How do YOU say fail
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do YOU say fail
It's a traumatic moment in any pilot's career when he / she has failed a check. It's also a terrible moment for the Examiner / Check Airman to have to pronounce failure to a pilot under check.
I first encountered the Check Airman's dilemma when, as a Senior First Officer, I was support pilot to a senior captain during a simulator check, who repeatedly could not make standard in several attempts over several days. The Check Airman, the Chief Pilot, who ruled with a rod of iron, and allegedly ate nails for breakfast, drew me aside and said "How do I tell him that he's failed?" I was quite astounded and could not give him the answer, but had to do a lot of thinking about it it some years later when I became a Check Captain myself.
I would imagine that very very few of our colleagues would derive the slightest satisfaction in failing anyone, and, like myself and Captain Iron Bar, find it to be a distressing situation. Be assured, that a fail is a fail, and must be pronounced as such regardless of the pain involved to all parties.
So, Check Airmen and Women, how do YOU pronounce failure upon the unfortunate checkee?
I have a gut feeling that this might be a one post thread, so will add my own technique, given by a colleague from the late great Ansett Airlines - If the candidate has failed, ask him/her "How do you think you went?". 9 times out of 10 they pronounce themselves as a failure, and the rest is rather painless. It's the 1 occasion in 10 that they do not realise the shortcomings in their performance that causes the greatest dilemma.
Beazelbub, interested in your thoughts.
Regards,
Old Smokey
I first encountered the Check Airman's dilemma when, as a Senior First Officer, I was support pilot to a senior captain during a simulator check, who repeatedly could not make standard in several attempts over several days. The Check Airman, the Chief Pilot, who ruled with a rod of iron, and allegedly ate nails for breakfast, drew me aside and said "How do I tell him that he's failed?" I was quite astounded and could not give him the answer, but had to do a lot of thinking about it it some years later when I became a Check Captain myself.
I would imagine that very very few of our colleagues would derive the slightest satisfaction in failing anyone, and, like myself and Captain Iron Bar, find it to be a distressing situation. Be assured, that a fail is a fail, and must be pronounced as such regardless of the pain involved to all parties.
So, Check Airmen and Women, how do YOU pronounce failure upon the unfortunate checkee?
I have a gut feeling that this might be a one post thread, so will add my own technique, given by a colleague from the late great Ansett Airlines - If the candidate has failed, ask him/her "How do you think you went?". 9 times out of 10 they pronounce themselves as a failure, and the rest is rather painless. It's the 1 occasion in 10 that they do not realise the shortcomings in their performance that causes the greatest dilemma.
Beazelbub, interested in your thoughts.
Regards,
Old Smokey
Start by stating EXACTLY how you feel...
"I hate to do this/I find this really difficult to do/the one thing I dont like having to do in this job etc.... but have to tell you that you have not reached the required standard and therefore have to record a fail etc..."
IMHO best in the multi crew environment to be one on one when you have to fail anyone - its embarassing enough to fail without having peer group aroundl listening, unless of course you feel you need a witness that you have followed the correct procedure.
Good Luck
"I hate to do this/I find this really difficult to do/the one thing I dont like having to do in this job etc.... but have to tell you that you have not reached the required standard and therefore have to record a fail etc..."
IMHO best in the multi crew environment to be one on one when you have to fail anyone - its embarassing enough to fail without having peer group aroundl listening, unless of course you feel you need a witness that you have followed the correct procedure.
Good Luck
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Smokey:
Great question! And I think the way you’ve chosen to communicate such an answer is perhaps one of the most commonly used. I would submit that the reason that it is probably the most used, is that it is also the most fair and the most honest – as I’m sure you and most of the other readers in this thread will agree – pilots are not hesitant to judge their own performance. But also true is the fact that they are not stupid, ignorant, nor blind. They know what the standards are, and they know, at least by gross measurement, when they’ve not met those standards. It’s been my experience that for the most part – by far the largest majority – of those who judge themselves, tend to rate their own performance more stringently than you or I would. So for those who believe they have failed and, indeed, have – the debriefing usually provides an opportunity to offer at least some encouragement while generally agreeing with their conclusion; “well, yes, your performance was below standard, but it was no where near as bad as you may believe it was.” It is also my experience, that after any training that may be necessary and any re-check required, the pilot is usually more confident in his/her own ability, and often expresses his/her appreciation to the evaluator who called it as he/she saw it originally; which, I believe, is one of the marks of a true professional, and one of many reasons why I dearly love being part of this fascinating industry.
