Good grief.
Honestly, why blame the FAA? Its the DPE that was not following the rules and got caught. I would not be surprised if the affected pilots band together and try to recoup their check ride fees as well as the additional costs incurred for the re-ride against the DPE. It only sounds fair. He provided a service that was not up to standards and it caused this mess to begin with. Its ALL on the DPE. The FAA is just making sure that everyone is held to the same standard.
That sounds similar what has happened in my local area. We might even be referring to the same FSDO. It’s basically at the point where if the DPE is being examined and they don’t fail the applicant for any reason, the DPE is deemed to be unqualified.
And DPEs need not bother appealing to the FAA if their examiner privileges are yanked, because they just rubber stamp whatever the rogue “specialist” says why they weren’t qualified.
That’s why I suggested an independent review board, because the FAA can’t be trusted to police itself. All it takes is a single rogue agent with a chip on their shoulder to ruin the aviation lives of many. That can still happen with a board, but at least it’s a little more difficult to pull off than a single person acting on their own.
Maybe, maybe not. We don’t know why that DPE’s status was revoked. And I personally know a DPE who had their status revoked for an insignificant reason. DPEs fear the FAA as much as pilots fear the FAA for making arbitrary decisions.
It could be that this examiner was indeed failing to meet their obligation as a fair and impartial judge of an applicant’s skills and that this action is justified. But it could also just as easily be a rogue FAA specialist who had it in for this particular examiner. Either way, it’s the pilots affected who got the short end of the stick.
That’s a very unfair assessment. First, FAA CMO inspectors are a product of the environment that raised them, i.e. the airline industry. So your experience with them is reflected in your own egotistical and gucci boy mirror. Second, DPEs are managed by FSDO inspectors, not CMO inspectors. That duty is just one of the hundreds that involve parts 61, 65, 145, 121/135, 141…and the list goes on and on. An impossible workload for the GA inspector. And lastly, before you judge the dreaded “FAA Inspector”, you may want to take a walk in their shoes. Put on your boots and hat and volunteer to help with some fatal accident investigations. It’s a great way to get out of the protection of your airline cockpit and get some fresh air. (or not so fresh)
Which is already an issue, and will be worse for those pilots dinged in this action; they could essentially have less than a month to actually find a “legit” DPE to re-test. At least in the lower 48, that pretty much ain’t happening.
I agree with You, Mr. Charles B…
This sort of thing comes up periodically in every part of the industry where designees make decisions. Typically, absent something concrete like bribery, we as outsiders don’t get much to go on in choosing sides, so most just go with the side they identify with.
As is the case here, I can’t recall any such action where the performance of the accused was identified as leading to any actual safety-related incident or incidents, therefore how do you adjudge? It would be nice to see something such as supporting statistics comparing his examinees’ records to those of others of similar experience engaged in the same type of flying. “His style just annoys me” would be a poor explanation to be left with.
There’s going to be a lot of ASA flights down to Arizona in the next month if they can find a DPE.
AT 70 Years of age, still flying GA but having dropped my commercial activities (EU CFI, IR, ME with several airliner type ratings and on) I am still very connected with the new rules. And these are no joke in the EU. Just about everything is regulated, there is so much stuff out there, that describes and requires any pilot, CFI and/or examiner to comply with. The Young kids accept that more(they have no choice), I would have trouble to be a teacher these days if I would have to study and teach according this harness.
Possibly the gentleman involved was like many older and experienced (in practical ways) flyers that followed his own “book”. Alas that has been, a bygone era. I accepted that and try to make my flights as much as according to the new rules and regulations.
Anyways not a bad idea as my flight hours are approaching 25k and the time to stop is already at the horizon. By flying GA better prepared, less risky, I hope to reach the day I hang my “stripes” myself, better than being told to do so by someone else. Or worse, ending as yet another terrible age related case on Kathryn’s reports.
Gary, sir.
This happens ALL THE TIME. I know of at three circimstances, just in recent memory (past 10 years) in which people I know were effected by the FAA invalidating many checkrides conducted by either a DPE, or in the case of my students (in 2010), an FAA Inspector/Examiner who was unqualified to perform the checkride himself!!! True story. Sadly, this is an all too common occurrence in flight training.
While I agree with most of your comments, the sad fact is that it does happen more often than we hear about. The FAA does not advertise it since it does not reflect well on the FAA when a DPE goes rogue. The reason for going rogue? It’s all about the MONEY until they get caught. DPEs are selected based on specific criteria they have to meet. They are then trained/indoctrinated on how to conduct checkrides and how to conduct themselves when performing tasks on behalf of the FAA. They also receive recurrent training as a DPE.
