Ya rabbit wolves. You remember from the 90s on Americas funniest home videos with Bob S, they had one!! The super jack rabbit. The jackalope.

 

Do you know what is even harder and more dangerous?

Flying around the 1900 in the north, in ice and weather, with no auto pilot, and an FO of your maturity level.

Those poor direct entry Captains, what have they gotten themselves into?

 

No, but some things are different.

Where I learned to fly if you had an engine failure in IMC (or simulated) you would fly the plane first and then after control was regained you would worry about shooting an approach to land, even if the failure was during an approach.

When I took my check-ride the examiner simulated an engine failure right when I was getting established on the LOC coming at a 30 degree angle.
So I did as I was used to, flew the plane, performed the procedures and then I worried about navigating to a fix where I could resume/restart the approach from. I didn't know at the time that I was supposed to keep tracking of the approach while performing the single-engine procedures.

The examiner told me I had failed and the reason why. We set up a date to go fly again the following week, which we did, and I passed the second time.

What's funny is that when I took the same check-ride abroad for the first time, the examiner's critique was that I should have just flown the plane first before worrying about the approach, he said to keep my a$$ in one piece and then navigate to an airport to land. So keeping that in mind made me fail here, oh well, just another learning experience!

 

Silver wings

One question, what if, by going thru the LOC, you flew into the mountain on the other side of the course? For example, inbound to KASE, LSGG, KEGE, of LFLB

GF

 

GF is right. Same goes for simultaneous parallel approaches. Everybody knows Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. But that does have its limitations.

 

There is no difference in aviate, navigate, communicate.
Scenario based training/checking can be difficult based on the different circumstances presented - such as GF pointed out. They may be prioritized, but often need to be near simultaneous.

USMCFLYR

 

Oh, I totally agree. After the failed check-ride the examiner explained to me the same things you guys are saying, and I totally agree!
I was just saying that by applying what was taught to me before I failed a check-ride. Of course it was taught to me in an environment where there are no mountains or partallel runways in the whole country.

Anyway it was my fault for not researching more about all the maneuvers and what was expected from me, the instructor that I flew with to prepare for the ride thought it was gonna be a piece of cake for me since I had more time than he had, so he didn't tell me a lot of things thinking I already knew everything, and that was a big mistake I had to suffer

 

Checkride busts are now more scrutinized after 3407 thanks to the media. Explaining it that way in the message board, people will understand...the media, not so much.

 

One of the first questions people ask me, "Do you know...."

You don't have to hope bud.

 

Are the mod's out to lunch? This thread needs to be taken out back a shot.

Cruz- After the time I know I spent giving you advice and answering your questions in the past (about getting on at an aerial survey company, no less), the new attitude on display here is pretty disappointing.