Commercial Checkride Failure Question
 

As the title states I had my first checkride failure yesterday, Comm. ASEL. The ride was flawless up until the Power Off 180. Landed about 50ft. short on first attempt DPE was good and actually let me try one more unfortunately went about 100ft. long on the second one. I take full ownership as it was my fault and my fault alone for the bust. I elected to continue the ride and flew each maneuver thereafter to ACS standards. I'm a 40 year old career changer hoping to fly professionally I guess my question is does this bust hold more weight in the eyes of any future employer since it was a Commercial ride. Thanks in advance for any insight.

A failed checkride(s) can be turned into a positive learning experience as long as you learned something from the failure.

Problems start occurring when a pattern of failures show up on your record.

No. I failed my Commercial SE on a similar maneuver. When asked "have do you have any checkride failures" during an interview, I answer yes. And when prompted to explain what happened, I accept full responsibility for my mistake and explain what I learned from it.

Like Freighthotdog mentioned in his previous post, checkride failures become an issue when they become a pattern (e.g. you fail a Commercial ME ride down the road, then your Commercial SES, and then another one, etc.).

tl;dr: Keep additional failures to a minimum, explain what you learned from the failures you do have, and they won't be a major point of concern.

Yes, it happens, try hard not to fail any more. They are typically more forgiving of GA training failures since you're relatively inexperienced, and GA training and checking consistency is all over the map. Of course don't use THAT as an excuse, own it and explain how you learned something and are a better pilot.

They probably scrutinize 121 failures more closely since those are more standardized and by definition more recent than your entry-level training.

Meh, DPE was a bit of a jerk failing you for just that.... whatever....


You'll be fine, it won't hurt you at all in your career. But as mentioned in the previous comments just make sure you explain it the proper way that employers want to hear.

I failed my Commercial ASEL as well; on the short field. A bit of an ego bruise at the time but I never made excuses as I messed it up, pretty simple. It has never been an issue with employers.
*Just don’t bust the retest!

Thanks to everyone for all the insight much appreciated.

As a general recommendation, do not try and salvage a badly executed maneuver and hope you don’t get busted.
If you exceed published parameters then abandon the maneuver and communicate your reasons why.
An examiner has no duty to let you redo a busted maneuver.
Examples:

Steep turns, briefly exceed +|- 50’ state you’re correcting. Don’t wish that maybe the DPE didn’t see it.
Gross exceedence then simply roll out and state why. I exceeded my altitude by 200’.
An incomplete maneuver is different from a badly completed maneuver.

Short field landing, book says -0 feet.
You’re supposed to know that. Execute a go-around and state why. Now you better nail the next one.
You should know how to fix a potential overshoot like with a little sideslip or briefly lower the nose and catch it before you pound it on.
Again if it looks like you’re going to overshoot by half a mile execute a go-around.

Pilot in Command decision making instead of being a passenger on your own plane.
These are skill excercises so I’m looking at the CFI that signed you off also.
Lack of ground school or lack of training.
’Scuse me if that sounds crude.
I’m not a DPE but I’ve done tons of stage checks as a 141 Chief/asst Chief./Check instructor. Like 100’s.

I doubt it will affect you in any way.
If I were an employer I’d want you to be honest.
Yes, I failed my CPL SEL.
I wouldn’t even ask you why unless it’s for a CFI position. Then I’d ask how you would have done things differently as your instructor.
Now…135 or 121 type rides and mandatory recurrent , those could be a big problem.
Same as failed upgrades. I’d dig into those.
Then again I’m a pilot and not an HR headshrinker.

* On my CPL SEL ride I did a Short Field instead of the requested Soft Field.
Somewhere on final I got my wires crossed because of nerves.
He assumed I didn’t hear him correctly the first time and asked again. Gave me that cop look with the eyebrow then gave me the benefit of the doubt.

LOL! Thanks

Figured you could handle it lol.
How did your Instrument rating work out?
Did you end up changing instructors ?

