Fighthing Flight Test Results?

[Freddy_Francis]

To start off im not fighting any flight test as this curiosity was brought on by something I read in a textbook.

I never really looked into it but apparently if you have a case in regards to the way your flight test was conducted you can "fight" it. Obviously it has to be more of a reason besides not being happy that you failed/partial.

Just wondering if anyone has gone down this road and what was the outcome.

[ywgflyboy]

I have not ever fought a flight test but I would always keep in the back of mind, "do I really wanna fight this partial because I have to fly with the guy again next week!"

[Tim]

i've heard of it happening once. when i was in school a friend of mine would have partialed his multi ride. unfortunatly i don't remember the details, but the examiner asked him to perform an exercise in a situation when you wouldn't normally be doing exercises. after the flight he told the examiner he didn't think it was a fair judge of his abilities and that he didn't think he deserverd to fail. the examiner agreed, called the flight incomplete, flew again the next day and my buddy passed.

[FlaplessDork]

My suggestion to flight instructors is to read the Pilot Examiners Manual. http://www.tc.gc.ca/publications/EN/TP1 ... 14277E.PDF

It will give you an idea of how the flight test is to be conducted and how they judge the candidate's performance. It can help you make your case.

There are some examiners I don't use because they don't understand fully the flexibility that the Pilot Examiner Manual offers in some areas. Students shouldn't always be assessed as a fail if they blow a standard. There are other factors to take into consideration.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I know of one instance where a pilot on an IFR initial ride decided he was to high and too fast on a non precision approach and declared a missed approach. His second approach went well but the TC examiner called the first appoach a fail and made the ride a partial pass with the non precision approach to be re-examined. The owner of the FTU took it up with transport who overruled the examiner and issued him a rating.

[Lurch]

I know of one instance where a pilot on an IFR initial ride decided he was to high and too fast on a non precision approach and declared a missed approach. His second approach went well but the TC examiner called the first appoach a fail and made the ride a partial pass with the non precision approach to be re-examined. The owner of the FTU took it up with transport who overruled the examiner and issued him a rating.

When did this happen?

A few years ago they changed the policy to allow for a screwed up approach and allow the student a mulligan.

Lurch

[patter]

You reride with Transport. Whole test over again.

[Donald]

If you are interested, you could also research the TATC. They deal with some of these issues, although I believe it is mostly in regards to PPC rides.

[Tim]

You reride with Transport. Whole test over again.

if you go back and read the only 2 stories about this (mine and BPF's) you'll notice neither include doing a full re-ride. in BPF's case they didn't even do a partial ride.

[patter]

Read your flight test guide.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The incident I refreed to occured in the mid 1990's. The canadidate was in IMC conditions when he elected to go around but up to that point the approach parameters were still inside the flight test standards. I am guessing that had the airplane been visual the examiner would have ended the ride when the candidate said he was going around. Therefore a partial reride would have been required as he would have not demonstrated the non precision approach manoever. But since he was in IMC he had to do a full second approach so he in effect did the reride right there. I am guessing that is what caused TC to just go ahead an issue him his rating rather than require him to go and demonstrate another non precision approach. It seems to me TC acknowledged the rather unusual set of circumstances of this case and provided a sensible and practical solution.

[Pugster]

visual the examiner would have ended the ride when the candidate said he was going around.

This is strange to me...I believe you...but strange...

When you PPC on a larger aircraft, if the approach gets bent out of shape, you are expected to abandon it and execute a go-around for another attempt. From what I know, it's not a fail - unless you elect to continue with a bad approach. You may not get stellar marks, but because you did the "extra" approach it's not a partial.

As far as challenging a TC evaluation, I really can't see it being a good idea...ever. Having a defensive attitude (not suggesting that's the case with anyone here) when someone critisizes your performance in the cockpit is not a good way to make friends in this industry...

[loopa]

Having a defensive attitude (not suggesting that's the case with anyone here) when someone critisizes your performance in the cockpit is not a good way to make friends in this industry...

I want to agree with the above, but then there are also some examiners that simply are jerks ! We know who they are and they know who they are. I personally don't know if I would want to be friends with such people. Not enemies, but not friends. Just a professional relationship.

[niwre]

For me it was not so much a "fight" but a disagreement on an interpretation of the flight test guide (dammit I wanted my 4 ) and the first indications of a stall on a particular a/c for the dirty stall of a multi ride. But from my understanding the onus is on the person being tested to provide proof the mark they got or the test was conducted in an unfair manner. I had a passing mark regardless of what happened but dammit its the principal of the matter

[HORUNNER]

Been there done that, won it . . . Maybe
In my case I made my complaint to the tribunal and got my day in court 4 months later.
3 more months and I learnt that I got a favourable outcome, refered back for review.
This is where it gets tricky, for those that dont know tribunal can only up hold the decision of the examiner or refer it back to the Minister of Transport for review; so there really is no win at tribunal.
The MoT took 5 months to review it and 2 months to write up there review.
It is not a quick process