Instrument Checkride

On June 1st, 2006, I passed my instrument checkride. Training started two months prior in late March 2006.

I arrived at West Valley Flying Club in Palo Alto around 12pm, two hours before my checkride was scheduled. The idea was to get the aircraft logbooks for N222MF and look them over prior to heading out to preflight the plane. After a half-hour of pouring over logbooks looking for the various required inspections, I headed out to the ramp to start my preflight. After checking all of the lights and heading back to the cockpit to shut them off, I noticed something discouraging: The electric turn coordinator was still flagged. Dispite having flown my last 4 flights in this aircraft in preparation for the checkride, I was not going to be able to use it. I locked up the plane and headed back to the front desk to negotiate a different aircraft.

N751SP was what I was sent back out to the ramp with but upon opening the aircraft for preflight I quickly remembered that it has an avionics stack that is slightly underequipped compared to the plane I had been doing my checkride preparation in. Although legal for IFR, I didn't want to introduce any new variables into the situation so I went back to the office yet again to see if the schedule could be adjusted to allow me an aircraft with avionics similar to N222MF. At this point I was handed the book to N669TW, which I knew was equipped identically to N222MF however upon reading the observations list in the aicraft binder I found that days ago the directional gyro was squawked inop. I was beginning to get discouraged.

Finally, the pilot and instructor who had reserved N739TW were gracious enough to swap airplanes with me and I finally had an IFR-legal aircraft for the checkride. I went out to the ramp, added fuel for full tanks and finished the preflight before running over to the maintenance hangar to pick up the correct logbooks and return the ones I had originally checked out. On the way I passed Mike Shiflett, who was to administer my checkride, and explained the delay I was experiencing. At this point I learned from him that on the instrument checkride the pilot is not expected to prove the aircraft airworthy by use of the logbooks (this exercise is only on the PTS for the private pilot practical exam). Mike said he just needed to see them himself and I didn't have to do any research at all. This was great because the time was rapidly approaching 2pm and I had yet to get any lunch, so I ran down to the deli and got myself a sandwhich before heading back to the flight club to start the ground portion of the practical test.

First on the order of business was proving my elligibility to take the practical test. This was easily accomplished by using the prewritten endorsements section on Mike Shiflett's website, along with his checklist of requirements. This combined with a quick review of FAR 61.65 the night before made sure that the elligibility portion of the exam went quickly and without issue.

Mike then started asking me which approaches I had been flying to local airports. He asked me if I had flown the GPS and VOR approaches to SCK, and whether I had done the GPS to LVK, and the ILS to OAK. I told him that I had flown all of those at one point or another in the past two months during my training. At this point I was expecting him to call out a few approaches for the flight test that I had never heard of, but instead he was pleased that I had flown them before and said that for the flight portion of the test we would fly VFR to SCK, doing our unusual attitudes along the way. Before the VOR approach into SCK we would fly the published course reversal and hold for one circuit prior to flying the approach. At the conclusion of the approach I would go visual and perform a touch and go en route to LVK for the GPS approach there, and then the ILS 27R OAK. At this point he asked me, "which of the first two do you want to fly partial panel?". I was shocked that I would have any choice in the matter and for some reason it took me a few minutes (and a little help from Mike) to realize that flying the GPS approach partial panel was going to be a breeze compared to the VOR approach, so that's what I chose. The VOR approach to SCK and the preceeding hold at ECA would be flown with the autopilot. Mike gave me some time to look at the approach charts while he was going over the aircraft logbooks.

Highlights of the ground portion of the practical test were:

• Required inspections for IFR flight
• Requirements for instrument pilot currency
• Pitot-static system of the C172S and how it can fail
• Vacuum system of the C172S and how it can fail
• Deicing/anticing equipment on the C172S and it's limitations (pitot heat, defrost, alternate air)
• Flight Planning (he had me plan one way PAO to RBL with the day's WX)
  • When an alternate airport is required to be filed, and what can be used as an alternate
  • Lost communications procedures
• Navaids and their principles of operation: VOR, ILS, DME, GPS
• GPS in detail, how it can fail, and how that affects flying a GPS approach (important! see below!)

After we had finished the ground portion of the test (which he said would be considerably shorter than the private pilot ground portion, and it was) he gave me a few more minutes to look at the approach charts for the flight portion, and to check the weather once more before heading out to the plane.

