IR Checkride

I took the IR checkride

  • Twice

    Votes: 10 11.6%

  • Just once because I rocked.

    Votes: 76 88.4%

  • More then twice..<sigh>

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    86
saracelica

saracelica

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
1,814
Display Name
Display name:
saracelica
I've heard different stats different places so. How many times did it take you to pass your Instrument Checkride? Yes 3 options. I've heard only like 70% pass on the first time through. If you failed it the first time leave a comment on why you failed, please!
 
Hoping to take mine in the next couple months, so this if of interest to me. I would really prefer to only have to take it once!
 
None of the above because I don't "rock". However, I have never taken any check ride twice.
 
Took it twice. My preferred examiner was n/a so went to a different one. After CFI heard about the checkride, he insisted I retake with original examiner -- which I did and passed with flying colors.

Pretty good explanation without any personal responsibility, huh? :) I wasn't ready the first time around and it was my fault. I was the "occassional" student by design. Because it took more calendar time, I (and the CFI) got ansy and moved to the next step too quickly.

Two lessons learned:
1) Knock this out in a very focused block
2) Work with a CFI who does a lot of instrument training
 
interesting on the 70 percent pass. I hadn't heard that. It seems like I did hear that if a DPE passes too high a percentage then he is maybe questioned. I heard that percentage was 90 percent.
 
The FAA web site has those data for pilot certificates, but not instrument ratings. My personal guess based on doing a lot of IR training is somewhere around 85% pass.
 
Passed it on first attempt though I am not sure I should have. Due to working many different places an my limited free time, I had 10 CFII's. I took a year of training on and off to complete it.

The day after the checkride pass I used the rating to climb through snow to get on top from PA to TN then descended through rain and IMC at destination. My destination did not have an approach so I requested minimum vectoring but did not break out so had to divert to an ILS nearby, then break off the approach to get to destination.

I was way behind the airplane in the approach phase. This was likely due to weaknesses in my training. I did not log a single minute in actual during training. I did not log a single minute on a real IFR clearance during training.
 
FORANE said:
I was way behind the airplane in the approach phase. This was likely due to weaknesses in my training. I did not log a single minute in actual during training. I did not log a single minute on a real IFR clearance during training.
Click to expand...
How is that possible? I thought the long IFR XC had to be done, well, under IFR. :dunno:

I didn't vote, sorry. I did pass the checkride on my first try, but I didn't rock. My partial panel approach was bloody sloppy, and my RNAV to a missed and the published hold was competent, but no great shakes. I turned for home after the second time crossing the holding fix because I misunderstood what the DPE wanted me to do, but he was okay with it. Then all the way home all I could think was, "Okay I've passed, as long as I don't kill him or scare him to death." The wind at home base was 14G24 at about a 60 degree crosswind. I actually greased the landing by sheer luck, and got a "nice job" from the DPE.

I really, REALLY don't want to do another checkride. :no:
 
azure said:
How is that possible? I thought the long IFR XC had to be done, well, under IFR. :dunno:
Click to expand...
You thought correctly. Of course, that doesn't stop an unscrupulous or underinformed CFI from signing the log entry for that flight as meeting the 61.65(d)(2)(ii) requirement when it does not. FWIW, all the examiners I've seen in the last few years have checked specifically for this requirement, but then again, I know of one examiner who I've been told by reliable sources routinely waives the ground portion of the practical test for applicants who get 100% on their knowledge test. :dunno:
 
Ron Levy said:
You thought correctly. Of course, that doesn't stop an unscrupulous or underinformed CFI from signing the log entry for that flight as meeting the 61.65(d)(2)(ii) requirement when it does not. FWIW, all the examiners I've seen in the last few years have checked specifically for this requirement, but then again, I know of one examiner who I've been told by reliable sources routinely waives the ground portion of the practical test for applicants who get 100% on their knowledge test. :dunno:
Click to expand...


