostly the same material.
On the other hand, Flight Tests have changed a whole bunch. There is greater specificity in the (now)
PTS, but the standards of success for the flights themselves haven't really changed that much except for the requirement to
cover the whole curriculum. A bigger difference is in the oral exam portion, which has
turned into to a multi-hour if not all-day-long affair that virtually duplicates the written exam, but often in greater detail.
When I made the leap from Student to Private Pilot SEL in 1970 the oral exam lasted about 5 minutes and the flight
portion took 0.7 hours. When I got my Commercial the following year the oral was a few minutes longer and the flight
took 1.0 hours. I took my initial CFI ride a few months later (with an FAA Inspector, as was required for all
CFI rides then) and the oral lasted less than half an hour and the flight 1.3 hours. Likewise, ME, instrument, A&P etc. Maybe
the fact that I got high scores on all my writtens was a factor, but it worked about the same regardless of type of test or
Examiner, so I don't think so. And it wasn't a matter of shopping for "easy" Examiners, or in any way out of the
ordinary, either. As mentioned, ALL CFI rides were once given by FAA Inspectors, not designees. 135 rides were
about the same. I have had the pleasure (?) of renewing my CFI four times by flight test, all but once with FAA Inspectors,
and the orals and rides were all about the same as the first time.
I bring all this up because I have a bone to pick. A couple of years ago I had my second Applicant
failure, for a Private SEL certificate. The "ride" went like this: Following a couple hours of increasingly stressful
oral grilling that had my student nearly ready to have an emotional break down (just kidding, sort of), the DPE threw
up his hands, declared the exam over, no flight test today, get re-trained and come back again, but not for another three
weeks or so since the DPE was going to be out of town until then. Oh, and bring another $250 (after having collected
$400 for the aborted first test). The Examiner had the courtesy to call and brief me with some emotion and increasing
criticism of me and my Applicant. Yes, among a few other minor offenses he had failed to properly note a few things
on the Sectional and so had made some errors in flight planning for the hypothetical x-country, so bad on him and me.
No, his written score was not impressive, but not that bad, either. After all, he had PASSED the exam. The chart
reading errors he had made would have hit him smack in the face had they actually made the flight (VFR, of course) and would
have been corrected by necessity. In any event, we covered the material again and my Applicant took another ride, no
problemo (with a different Examiner--neither he no I wanting anything to do with the first DPE), including another multi-hour
oral and very thorough flight test. No, the second Examiner was not a "pushover." And, no, I didn't have any prior
experience with the second DPE or prep him for the ride. I didn't even know or select him. In any case, it should
be noted that my Applicant was (and is) an excellent pilot. Is military-style hazing of Applicants an acceptable way
to conduct a flight test? Was the DPE's conduct out of the ordinary? He's been at it for 25 years... Doesn't an Examiner
owe the Applicant a full ride for his money? Any wonder the pilot population has dropped by nearly a third in the last couple
decades?
If I'm still a bit emotional about this its because over many years and many students I have had good reason
to think that I am a competent CFI who does a proper job of training students and preparing them for their check rides and
flying careers. We all know the endorsing CFI is being tested at least as much as the Applicant, so I feel absolutely
responsible for the outcome of all tests undertaken by my students. I own my airplanes, don't employ newbie instructors
(no offense, I was a newbie once, too) at less than minimum wage and insist on very high standards of performance for my own
peace of mind as well as theirs. I don't want my students or my airplanes damaged. People tell me I am a notoriously
careful and thorough CFI. My Applicant success rate is about 100 to 1, with only two failures in nearly forty years
of instructing (the first failure was a fluke, but that's another story). Although the first DPE's conduct was not (in
my experience) typical, I don't think its that unusual, either, so I'm not just whining about a bad experience. Orals
always last a long, long time these days. A woman friend (not my student) broke down and cried after being grilled for eight
(yes, eight) hours on an Instrument ride oral with another local DPE (I don't use him, either). The same DPE nearly
killed them both on her MEL ride by giving her an engine cut at Vr and ground looped the airplane (a Baron). Does FAA
know about these DPE's? Maybe a bit of DPE evaluation by Applicants would be in order. I'm sure many CFI's can
tell similar stories.
I hesitate to say this, but have to wonder, given that FAA has apparently instructed DPE's to fail at least
25% of Applicants, if that directive doesn't provide motivation, intentional, subliminal or otherwise, for
DPE's, in particular those who are associated with a flight school, to respond to pressure to reach that 25% goal by
arbitrarily and capriciously failing applicants "not trained here."
Back in the early 70's FAA made some significant changes to Parts 61 and 141, intending to place greater responsibility
and authority with the CFI. There's been lots of contradictory regulation since. Have they decided we're not worthy?
