pangolin

And exactly how did you screw it up?

Captelmo

Just couldn’t do it. Ended up high twice went around then landed on my 3rd try

pangolin

Go arounds are good decision making. There's more here..... So when you interview be TOTALLY honest, own it and move on. No second try on the check ride? Other lesson failures? Something not adding up. I'm not trying to be negatively critical - I want to help you succeed. If I were interviewing you I would be suspicious.

Captelmo

Well I didn’t check for fuel on the go arounds and landed under reserve +alt mins. Also I’ve used up all my extra sims.

rickair7777

Don't sweat it too much, GA to 121 jet can be a hard jump to make for many folks, if you recover cleanly this will have minimal impact on your long-term career prospects.

Captelmo

Hope I can get another regional to give me a chance

TiredSoul

Was this a visual approach with PAPI/VASI inoperative?
3:1 rule.
Extend runway threshold in the box and mentally calculate your altitudes.
3:1 so 3 NM = 900’ 5NM = 1500’ etc
It’s a classic end of checkride low hanging fruit really.
Sounds like you dug yourself a hole.
Honestly this is lack of experience and you start overthinking everything.

rickair7777

Visuals in the sim? Almost nobody does that and for good reason. It's hard enough for a noob in a real jet where you can look out the side window. Unless it's straight in for a no-flapper.

JamesNoBrakes

Well here is a life lesson, if you are asked to do something on your checkride that you haven't trained on, you need to stop right there. Do not pass go. Bring it up professionally. Ask to speak to a manager right away and explain the situation. If they don't incomplete and "reset" you after accomplishing the required training, you need to take it as high as necessary to get it fixed. Younger guys often aren't as resourceful and aggressive with this (and I don't mean being condescending and argumentative), so unfortunately the get the short end of the stick sometimes when the department knows they couldn't get away with the same thing with someone a bit older. You should have training records as well, so you should be able to show them where you have NOT trained on a visual approach. You should be watching them fill out the forms/entries at the end of each event and if it doesn't match, then they are falsifying records and intentional falsification is a big deal.

The life lesson is that you have to look out for you. You need to be intimately familiar with the checkride and what is on it as far as tasks. You should have known ahead of time. Checkrides are not supposed to by mystery guessing games. At the time of the check they should have been able to show/tell you what is on the check as far as tasks. You should have known before you started the check whether you practiced all of the tasks and if you find something that you had not been trained on, you don't take the check, no matter how much you want to get it done. Errors and screwups happen, both in training departments and as the fault of the applicant, but not providing training on a checkride task isn't a small thing. Who would a reputable airline want to hire?, the one that "got away with it" and "made it work" or the one that didn't take the check because they didn't get training on the tasks in the check? That's like turning down a flight when the weather doesn't meet mins. I realize that not all regionals are "reputable" in this way, but eventually you might make it up to a big airline and they most definitely care about doing things the right way.

PerfInit

Was the initial training/checking done under AQP (Part 121 Subpart Y) or traditional Part 121 Subpart N&O training program? I am not aware of any requirement for an air carrier to check visual approaches on an initial equipment 121.441 Sim PC or AQP maneuvers validation.

Was it perhaps a “no flap” visual approach without reference to the VGSI? “No Flap” approach & landing should be trained and checked if the aircraft’s FSB Report requires it.

Usually visual approaches are done with a check airman during IOE.