It's been a couple decades now. But does this require 'actual' ifr? Does the definition of 'Conducted under Instrument Flight Rules' only require that the rules of instrument flight are followed, not necessarily the 'conditions' under which it took place? Mine was IFR solid most of the way but I suspect that is an anomaly (midwest in the fall/winter). Especially for those who train in the SW or FL. Of course I don't recall specifically asking, I was just excited for a great 1000' or so over evening, without icing, to get some long actual. :)

(ii) Instrument flight training on cross country flight procedures, including one cross country flight in an airplane with an authorized instructor, that is performed under instrument flight rules, when a flight plan has been filed with an air traffic control facility, and that involves—

(A) A flight of 250 nautical miles along airways or by directed routing from an air traffic control facility;

(B) An instrument approach at each airport; and

(C) Three different kinds of approaches with the use of navigation systems.
 
azure said:
How is that possible? I thought the long IFR XC had to be done, well, under IFR. :dunno:

I didn't vote, sorry. I did pass the checkride on my first try, but I didn't rock. My partial panel approach was bloody sloppy, and my RNAV to a missed and the published hold was competent, but no great shakes. I turned for home after the second time crossing the holding fix because I misunderstood what the DPE wanted me to do, but he was okay with it. Then all the way home all I could think was, "Okay I've passed, as long as I don't kill him or scare him to death." The wind at home base was 14G24 at about a 60 degree crosswind. I actually greased the landing by sheer luck, and got a "nice job" from the DPE.

I really, REALLY don't want to do another checkride. :no:
Click to expand...
My ifr ride sounds similar to yours, but I did vote.

Don't be scared of another check ride. I did my com with the same dpe and nailed it. The instrument is the hardest.
 
Z06_Mir said:
My ifr ride sounds similar to yours, but I did vote.

Don't be scared of another check ride. I did my com with the same dpe and nailed it. The instrument is the hardest.
Click to expand...

I agree. The Instrument check required a lot of concentration. After that, the commercial maneuvers felt so light\free\fun and natural, I had to remind myself that chandelles (sp) were not wing-overs! Minus 8's-on.
 
pass the first time. But I don't want to claim I "rocked". I was fortunate to fly the checkride on an absolutely perfect day. No bumps, no wind, CAVU. If I couldn't maintain altitude, heading, and airspeed in those conditions...
 
Z06_Mir said:
My ifr ride sounds similar to yours, but I did vote.

Don't be scared of another check ride. I did my com with the same dpe and nailed it. The instrument is the hardest.
Click to expand...
Maybe I should be more specific: I don't want another checkride with an eccentric, neurotic old examiner. :mad:

Details are available privately, but publicly all I'll say is that the experience really took the joy out of going for advanced ratings and it had NOTHING to do with the difficulty of the tasks.

I've thought of going for the commercial just for fun, but I might just learn the maneuvers and stop there. I can't imagine what I'd ever do with the rating. I'd never get a job as a pilot at my age, and I have no desire to sit in the right seat while someone tries to kill me.
 
I voted 2 even though I haven't taken the second ride yet. According to the DPE, "your problem is you were never taught basic instrument flying." Yes, I will be changing CFII.
 
azure said:
Maybe I should be more specific: I don't want another checkride with an eccentric, neurotic old examiner. :mad:

Details are available privately, but publicly all I'll say is that the experience really took the joy out of going for advanced ratings and it had NOTHING to do with the difficulty of the tasks.

I've thought of going for the commercial just for fun, but I might just learn the maneuvers and stop there. I can't imagine what I'd ever do with the rating. I'd never get a job as a pilot at my age, and I have no desire to sit in the right seat while someone tries to kill me.
Click to expand...