Ha ha nope my instructor and I had a long productive sit-down after that. Instrument ride went great. It was that !@#$%&* PO 180 that got me LOL!

Hey! I'm also a 41 y/o career change pilot. Congrats on not just talking about it but DOING IT! Got my Commercial Single in January, have my CFI checkride on Tuesday.

I LOVE Power-Off 180s. Currently on an unbroken streak of 19 successful PO180s in a row. To get to this comfort level, I did the same sort of thing you're doing, practicing the maneuver in lots of different conditions. Here's my tips on locking it down. Disclaimer: advice is based on Cessna 172 aircraft.

1. Setup the same way every time. Same airspeed, same altitude, same distance/sight picture from the runway on downwind. Once you're abeam of the landing point, pull carb heat & power and pop a notch of flaps (10 degrees). Turn base the moment your airspeed matches best glide speed (should take 3-4 seconds) and trim accordingly for ease of control. From base you can correctly gauge if you need to dog-leg it directly to the runway or box it out to lose more altitude (remember to take wind into account by looking at the windsock on downwind EVERY TIME).

2. Specifically practice coming in too high and coming in too low on final. This way when you make the wrong call on the base leg, you've still got options on final approach to salvage your landing.

Too High: Flaps to 30 degrees, put the plane into a slip and drop altitude like a pro. Once you're out of the slip, feel free to drop in those extra flaps (don't slip in full flaps configuration, it's a bad habit). When you're approaching the target landing spot, don't be afraid to put her down hard. Just make sure you're not coming in with excess speed, use the slip to bleed off altitude and keep your speed in check, ride the slip all the way down if you have too, DON'T try to land at high airspeed. You'll bounce, nosewheel-barrow, prop strike or porpoise (in other words, you'll fail).

Too Low: I can explain this to you all day but you won't get it until you TRY IT. You're on final, you have 10 degrees of flaps in and you're coming in too low/too slow. As long as the approach area is clear of obstacles, push the nose down and increase your airspeed from 70 mph to 80-85 mph. Yes, I know your aiming spot is now grass, that's okay. HOLD THIS. You're going to round out once you're in ground effect (yeah, LOW). Don't flare. Go to full flaps once you're in ground effect. The extra airspeed plus the additional lift being created by your flaps in ground effect is going to float you down the runway. Slowly increase back pressure to stay off the ground until your landing spot is past your rear wheels, then gently release some of that pressure to touch down.
Try this approach and just see how long you can keep it off the ground. See how far you can make the plane float. Once you've got this technique in your tool belt, PO180s will hold no fear for you. I honestly love coming in a little low on these now. This is exactly how I executed the PO180 at my Commercial Checkride.

Good luck! Maybe I'll see you in the Regionals!!

What does the airplane manual state about slipping with flaps?
Why would you call it a bad habit?

In my post I listed a disclaimer that my advice was specific to the Cessna 172. The 172 POH specifically advises against executing slips with full flaps. I know some people still do it but disregarding instruction located in an aircrafts POH is a bad habit.

If I remember correctly it creates a flutter.... harmless but can freak out the pilot and pax... so they recommend not doing it.

Something about the way the air deflects off the wing in full flap configuration and hits the rudder when in a slip (applies to both forward slip and side slip). So, we just don't exceed 30 degrees of flaps if we intend on using a slip.

I’m a CFII and have experienced the “phantom flutter” in both C150’s & C172’s with 40° flaps in a full forward slip. Slightly unnerving the first time (feels similar to, but much less violent than driving over the asphalt vibration strips on the sides of highways), but easily rectified by slightly easing out of the slip to more like an 80% full slip... I do agree that the best approach to get proficient deadsticking is by slipping with 20°- 30° flaps and then be dropping final flaps as you’re easing out of the slip...

I was taught to avoid it so as to not mistake phantom flutter for stall buffet. Or worse, mistake stall buffet for phantom flutter.

I completely agree- the only scenario warranting a full forward slip with 40° is an actual emergency where the field MUST be made... or a flight instructor wanting to truly understand the envelopes of the plane they’ll be teaching in...