We departed PAO on a right crosswind and shortly after takeoff he had me go under the hood where I would stay for the remainder of the flight. Just over Fremont on our way to SCK, the engine coughed - enough to immediately get both my attention and Mike's. I quickly looked up under the hood outside to scan for landing zones, just in case this was the beginning of a more serious problem. Mike quickly came back and mentioned that there were a few places we could put it down should that become necessary. We then focused our attention on the engine instruments, all which were reading ok. With no indication of further problem, we proceeded with caution and flew towards LVK en route to SCK (instead of going directly over the mountains). Fortunately the engine performed well the rest of the test and we assumed that the monentary roughness was probably caused by water or some other contamination in the fuel. (Yes, I did check the fuel during preflight.. all 13 drains).

Just after passing I-5 towards Stockton, Mike took the plane and set it up for two unusual attitudes. Both of which I quickly recovered from and we were back on our way to SCK. Mike called up approach and did most of the radio work for the entire flight. He would hand off the radios to me when we got ready to fly the approach and would take them back after execution of the missed as he set us up for the next approach.

Upon arrival at the ECA VOR, I flew a parallel entry to the hold and then completed another circuit around the hold in the published direction. Flying the hold was a little rough since it was directly over the VOR, and in my experience the ECA VOR can be very moody causing the CDI to vary in indication by as much as 5 or 6 degrees. This made it quite nerve-racking to maintain positive course guidance during the inbound leg of the hold. This was with use of the autopilot but the varying indications on the CDI were causing the autopilot to S-turn across the course fairly drastically and once I had to disconnect the autopilot and manually fly the plane to keep from losing course guidance.

The approach into SCK was flown with the autopilot also until 1 mile from the runway, where Mike had me flip up the hood, disconnect the autopilot, and go visual for a touch and go.

The next approach would be GPS 25R LVK. I cleared the previous flight plan information from the KLN 94 GPS, and loaded up the approach procedure. Shortly we were told to fly direct to UHHUT and later cleared for the approach. Apon reaching UHHUT Mike told me that altitude was at my disgression so I descended to 3000 (which is the minimum altitude from TRACY to UHHUT) and told Mike that if this were an actual IFR flight that the controller would have told me to maintain a certain altitude until joining the approach. Shortly before reaching UHHUT, the panel cover came out and I was flying without the aid of the Attitude Indicator or Directional Gyro. This wasn't so difficult on the GPS approach because I still had the MFD, NAV-4 map page, and the ground track information displayed on the GPS. I never had to reference the wet compass at all, which was quite a relief. On our way to OYAHI (the FAF) from UHHUT, I explained to Mike that I was verifying the GPS was in approach arm mode, and that at 2 miles to OYAHI the GPS would perform a RAIM check and go into approach active mode.

Shortly after reaching 2 miles to OYAHI, the GPS became flagged and I received a message "Press PROC to resume navigation". I quickly remembered reviewing the KLN 94 documentation the night before and this was exactly the indication that I would get if the RAIM check failed prior to approach activation. Sure enough, the next message on the GPS indicated that RAIM was not avaiable. I told Mike that I would have to fly the approach to the missed approach point but I would not descend. Upon arrival at the missed approach I would execute the missed. Mike confirmed that was the appropriate procedure, and said that since it was VFR outside that he wanted me to continue the approach as if the GPS had gone into approach active mode, so down I went and continued the approach without further event.

The final approach was ILS 27R OAK. After climbout from LVK I was on a heading of 240, which ATC told me to maintain, intercept the localizer, and cleared for the approach. At this point, Mike turned off the GPS and MFD and told me that I would not have the use of GPS (or it's DME capability) for this approach. Since I was not aware of where I was with regard to distance to the runway on the approach, I used the LOC 27R stepdown points identified by SJC VOR radials for my altitude stepdowns until I reached the glideslope intercept altitude. I was later told by Mike that this was not necessary and that I could have intercepted the glideslope at any point along the approach. After glideslope intercept, I flew one of my best ILS approaches to date, keeping both needles within 1 dot deflection for the majority of the approach. Mike told me to call out my decision height, which I did, and then he took the airplane and flew us back to Palo Alto.

I spent a lot of time in the week prior to the checkride preparing for the test both by flying different approaches with an instructor or safety pilot, and by studying the FARs paying special attention to Mike's notes on the instrument checkride on his website. The result was a very smooth test both on the ground and in the air.