I'll IM you. I didn't complete my commercial either. However, I was within the 3 hours of prep dual required. I enjoyed the training and most of it is private to another level of proficiency. 100'/50'/25' or something for pvt/com/atp, according to the pts on altitudes... etc. At least as I recall. After practicing Instrument procedures, that comes much more natural. I stopped just short of acieving my commercial, but I don't regret, for one minute, having done any of the training. Wish I had the chance to finish at the time. Never hurts to be able to charge a photog, etc something just to do what you love anyway! remember... options = free flight time!
 
I recently heard of a horrible check ride story that started with the DPE chastising the student for "rushing" his training and only having 40.2 hood/actual, then chastising the CFII for allowing the student to arrive "so unprepared."

It was the oral from hell with dead-end questions where the DPE either said, "right" or "wrong" then moved on. No discovery, drilling down, no discussion, etc.

The candidate actually through the DPE out of the airplane before they started the engine and discontinued the ride while the DPE went off an attended a funeral that was apparently distracting him and causing him to rush the student.

They resumed several hours later. At the end of the ride, the DPE admitted that as much as he "wanted to fail him," he "didn't do anything wrong," so he gave him the ticket.

My ride was completely different to that. I had a wonderful experience with the examiner. It's good to get reference for DPE's, apparently. I've sincerely enjoyed both the rides that I've had so far (PPL and IR).
 
Hard checkrides... As I hear. IR, CFI, and (ATP/Multi/IR). One down. Fail rates in a poll do not rate against actual results either. Different times, equip, standards, regions... Kind of like the mysterious 'how long is avg?' argument. Ask, and people present their best or shy away. without actual numbers, its impossible to tell. attitude, aptitude, and determination count more in success. I've seen many cfi's that have failed a check more than once who now fly for the airlines.
 
bem411s said:
It's been a couple decades now. But does this require 'actual' ifr? Does the definition of 'Conducted under Instrument Flight Rules' only require that the rules of instrument flight are followed, not necessarily the 'conditions' under which it took place?
Click to expand...
I think we have a disconnect on the semantics.
First, some definitions...

As a legally critical point of semantics, let's not forget the definitions of VMC, IMC, simulated instrument conditions (which for brevity I'll call SIC here), and actual instrument conditions (AIC).

VMC is flight conditions in which VFR flight is permitted under 14 CFR 91.155. These conditions change depending on altitude and airspace.

IMC is flight conditions in which VFR flight is not permitted under 14 CFR 91.155.

From the 1984 Carr letter of interpretation:

"Simulated" instrument conditions occur when the pilot's vision outside of the aircraft is intentionally restricted, such as by a hood or goggles.

"Actual" instrument flight conditions occur when some outside conditions make it necessary for the pilot to use the aircraft instruments in order to maintain adequate control over the aircraft. Typically, these conditions involve adverse weather conditions.
Click to expand...
Note in particular the "typically," as oppose to "always" in the AIC definition.

Thus, you can be in AIC in VMC -- say, between layers at night with several thousand feet between the layers and miles of visibility, but no visible ground or horizon references for navigation or control. Likewise, you can be in IMC without being in AIC, say, when you're 1500 feet laterally from the only cloud in a clear blue sky.

This may seem silly, but it's an important point to remember when discussing these rules, particularly since there are times you can be legally actual instrument time in VMC, and there are also times you cannot legally log instrument time when in IMC.

The next issue is the meaning of "IFR," which stands for "instrument flight rules." When the FAA says "IFR," they are talking about the rules under which you are operating, not the conditions in which you are operating. So, the long IFR XC required by 61.65(d)(2)(ii) must be flown under IFR (i.e., with an IFR flight plan and IFR clearance), and because it is "instrument flight training" must be flown under instrument conditions, but it need not be flown under actual instrument conditions -- simulated instrument conditions (i.e., (under the hood") are sufficient.

The comment to which I was responding was "I did not log a single minute on a real IFR clearance during training," and that would violate the requirement that the long XC be flown under IFR. The fact that FORANE "did not log a single minute in actual during training" would not be an issue, since all of the required 40 hours of instrument time (including the long XC flown under IFR) may legally be flown in simulated, rather than actual, instrument conditions.
 
