DPE Gouge Report Database

Mjg2011

Mjg2011

Pre-Flight
Joined
Apr 28, 2020
Messages
52
Display Name
Display name:
Mjg2011
I created a database for checkride/examiner reports to help students choose the right DPE. If you could help me spread this along, that would be great. Thanks



https://dpesearch.com/
 
Some feedback:

TL;DR:
The idea here is good.
The site is functional as is.
The interface needs some further work.
The underlying code needs some 'public proofing'


UI/UX:
1) Page is very plain. Look into Bootstrap (free) as a way to make things more visually up to date.
2) When submitting a report, the DPE names are not properly capitalized.
3) When "other" is selected, the user should be able to input the name then, not have to wait for a popup after they hit submit.
3a) If you insist on doing it the way it is, there should be some notice that they will put it in later.
4) What field is "Ride" supposed to be? "Ride must be filled out" There is no ride on the page.
5) There is no validation on your fields
6) You do not require any comments
7) Cost is allowed to be letters
8) Your site dpesearch.com but your page title is DPE REPORT they should be equivalent
9) You have no explanation of what this is or how to use it, you just assume everyone will understand
10) After submitting a DPE report, I would expect to go back to the homepage. More people will be submitting one report rather than multiple.

Code logic issues:
1) Why are you loading data on the initial page load? You cannot know what the user will want, so you're wasting load time and data bandwidth.
2) Why are you publishing the data immediately w/o some sort of validation checking? That is a really bad idea as you're assuming people will use the site as you intend. People don't. There needs to be human verifying and approving these submissions.
3) I'm presuming you're storing the data in a database. Are you doing any kind of logic to prevent SQL injection (or equivalent)?
4) Looking at your fields, why do you have the submitter's name as "fname" and the examiner's name as "name"?
5) If you do not already, be sure you record the submitter's IP address. That way if you get two reports on the same DPE, you would immediately see if it is from the same machine. (Yes, there are ways around it, but most people aren't going to think that far ahead.)

--------------------

This site, if used strictly as intended would be functional as is. However, the reality is that the public internet is open to the public. Which means if you can think of a way to misuse it on purpose, so can others. If you can think of a way to mess up the data on purpose, others can do so by accident. You will find that "public proofing" your website will take more time than building your website's functionality.

From a reality point of view, be aware that what you are providing can be dangerous and can actually affect a DPE's livelihood. Do some DPEs need to be steered clear of? Sure. Do you believe people will only report the gospel truth? They won't. Why should a person who may have failed their checkride be allowed to post multiple reports about the DPE who may have failed them legitimately? After all, you're allowing anonymous reporting. I could, right now, spam your system with reports that would absolutely ruin the reputation of any DPE in your system, and I've never even taken a checkride with them! If I can do it, others can. And if you don't think people will file false reports to harm others, you will learn. My suggestion would be to have a human review these before they're published.
 
"Gouge"? Hmmm, so who and how is a "gouge" determined over a fair price? Seems very subjective to me.
 
PaulS said:
"Gouge"? Hmmm, so who and how is a "gouge" determined over a fair price? Seems very subjective to me.
Click to expand...

That’s not what gouge means in this context.
 
I understand the desire to help share information like this. As TCABM pointed out, its even been done before.

However I'm not sure posting it publicly on the internet is desirable either. Its one thing for there to be word of mouth to either steer clear of a tough examiner, or seek out a "easier" examiner, but to put it out there in a documentable and searchable fashion could invite scrutiny. The FAA may take interest and give special attention to certain DPEs that have a reputation of being "easier".
 
Last edited:
nauga said:
Inside dope, skinny, hints, helpful suggestions, or whatever the last guy tried that worked.

Nauga,
who says, "Where's the gouge, dude?"
Click to expand...
Interesting. Have never heard that word used in that way in my entire life. Must have its origin in some community I've never been around.
 
Yelp for DPE’s?
Good luck with that, when supply is so tight!
The one I fly with says rating & pilot candidates are coming to him from 1000 miles in all directions because there are not nearly enough right now.
 
Wha? You can look it up in Reefpoints.
 
I read that title and I see report dpe's price gouging.
 
DaleB said:
Interesting. Have never heard that word used in that way in my entire life. Must have its origin in some community I've never been around.
Click to expand...

After some cursory googling, as I too had never heard it used that way, it seems to have originated in the Navy and Coast Guard aviation sector, and is considered "military slang".
 
