Greater instrument checkride guidance
In October 2004, FAA-S-8081-4, the D version, superceded our five-year-old favorite, and as one instrument flight instructor acquaintance said, "Oh, what changes there be!" The outline of changes lists enhancements to 13 specific aspects of the PTS (see "Instructor Report: Embracing Technology," p. 65). Many appear in the book's introduction. This discussion focuses there.
A subtle difference on page 2 grabs our attention. Wording identical to the previous PTS appears in boldface type in the new: "Adherence to the provisions of the regulations and the practical test standards is mandatory for evaluation of instrument pilot applicants." That such wording is identical bespeaks stability. That the feds found it necessary to boldface this text should give the entire industry pause.
While the introduction describes the PTS book as before, the latest version clarifies that areas of operation are arranged in a logical sequence, beginning with preflight procedures and ending with postflight procedures. Logical. The introduction reaffirms designated pilot examiners' (DPEs') flexibility to conduct the test in any sequence that results in a complete and efficient test. Then comes the "controversial" statement: "however, the ground portion of the practical test shall be accomplished before the flight portion." This simply means that you should expect to perform the oral testing before going to the airplane. Again, logical. Many DPEs object to this when weather would dictate flying first. But, the FAA has noted that too frequently DPEs encounter applicants who possess truly admirable airplane skills but are sadly lacking in the ability to apply knowledge. Temptation for examiners is overwhelming to let the ground portion slide because flight was so good. That is the purpose of the ground portion of the test -- to demonstrate the ability to consistently coordinate knowledge to aeronautical situations.
Page 3 discusses references peppered throughout the PTS. Also, you will find few descriptions of how to perform tasks, emphasis instead being on limitations and standards. The PTS exists to guide airmen in standards of performance, while the listed references discuss all other aspects of the phase of flight being discussed.
The instrument rating PTS now lists 22 references, where the old instrument PTS mentioned 17, not including "Others." Publications other than those listed may be used for references if their content conveys "substantially the same meaning as the referenced publications." Most pilot examiners of my acquaintance rely on the listed FAA publications for their guidance, but some DPEs with close ties to schools or organizations rely on non-FAA publications for bookstore sales. Since the FAA has no authority to demand that commercial publishers of reference materials copy FAA sources verbatim, some discrepancies occur. If this worries you as your instrument checkride nears, discuss it with your flight instructor or pilot examiner.
Your new instrument PTS has a list of 57 abbreviations with their meanings. In an acronym-choked culture, this is a welcome tool. Following that, the introduction expounds on another examiner-contested matter: plans of action. Your examiner is still required to develop a written plan of action, but the new PTS now explains how a plan of action is a tool solely for your examiner's use. Its format need not be grammatically correct or formal. Also, your new PTS introduces the concept of applying scenarios for use in practical testing. Scenarios have the highest level of effectiveness in causing applicants to demonstrate aeronautical decision-making prowess, correlate multilayered information into a meaningful action, and generally show your examiner that you are in fact a snazzy pilot worthy of the privilege you seek.
Special Emphasis Areas were previously hidden within the verbiage of how to use the PTS book, but they now have their own heading and paragraph. The list of special emphasis items has expanded, adding positive aircraft control, positive exchange of flight controls, land and hold short operations, controlled flight into terrain, aeronautical decision making and risk management, and other areas deemed appropriate to any phase of the practical test. Such topics as low-level wind shear, stall/spin awareness, wake turbulence, runway incursion avoidance, and other fun things your examiner has experienced over the years fall into this "Other Areas" catchall.
The section on aircraft and equipment required for the practical test has expanded, adding area navigation (RNAV) to the list of nonprecision approaches. This section now notes that an approach with vertical guidance (APV) shall not be used in lieu of the required precision approach. Next, the introduction adds a paragraph that addresses those magical instrument panels you have seen in aviation magazines recently. Naturally, such equipment must be certified for operating under instrument flight rules if it is to be used during the practical test. If this describes your airplane, be prepared to show your examiner the documentation authorizing operations in IFR, along with current databases for that equipment requiring such updates.
FAR Part 61 has long required applicants to supply their own view-limiting device, and now the instrument PTS echoes this re-quirement. Examiners now have guidance as to how to deem a hood acceptable, that a procedure be established to don and doff the hood in flight, and the PTS puts to rest the old notion that there is no requirement that an applicant wear a view-limiting device during an instrument checkride in good visibility.
Your PTS now expects you to use an autopilot and/or flight management system, if these are properly installed aboard the aircraft, during your instrument checkride. The FAA wants pilots to make best use of available resources in managing their aircraft during high workload, for example during nonprecision instrument approaches. (Precision approaches must be hand-flown.) Also, if your aircraft has an operable and properly installed GPS you must demonstrate a GPS approach when asked. Note: " asked." If your training is under a contract in an approved course that includes GPS training in the system installed in the airplane/simulator/flight training device, and the same system is properly installed and operable in the equipment used for your checkride, you must demonstrate GPS approach proficiency. So, examiners must now know details of applicant training.
Regarding your performance during your instrument checkride, the PTS notes on page 11 that tolerances represent the performance expected in good flying conditions. Published tolerances help your flight instructor and DPE to measure your ability to operate in an instrument environment. The PTS now states this clearly, then discusses proper action should your performance be unsatisfactory.
Crew resource management, as it appeared in the former PTS, is expanded into Aeronautical Decision Making and Risk Management on page 12, with Single-Pilot Resource Management on page 13. Again, your examiner develops scenarios incorporating tasks evaluate your risk management and safe aeronautical decisions. Beyond simply following needles while listening to a "dit-dah" symphony, your ability to use all available assets to make good risk analysis and the safest course of action becomes the goal of your instructor, you, and your examiner. Pilot resource management is a set of skill competencies evident in all tasks.
The introduction ends on page 15 with a paragraph discussing applicants' ancient hope of sneaking a peek while cross-checking the magnetic compass during partial-panel operations. The PTS advises that examiners are responsible for determining if applicants are receiving visual clues from outside the cockpit during this procedure.
The instrument PTS has changed. Instrument training will change as well. Certainly the availability in lightplanes of high-tech navigation and instrument displays proves the need to train and test with these technologies in mind.
Dave Wilkerson is a designated pilot examiner, writer/photographer, and historian. He has been a certificated flight instructor since 1981 with approximately 2,000 hours of dual instruction, and is a single- and multiengine commercial-rated pilot.
Related Articles