The IR checkride wasn't ever in doubt. I had some fears I wasn't passing my private ride but got that one the first time around as well.
 
Still have to go for the 2nd but suffice to say I got rattled almost borking one approach and overthought the 2nd. Simple mistake, DPE even said he didn't expect to see me with more than .1 of remedial training before I got back to him.
 
coma24 said:
I recently heard of a horrible check ride story that started with the DPE chastising the student for "rushing" his training and only having 40.2 hood/actual, then chastising the CFII for allowing the student to arrive "so unprepared."

It was the oral from hell with dead-end questions where the DPE either said, "right" or "wrong" then moved on. No discovery, drilling down, no discussion, etc.

The candidate actually through the DPE out of the airplane before they started the engine and discontinued the ride while the DPE went off an attended a funeral that was apparently distracting him and causing him to rush the student.

They resumed several hours later. At the end of the ride, the DPE admitted that as much as he "wanted to fail him," he "didn't do anything wrong," so he gave him the ticket.

My ride was completely different to that. I had a wonderful experience with the examiner. It's good to get reference for DPE's, apparently. I've sincerely enjoyed both the rides that I've had so far (PPL and IR).
Click to expand...

Same here as far as my two check ride DPEs. Both were very nice, respectful individuals. Actually both checkrides were educational and enjoyable experiences for me. I can't imagine experiencing some of these horror stories.

BTW I DID vote that I passed on 1st try but certainly don't put myself in the "I rocked" category. I was nervous as hell on both checkrides.
Something I have discovered about myself though... I usually get in ruts with whomever is my instructor and tend to fly so as to please their standards instead of simply flying to PTS which has created lots of personal frustration for me throughout my training. With that said I have found that when test time comes I simply create a mindset that I very well may fail and have to test a second time. This mental state has somehow allowed me to rise above myself and fly above my normal confidence level. Said in a nut shell.. After a year to year and a half with an instructor I typically fly with an attitude of..."Hope I don't screw up too much today" a very negative state of mind. When I go test however I simply see the person as a passenger that I'm flying and I need to make sure they're safe so I buddy up to them. My normal personality begins to exude and I fly better than my own average. Not sure if this makes sense it's just an observation I've made.

Mike
 
Last edited:
My checkride took place on a weird day where both the surface winds and the winds aloft (at least at the altitudes we cared about) were zero. Made everything really easy.
 
9 rides busted 1.....ATP.

Funny thing is every ride I ended thinking there was something I jacked up or didn't go just so and I passed anyway. But the ATP was the only ride I walked out thinking I nailed it. Check Airman says in the debrief room, "well, that was a great ride, too bad I have to pink slip you."

My jaw dropped. Said I lost too much heading on a V1 cut. Didn't know how much but insisted it was too much. I was there and it was less than 10 degrees, but what are you going to do?

Oh well...
 
Does anyone have a stat of what % of the PPL crowd that's had a rating for > 24 mos does not have their IR? It would be interesting since I have a feeling folks participating in this kind of forum are more likely to take training and proficiency seriously
 
Of people here I'd guess 50% to 70%.
 
Didn't radio the Class D tower inbound on the ILS after being cleared by Center, re-flew the next day and radioed them.
 
airheadpenguin said:
Does anyone have a stat of what % of the PPL crowd that's had a rating for > 24 mos does not have their IR? It would be interesting since I have a feeling folks participating in this kind of forum are more likely to take training and proficiency seriously
Click to expand...
As of the end of last year, the FAA estimated 179,738 PP-A's, and 50,617 PP-A's with IR's. 16,571 original PP-A's were issued in 2012, and 16,802 in 2011, for 33,183 in the two years, which means there were 146,555 PP-A's with more than 24 months. That leaves about 65% of PP-A's over 24 months who don't have their IR. Yes, there were probably some new PP-A's who got their IR's in that time, but there's no way to track that, and we can get the general idea from these data that Captain's guess is in the ballpark.
 
