All examinees of DPE Edward L. Lane to be required to re-test

This is disgusting. Because some DPE is a scumbag should not mean that a group of pilots, of whom we are sorely lacking in numbers, should get hosed and forced to redo their previously earned qualifications.

Additionally, having a 709 ride on your record is pretty bad, even in a case where some dude that doesn't like to follow the rules screws a group of people and they've done nothing wrong - its the flight equivalent of trying to explain a GED on a resume.

Ultimately, I hope the DPE is stripped of everything he has associated with his ticket, and he starts over as a private student. But his students shouldn't have to pay because he is a loser.
 
Does anyone know the full story. I have heard two versions, one was this DPE passed too many and did fail enough(as to why that should be a criteria as to how good a DPE is I do not know, other than the obvious, but that is why there are bell curves), and the second one was that he was taking payments to pass people who should not have been passed. In either case, why did it take so long for such action?

Certainly, we as pilots as a whole should be upset about this and I wonder if a mass writing campaign to AOPA may force AOPA to help these pilots. If they did it to this DPE's clients, who says there not going to do it to others. I for one know I would pass a new checkride if I had to, but I would not want to. How many of us would like to do a drivers test again.

Doug
 
This is horrible to hear.

The DPE system seems easy to abuse, after my first personal experience with it. I'm sure most DPEs are great, but unethical people always make it high up the ladder.
 
Does the FAA ever charge for 44709 rides? I would doubt it. As for the other costs, if the problem DPE has any assets, maybe one could take him to small claims court.

The FAA doesn't charge, but a majority of those affected appear to have added ME ratings and getting a rental aircraft lined up to refresh and retest even if the exmainer is free isn't a nontrivial amount of money.
 
Every one is talking 709 ride, is it really?

or is it simply a re-test?
 
The FAA Order regarding Mr. Lane was issued over two months ago, and the FAA will not be receptive to any objections to its provisions. If your last practical test was with him, and you haven't met any of the mitigating provisions, they are going to take back any privileges granted to you on the basis of the practical test from Mr. Lane until you are retested. If you read the order, you'll see they are already preparing for a massive wave of retests at the FSDO involved. The only good news is that you will not in the interim lose any privileges you had before you flew with him.

Here is the Order.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Notice/N 8900.194.pdf
 
Last edited:
On the subject of ethics in aviation, related to jFly's comment...

Aviation safety relies on the personal integrity of everyone who participates, ESPECIALLY in the part 91 area. There is just no way the system would work if we tried to "police" the 91 fliers in the same way as the 135/121 and other operators are monitored. Can you imagine having to take an IPC every year with an FAA inspector as a GA part 91 pilot? It's hard enough to get an appointment for a simple paperwork issue like a CFI renewal. That's not a dig at the FAA - they have only so much funding and staff in Flight Standards.

This comment is also not aimed at the DPE in question - I have no idea what caused this situation. There have been folks who've abused the system, both in the pilot/examiner community and in the FAA (yes, there have been things that could be termed malicious prosecution). There are CFIs who pencil-whip flight reviews. There are pilots who cheat on their proficiency requirements and log approaches or landings they haven't done.

I feel fortunate that we have a system in this country that gives pilots like us the freedom to fly, and trusts us to follow the rules. Folks who make a habit of not following the rules tend to eventually have a bad outcome or come to the attention of the FAA.
 
Every one is talking 709 ride, is it really?

or is it simply a re-test?

The only way you can do a retest with another DPE and avoid the 709 would be to surrender your certificate (or rating), retake the knowledge test (if required) and receive the required amount of training for the checkride (usually, 3 hours).
 
Every one is talking 709 ride, is it really?

or is it simply a re-test?