I've heard it as a civilian. Basically used as a "cliff note" to shortcut the checkride instead of learning the full material and maneuvers list.
 
SkyChaser said:
After some cursory googling, as I too had never heard it used that way, it seems to have originated in the Navy and Coast Guard aviation sector, and is considered "military slang".
Click to expand...
I grew up a CG Brat, although non-aviation, and have been interested in military stuff most of my life..... never heard this term that I can recall
 
guest user said:
From a reality point of view, be aware that what you are providing can be dangerous and can actually affect a DPE's livelihood. Do some DPEs need to be steered clear of? Sure. Do you believe people will only report the gospel truth? They won't. Why should a person who may have failed their checkride be allowed to post multiple reports about the DPE who may have failed them legitimately? After all, you're allowing anonymous reporting. I could, right now, spam your system with reports that would absolutely ruin the reputation of any DPE in your system, and I've never even taken a checkride with them! If I can do it, others can. And if you don't think people will file false reports to harm others, you will learn. My suggestion would be to have a human review these before they're published.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the problem I see with this site and the others out there that try to accomplish the same thing. And really, it's like any review site for anything - someone who is satisfied with what they got isn't that likely to post about it. Somebody who was dissatisfied is VERY likely to post. Especially with something as emotional as a checkride.

As a CFI and active on various forums, I have come to realize that if someone fails a checkride, it is VERY rare that they will feel it was a valid bust and "own" the failure. More often they consider it a completely unreasonable call on the part of the examiner, the examiner is a crook, the examiner is just running a scam to get retest fees and pad their income, etc., etc., etc. I see and hear it all the time.

And with a site like this, there's really no way to proof it. How can you check that a poster actually did a checkride with that examiner? You can't. It's not like Amazon's "verified purchase". So you're left with just accepting whatever people submit, and as stated above, is just ripe for abuse.
 
The Geezer did not learn "gouge" until he subscribed to IFR magazine, they used it extensively, and he found it confusing, until the context finally became clear.

I was an initial subscriber to IFR, and found it incredibly educational. The deep dive into the small parts of each of the IFR charts and plates brought out things that my ground instructor had not done. Certainly, I became a much better and safer instrument pilot, both from deciding not to fly, and deciding to fly, because I understood the possible 'outs' that the route provided. After their analysis of the hazards of "Circle to land" if not precisely flown, plus the inclination to duck under if anything that looked like an airport appeared, I arbitrarily raised my minimum to even file to such an airport to 1,000 feet above the charted minimum. I never did an actual circle to land except under the hood.

The ongoing comparison of Jepp's and FAA approach plates gave me valid reasons to chose FAA plates, as they more closely matched my flying use. The fact that the distribution center at that time was 2 miles from my home was a part of the decision, though.
 
The DPE review concept has been done many times before, none have been successful. DPEs aren't restaurants, a person might only have one experience with a DPE in their entire life. The market is small (some of the biggest flight schools in the country only have a few reviews on Google), and most people aren't interested in writing a review especially when it means potentially badmouthing an individual by name instead of a business.
 
This particular geezer never encountered it during his military service. Of course that may be explained by the fact that said military service was prior to the invention of powered flight, and ships were still made of wood so the only thing flying off of them were seagulls. Or so I heard; I'd never been within a hundred miles of a naval vessel until they parked an old WWII minesweeper on the river here back in the early 70s.
 
Last edited:
From navy.mil:

In U.S. Navy jargon, "gouge" is the essential piece of information; the heart of the matter; or outstanding test-preparation material (such as an old test copy). A person who is tired of hearing all the extraneous information surrounding a problem might exclaim, "Just give me the gouge!" Originated at the U.S. Naval Academy and introduced from there into the wider Navy, where it sees less frequent usage​

https://www.doncio.navy.mil/contentview.aspx?id=893

Also:

https://go.navyonline.com/blog/get-the-gouge-naval-terms-with-history-mystery
 
Palmpilot said:
From navy.mil:

In U.S. Navy jargon, "gouge" is the essential piece of information; the heart of the matter; or outstanding test-preparation material (such as an old test copy). A person who is tired of hearing all the extraneous information surrounding a problem might exclaim, "Just give me the gouge!" Originated at the U.S. Naval Academy and introduced from there into the wider Navy, where it sees less frequent usage​
Click to expand...