It is those who don’t believe that their performance was as bad as it really was that presents a real problem – not only for the evaluator but for the company, the industry, and him-/her-self as well. As I said above, pilots generally are not stupid, ignorant, nor blind. When someone doesn’t recognize a substandard performance one of these precepts is not met, or the individual has a problem with being truthful about their own decisions and/or performance. I believe that any one of these maladies warrants additional scrutiny. Anyone who would disbelieve an evaluator in a calm, safe, air conditioned environment that exists after most “bouts” in a simulator, is very unlikely to believe his/her flying partner in a pressure packed airplane cockpit, with deteriorating circumstances. Without trying to be overly melodramatic, this is something that demands to be addressed, on the spot and with some level of continuation until the circumstance is resolved, one way or the other.
One other observation before I stop, is this – I believe that evaluators in the aviation industry, if they are successful at all (usually gauged by how long they’ve been at it) have developed an ability to see past any personal, ideological, political, or other differences that may exist between themselves and the person(s) they evaluate. This allows them to make the right call, all the time. It is my opinion that this ability is the solid foundation on which that evaluator’s reputation and the way he/she behaves in all facets of his/her life, as an aviator, an evaluator, and, indeed, as a human being, succeeds or fails, flies or crashes. And I also believe that it is these good men and women about whom the safety of the aviation world revolves.
_______
AirRabbit
Great question! And I think the way you’ve chosen to communicate such an answer is perhaps one of the most commonly used. I would submit that the reason that it is probably the most used, is that it is also the most fair and the most honest – as I’m sure you and most of the other readers in this thread will agree – pilots are not hesitant to judge their own performance. But also true is the fact that they are not stupid, ignorant, nor blind. They know what the standards are, and they know, at least by gross measurement, when they’ve not met those standards. It’s been my experience that for the most part – by far the largest majority – of those who judge themselves, tend to rate their own performance more stringently than you or I would. So for those who believe they have failed and, indeed, have – the debriefing usually provides an opportunity to offer at least some encouragement while generally agreeing with their conclusion; “well, yes, your performance was below standard, but it was no where near as bad as you may believe it was.” It is also my experience, that after any training that may be necessary and any re-check required, the pilot is usually more confident in his/her own ability, and often expresses his/her appreciation to the evaluator who called it as he/she saw it originally; which, I believe, is one of the marks of a true professional, and one of many reasons why I dearly love being part of this fascinating industry.
It is those who don’t believe that their performance was as bad as it really was that presents a real problem – not only for the evaluator but for the company, the industry, and him-/her-self as well. As I said above, pilots generally are not stupid, ignorant, nor blind. When someone doesn’t recognize a substandard performance one of these precepts is not met, or the individual has a problem with being truthful about their own decisions and/or performance. I believe that any one of these maladies warrants additional scrutiny. Anyone who would disbelieve an evaluator in a calm, safe, air conditioned environment that exists after most “bouts” in a simulator, is very unlikely to believe his/her flying partner in a pressure packed airplane cockpit, with deteriorating circumstances. Without trying to be overly melodramatic, this is something that demands to be addressed, on the spot and with some level of continuation until the circumstance is resolved, one way or the other.
One other observation before I stop, is this – I believe that evaluators in the aviation industry, if they are successful at all (usually gauged by how long they’ve been at it) have developed an ability to see past any personal, ideological, political, or other differences that may exist between themselves and the person(s) they evaluate. This allows them to make the right call, all the time. It is my opinion that this ability is the solid foundation on which that evaluator’s reputation and the way he/she behaves in all facets of his/her life, as an aviator, an evaluator, and, indeed, as a human being, succeeds or fails, flies or crashes. And I also believe that it is these good men and women about whom the safety of the aviation world revolves.
_______
AirRabbit
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi gents, im interested to know, what common procedure is in place for unfortunates who fail a sim check??What usually happens post failure, are they let go??Im quite suprised to hear of a captain failing a sim check.
Just curious!
Many thanks!
Just curious!
Many thanks!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vilha Abrao
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, very good question.