From the letter:

7. Section 44709 Notification Letter. Airmen requiring reexamination will be notified by mail
sent to the airman’s address of record (obtained from the FAA’s Civil Aviation Registry). The
Las Vegas FSDO point of contact (POC) will issue each notification letter. The Las Vegas FSDO
will print and mail two copies of the notification letter to each airman via the U.S. Postal
Service; one copy will be sent certified mail/return receipt requested (proof of service), and the
other by regular mail. Lack of a return of the regular mail letter raises a presumption that the
airman received the letter; in such cases, an appropriate person at the Las Vegas FSDO should
document that the regular mail letter was not returned. For an airman with both U.S. and foreign
addresses, two copies will be mailed to each address. The letter will notify the airman of the
decision to reexamine and require the airman to contact the Las Vegas FSDO POC (referenced in
the letter) within 10 business days of receipt of the letter to schedule a reexamination. The letter
will state that the airman may be reexamined for each certificate and rating DPE Lane issued
them from September 2009 to October 2011. The Las Vegas FSDO will maintain the records of
the notifications to the airmen and the records of the administration of the reexaminations.
 
On the subject of ethics in aviation, related to jFly's comment...

Aviation safety relies on the personal integrity of everyone who participates, ESPECIALLY in the part 91 area. There is just no way the system would work if we tried to "police" the 91 fliers in the same way as the 135/121 and other operators are monitored.

I feel fortunate that we have a system in this country that gives pilots like us the freedom to fly, and trusts us to follow the rules. Folks who make a habit of not following the rules tend to eventually have a bad outcome or come to the attention of the FAA.

Unfortunately, every aspect of aviation is replete with the cheat. It's a high-cost high-stakes game for the players, many of whom have repeatedly demonstrated that they are willing to bend or ignore the rules. Thinking that the majority of them get caught is naive.
 
This is disgusting. Because some DPE is a scumbag . . .
But we do not know if he is, Nick. John and Mike report that their checkrides were not in any way compromised, and we have testimonials in this thread that FAA bobhoovers DPEs for no reason. Where is the evidence?
 
Every one is talking 709 ride, is it really?

or is it simply a re-test?
A 709 ride is a re-test. "709" refers to the statute (49 U.S.C. §44709) that gives the FAA authority to re-examine.


==============================
Sec. 44709. Amendments, modifications, suspensions, and revocations of certificates
(a) Reinspection and Reexamination. - The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may reinspect at any time a civil aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, design organization, production certificate holder, air navigation facility, or air agency, or reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 44703 of this title.
==============================

While typically done in the aftermath of an accident or incident and generally targeted to specific skills, there is nothing that prevents it from being used for a complete do-over of a complete practical test if the situation warrants.
 
Is it possible to pre-empt the 709 ride?

For example - rather than rush and get ready for a checkride that you may be working toward, is it possible to take the initiative and get the checkride for your previous rating done with a new DPE or FAA examiner so it can go on your record and NOT be called a 709?

I know, you'll still be out the cash for the prep and the ride expenses, but could it be done in such a way that a 709 doesn't show on your record?
 
Don't rule out the possibility that you might be able to.

I don't think anyone has said it yet: Get an aviation attorney. If you are an AOPA/LSP member, take advantage of it. If you are not, see if you can get a referral. If you are an AOPA member but not signed up for the LSP, the list of LSP attorneys is still available. I would be very surprised if the small group of Plan attorneys in Vegas are not receiving multiple calls as well as Plan attorneys in neighboring states.

It's not that the FAA is going to be frightened. That's not what legal representation is for. It's to provide advice and negotiate as your objective representative in a system that he or she understands.

I'm a member of AOPA legal. Called them first. Basically said there is not much we can do short of what the letter says.

Mike
 
I went to Sheble Aviation to prepare for, and receive my check ride. I spent four days there, being drilled from sun up to sun down at a cost of around $1,500.00 if I recall correctly. They furnished the DPE, who I had to pay another $400.00 in cash for the check ride, which lasted the better part of the day.

Prior to that I had over four years of flight training with one school and two private instructors.

Sheble drilled me on the ground portion for the better part of a day, with two of their instructors trying to make me miss at least one question....they didn't.

I had never flown a high wing, and that is all that was available for the test. The bulk of my time spent with Sheble was in the air, becoming familiar with a C-172. Being a mono vision pilot, I had trouble getting used to landing the 172 since one eyed people rely more on shapes & perspective rather than hight above the ground, although that is used as well, but not to the degree that full vision people do.

So it does take folks like me a little more time to get used to judging hight from different airplanes.

