CPL Test Conditions

[Desert Strip Basher]

I guess responsibility ultimately resides with the applicant, though what do Instructors and Examiners generally think is minimum acceptable for the CPL Skill Test? I've heard informal reference to +9k vis, >2000ft cloudbase, <10kts xwind in the circuit and <20kts 2000ft wind. When do others think applicants are being too gung ho or alternatively conservative?

[mad_jock]

I have had PPL students do tests in less/more than that.

['India-Mike]

Well on mine it was a fine, if rather windy and bumpy day. After the nav element, setting up for air work at 3500' the Examiner pointed out that we had 65 knots IAS, but 0 on the GPS. The only difficulty was the robust exchange of views in debrief vis-a-vis whether or not one added half the windspeed to best glide when PFL-ing under such conditions.

They're assessing captaincy in a commercial context, but the conditions have to be such that they can make the assessment. Do the conditions on the day make the examiner's job difficult from an assessability point of view? If so, don't go.

[FlyingStone]

Jesus christ. Poor guys who have 10 knots of crosswind on a commercial pilot's licence skill test. I feel so sorry for them, nature, instructors and examiners are just fixed on having the poor candidate failing the exam with such enormous crosswinds and such bad weather.

Now, jokes aside. First of all, it's the applicant/candidate responsibility to decide whether the weather is OK to do the planned mission. If he can't do that, he has no place even doing the PPL skill test, let alone CPL skill test, which - if passed successfully - will allow him to get paid for flying. And even if weather is at the legal minima (and most aircraft don't even have maximum crosswind limit, just a maximum demonstrated value) and the forecast doesn't predict worsening, I don't see a reason why an applicant on a CPL skill test couldn't depart in 5 km visibility which is forecasted to increase to let's say 8 km in the next hour? Of course you can say to the examiner that there is small posibility that the weather could go below minima during the next hour and should you need to divert, you would go to XY via XYZ route, etc.

I really can't see the reason why one couldn't fly at legal minima on CPL skill test - PPL is different, since private pilots have much more room for "personal limits" way, way above the legal ones. If you need 10km+ visibility to do a CPL skill test, why wouldn't a candidate who can't fly the ILS precisely for the last mile even go to the published DH (200ft) just tell the examiner that his personal minima is 1000ft, where the localizer and glideslope aren't sensitive at all? If the licence/rating gives you the privilege to fly in certain weather conditions and if similar conditions exist on the day of the skill test and given that - again - we are talking about future commercial pilots, I really don't see any reason at all why the weather would be a problem.

[mad_jock]

Mine was in 4k viz in the vale of york and it was like flying in skimmed milk.

And I don't think I ever landed in LBA with less than 10knts xwind. 2 levels of wind shear wasn't uncommon either on approach.

[Cobalt]

The only difficulty was the robust exchange of views in debrief vis-a-vis whether or not one added half the windspeed to best glide when PFL-ing under such conditions.

What was the outcome of this debate?

[Desert Strip Basher]

Similar opinion to those above. I seem to recall a student saying there's a Keynotes book with those limits in. Never seen it myself so not sure.

['India-Mike]

What was the outcome of this debate?

At 89 knots one had a rate of descent in the order of 600-700 feet/min. At 119 it was way over 1000 feet/min (I think, if memory serves correctly, 1600 feet/min). I preferred the former, for lower RoD accepting that I wasn't going to go far from the failure; he preferred the latter, I think for greater 'penetration'.

The outcome was less important than the fact that I felt he was just wanting to see to what extent I was a 'thinking aviator'.

[172_driver]

Hm…I wouldn't recommend a student to do a checkride in anything near 5 km visibility and clouds at 2000 ft. I am mainly speaking from an FAA perspective, but it applies in Europe as well. For a few reasons…

Inflight 5 km is not as good as it sounds like, you need to be mighty familiar with the area to get yourself out in visibility close to the legal limit. The additional stress of poor vis simply isn't needed on a checkride.

In USofA you need to complete certain maneuvers (stalls, steep turns etc.) at 1500 ft AGL. The legal limit is 500 ft from clouds (assuming E airspace). You think the examiner will be impressed by your decision to go with a cloud base of 2000 ft??

