JohnBurke

Someone actually nicked you for being 2 knots over Vlo?

ECAMMemo

Yeah, I mean I did exceed an aircraft limitation so fair game. I should have known better. However, I talked to a buddy about it and he said he had the exact same thing happen, except he was at 110, and the instructor let it slide.

One thing I notice the more and more I talk to fellow classmates is just how inconsistent the stage checks are. People failing on stuff that others get passes on, depth of orals varying greatly from instructor to instructor.

TiredSoul

First of all I’m calling BS on the stage check.
As a check airman you’re not supposed to “stack” failures.
What was the scenario?
Critical engine failed cross wind from the right pump failed, vacuum pump failure on the working engine, occluded front from the NE and the runway notam’d out of service?
See where I’m going here?
And a ‘temporary brief’ exceedence is allowed.
And no it’s not a Check ride fail it’s a Stage Check fail and if airlines were interested they would ask.

And yes I’ve been a Chief 141, asst Chief 141 and Check Instructor 141 and I’ve done hundreds of stage checks.
At the most it would have been a debrief item but again you DO NOT stack failures.

ECAMMemo

I believe we just got done with the Vmc demo and shortly after she asked me to do an emergency descent. At this point I knew all that was left was the descent, and then SE instrument approach. I’m not even sure there was a “scenario” for the descent such as engine fire or something. She just said emergency descent. So in fairness, she didn’t really stack any failures.

Thanks everyone for the replies and reassurances, I really do feel better about the whole situation!

JamesNoBrakes

I had that thought too. I'd give scenarios like that during training occasionally, but not during checkrides. Is it a realistic scenario to fail the gear and prevent it from being retracted after an emergency descent. Who cares? Gunna land. Then it seems a bit more like a sneaky "trick" to see if they'll notice the landing gear not coming up, etc. Now, it is valid from a cockpit management/ADM/SRM perspective, as in flying the plane while conducting checklists (taking time for non-critical situations, which most are)?, probably yes, but that would be just as easily evaluated without compounding the failure on the emergency descent. I think there is some validity in compounding at times, like it's time to see whether or not you can do pilotage and dead reckoning, so no GPS and VOR for a while, must be used judiciously and not to try and "trick" the applicant or create an unrealistic situation. A gear malfunction is most appropriately given in the traffic pattern/on approach when you are going to land. Combining aircraft failures and tasks just to shorten the checkride also has to be done very carefully and in many cases, it's not appropriate. The ACS/8900.2 (DPE guidance) does encourage combining tasks that can be combined, but then you get the ridiculous stuff like DPEs asking someone to do a short field no-flap landing when you don't use a bit of critical thinking. It's better that the checkride be straight-forward and simple rather than the high-speed awesomeness that some people think they can do that is faster and presents maneuvers in ways the student never learned (and are inappropriate). From what we have seen from the OP, it's out there on the edge of what I'd consider acceptable from the examiner standpoint. 2kts is hard to say, was it 2kts and increasing, or just hovering around there, or 2kts with parallax error where you can't say definitively either way? The OP did say they learned to slow down, and that's always an important thing to do and carry forward. Very few situations require doing something right away and the most important thing to do first is usually nothing, or count to 10, and manage the situation rather than let the situation box you into a bad course of action. One thing you are also taught as a DPE/examiner is that a "failure" should be something you can "hang your hat on", in other words not easily debatable or questionable. Meaning, if there is a question, you repeat the maneuver or inject a similar senario late in the checkride to get a second look. You never repeat maneuvers for practice, but if there's a question as to the outcome, that is a valid reason to do so. With parallax error, 2kts could easily be that scenario, but again, we don't know if it was hovering around 2kts, increasing rapidly, etc. I don't think even a brief exceedence is allowed with an aircraft limitation though on a checkride, that's more for a parameter of a maneuver like +- 100ft, but the real question was if the outcome of the maneuver was clear or in doubt. If you exceed a limitation, you have "broken" the airplane and need to write it up, checkride over.

ECAMMemo

No chance for parallax error as the aircraft was equipped with a G1000. Right as I selected gear up she said “oh no” and I immediately looked at my speed and it just ticked over from 110 to 111 and I arrested it there

JohnBurke

I don't think it's fair game at all.

The philosophy of busting is somewhat old school in that for the last decade or so, the FAA has pushed the approach of recognizing an error and correcting it; if one can recognize and correct, that's far more important than trying to bust someone for a two-knot excursion. The point of doing this is to recognize the real world and the need to be constantly correcting. We fly an approach not perfectly but by bracketing the glideslope and localizer up and down, left and right, constantly making small corrections back to where we want to be.

The check airman is there to see that you can fly the airplane. It's not a lottery, and it's not a fault finding mission. It's a flight. Two knots?

My question would be did you recognize it and correct? Far more important than a two knot excursion.

ECAMMemo

Right after I recognized my error I immediately reduced speed below 109, but it was too late

Bucknut

No one should be entering anything in your logbook but you. Yes an Instructor or Check Airman can sign your logbook or enter an endorsement but no where in is written that they are required or should enter a "checkride or end of course result " in your logbook. If someone else on this forum can enlighten me on this please do. This crap has been happening for a long time and needs to be addressed!!!

JohnBurke

Yeah...it's not too late until the gear doors come off.

But those can be replaced.

Worst case for Vlo, the gear struggles to operate; there are far bigger things to worry about, like completing your procedure, recognizing the problem, and addressing it, which you did.

Calling the game on account of rain for 2 knots...is what in the scientific world we call chicken ****.