Jay, no offense.
As I’m teaching an initial CFI I’ll give you the same answer I’ll give him…..what-does-the-book-say?
Not all 172’s are the same, there are many variations in many models.
Some have the same limitations or restrictions and others don’t.
First of all is it in the Limitations Section?
If not is it a Warning, a Caution, a Note or a recommendation?
For instance the starter duty cycle in a 172S is a “recommendation” and not a “Limitation”
Under Emergency Procedures 3.17 descent through cloud the recommended techniques is hands OFF the yoke and small corrections on rudder only. That is not a technique that I would teach for various reasons.
Since you’re heading for your CFI what you’ve been “told” in the past should not necessarily be taken at face value as the person telling you may have been incorrect, quoting the manual for a different sub-model.
Being a CFI is about knowing why and where it says so.
Slip with full flap when frequently done will cause increased and accelerated flap track wear because of the ‘chatter’.
Now since a lot of flightschools use clapped out jalopies its often difficult to tell as it rattles regardless of flap position.
The effect still needs to be taught as you don’t want a solo student experiencing this for the first time on a solo flight as they’re often less then perfect.

Back to the Commercial, in that check ride it’s about demonstration of superior airplane control. Needing a full on forward slip with full flap in order to not overshoot your intended touchdown point is not part of that, at least in my opinion.
It’s not about throwing everything at it including the kitchen sink.
If you find yourself in a situation where you need that you’ve set up the maneuver wrong.
Now a gentle slip for a couple of seconds to loose just a little bit of extra altitude shows insight and skill.
Totally different thing.

i always want to ask the CFI what do the regs say? just like when a cop asked me for my id. texas penal code 3802.

First you challenge me on the "don't slip with full flaps" by asking about the Airplane Manual. Then I answer you with the Cessna POH and say the advice is specific to the Cessna 172. Then you go on a rant lecturing me about "what does the book say?" like I didn't JUST reference the book.

No offense but I already stated that it's clearly listed in the POH for the Cessna 172. Since there are a lot of different types of Cessna 172's out there, I guess I could have been a little more specific in that it's in the POH for Cessna 172-L models manufactured in 1967.

Since I'm doing all of the legwork here and you're disagreement isn't based on knowledge but you're assumption that I'm wrong, maybe take a look at Section 2 of the PoH under the heading "LANDING" where it says: "Slips are PROHIBITED in full flap approaches because of a downward pitch encountered under certain combinations of airspeed and sideslip angle."

So, it's NONE of these, it's a PROHIBITED technique when landing the aircraft.

Also, I just passed by CFI Initial yesterday (1st attempt) using the very same advice I'm giving to successfully land the Power-Off 180 *CONSISTENTLY*. OP is welcome to take my advice or not.

I’ve got 8000 Dual given and have been a Chief Flight Instructor 141 for 6 years at one point supervising 14 instructors.
I’ve also trained and signed off 25+ initial CFI’s, CFII and MEI’s.

Yes…I don’t know anything

Congrats on your CFI, you’ll learn more about flying in the next 1000 hrs dual given then you’ve ever been taught.
No pun intended.

It does not state that in my POH 172S.
Thats my point.

It does not state that in my POH 172S.
Thats my point.[/QUOTE]

So can you assume you can slip with 30 degrees in a S?

What about 20 degrees in a full slip? Seems like a good compromise.

Attitude, Jay.

You're being taught something. It doesn't work, if you don't listen.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said YOU don't know anything, I said your DISAGREEMENT wasn't based on knowledge. Knowledge as in having a factual basis for your disagreement. You've offered nothing other than questioning my claims, claims I backed up.

You could have lead with that statement, which would be a disagreement based on facts.

Since the POH for the 172S wasn't relevant to sharing my practice techniques for the Power Off 180 and my initial post specifically stated that my recommendation was based on my own experience in my own aircraft, you haven't exactly added anything to the conversation.

