Can failed checkrides trigger a 709 ride?

[dana172]

I have failed the practical test for an ATP certificate 2 times. Does the FAA use failed checkrides as a criteria for a 709 ride. I have never had a violation, accident, or incident. I just get very nervous when I take checkrides.

Thanks.

 

[nosehair]

No, not on the applicant, but it can trigger a 709 for the instructor. Depends on the FSDO area.

 

[avbug]

That's not entirely accurate. When taking a practical test for a certificate or rating, you may be given an unsatisfactory notice, the ride may be discontinued, you may be failed, or...you can lose the certification you now posess. This is rare, but it can happen. Airmen would do well to remember that when they test for any checkride, the possibility does exist that it could compromise their certificate(s).

Go prepared.

Your instructor is unlikey to get a competency ride, but with enough student failures, may become the subject of surveillance.

 

[nosehair]

Your instructor is unlikey to get a competency ride, but with enough student failures, may become the subject of surveillance.

I do know of a FSDO that has an iron-clad policy of 709ing any instructor whose student fails on a second recommended attempt at any check-ride. FSDO name withheld to protect myself.

There is no standard answer to any FSDO policy or procedure. Each FSDO is it's own little FAA. They don't even agree on black-and-white regulatory interpretation. That's why they are supposed to refer a regulatory question to FAA legal.

 

[avbug]

I do know of a FSDO that has an iron-clad policy of 709ing any instructor whose student fails on a second recommended attempt at any check-ride.

That doesn'tsurprise me a bit.

I think it may be a bit extreme, because despite an isntructor's best efforts, some students do the unpredictable, and people are only human (one can only hope). Perhaps if the instructor has two students in a row...

When I did my initial flight instructor, the FAA had a practice of failing 90% of the applicants. I discussed it with an examiner at the time; the examiner confided that he was under pressure to fail more because the end of the month was approaching, and he needed to show the 90% on their initial try.

I should say I believe it was 90%...I don't recall the exact number. This wasn't a policy to be found in a regulation or handbook; it was a practice by memo. I wish I had a copy of that memo.

 

[dana172]

I am even more nervous to take the checkride for the 3rd time. I felt well prepared and confident for the 2nd attempt, but I can't imagine failing it again. My worst fear is to get the FAA involved and have to take a 709 checkride with them.

Have anyone seen the FAA get involved with unsatisfactory checkrides?

I really didn't do that poorly on either failure, I just let small errors rattle me too much. I agree that my performance was unsatisfactory per the PTS.

Thanks for the replies.

 

[AC560]

I do know of a FSDO that has an iron-clad policy of 709ing any instructor whose student fails on a second recommended attempt at any check-ride. FSDO name withheld to protect myself.

Ours is the third ride though only if the same instructor signs off all three times. So you can sign twice and somebody else signs the third and the student fails nobody gets the 709.

The FAA also doesn't really need any reason to request a 709 ride.

49 U.S.C. 44709
(a) Reinspection and Reexamination.— The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may reinspect at any time a civil aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, design organization, production certificate holder, air navigation facility, or air agency, or reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 4703 of this title.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The FAA also doesn't really need any reason to request a 709 ride.

49 U.S.C. 44709
(a) Reinspection and Reexamination.— The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may reinspect at any time a civil aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, design organization, production certificate holder, air navigation facility, or air agency, or reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under section 4703 of this title.

There's a "gloss" over the statute that requires that "An inspector's decision to conduct a reexamination of an airman's competence must always be based on probable cause." (Order 8400.10 - the inspector's handbook). But you're essentially correct since (a) it doesn't take much to establish the "probable cause" and (b) the only way to challenge it is to refuse and fight the emergency certificate revocation proceedings.

 

[TEXAN AVIATOR]

The Feds can pretty much do whatever they want. So, will they give you a 709 ride? Probably not. Will they give your CFI one if you fail again, I'd think so. Anything is possible because it's at their discretion. Try not to worry just focus on passing the ride. Good luck!

Edit, I take that back. For an atp I'd say chances are you'd get the 709 ride before an instructor. ATP you pretty much just fine tune what you know and your skills. It's not really anything a cfi does wrong. That's about the only rating that way as you know.

 

[cvsfly]

With no prerequisite training from a CFI for a CFI to endorse an ATP applicant, what do think the CFI should be held accountable for? I'm trying to remember how mine went. Basically the CFI who endorsed my Form 8710 for the ATP ride was attesting to a review of my logbook, confirming my qualifications on paper to take the practical according to 61.153, and considered me to be of "good moral character". Yeah, well, she should be held accountable for that because she knew very well she was glossing over that. Ha Ha. What do you for an ATP applicant?