When they go off the reservation, it’s purely intentional and it’s always for the MONEY. I don’t feel sorry for the applicants either. The Airman Certification Standards are very clear about what’s required so if the applicant see’s things are not unfolding as they should during a check, the applicant should terminate the test. A simple, “I feel like I’m about to throw up,” will end the check immediately without tipping off the rogue DPE. Typically, the applicant never reports the DPE, it’s usually a third party who finds out what is going on and reports it. In fact, most applicants spread the word to other potential applicants to use the rogue DPE because he/she gives an “easy checkride.” Both rogue DPE and applicants who partake are equally guilty and cannot plead ignorance as a valid reason for their actions. Those 140 applicants being recalled thought they got away with something. Now they’re whining because they got caught. There are consequences for bad behavior. Not all of the 140 will retake a check because some of them know they cannot pass a check. Many others will fail a subsequent check as well. A few may pass a real check too. They are not innocent victims.
DPE’s are selected based on their reputation for integrity. It’s part of the criteria for DPE selection. However, some people lose it or were phonies who never had integrity. I’ve seen both. The same is true for those that oversee DPEs. When the system breaks down with DPEs, it usually was going on for a while and should have been discovered but like all things in life, you have to be looking for it 24/7. That is not how the system works. There needs to be a level of trust that DPEs will do what they are expected to do and act with integrity. When they demonstrate they cannot behave the way they should, they need to be removed. That is the way the system works no matter how imperfect it may be.
A class action by who? The 140 applicants who should have known better but were looking for an easy check? They are equal participants with the DPE. They should all crawl under a rock and hope they are never discovered by the industry and barred from ever getting a flying job.
While getting to schedule a check ride is woefully inadequate, it doesn’t justify being a rogue DPE. If 140 applicants were administered checks that did not meet ACS Standards, there is doubt as to whether these airmen are qualified to hold the privileges of their certificate. That requires a reexamination under US 49 Code 41709. It’s the law, not an arbitrary or capricious decision on the part of the FAA, a FSDO, or an inspector. Flight reviews and CFIs do not have the authority to apply reexamination to determine if an airman should retain their certificate or have it revoked. The FAA is being fair. Violating the law would be unfair to you, to me, and the Public.
Your post is irresponsible. How did you ever fit on the flight deck with such a massive ego? For the readers: this guy is not a typical example of an airline pilot. The vast majority are professional, exercise good judgement, and don’t disparage people with a broad brush like this guy. Thank God you’re retired Billy.
You don’t lose your DPE for an “insignificant reason.” I doubt if you know as much about the event that cause the DPE to lose the privilege as you posted. Suffice it to say, if the DPE lost his designation, the world is a safer place. I’m sure if you learned all the details you might have a different opinion.
“ They are not innocent victims.”
140 check rides. Not 10. Not 30. One-hundred and forty.
The FAA placed a stamp of approval on the DPE. Either that stamp is worth something, or it’s not.
Turns out, if that stamp is worthless then yes, there are victims. That stamp is meaningless and you might as well have taken a check ride from your local FDA approved butcher.
The responsibility here, lies directly with the FAA. The FAA holds a monopoly on who can give check rides. If you can’t receive a proper check ride with an FAA approved DPE, where else can you get one?
I am one of the pilots affected by this action in Alaska. 20 years and 2100 hours of real world flying all over Alaska. Instrument and Commercial SEL/SES. Retired senior engineering and construction manager for a major international oil company. I got my Instrument and Commercial ratings as a way to improve my flying in the way that an accomplished musician still takes lessons to be even better. I was actually honored to fly with Don Lee. He is a living Alaska aviation legend and has forgotten more about flying than most pilots ever knew. In my experience, his checkrides were real and thorough. (And I know a LOT of pilots in Alaska that would say the same!) If anyone that has posted here actually read the Notice (N 8900.647) then you will see that the FAA conveniently left out mention of any actual noted deficiencies in the checkrides. The pilots affected are left with a “just because” which wouldn’t work in any other world other than the FAA’s. Nor do they reference a single accident, incident, or violation that has resulted from a deficient checkride with Don. The scope of this action is 140 pilots over 4 years. That’s a lot of cumulative flight hours. And nothing has happened. I don’t know the actual reason for this but in my opinion it is a gross over-reaction.
And to the individual that made a blanket statement above about the Airmen being complicit in this and just looking to get away with something…that’s insulting. You’re a jerk.
Not necessarily true. I personally know a guy who was very conscientious, who got caught up in a DPE loss of qualification.