BTW, what would you do with a guy/girl who e.g. goofed a groundprox and crashed ONCE. A second and third attempt worked out very nice and all other performance was well/very well?
regards
BTW, what would you do with a guy/girl who e.g. goofed a groundprox and crashed ONCE. A second and third attempt worked out very nice and all other performance was well/very well?
regards
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A story told me by a DC-10 Chief Pilot for a major airline was of his early rotation and subsequent crash running off the end of the runway when doing his initial type rating FAA check ride in the sim. At this stage he was a highly experienced captain (jet) and had just spent 4 hours in the right seat while a compatriot had done his initial check ride. The FAA examiner just asked for a repeat of the item.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Each case will be judged on it's own merits (or demerits as the case may be), to answer the last 3 posts in general terms. In many ways it is a decision by the Check Captain to evaluate whether a fail of a particular component of a check was a temporary aberration, or part of an overall lower than required standard. If a failure of one component of the Sim check is viewed against good performance in all other areas, it is normal to re-do that particular component, and if successfully completed, pass the overall check with an appropriate note on the check report.
If a second attempt of one component of a check is unsuccessful, or there are short-comings in a number of other areas, the Check Captain has no choice but to fail the candidate on the check. In almost all cases, this will be followed by additional training (if a conversion) or retraining (if already qualified) until the candidate is up to standard. It is usually only after a number of retraining and re-check failures that a pilot's career is now in jeopardy.
Yes, Boeing737, Captains do fail checks, although the chances of doing so decline with increasing experience, and, by implication, a Captain is usually someone of increased experience. In the instance that I quoted in my initial post of the failed Captain, he was in fact a 'high profile' airman who had been Chief Pilot on his previous aircraft in the same company. He made the very bad decision to continue to submit to a series of check failures during a time of extreme family duress (his son-in-law was a foreign national, and had abducted the Captain's grand-son back to his home country). He was offered the chance to take time off to resolve the problem, but chose to continue working. I once had to fail a Captain who repeatedly lost control following engine failure at V1 - uncharacteristic of him, until it was found that he came to work on the day that his mother was dying (she did die that day), again, a bad personal decision.
A failed, but subsequently re-passed check can be a black mark on a pilot's record which may take many years to erase, but I know of several who weathered the experience and went on to become instructors and check airmen themselves in later years. In my own 40 years in the airline business, I know of only 4 people who lost their jobs after many repeated failures, very low odds indeed.
Regards,
Old Smokey
If a second attempt of one component of a check is unsuccessful, or there are short-comings in a number of other areas, the Check Captain has no choice but to fail the candidate on the check. In almost all cases, this will be followed by additional training (if a conversion) or retraining (if already qualified) until the candidate is up to standard. It is usually only after a number of retraining and re-check failures that a pilot's career is now in jeopardy.
Yes, Boeing737, Captains do fail checks, although the chances of doing so decline with increasing experience, and, by implication, a Captain is usually someone of increased experience. In the instance that I quoted in my initial post of the failed Captain, he was in fact a 'high profile' airman who had been Chief Pilot on his previous aircraft in the same company. He made the very bad decision to continue to submit to a series of check failures during a time of extreme family duress (his son-in-law was a foreign national, and had abducted the Captain's grand-son back to his home country). He was offered the chance to take time off to resolve the problem, but chose to continue working. I once had to fail a Captain who repeatedly lost control following engine failure at V1 - uncharacteristic of him, until it was found that he came to work on the day that his mother was dying (she did die that day), again, a bad personal decision.
A failed, but subsequently re-passed check can be a black mark on a pilot's record which may take many years to erase, but I know of several who weathered the experience and went on to become instructors and check airmen themselves in later years. In my own 40 years in the airline business, I know of only 4 people who lost their jobs after many repeated failures, very low odds indeed.
Regards,
Old Smokey
Only half a speed-brake
Owing to my inexperience I have ZERO authority to comment on a thread like this. However I did witness a tightly passed ride and afterwards the examiner quickly pulled a copy of regulatory "skill test proficiency tolerances". Not used for pointing fingers or abusing the numbers but rather as a guide. "have a look, I saw you save the aeroplane at the end yet this actually says V2 +10/-0 and I am afraid -15 kt is just more than the turbulence margin mentioned down here in the fine-print." Reading your posting I do now realise why he REALLY carried this on him.