Is your POH for the 172S different from the one here? It clearly states in Chapter 4 under Landings: "Steep slips should be avoided with flap settings greater than 20 degrees due to a slight tendency for the elevator to oscillate..."

It seems like that would back-up my statement about hard slipping with full flaps being a bad habit since it contradicts the POH of your plane too. I'm not sure if it's universal to all Cessna 172 models, but it appears to at least apply to both of our planes.



We're all always learning. As a CFI I was taught that I need to own my mistakes but never back down when someone is challenging you on something when you're doing it by the book. If I'm wrong on something, the correction makes me a better pilot. If I'm right about something, then maybe I'm saving another pilot from making a dangerous error during a critical stage of flight. That's what this job is all about, right?

If my attitude comes off as unacceptable, I apologize. Feel free to PM me with suggested corrections and I'll adjust going forward.

I’m not your enemy Jay.
Just pointing out a couple of things.
From your initial post:

The 172S Manual:

Then we can talk about forward slips and side slips.
You stated “don’t slip”.
Besides it’s a technique and not a “habit”.

Sorry. Didn't realize I was addressing a savior.

Learning is evidenced by a change in behavior. It's clear yours will remain the same.

Carry on.

A man of experience is not at the mercy of a man of opinion Jay. Hopefully you won't carry on that disposition later on in your career. You'll end up flying with various captains with different personalities, some even more pedantic than yourself.

Love to see any one of you that seem happy to take a shot at me offering a helpful suggestions to the OP. =/

If you're training in an older 172-L, don't forward slip with 40 degrees of flaps on approach to landing with throttle at idle. Elevator oscillation occurring at low altitudes with low airspeeds isn't something any pilot wants to experience. That's my $0.02.

I have learned that some newer Cessna's are produced with max flaps setting at 30 degrees to help avoid the issue with elevator oscillations. No one here offered that insight, but it is something I've learned in exploring the issue of 172 type aircraft executing a slip with full flaps.

Thankful for the challenge to expand my knowledge on the subject.

Jay, you be learned one solution to every problem.
Teaching you will learn many solutions to the same problem.
An experienced instructor is differentiated by the amount of tools in their toolbox.
Again, we’re not your enemy here.

I'm hearing you out here. Take a look at my original advice to the OP's problem.

1st advice is to setup the same every time, assess distance on the base and make the call to setup final well.

2nd advice is to practice for when the setup puts you too high with too much speed on final and how to correct.

3rd advice is to practice for when the setup puts you too low so you may not make your landing point given your normal practiced approach.

I get the advice about "there's not just one solution to every problem", my advice is built on that truth as outlined above. Since you understand there are many ways to skin a cat, you seem to have taken exceptional issue with the method I used. Slips in Full Flaps works for many aircraft (especially low wings) and historically the forward slip was the method of final approach in older aircraft without flaps. Though I made my disclaimer about the advice being for my experience in the 172, I guess I could have been more specific in the statement about slipping with flaps directly applying to my aircraft type. My bad, correction accepted.

Let me ask you this. Do you understand the frustration of being called out on the carpet for giving advice to a student who is weak in an area and asking for help? Was I factually incorrect in the advice I gave to the student? Do you think that level of frustration increased or decreased as the challenge became more and more questionable as slip in flaps does seem to apply to 172 models across the board? What about the student who made the OP, do you think this back and forth was helpful or hurtful to their situation?

Happy to own my own arrogance and pride. Was this back and forth illuminating? Very. I'm not on a site with extremely experienced pilots to find an echo chamber. Friction makes us all sharper.

Yes.

That’s not advice.
CA.IV.M.S3 page 32 Commercial Pilot ACS
If you need to throw the kitchen sink at it and “put her down hard” you’re not doing the right thing.

FAA-H-8083-3

That's the problem. You were being taught, and took it personally. You still do. You see it as taking a shot at you.

Slipping...I'll take a different approach. I'm not a big fan of slips, and I say that as someone who learned to fly in a J-3.

