Pilot judgment is the nucleus of testing in equipment failures. Your examiner will likely create a scenario wherein you must develop a prudent response to an equipment failure. Not every situation is best served by the reply that examiners usually hear: "I'll land immediately!" Equipment failure may or may not be an emergency. Some actually nix your immediate landing option. For example, a few years ago, a pilot disgorged a load of skydivers and began a descent. Although the airplane was trimmed for 135 knots, the airplane suddenly pitched up. As the nose resisted the pilot's pressure against the yoke, the savvy flier found that the trim wheel seemed welded solid. The pilot used a steep turn to lower the nose. While turning, this thinking pilot worked the yoke fore and aft to dislodge anything that might have become jammed in the flight control system. (Controls have been disrupted by tools orphaned during maintenance, dropped flashlights, and discarded drink containers; even checklists intentionally placed beneath seats have migrated to arrest the rudder pedals.) In a situation that did not appear on the emergency checklist, this aviator fought panic and worked from an equipment-oriented response to a system-oriented investigation by combining his knowledge of aerodynamics and systems to bring the airplane under control.
How you develop your pilot decision-making skills is the foundation of your response to each aerial drama that may await you. Your examiner is there to verify that decision-making skill.
Skilled pilot judgment demands thorough systems knowledge. Your examiner might not ask you to page through the airplane flight manual or pilot's operating handbook (POH) during your test, but you can bet that a series of queries will test your awareness of its contents. The more comfortable you are with your POH, the better your checkride will go.
Applicants occasionally respond to questions (or ignore events) in a way that reveals ignorance that a problem exists. What do you or your instructor consider to be an equipment failure? If the oil pressure remains zero within 30 seconds of starting, is there a problem? Does a bird's nest in your empennage constitute an equipment failure or, perhaps, a pending failure? How about an animal roaming the fuselage? Snakes, rodents, birds, and other creatures have caused havoc aboard flying machines of every variety. Such intruders can jam control cables, destroy electrical wiring, degrade fuel cells, and incite massive corrosion.
Some equipment malfunctions are pilot-induced. Oil loss from loose dipsticks can spell harsh endings to otherwise good flights, as can fuel loss from missing fuel caps. Other events stem from improper teaching. Is the spinner a part of your airplane's cooling system? Many light airplanes depend on spinner-deflected airflow to cool the engine. What threat lurks, then, when pilots push and pull the spinner's tip to check nose strut inflation? This puts stress on the spinner and backing plate alike, leading some spinners to forsake their airplanes in flight. If your examiner asks, you should know that no manufacturers endorse forcing the spinner. Other training-based habits that can evoke equipment malfunctions include the enthusiasm with which we check our flight controls. Some instructors teach students to check the flight controls by moving them to the limit of travel with a firm, positive thunk. Repeated impact at the stops can damage the stop plates or mounting hardware. Worse have been rudder jams when the rudder horn stop plate slams past the stop bolt head. When this happens, the stop plate's forward edge lodges under the stop bolt head, leaving the rudder in an over-travel position. Spin recovery becomes im- possible at that point. This makes it clear why Part 61.43 of the federal aviation regulations (FARs) require checkride applicants to "demonstrate mastery of the aircraft" and the reason that the practical test standards allude to flying smoothly. On your checkride, your examiner will be willing to excuse pilot-induced malfunctions only under the most unusual set of circumstances.
The timing of an equipment failure can be as important as the failure itself. For example, landing flaps that refuse to retract after stalls or slow flight at altitude can be exasperating, but flaps that don't retract during a low-altitude go-around invite tragedy. A question you might expect as you go around during your checkride is, "What if the flaps stayed down right now?" Your examiner is often more concerned with your aircraft control actions than your ability to immediately troubleshoot the problem. There will be time for that when you have the airplane safely under control.
Some equipment discussions include the term "operable condition" as found in FAR 91.205(a). Operable condition means more than, simply, it works. Doubtless your examiner has seen the airplane whose compass moved as the airplane's heading changed, yet never settled down to any semblance of accuracy. Or, he or she has seen gauges whose stories would result in precautionary landings far and wide if only pilots believed them. You may have heard someone say, "Don't worry about that (fill in the blank) indicator, it's always (fill in a quantity) off." But that attitude has no place in aviation.
Years ago, I flew with a pilot seeking his private pilot certificate. Upon engine start, I noted that the ammeter needle rapidly slammed to both stops. The applicant taxied to the runup area. The ammeter's needle remained a psychotic metronome as the applicant taxied onto the runway. As he advanced the throttle for takeoff, I pointed out the errant instrument, to which he replied that he'd flown the airplane the day before, and asked at the fixed-base operator about the needle. He was told that the needle had done that for years and he shouldn't worry about it. We aborted the takeoff. The applicant raised the issue at the FBO again, stating that he had just been disqualified for a pilot's certificate because of the gauge. The FBO owner turned his wrath upon the examiner, stating in unmistakable terms that so hard-nosed an examiner was henceforth unwelcome at that business. (That FBO has since closed. Insurance problems sealed its fate.) The lesson here is that an airplane used for a checkride must be capable of performing all tasks required in the appropriate practical test standards. You would be wise to subscribe to the FAA's position that "operable condition" means that the equipment in question works as the manufacturer intended or is appropriately placarded. Examiners do.
Equipment also includes items not bolted to the airplane. Fire extinguishers, for example, normally have a status gauge, and they often display inspection or overhaul records. If your aircraft has one, expect questions about it. Fire extinguishers have failed, so expect to be asked, "What if the extinguisher does not work?" Handheld radios and navigation systems may also fail or have reduced effectiveness inside an airplane. You should be aware of their potential problems if you depend on them.
Even as your flight ends, equipment can die. A couple of years ago, a pilot opening his canopy felt strong resistance accompanied by an abnormal noise. Inspection revealed a broken canopy-assist spring. Fluid leaks have begun during parking. Brakes have failed while taxiing in. Just because you are safely on the ground doesn't mean that the test is over. You should demonstrate your good judgment by reporting the problem to maintenance. Then the owner should comply with regulations and good aeronautical practice and repair the problem. Too many lives have ended because airplane operators deferred maintenance with the statement, "Well, the airplane flies just fine without that." Your examiner wants to be sure that you and your passengers never fall victim to this deadly logic.
Related Articles