My very first air task with Eddy, after the nit picking paperwork portion and drilling, was to navigate and fly to a long dirt landing strip in the desert. I had never landed on a soft sand strip in my life. I found the strip on my first attempt, which was not easy, since it is the identical color of all the surrounding terrain, and I executed a perfect landing and taxi the full length of it, which was a long desert strip. I kept the nose wheel off the ground the entire length.

We did a full stop and went into the restaurant where Eddy spent several hours continuation of the ground portion. I then worked up a flight plan to another airport, and executed a perfect run up and take off from the sand strip. About a third of the way, he had me execute a diversion. Then he ran me through all the maneuvers, unusual attitudes, etc. He then had me divert one more time to Bullhead City class D airport. Make an approach and land to a full stop. We taxied back and took off again. He then did the emergency engine out, which I passed again. He then had me take us back to Sheble, about ten miles south.

Anyway you look at it, it was a full and complete check ride.

-John
 
Last edited:
Myself, I'm not going through it again. My small monetary contribution to GA will probably not be missed at all. I know I'm done with having my bank account being milked monthly to help support it.

-John
 
Dang, John. I've followed your experiences as you've posted. You've had the determination to earn what you want that I wish a lot more people in this world would have.

I'm wondering if there is more to the story that just a pass/fail percentage issue. To retest ALL his checkrides for that period just seems suspicious to me - more than simply the percentages not adding up. There must have been something seriously wrong with his elgiblity to administer checkrides that would cause all of them to be voided.
 
You're making the assumption that, in a situation where the FAA knows that there are potentially hundreds of pilots involved, it would have a team of inspectors (and maybe even Designees) from all across the country on call.

These are practical tests being called into question. Not flight reviews. CFIs give flight reviews not practical tests.


This is what I had in mind when I made the comment about not charging for the retest. Since there are so many victims, the FAA should at least pull out all the stops to see that they can get a checkride in a reasonable amount of time at no cost.
 
I'm wondering if there is more to the story that just a pass/fail percentage issue. To retest ALL his checkrides for that period just seems suspicious to me - more than simply the percentages not adding up. There must have been something seriously wrong with his elgiblity to administer checkrides that would cause all of them to be voided.

I think that's a natural reaction that many would share until they see the events first-hand. He could well have been screwing the pooch, and it might be a total over-reaction with scant facts to back it up.
 
I went to Sheble Aviation to prepare for, and receive my check ride. I spent four days there, being drilled from sun up to sun down at a cost of around $1,500.00 if I recall correctly. They furnished the DPE, who I had to pay another $400.00 in cash for the check ride, which lasted the better part of the day.

Prior to that I had over four years of flight training with one school and two private instructors.

Sheble drilled me on the ground portion for the better part of a day, with two of their instructors trying to make me miss at least one question....they didn't.

I had never flown a high wing, and that is all that was available for the test. The bulk of my time spent with Sheble was in the air, becoming familiar with a C-172. Being a mono vision pilot, I had trouble getting used to landing the 172 since one eyed people rely more on shapes & perspective rather than hight above the ground, although that is used as well, but not to the degree that full vision people do.

So it does take folks like me a little more time to get used to judging hight from different airplanes.

My very first air task with Eddy, after the nit picking paperwork portion and drilling, was to navigate and fly to a long dirt landing strip in the desert. I had never landed on a soft sand strip in my life. I found the strip on my first attempt, which was not easy, since it is the identical color of all the surrounding terrain, and I executed a perfect landing and taxi the full length of it, which was a long desert strip. I kept the nose wheel off the ground the entire length.

We did a full stop and went into the restaurant where Eddy spent several hours continuation of the ground portion. I then worked up a flight plan to another airport, and executed a perfect run up and take off from the sand strip. About a third of the way, he had me execute a diversion. Then he ran me through all the maneuvers, unusual attitudes, etc. He then had me divert one more time to Bullhead City class D airport. Make an approach and land to a full stop. We taxied back and took off again. He then did the emergency engine out, which I passed again. He then had me take us back to Sheble, about ten miles south.

Anyway you look at it, it was a full and complete check ride.

All of this nonsense only adds to my belief that our dependency on bureaucracies with their overall incompetence, along with their total inability to use reasonable judgment, is what is eventually going to lead this nation to it's own destruction. It is not just the FAA, it is all of them. Millions of people doing nothing more than busy work to while away their lives at the expense of all those who are unfortunate enough to fall within their jurisdiction of bureaucratic power.

