Yoda2

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

bgmann

Why are you asking for peoples opinion then?:confused:

Yoda2

Responses that include at least some modicum of respect, whether or not I happen to agree with their opinion. I have stated some of the reasons I find this practice disturbing. It seems about all the other camp is saying is that I'm wrong. One way to really find out is as I have previously stated. It also might make an interesting project for a student, whichever way it turns out. I'd really like to be proven wrong. BTW, I thank all of the constructive participants, especially those that have contributed legal citations. The whole point of this is to possibly effect some changes resulting in an improved learning environment, while still maintaining or even improving oversight.

JohnBurke

You have been. Repeatedly.

You assert that the FAA isn't allowed in the sim. The FAA is allowed to monitor and observe during checkrides and during training.

That you keep saying otherwise is somewhat like saying the sky is green. You can keep on saying it, but that doesn't make it so.

Ben Kenobi

How, praytell, is a POI supposed to assess the "effectiveness" of a training program if inspectors are 'verboten' from observing training sessions? While FAA paranoia may infiltrate the normally 'relaxed' ambiance of the training session, it must be noted that, unless the airman in training is a specific target, the main goal of the observation is to assess the training program (or the instructor/evaluator). In this case there may have been alleged distractions via unprofessional conduct by the inspector; but that does not negate the inspector's authorization conduct his principle duty -- INSPECTION. Bottom line is, the regulations permit it whether you like it or not AND it seems a fairly reasonable police power given the high level of safety that is demanded from pilots. So, while you can fruitlessly demand for scientific proof until your hearts content, the fact remains that the FAA has the right and the duty, as permitted by the regs, to observe just about any damn thing related to operating aircraft.

Yoda2

I don't recall fruitlessly demanding anything. I just happen to think the current system, regarding this particular issue, deserves another look. Like I previously stated, this would make a great project for an aviation student, to conduct a scientific study. It is my hope that this study is accomplished; though I think the potential results of such a study are what might be concerning you most... Personally, I would be satisfied to be proven wrong.

Ben Kenobi

I'm not concerned with the possible results of a study on this issue. And I will admit that having ANY FAA inspector "riding" along can be personally nerve racking. The fact remains, however, unless pilots are willing to agree to have surreptitiously recorded training/checking sessions, an occasional FAA body on the jumpseat will remain a constant, just as death and taxes.

USMCFLYR

Yoda -

You are the one that needs to be proving that the current situation doesn't work.

In an earlier post - you said that there were two "viewpoints".
Actually, there is one law and your opinion.

We can think that many laws are unfair and unjust and there is even a process to try and change them. If you are truly interested in this issue, then maybe YOU should take up the mantle of some such study to try and gather some scientific proof.

It seems that this issue has struck some personal chord with you and your chosen drum to beat is the ASI's regulatory *requirement* to observe. If an ASI doesn't behave in a professional manner in the performance of their duties - then you should address it with that ASI on the spot, the training program manager in the case which you have cited in this thread, or the ASI's manager.

Yoda2

This subject does not strike a personal chord other than attempting to shed some light on a potential training detractor. I would possibly be willing to participate in such a project. Further some of the bigger schools could easily and cheaply perform such a study as they already have the required resources in place. To be clear, I am not overly concerned with inspectors present during exams, Etc. This is about them detracting from the training experience. Who knows what could come from a serious and thorough study. It could just as easily result in increased oversight, possibly through new or novel methods.

Ben Kenobi

Really, you're more concerned about the "training" experience when the level of jeopardy is almost non-existent. I really see this as a red-herring argument for the supposition that FAA oversight is intrusive and therefore detracts from the training experience. If the dude (or gal) on the jumpseat or in the classroom was just a scientist conducting an experiment, then one could also argue that his or her presence is a "distraction". Admit it, it's the oversight you take issue with.