I come from a world where we slipped big airplanes...four engine airplanes, down canyons just like a super cub, with flaps. I also come from a world where everyone who did that was a mechanic, and we worked on those airplanes in the off-season. After finding a number of attach brackets and fittings broken due to side loads from slipping, I'm not a fan. Not just big airplanes, either. I worked for an operation years ago with a number of Cessna 206's and 207's, and we slipped a lot, and had a lot of broken attach brackets. I've seen it on a number of light airplanes now.

Full slips with full flaps can be done. Cessna's issue with it was one of loss of pitch authority by "blanking" the tail. It has partially to do with that, and partially to do with where the downwash goes as the wing camber changes with flap application. Think about download on the horizontal stab, when you think about where the downwash is going.

As for getting an airplane down on a spot, it's one thing if one is playing to a contest in a spot landing competition. It's another matter if one is executing a forced landing following an engine failure. While the FAA likes to describe short fields that seem to feature smooth, hard surfaces, and soft fields that don't (but are always practiced off a dry, hard field with imaginary obstacles, reality doesn't typically fit either model. In my experience, most short fields are soft or rough, and most soft or rough fields tend to be fairly short. Either way, slamming that airplane down looks good in a contest, but doesn't necessarily win points in real life, and the point of the exercise in training is to manage one's energy and approach path to the landing point...not to force it onto the ground as one passes the point. It's a big-picture exercise, rather than merely focused on where the airplane touches down.

From a practical point, if 200' makes the difference...then you're already having a bad day.

If one makes the approach with a few extra knots, uses slipping to increase descent rate and adjust path, that drag vanishes when the slip is removed. The extra energy leads to float. The point of the exercise is to manage the energy and approach path such that one arrives at the landing point without excess energy that one needs to fudge by forcing the airplane down .

As noted above, there are a lot of ways to skin a cat. Making the approach with extra energy and slipping. Staying high to avoid coming up short. When to slip, when not to slip. Using an aim point short of the intended landing point. Some back country practices such as retracting the flaps as one touches down (generally not something you want to teach). I've even seen beta in various forms used, on aircraft that are capable; there are some significant hazards associated with that.

Ultimately, the idea is to account for wind and adjust the path to arrive on target. When I was a kid, spraying, we had a 150 that was for running out to fields to inspect the fields. We'd land on roads or other convenient spots, inspect the field, and fly back. I spent a lot of time playing with the 150, and one of my things was flying traffic patterns at all different altitudes, pulling power and seeing what it took to get on the grass runway. Extend, turn now, shallow, slip, flaps, no flaps. I tried patterns at 100', slow, fast (relatively speaking, in a 150), and engine failures just after takeoff, on the crosswind, joining the downwind, mid field, abeam the numbers, etc. What I found was a lot of ways not to make it to the runway, yet each attempt was part of a learning curve. It had practical applications; if an engine quit spraying a field, what were the options? How to use them? How much of the envelope remained to use, and how comfortable was I willing to prepared to be, to use it? All of it? The FAA ACS/PTS is a test standard; it's a theoretical exercise, but it has practical ramifications.

For your single engine students, it's never a matter of if they'll have an engine failure. Only a matter of when. There are a lot of tools in the toolbox. Teach them to use them all.

Unless you're at BUR or DCA.

Unless you’re at SouthWest and going into Burbank or Chicago Midway.
Then you dump that mother on the deck like you don’t want to use it again.

Kind of like landing on an aircraft carrier…

You can use it again, if you don't mind a neon sign in the cockpit and a station wagon fused to the landing gear.

I believe there's an STC for that, now.

JayMahon

I’m not a complete a-hat so shoot me a text or give me a call.
I’ve send you my info.
I could type it all down but that’s too much work.
Not to beat you down further.

Update:

Wow this thread went off the rails rather quickly LOL! Anyway went back up yesterday knocked out the PO 180. For the record it was in an old 172P and I slipped it all the way down final with flaps 20. Thanks again to everyone for the insight, on to CFI.