They are destroying industries, GA, the environment, education, as well as turning the legal system into a complete joke by overwhelming all of them in nothing more than petty regulations and redundant laws that do little or no good at all.

My, wasn't that a swell rant. I feel much better now.

-John


John,

I and my flying situation is very similar to yours, so I feel compelled to reply to your post.

I started my flight training over 20 years ago but did not finish. I started all over again about a year and a half ago at the age of 62. I'm in a remote area so had all sorts of challenges including finding an instructor and a plane, which ultimately involved BUYING a plane. I have not put as many dollars in my aircraft as you, but I don't have too many dollars to work with so my financial strain might be similar to yours in that regard.

I could just as easily be in the same situation as yourself, so I feel fortunate. I almost feel guilty for being lucky while you were unlucky.

Also, I agree with your assessment of the beauracratic country we now live in. It's sad but true, and those of us who have been around long enough to remember a much different country, probably realize it and feel it the most.

Best of luck to you!:)
 
I think that's a natural reaction that many would share until they see the events first-hand. He could well have been screwing the pooch, and it might be a total over-reaction with scant facts to back it up.


It didn't even have to be him that was screwing the pooch. Could have been someone in FAA who forgot to dot the i or cross the t on DPEs own paperwork.
 
I'm a member of AOPA legal. Called them first. Basically said there is not much we can do short of what the letter says.

Mike
Go a step further and ask for an attorney referral. I wouldn't just speak to the AOPA staff.
 
This is what I had in mind when I made the comment about not charging for the retest. Since there are so many victims, the FAA should at least pull out all the stops to see that they can get a checkride in a reasonable amount of time at no cost.
As others indicated, the FAA doesn't charge for 709 rides. Unfortunately, the FAA is not likely to reimburse the costs of the aircraft or instruction the pilot chooses to (and should) receive prior to the test.
 
Does anyone remember Robert Hoover... This has the odor of that...

Were I one of the pilots who took a ride with Mr. Lane during the time period in question I would not wait for a letter... I would go right out and get some hours and a sign off for conventional gear, or seaplane, or glider, or complex, or high power, or aerobatics, or multi engine, commercial, hot air balloon, etc... The best defense is a good offense...
Conventional gear or sea plane would be the quickest, 1 or 2 days in some cases...

Lacking that, best be getting some CFI time to be ready for the 709...
 
Conventional gear or sea plane would be the quickest, 1 or 2 days in some cases...

Conventional gear does not require a checkride, so that would not qualify under the stated exceptions in the letter.
 
Go a step further and ask for an attorney referral. I wouldn't just speak to the AOPA staff.

Was told if I hire an Attorney to fight it, my certificate would be suspended until the out come and that I would most likely loose and be back here anyway.

I'm sure I can pass a check ride. I'm concerned about this 709 thing. Don't really need a black mark on my record especially for something I have no control over.

Also if the FAA is head hunting maybe they expect a certain number of us to fail, which has me concerned that these rides may not be reviewed fairly....
I'm Sure I'm just paranoid but the whole thing stinks. I have over 200 hours flying to several different airports in various airplanes. Have flown with dozens of other pilots/CFIs I think if I was unsafe someone would have pointed it out by now.

bumming hard
Mike
 
I feel bad for you, John, but believe me, the light at the end of the tunnel is not necessarily a train.

Sorry but I just have to post this, JUST as I read the word "train" one blew its horn and rumbled by the hangar.
 
If it were me -- I'd be adding an additional something to my certificate ASAP with a DPE.
 
Was told if I hire an Attorney to fight it, my certificate would be suspended until the out come and that I would most likely loose and be back here anyway.

I'm sure I can pass a check ride. I'm concerned about this 709 thing. Don't really need a black mark on my record especially for something I have no control over.