Didn't bust my IR check ride but I did ask to discontinue. I was exhausted, nervous, hungry and recovering from a common cold and I wanted it all to be over ASAP. So I went into the oral and it became apparent that it was not going to end well so I asked for a discontinuance. One week later I went back and passed.

It was a 141 program so the examiner was one of the senior management instructors at the school. When I went back to complete the ride it so happened that the FSDO's POI decided to sit in on my oral to audit the examiner! The POI said to me that he was there to audit the examiner so I should ignore his presence. Yeah, right. So the examiner and I were both a nervous wreck. The oral this time was waaaaay more rigorous than the first attempt. At the end of the oral the POI turned to the examiner and said that I obviously know my stuff and then he wished me luck on the flight, which thankfully he chose not to observe. By the time we landed I was drained and drenched in sweat but I passed. I guess the examiner was just as relieved as I was.
 
Ron Levy said:
...but then again, I know of one examiner who I've been told by reliable sources routinely waives the ground portion of the practical test for applicants who get 100% on their knowledge test. :dunno:
Click to expand...
Does he "waive" part of the fee? If not this kinda sounds like something motivated by laziness (or greed if he crams more rides into a day this way).
 
gismo said:
Does he "waive" part of the fee?
Click to expand...
Not to my knowledge.

If not this kinda sounds like something motivated by laziness.
Click to expand...
:dunno: Or maybe foolishness -- if the FAA ever finds out, he can kiss his designation good-bye, and everyone for whom he did that (maybe everyone he tested) will get called back for reexamination at the FSDO.
 
I didn't rock, at all, not even close, but I managed to squeak by on the first try...
 
While performing the ILS approach I did not cycle to VLOC I was still on GPS. ATC turned me in very tight to the glideslope intercept and the GPS did not cycle like I had assumed it would. The DPE had messed with some of the setting on the GPS while I was enroute to the airport with the ILS. We then did unusual attitudes and when I got back to it I fell behind the aircraft. Should have checked what he did and I did not.

Anyways, I turned on to course and when in GPS the vertical needle had just a little bobble to it and I had done that approach numerous times before so it was about the time it would usually start tracking. I began my decent and then noticed that the needle wasn't moving like it usually did on approach. At that second the DPE killed that part of the ride. I chose to call it a day with an ILS and GPS approach left.

Then there was a fatal accident at the school I was training with involving the chief instructor I was getting my retraining with. Then 59 days later I flew with another instructor the required 3 hours and retook the practical portions I had to complete. That was the scary part. I was not nearly as proficient as I was the 59 days earlier. My ILS was spot on with the VLOC confirmed the second I started recieving vectors. The GPS approach was looking hairy (not quite 3/4 deflection but about 5/8) so I called it missed and told the DPE I was going around for another attempt while having to pick up a pop up clearance because the clouds dropped to pattern altitude. The second GPS was spot on. I felt great after that.

Now I am one week away from my commercial checkride. This time it should only take one ride. Flying in southern Arizona during these months is always bumpy so it should be fun.
 
ronnieh said:
None of the above because I don't "rock". However, I have never taken any check ride twice.
Click to expand...

Same here, at least as far as FAA-required checkrides. (I did have to take a CAP annual flight check twice one year.)
 
Here are are a couple tricks I have seen to fail an IFR check ride, Including one I did.

Read the wrong altitude off the chart and descend below the minimum altitude

Turn right when the protected side of the approach is to the left (Seen this one done twice)

Brian
 
Ron Levy said:
The next issue is the meaning of "IFR," which stands for "instrument flight rules." When the FAA says "IFR," they are talking about the rules under which you are operating, not the conditions in which you are operating.
Click to expand...

However, the FAA does use the phrase "IFR conditions" quite a few times in the AIM, including the Pilot/Controller Glossary, which may result in confusion when the subject is discussed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top