Checkride

Is it possible to have a “perfect” checkride? Well, not in the sense that nothing went wrong, or zero mistakes were made. That never happens. Perfection in aviation isn’t measured by the number of errors made, but by what a pilot does when a mistake is made. Every time you fly, you will make mistakes—but hopefully just a few, and nothing too serious. Mistakes are a part of every pilot’s life.

When it comes to grading a checkride performance, excellence is achieved when the applicant can identify and correct errors immediately, while a failed checkride occurs when an applicant does not identify or correct errors prior to exceeding the practical test standards (PTS) limitations or tolerances. Everything in between results in a passing—although less-than-perfect—checkride because the errors were eventually corrected before exceeding PTS tolerances. The important point to make is that in every checkride—even a perfect one—errors will be made and should be expected. The big difference is in how quickly and effectively those errors are identified and dealt with.

During the required pretest briefing, designated pilot examiners (DPEs) are directed to advise their applicants that “perfection is neither standard nor required” to pass the test. Just knowing that errors are expected and allowed should help alleviate some of the stress that every applicant feels on checkride day. However, there is a limit to the extent that those errors can be forgiven.

So what happens when an error is made and it’s not corrected immediately? For example, during a steep turn you notice you’re already 75 feet low and getting lower. You’re only 25 feet from exceeding the maximum PTS tolerance of 100 feet, so you must take corrective action without further delay.

Effective corrective action can still save the day, and your performance can still be graded as satisfactory. But if you further delay or take ineffective corrective action that leads to a PTS exceedance, what next? Most applicants know when they’ve exceeded the PTS tolerances and might ask to try the maneuver again. However, the FAA wisely does not permit a “do-over” simply because the PTS tolerances were not met on the first attempt. Most important, the FAA does not allow DPEs to provide hints, training, practice, or instruction to applicants during the test—and especially not as a means to satisfactorily complete an otherwise unsatisfactory task.

There are, however, special circumstances when a maneuver or task may be repeated. If, for example, a maneuver was interrupted before it was completed because of a distraction from air traffic control, a traffic conflict, an aircraft system anomaly, or another outside factor, you would be allowed to repeat that maneuver. Or if the DPE was distracted and could not fully observe the maneuver, rendering its outcome uncertain, the examiner should ask for the maneuver to be repeated. But if the outcome of the maneuver was clearly below the minimum PTS tolerances, repeated attempts would not only be unauthorized, but also potentially unsafe. Additional training by a CFI would be required following the failed checkride.

A typical checkride scenario is during an attempted short-field approach and landing in which applicants find themselves too high or fast (or both) to complete the landing safely. An excellent checkride performance would be to recognize and repair these errors immediately, permitting a successful approach and landing, still well within the applicable PTS tolerances. An acceptable performance would be to identify and correct the problem before exceeding PTS tolerances, even if it means executing a go-around to maintain the safety of the flight. Go-arounds are, after all, a corrective measure for most landings. However, if the applicant was hell-bent on completing the botched approach and landing, even at the expense of exceeding the PTS tolerances—or worse, requiring the DPE to intervene by directing a go-around—then the outcome of that checkride should be a surprise to no one.