Also if the FAA is head hunting maybe they expect a certain number of us to fail, which has me concerned that these rides may not be reviewed fairly....
I'm Sure I'm just paranoid but the whole thing stinks. I have over 200 hours flying to several different airports in various airplanes. Have flown with dozens of other pilots/CFIs I think if I was unsafe someone would have pointed it out by now.

bumming hard
Mike

How would this be a black mark? Would there be a case where you were asked if you'd ever had a 709 ride and that would presume you'd done something wrong? I honestly don't know the answer but would be suprised if this was the case. Just because the same ride applies to when you do something wrong and when someone else does something wrong, is that an issue? I had to get fingerprinted at the local police station the other day, but it wasn't because I was arrested or being booked.
 
How would this be a black mark? Would there be a case where you were asked if you'd ever had a 709 ride and that would presume you'd done something wrong? I honestly don't know the answer but would be suprised if this was the case. Just because the same ride applies to when you do something wrong and when someone else does something wrong, is that an issue? I had to get fingerprinted at the local police station the other day, but it wasn't because I was arrested or being booked.

You're looking through a stack of resumes for a pilot position. There's about 500 of them there. 499 of them are pristine, and one of them answered yes to the 709 ride.

Would you even bother trying to find out what the 709 ride was for, or what the result was, or would you take the easy path of eliminating the resume and only having 499 more to go.

Take it a step further - you have 10 resumes, 9 have a 709 ride, and 1 doesn't. In the 9 resumes with the 709, 6 of them were for making a bad decision, 3 of them were because DBag Lane was their DPE. Are you really going to go that deep to find out what happened, or would you pick the exemplary choice...

That's where this hurts.
 
You're looking through a stack of resumes for a pilot position. There's about 500 of them there. 499 of them are pristine, and one of them answered yes to the 709 ride.

Would you even bother trying to find out what the 709 ride was for, or what the result was, or would you take the easy path of eliminating the resume and only having 499 more to go.

Take it a step further - you have 10 resumes, 9 have a 709 ride, and 1 doesn't. In the 9 resumes with the 709, 6 of them were for making a bad decision, 3 of them were because DBag Lane was their DPE. Are you really going to go that deep to find out what happened, or would you pick the exemplary choice...

That's where this hurts.

Sure. But is that the way the question is asked? Seems like you'd be asked if you were ever the subject of an enforcement action or failed a checkride. Neither of which would apply in this case.

But I see what you are saying. If you were ever in the position of having to explain why you had to retake a checkride, this would automatically put you at a disadvantage to other applicants no matter how justified the reason.
 
You're looking through a stack of resumes for a pilot position. There's about 500 of them there. 499 of them are pristine, and one of them answered yes to the 709 ride.

Would you even bother trying to find out what the 709 ride was for, or what the result was, or would you take the easy path of eliminating the resume and only having 499 more to go.

Take it a step further - you have 10 resumes, 9 have a 709 ride, and 1 doesn't. In the 9 resumes with the 709, 6 of them were for making a bad decision, 3 of them were because DBag Lane was their DPE. Are you really going to go that deep to find out what happened, or would you pick the exemplary choice...

That's where this hurts.

I have never seen an application where they ask you if you have had a 709 ride, and I certainly wouldn't put it on my resume. They usually just ask if you have had any accidents, incidents, or FAA violations. A 709 ride isn't any of those.
 
Was told if I hire an Attorney to fight it...
Where did I say "hire an attorney to fight it?" Certainly not here:
It's not that the FAA is going to be frightened. That's not what legal representation is for. It's to provide advice and negotiate as your objective representative in a system that he or she understands.
. Why do people think that the only reason to have a lawyer is to raise a stink and fight?

Yes. If you "fight it" the most likely result is emergency suspension of your certificates. But heck, you're the one who indicated you wished you could just take a checkride for another certificate or rating. If you don't want to even inquire into the possibility through a representative, don't.
 
I did my CFI Initial at Shebles (by that time, Eddie already had his DPE ticket revoked) and flew with Eddie on one of my checkride prep flights. Let's just say if there was something to grill me on/cover, he did it. A very sharp pilot and excellent CFI. I forget the story one of the CFI's told about when he got his DE revoked, but it sounded like someone at the Vegas FSDO had it in for him-I've heard way too many stories about Eddie's checkrides covering all of the bases from people who did various checkrides with him to CFI's who have had students go to him to believe the FAA's reasoning behind all of this. Somebody at the FSDO doesn't like him and 500 airmen around the country now have to pay the price.
 
Back
Top