Whistlin' Dan Roman, awesome username. Nobody expects pefection - airline pilots are allowed minor errors, and the system is built so as to allow the recognition and correction of these. Significant, uncorrected errors are what lead to checkride busts (in the mean, and this Capt. has provided us with a large enough sample size of busts to assume that most were fair). Significant uncorrected errors also lead to catastrophic accidents. I see plenty of correlation.
I'm not defending the Captain's performance in this matter. It sounds like the whole sequence of events started when he got too slow on approach...a mistake he might not have made had he been focused on flying the d#@! airplane and not on idle chit-chat with his young, female F/O. I just don't believe in the infallability of the system enough to permit lifetime "branding" of pilots by flight standards. There are no checks-and-balances within the system. There are few objective standards, and no real accountability when those standards are not applied.
In most cases, there isn't even a physical record of what actually transpired on a check-ride, only what the check airman
says happened.
Most check airmen, like most cops, are good people trying to do a good job. The difference is that when a cop says he thinks you're a lawbreaker, he still has to prove his case before a judge or jury of your peers. The "accused" is permitted to challenge both the evidence and the cops objectivity in presenting that evidence, as well as the applicability of the law in court.
A pilot has no such protections. The check-airman becomes judge and jury, his assessment becoming a part of that pilots permanent training record for life. It stays there even if the check airman is subsequently discredited. (Yes, I've seen it happen. More than once)
A pilot has more avenues of recourse available to him after receiving a $20 parking ticket than he does after suffering an improperly adminstered (and career-altering) check-ride. And you want to know what the real kicker is...?
The meter-maid probably went through a more comprehensive background check, general knowledge test and psych eval to get her job than the FAA requires of check airman!
Did this guy screw up? Yea, probably. Were there prior indicators that he might? Yea, but they were probably evidenced more by his lack of experience and training as by his history (2) of "failed" Pt 121 check rides. His F/O wasn't much help, either. (Why wasn't she calling "airspeed!" and when did he call for "flaps up?")
Sorry for the thread hijack. Now, back to our regularly-scheduled program