Also I should never forget one exceptional gentleman who said there had been one thing he believed we would benefit from repeating. Priceless, and he actually thinked and worked that way.
FD
(the un-real)
Also I should never forget one exceptional gentleman who said there had been one thing he believed we would benefit from repeating. Priceless, and he actually thinked and worked that way.
FD
(the un-real)
Last edited by FlightDetent; 8th Jul 2005 at 06:16.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Far Eastern Airline places contract with BA to train a number of 747 classic crews. A friend of mine was the Training Engineer looking after the trainee on the panel. In front of him was the BA Training Captain in the RHS with trainee (Captain) in the LHS.
All was not going well with EFOT's and the Training Captain opted for the direct approach...
"We have all died four times in the last hour, and if you kill me just one more time I personally am going home"
All was not going well with EFOT's and the Training Captain opted for the direct approach...
"We have all died four times in the last hour, and if you kill me just one more time I personally am going home"
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do YOU say fail
You tell the person that s/he has failed. Then debrief the person on the areas that need to be improved and offer advice on how to improve.
Then go back and do the full exercise again. Hopefully the person has listened to your constructive criticism and shows improvement.
If all the same mistakes are remade send them back for re-training.
You tell the person that s/he has failed. Then debrief the person on the areas that need to be improved and offer advice on how to improve.
Then go back and do the full exercise again. Hopefully the person has listened to your constructive criticism and shows improvement.
If all the same mistakes are remade send them back for re-training.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engineer,
What you say is wonderful, if only the system within which I work allowed such latitude. When I was in a much more senior position on another aircraft type, I 'converted' several sim checks to training sessions at an early stage when it was obvious that the trainee was headed for failure. For my sins, I took a bit of 'heat' from higher management, but the trainee's egos and confidence were saved, and all passed after 1 or 2 more training sessions.
Now, in a position of less managerial authority in the checking area on a higher type, I have no choice within our system but to declare 'Pass' or 'Fail', Black or White, no shades of Grey, and hurl the poor unfortunate candidate back to the mercys of the system.
If only.......................
Regards,
Old Smokey
What you say is wonderful, if only the system within which I work allowed such latitude. When I was in a much more senior position on another aircraft type, I 'converted' several sim checks to training sessions at an early stage when it was obvious that the trainee was headed for failure. For my sins, I took a bit of 'heat' from higher management, but the trainee's egos and confidence were saved, and all passed after 1 or 2 more training sessions.
Now, in a position of less managerial authority in the checking area on a higher type, I have no choice within our system but to declare 'Pass' or 'Fail', Black or White, no shades of Grey, and hurl the poor unfortunate candidate back to the mercys of the system.
If only.......................
Regards,
Old Smokey
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Under the JAA system, a complete fail of the LPC is uncommon. A 'Partial Pass' is more common but is often seen as a 'fail' by the candidate as the same warnings about not excercising the licence priviledges still has to be given.
Under the JAA rules a candidate can repeat an item if the examiner feels that there was a minor error. A successful repeat is seen as a 'pass at the first attempt'. If the repeat is not successful then it becomes a 'Fail'. The candidate is allowed to fail five items before the entire LPC becomes a 'Fail'. Any items that have been failed at the first attempt can be retested at the end (note the difference in the wording, 'repeat and retest'). If any item is failed on the retest then the entire LPC is a 'Fail'. Training, both physical and verbal, can take place prior to a Retest, but only verbal correction prior to a repeat.
The UK CAA rules for Licence Proficiency Checks are laid down in Document 24 V4 which is available to all on the CAA website. Page 17 of that document gives the rules for debriefing a candidate. It states that the examiner should give the reasons for the failure in descending order of severity. They should be factual statements which are not open to dispute. The examiner should not ask the candidate to assess himself or be apologetic. This should be followed by stating the retest requirements, the effect on privileges and any retraining requirements.
The examiner should then comment on the whole flight bringing up both good and bad points and giving training input. Facilitative techniques, which are not allowed in the initial failure debrief, are positively encouraged in this area of the debriefing.