It's not about not_being_capable, a CPL student should certainly be able to handle 2000 ft (and lower..) cloud bases, 15 kts crosswind or up to the maximum demonstrated, but why push it on a checkride??

I was doing a checkride (as an instructor all ready) one day when the weather wasn't particularly bad for flying. But certain maneuvers required certain ground & cloud clearance, which may or may not have been possible. The examiner hinted to me not to go. He asked me not to give him a reason to fail me.

In Europe doing my JAA FI checkride the x-wind was exceeding the max demonstrated for the plane. I am 99 % sure, without confirming now since I am too tired, that the national rules in Sweden prohibits flying in x-wind exceeding the max demo. I informed the examiner about the wind, but I could tell he really wanted to get the checkride over with. On him, we went… no probs! But I felt it was "his" decision and he wouldn't be able to bust me for it afterwards. Not sure about UK, but in Sweden the examiner is the legal PIC.

[mad_jock]

Same in the UK in regards to PIC.

To be honest the whole wx thing on the CPL is a bit of a nightmare and the instructors usually take care of it with a tatical teching of the aircraft if its borderline with certain examinors.

Some examinors are very gungho and are happy and want you to launch in the legal mins and others are more conservative and are happy to postpone if its a bit crappy.

Same with PPL tests. There is a school of thought out there that the more horrible the wx the easier it is for the candidate.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Surely any instructor and examiner should encourage and indeed require the development and sensible use of personal minima.

Let's face it, it's pretty rare for any of us that legal VFR minima are sensible for a true VFR flight.

G

[mad_jock]

Commercial its more you go if its legal.

Some examinors are your way of thinking others arn't.

[foxmoth]

I would certainly expect someone on a COMMERCIAL test to go with more than 10kts crosswind and much more than 20kts wind <2000'! Same with vis, Cloubase is slightly different as you are looking at stall recoveries and this would be the deciding factor there, many will be using recover by 2,000' so need higher, not a lot, but personally on a test for a new commercial candidate I would expect him to be saying, "my personal minimum for stalling is to be recovered by 2,000', and on that basis my decision is not to go", the examiner could then suggest that his own limit was lower and he was happy for the candidate to make his decision on that - but that would be down to him and I doubt many would do so.

[mad_jock]

Would you take them VMC on top Fox?

Thats what I did, mind you I was doing mine in a twin after doing the IR so the examinor was more than happy for us to do them in IMC if we couldn't VMC on top he was also an IRE.

[Whopity]

The CPL skill test is a simulated Public Transport flight therefore; your minima are laid down in the Operations Manual and you must adhere to them.

[foxmoth]

Would you take them VMC on top Fox?

Now that does depend on ops manual etc! Would be quite happy to fly a student on top, but as someone doing a commercial test I would have to look at the rules a lot closer, long time since I did proper commercial SE ops so not as up to speed as I used to be. Certainly be happy if it came from the examiner, but don't think many would put that forward. Whopity, yes you need to adhere to these, but I think the limits suggested are WELL above most ops manual limits, and you do not Have to fly right down to them!

[Tinstaafl]

I always expected my CPL students to fly up to, but not over, the limit of the rules - because that's what happens in real life. Doing a test in something better than VMC was then easy.

10kts crosswind? My PPL students could do that with ease. Sure as hell not a problem for a CPL candidate.

[Piltdown Man]

Don't forget, you can fail for not going when the conditions are acceptable. So what are the limits? Well it's a VFR flight, you are in a single and probably inside Class C or D airspace. So if the weather shows that it's within the legal and aircraft limits (say for the flight plus one hour), you go. End of.

PM

[Desert Strip Basher]

Regarding last post, below 3000ft at <140kts, 1500m vis is within limits though I don't think this is advisable for a test!! I seem to recall the examiner limits being >3000m.

[S-Works]

everyone seems to have ignored Whoppity's accurate post. The ops manual contains the permitted weather conditions........