Was it used in Top Gun?​
 
RussR said:
That's exactly the problem I see with this site and the others out there that try to accomplish the same thing. And really, it's like any review site for anything - someone who is satisfied with what they got isn't that likely to post about it. Somebody who was dissatisfied is VERY likely to post. Especially with something as emotional as a checkride.

As a CFI and active on various forums, I have come to realize that if someone fails a checkride, it is VERY rare that they will feel it was a valid bust and "own" the failure. More often they consider it a completely unreasonable call on the part of the examiner, the examiner is a crook, the examiner is just running a scam to get retest fees and pad their income, etc., etc., etc. I see and hear it all the time.

And with a site like this, there's really no way to proof it. How can you check that a poster actually did a checkride with that examiner? You can't. It's not like Amazon's "verified purchase". So you're left with just accepting whatever people submit, and as stated above, is just ripe for abuse.
Click to expand...
I agree. Similar issue is teacher evaluations at universities. Far too often the reviews are revenge. Very rarely do you find constructive criticism. There are online websites that allow students to eval the faculty and there's zero moderation or verification. So it become gossip and at times very vindictive gossip. At this timestamp, it's week 12 of a 16 week semester. One student, who only turned in 4 of 8 current assignments (and failed them miserably), never comes to class and failed the mid-term exam, is raising **** that I won't provide any avenue for him to pass the course. Care to guess what his eval of me will be? Three guesses and the first 2 don't count.
 
murphey said:
I agree. Similar issue is teacher evaluations at universities. Far too often the reviews are revenge. Very rarely do you find constructive criticism. There are online websites that allow students to eval the faculty and there's zero moderation or verification. So it become gossip and at times very vindictive gossip. At this timestamp, it's week 12 of a 16 week semester. One student, who only turned in 4 of 8 current assignments (and failed them miserably), never comes to class and failed the mid-term exam, is raising **** that I won't provide any avenue for him to pass the course. Care to guess what his eval of me will be? Three guesses and the first 2 don't count.
Click to expand...

He finds you to be tough but fair, even-handed and equitable, and greatly appreciates your just treatment of all students? How'd I do?
 
The dpes that I have used were recommended by my instructors. Shopping for a dpe is not a good idea IMO. If you don't trust your instructor's recommendations, then you should get a new instructor. If you are worried about a few hundred dollars either way, flying may not be for you.
 
It’s interesting reading that folks have not heard the term before. I heard “gouge” used in this context at least 6 times at work today. I’ve been using it for over 30 years in the aviation world too.
 
The very first thing I ask for after booking a DPE is what their gouge is (from the CFI, not the DPE). But I don't care about reviews or who is tough or easy - I have the ACS to define that. I want to know what the flow will be like so I can best prepare.

TCABM said:
http://dpereviews.org/
Click to expand...
Interesting. My PPL and CPL DPEs are in here. No reviews for my CPL DPE, but my PPL DPE I'd say the reviews are almost opposite from what was written (in 2017).
 
murphey said:
I agree. Similar issue is teacher evaluations at universities. Far too often the reviews are revenge. Very rarely do you find constructive criticism. There are online websites that allow students to eval the faculty and there's zero moderation or verification. So it become gossip and at times very vindictive gossip. At this timestamp, it's week 12 of a 16 week semester. One student, who only turned in 4 of 8 current assignments (and failed them miserably), never comes to class and failed the mid-term exam, is raising **** that I won't provide any avenue for him to pass the course. Care to guess what his eval of me will be? Three guesses and the first 2 don't count.
Click to expand...

Thank you, murphey, for reminding me that I am not alone.
<sigh>

Well, off I go, that pile of midterms isn't going to grade itself......
 
murphey said:
I agree. Similar issue is teacher evaluations at universities. Far too often the reviews are revenge. Very rarely do you find constructive criticism. There are online websites that allow students to eval the faculty and there's zero moderation or verification. So it become gossip and at times very vindictive gossip. At this timestamp, it's week 12 of a 16 week semester. One student, who only turned in 4 of 8 current assignments (and failed them miserably), never comes to class and failed the mid-term exam, is raising **** that I won't provide any avenue for him to pass the course. Care to guess what his eval of me will be? Three guesses and the first 2 don't count.
Click to expand...
Funny how people who won't take the time to study effectively have plenty of time to destroy those they blame for it...
 
RyanShort1 said:
Funny how people who won't take the time to study effectively have plenty of time to destroy those they blame for it...
Click to expand...
Yes. but fortunately in the end, it gains them nothing. The DPE is happy to rete$t as many times as is needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top