Airclues
Under the JAA rules a candidate can repeat an item if the examiner feels that there was a minor error. A successful repeat is seen as a 'pass at the first attempt'. If the repeat is not successful then it becomes a 'Fail'. The candidate is allowed to fail five items before the entire LPC becomes a 'Fail'. Any items that have been failed at the first attempt can be retested at the end (note the difference in the wording, 'repeat and retest'). If any item is failed on the retest then the entire LPC is a 'Fail'. Training, both physical and verbal, can take place prior to a Retest, but only verbal correction prior to a repeat.
The UK CAA rules for Licence Proficiency Checks are laid down in Document 24 V4 which is available to all on the CAA website. Page 17 of that document gives the rules for debriefing a candidate. It states that the examiner should give the reasons for the failure in descending order of severity. They should be factual statements which are not open to dispute. The examiner should not ask the candidate to assess himself or be apologetic. This should be followed by stating the retest requirements, the effect on privileges and any retraining requirements.
The examiner should then comment on the whole flight bringing up both good and bad points and giving training input. Facilitative techniques, which are not allowed in the initial failure debrief, are positively encouraged in this area of the debriefing.
Airclues
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was taught to complete the debrief and then bring up the 'fail' bit at the end, not the beginning. The logic was that if you mention 'failed' at the beginning you won't have their attention for anything else you say afterwards.
Announcing 'Fail' Polish Air Force Style:
QFI: What does your mother call you Higgins?
HIGGINS: John, Sir!
QFI: Well John, you're f*****g chopped!
Announcing 'Fail' Polish Air Force Style:
QFI: What does your mother call you Higgins?
HIGGINS: John, Sir!
QFI: Well John, you're f*****g chopped!
Folks
One point that should be remembered is that the candidate has failed him/herself, and that it is not you who has failed them; in essence they have failed themselves by not reaching the laid-down standards. Having said that, though, it gives no trainer any pleasure whatsoever to advise anyone they have not reached this required standard.
One point that should be remembered is that the candidate has failed him/herself, and that it is not you who has failed them; in essence they have failed themselves by not reaching the laid-down standards. Having said that, though, it gives no trainer any pleasure whatsoever to advise anyone they have not reached this required standard.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Derby
Age: 45
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure if this is near topic but
since we mention fail!
I recently failed my Instrument checkride and I can tell you that I was by no means saddened nor angry since I've learned that failure isn't as bad as DYING while flying. An examiners job is to make sure you don't go out and kill yourself in the processes and therefore should you manage a blunder on your checkride then at least you had the chance to do it before you actually went out and did it by yourself.
Several people out there have failed something somewhere and most of them are good hearted cheerfull folk who didn't treat it as a complete fail, they learned to view it as gaining experience and tell their freinds stories of how they managed to botch up that test flight.
A fail need not be negative, if you learned from your failure, isn't it better to fail rather than passing a test when you should not have passed it due to safety issues or because you did it the wrong way but still got the pass?
(hope you understand what I mean)
I can share the pain of failing anything but I won't kick myself for weeks on end because of it. I'll kick myself maybe for a day and then enjoy life again.
Of course this doesn't mean I won't post some rant about how I failed my sim check or what not!
I recently failed my Instrument checkride and I can tell you that I was by no means saddened nor angry since I've learned that failure isn't as bad as DYING while flying. An examiners job is to make sure you don't go out and kill yourself in the processes and therefore should you manage a blunder on your checkride then at least you had the chance to do it before you actually went out and did it by yourself.
Several people out there have failed something somewhere and most of them are good hearted cheerfull folk who didn't treat it as a complete fail, they learned to view it as gaining experience and tell their freinds stories of how they managed to botch up that test flight.
A fail need not be negative, if you learned from your failure, isn't it better to fail rather than passing a test when you should not have passed it due to safety issues or because you did it the wrong way but still got the pass?
(hope you understand what I mean)
I can share the pain of failing anything but I won't kick myself for weeks on end because of it. I'll kick myself maybe for a day and then enjoy life again.
Of course this doesn't mean I won't post some rant about how I failed my sim check or what not!
You'll be amused to know, Old Smokey, that a British teaching union wants to replace the term "Failed" (in the context of exams) with "Deferred Pass".
Further comment fails me!
Further comment fails me!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pass or Fail, doesn't matter which - Blue Eagle's point is the important one in a debrief; don't give the result until the summary at debrief end - that way you will have Blogg's undivided attention for the whole debrief and not just the first 10 seconds!