[FlyingForFun]

My opinion:

From the examiner's point of view, it needs to be safe and legal, the student needs to be happy, and the examiner has to be reasonably confident that he'll be able to assess the student's ability.

From the instructor's or student's point of view, it depends very much on the individual. If an individual has had x-winds almost every day on his entire course, then he might be happy to go right up to the demonstrated x-wind (or even higher, if there's no legal x-wind limit, although most ops manuals will give the demonstrated x-wind as a school limit anyway). On the other hand, a student who hasn't had a chance to experience x-winds might be wiser to cancel a test on a day with x-winds. And exactly the same applies to poor vis, low cloudbase, etc etc.

As an instructor I'll certainly do my best to train students up to the limits of what is safe and legal. But I can't guarantee that a particular student will experience poor conditions on his course.....

FFF
--------------

[Solar]

Sorry for the thread drift.
But a note of caution for anyone at the CPL skills stage, the CAA have informed me that they no longer have the flexibility to provide an extension period for the skills test due to European legistration should you exceed your exams to test limitation period regardless of the situation.

[Whopity]

your exams to test limitation period regardless of the situation.And where exactly is this limitation in the regulation? The regulation gives a validly period for theoretical knowledge, for licence issue, but not for taking the skill test! There is a maximum period stated between the skill test and completion of the flight training.

[Solar]

Whopity
What I was referring to is the three year time limitation from the end of the month in which you passed your last CPL theory exam to the date of your skills test. In the past there was a possibility of an extension due to certain circumstances but this flexibility is no longer available due to EASA legistration. If you want I can pm you a copy of the CAA email that states this.

[Whopity]

the three year time limitation from the end of the month in which you passed your last CPL theory exam to the date of your skills testAnd what I meant is that I can't find any such limitation in the EASA regulation. The 3 year time limit is to licence application, not the skills test!
FCL025(c) Validity period
(1) The successful completion of the theoretical knowledge examinations will be valid:
(ii) for the issue of a commercial pilot licence or instrument rating (IR), for a period of 36 months; FCL.030 states:FCL.030 Practical skill test
(a) Before a skill test for the issue of a licence, rating or certificate is taken, the applicant shall have passed the required theoretical knowledge examination, except in the case of applicants undergoing a course of integrated flying training.
In any case, the theoretical knowledge instruction shall always have been completed before the skill tests are taken.It does not state that they have to be within the validity period!

It won't stop you having to retake the exams but the following statement is fundamentally inaccurate:the CAA have informed me that they no longer have the flexibility to provide an extension period for the skills test

[Solar]

Hi Whopity
I think I understand what your getting at but as you say the end result is more or less the the same in that one would have to resit the exams if the skills test is not undertaken within the three year period.
Thanks for the clarification.

[foxmoth]

As an instructor I'll certainly do my best to train students up to the limits of what is safe and legal. But I can't guarantee that a particular student will experience poor conditions on his course.....

Whilst I agree with the statement, we are talking CPL not PPL here, IMHO if someone is at this level then they should have the experience to deal with at least a decent crosswind, if applicants are turning up without that then maybe the hours requirement should be looked at again!:bored:

[FlyingForFun]

Fair point, foxmoth. But remember the BE76, one of the common aircraft used for CPL, has a higher demonstrated x-wind than many single-engine aircraft - more than double that for a C152 - and therefore higher than many clubs will allow PPL hirers to fly in. So it might be unreasonable to expect someone to test in x-winds near that limit if they haven't practiced that on their CPL course.

Also, the general principle extends to the IR (thread creep, I know - sorry) where students learn things they haven't practiced in hour-building. It's very common for students to do a lot of flying in winds of, say, 20G30, 30 degrees from runway direction, and these students would probably be happy to test in similar windy, bumpy conditions. Other students may not encounter more than 10kt wind on their entire IR (the sim doesn't count!), and would not want to test in these conditions, having never seen how the bumpy weather and updrafts affects the ILS. The point is it depends on the student, and on the student's experiences, both before, and especially during, the course - as well as several other factors. There is no black and white answer to the question of what is suitable weather for a test.

FFF
----------------