Has any of it made any measurable difference? Jason Blair (National Association of Flight Instructors honcho and DPE)
says in the latest NAFI online newsletter that his FAA POI says a sterile cockpit should be the order of the day on check
rides--no friendly conversation. Maybe. I guess that would be better than hazing, but not much.
Personally speaking, I've always thought a competent pilot or Examiner could pretty well sum up another's skill by the time
they got to the runup area...
In any event, I have a couple of questions: have the changes in flight tests, particularly the oral portion, resulted
in better pilots? Is it really necessary to completely re-hash the written exam material during the oral? Does
it really take two or three hours of flying to determine whether a Private Pilot Applicant is competent and safe?
Does setting a failure "quota" improve the quality of DPE's, flight tests or pilots? Should there be more of those DPE-on-the-ground
flight tests (just kidding)? How about some form of DPE evaluation, too? Should CFI's be given the credibility,
responsibility and authority promised nearly 40 years ago?
FWIW, once upon a time, long, long ago, in a place far, far away, I, too, was a government employee and have
some insight into the workings of the bureaucratic mind (and I don't mean to pick on gov't emploees here--the "private sector"
mind works about the same)... We all know from personal experience that a "dialog" requires a two-way
conversation, not just a sender and receiver. For every "vendor" there has to be a "customer", too. While DPE's and Inspectors
don't quite have a monopoly, its about as close as it gets--doesn't encourage a lot of creative thinking. Government
(including FAA and their designated representative) claims to be responsive. Is it? Most universities and many
secondary schools give students an opportunity to critique instructors. I always ask students for a critique and have
learned a lot over the years from their comments. I think it has made me a better CFI. Wouldn't that be a good
idea for Examiners, too? Ideas?
PS (June 4, 2010)
A couple days after writing this I got a response from Jason Blair. He says the FAA has NOT instituted
a "failure quota." OK, but that's not what I hear. He does say if an Examiner has too high (or low) a success
rate they may be subject to review. But dontcha think we should all be shooting for 100% success? Given the Silver State
Helicopters (and other, similar) debacles, the state of California has decided to place some very stringent (and expensive)
requirements on flight schools and even independent CFI's, all intended to ensure students get what they pay for (good) and
that all training is at least equivalent to that expected in a Part 141 environment. The CA legislature is showing
their ignorance here (Part 61 actually requires MORE training than Part 141, but less paperwork), but I understand their intentions
and concerns. Government (like all bureaucracies) always seems to think form (paperwork) is at least equivalent to (if not
even better than) substance. But that's another discussion... In any case, every student should have every
right to expect full delivery for payment (of course, the student has to deliver, too). And a bit of two-way feedback
on what is a pretty demanding and expensive undertaking would help both sides of the transaction function better, too. Actions
on the basis of pre-conceived notions don't improve anything for anyone. Kinda like basing go-nogo decisions on careful review
of the real-time facts, not external factors that have nothing to do with whether or not the flight can be made safely. Of
course, that requires judgment, something we expect every CFI, DPE and Inspector to possess. Pilots, too.
JP
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Watch out for Rattlesnakes in the gear wells!
Being located here in Boeing Country, lots of my friends, fellow pilots and students are Boeing types. Boeing also
offers employees some great deals on training programs, including Flight Training. If you're a Boeing employee
and want to FLY, contact the company for more info.
Anyway, with all of the new designs rolling out, 787, 747-8 freighter etc., there's flight testing to be done.
Several of "my" guys are involved, including James Kruse (F-22), Azim Khan (787), Wade Stoelting (787), Dave Patterson and
Gary Lackey (both 747-8) to name a few. They're a great bunch of guys. Dave and Gary are off to the southern California
desert next week (Palmdale) for six months to a year of 12-hour days and seven day weeks. Friday night we had a send-off
party for them here at the hangar. They plan on keeping their flying skills shiny while in the desert, possibly at Barnes
Aviation at Fox Field in Lancaster. Anything to do with Pancho or son Billy? Don't know, but hers is a great story,
what with the 1929 Travel Air Mystery Ship, Happy Bottom Riding Club, Chuck Yeager, Bob Hoover, Jack Ridley, Al Boyd,
The Right Stuff etc. See www.panchobarnes.com for more.
And have a Great Time Dave and Gary!
|
|
click here to download "The Ballad of Flight Service" song
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Wild Blue AviationHangar 28
18228 59th Dr. NE, Arlington, WA, 98223 USA
Arlington Municipal Airport (KAWO)
mail to: 1521 Wetmore Ave., Everett, WA 98201-2057,
USA
|
|
|
|
