When I do checkrides on people, I try as much as possible to make it like a lab experiment: I shut up and let the person do the job. I don't offer advise or ask them "if they are sure" when something they do/say doesn't make sense. I will only intervene if the person is about to bust a clearance or compromise safety, at which point it is likely a fail.
I believe doing anything else is just doing a disservice to the individual but more importantly to the aviation community. That person is supposed to know/be able to fly on their own.
PPL Flight Test - Partial Failure
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore
Re: PPL Flight Test - Partial Failure
I was able to complete the partial flight test to the satisfactory of the examiner yesterday so all is right in my world again.
My instructor made a good point regarding the forced approach - while it might have been desirable to touchdown in the field with wings flaps T/O rather than landing given those conditions, the fact that the examiner wasn't convinced I would have been able to make the field with wing flaps landing implies that I was cutting it too close for comfort in terms of whether I'd be able to make the field. There are techniques to lose altitude if you have too much (e.g., slipping), but so far I don't think anyone has come up with a technique to reliably gain altitude with a failed engine.
Regarding maximizing available runway length, it does state in Short-Field Takeoff, point 5 https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... 32.htm#B.1:
5. check for traffic and taxi into position for maximum utilization of available take-off distance;
Leaving 100' of runway is in clear violation of that criteria. The fact that it doesn't sit right with some (I have received mixed reactions about the decision both on this forum and talking to people in person) I think stems from the fact the flight was not not in danger given the actual amount of runway length available, but that is moot as the performance criteria was not met.
My instructor made a good point regarding the forced approach - while it might have been desirable to touchdown in the field with wings flaps T/O rather than landing given those conditions, the fact that the examiner wasn't convinced I would have been able to make the field with wing flaps landing implies that I was cutting it too close for comfort in terms of whether I'd be able to make the field. There are techniques to lose altitude if you have too much (e.g., slipping), but so far I don't think anyone has come up with a technique to reliably gain altitude with a failed engine.
Regarding maximizing available runway length, it does state in Short-Field Takeoff, point 5 https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... 32.htm#B.1:
5. check for traffic and taxi into position for maximum utilization of available take-off distance;
Leaving 100' of runway is in clear violation of that criteria. The fact that it doesn't sit right with some (I have received mixed reactions about the decision both on this forum and talking to people in person) I think stems from the fact the flight was not not in danger given the actual amount of runway length available, but that is moot as the performance criteria was not met.
Re: PPL Flight Test - Partial Failure
AWESOME.... look at it this way, you probably have another .5 hours in your log for that "re-do"! Congratz!!! 
