Originally Posted by
GogglesPisano
Unless checkrides can become more objectified, any attempt to use them to weed out plots will be met with stiff resistance. Sen Lautenberg of NJ tried to pull a "One Strike and You Need to Find Another Line of Work," rule and it didn't go anywhere.
I worked for a regional that had a 50% bust rate in the CRJ. It was obviously far from objective.
IMO, the whole DPE system is flawed. What does it indicate: On that day, in that aircraft, under those conditions, with that examiner, my private pilot applicant performed (or not) for a three hour period. I did 3000+ hours of primary instructing (gold seal CFI) and had applicants that I figured would pass with flying colors - nope, pink slips. Others that I did all I could for, and hoped for the best - passed without a glitch.
Then you have the financial incentive issue. In the 90's some examiners were making 100K a year just giving checkrides (when a private exam was $125). I don't know what the answer is. But after flying with someone for 40 hours you get a better glimpse at behavior and traits than a quick look see.
ACA had a pretty high failure rate on the CRJ at one point as well. To them it was the space shuttle. They gave us maintenance manuals at indoc. At JetBlue I get a lot of, "you don't need to know that." Which is great, but being old school, I'm still wondering what the answer is sometimes.