Bumblebee
Commodore
what's a 709 ride?
Kellwolf's Upgrade Updates
- Thread starter kellwolf
- Start date
staplegun
Well-Known Member
ERfly
Well-Known Member
what's a 709 ride?
If memory serves, it's a ride for all your certificates. If you fail, the FAA can take them all and you start over. Bad juju!
Congrats on the upgrade! I can't believe it's almost been a year since I started class, myself. Good luck!
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
Rightly called a 44709 ride (taken from the CFR # and shorted to '709' as it used to be a 609) it is the FAA's authority to re-examine your competency to excercise the priviledges of one (or both) of your flight certificates. The most common 709 ride in GA aircraft is after someone does a gear up landing. My old boss had a 709 ride on his flight instructor certificate because a student he signed off to solo had a runway incursion and caused a 737 to have to go around. The FAA has extremely broad discretion (only has to show that lack of qualification/competence could have been a factor for the incident) on the reasons it can require you to submit to a 709 ride but most of the time there was an incident, maybe not an accident, and they want to check you out.
Your average 709 ride consists of generally only tasks that may have been called into question by whatever happened. The experience really depends on who is performing the 709 ride. Most of the time it is not a huge deal and the FAA just wants to make sure you aren't insane. However, if you get an inspector who for some reason doesn't like the cut of your gib you will find this to be a nightmare.
If you fail they'll generally give you one more chance after you've received dual instruction in the areas you were deficient. If you fail again or if you just failed the one time and the inspector doesn't like the cut of your gib expect to be very shortly the focus of an FAA enforcement action seeking the revocation of your certificate. (Note: This certificate would only be the one being tested for. For example, if you are a horrible teacher and you fail your 709 ride on your flight instructor certificate they will not revoke your pilot certificate necessarily.)
At that point you'd have to go through the appeals process like any FAA enforcement action. But I have heard of very few successful appeals if the reason of your revocation was the deficient performance in a 709 ride. You would almost have to show malfeasance or incompetence on the part of the FAA inspector.
Your average 709 ride consists of generally only tasks that may have been called into question by whatever happened. The experience really depends on who is performing the 709 ride. Most of the time it is not a huge deal and the FAA just wants to make sure you aren't insane. However, if you get an inspector who for some reason doesn't like the cut of your gib you will find this to be a nightmare.
If you fail they'll generally give you one more chance after you've received dual instruction in the areas you were deficient. If you fail again or if you just failed the one time and the inspector doesn't like the cut of your gib expect to be very shortly the focus of an FAA enforcement action seeking the revocation of your certificate. (Note: This certificate would only be the one being tested for. For example, if you are a horrible teacher and you fail your 709 ride on your flight instructor certificate they will not revoke your pilot certificate necessarily.)
At that point you'd have to go through the appeals process like any FAA enforcement action. But I have heard of very few successful appeals if the reason of your revocation was the deficient performance in a 709 ride. You would almost have to show malfeasance or incompetence on the part of the FAA inspector.
staplegun
Well-Known Member
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Thanks for all the well wishes. I'm actually starting to have fun doing this. When I showed up Monday morning, I was nervous as hell, didn't know what to expect and had never met my sim partner. A couple of days into this, I'm starting to relax, find my groove and have fun.
Day two was pretty boring.....unless you like weight and balance problems and performance stuff. I'm a dork, so I kinda liked it.
We started by going over the homework problem from last night, making sure everyone used the correct charts in the book and didn't make any crazy math errors. We had a couple people say "I used this chart." If they could give a good reason why, then it was cool. There were a lot of things left out, like what the weather was during the climb. It was low overcast at takeoff and 13 degrees, so a lot of guys assumed they'd still be in the clouds during the climb and used the "anti-ice on" chart. Since it was MEM in the problem, I assumed ground fog and went with the normal climb chart. No wrong answer as long as you could back it up, which seems to be the norm so far in class. As long as you can back up your answer with reasoning and show you put effort into it, seems like they'll take the answer unless it's way out in left field.
After that was done, we went over performance information we get every flight that some guys never look at. Once again, I'm a dork, so I was ahead of the game here, too. Things like runway takeoff perfomance numbers, single engine climb gradients, special engine out procedures and non-standard clean-up altitudes.
45 PowerPoint slides later, it was time for lunch. Chief Pilot's office bought us all Chick-fil-A for lunch, then we talked about risk assessment and how it works out on the line. Dispatch even has a system they use to determine if a ferry flight is gonna go based on risk factors (we get a copy of the form on Thursday). So, we were told to sorta do the same thing ourselves based on our experience in the plane, the FO's experience, how bad the MELs affect performance and safety, the weather, runway conditions, etc. Basically, score each thing. Once you get a high enough score, it's not safe, so don't do it.
Then we dug a little bit into the Flap Airworthiness Directive that came out a while back. This was a result of all the flaps fail incidents that are notorious on the CRJ-200. A Canadian carrier had to do a missed approach, the flaps failed at 45, and they had to go to their alternate. Apparently, they landed with about 500 lbs of fuel left, which is bad juju. So, the new rule is if you don't think you'll have the visibility to land (or ceiling as well if it's a non-precision approach), you can't take the flaps out of zero. So, we got a couple of scenarios tossed at us. ILS 18R into MEM, 1 1/2 mile visiblity, GS out of service, ceiling is VV001. Sure, you could legally shoot the approach, but you'd have to do it zero flaps since with the GS out of service it becomes a non-precision. Same thing if you're holding waiting for the visibility to improve on an ILS, then it starts dropping below mins again on your way in.
Wrapped the day up with the sexual harassment policy and more homework for tonight. Pretty much the same as last night, but the WX is crappier. Still have to do a manual W&B, determine V speeds, T/O weight, trim settings and N1 settings.
Wound up meeting with my sim partner in one of our new touchscreen trainers after class and running through flows and checklists. I'm pretty happy with the progress there so far. We work well together, and both of us seem to have the flows and checks down fairly solid. That means we can move on to double checking the profiles and going over the sim syllabus.
Day two was pretty boring.....unless you like weight and balance problems and performance stuff. I'm a dork, so I kinda liked it.
We started by going over the homework problem from last night, making sure everyone used the correct charts in the book and didn't make any crazy math errors. We had a couple people say "I used this chart." If they could give a good reason why, then it was cool. There were a lot of things left out, like what the weather was during the climb. It was low overcast at takeoff and 13 degrees, so a lot of guys assumed they'd still be in the clouds during the climb and used the "anti-ice on" chart. Since it was MEM in the problem, I assumed ground fog and went with the normal climb chart. No wrong answer as long as you could back it up, which seems to be the norm so far in class. As long as you can back up your answer with reasoning and show you put effort into it, seems like they'll take the answer unless it's way out in left field.After that was done, we went over performance information we get every flight that some guys never look at. Once again, I'm a dork, so I was ahead of the game here, too. Things like runway takeoff perfomance numbers, single engine climb gradients, special engine out procedures and non-standard clean-up altitudes.
45 PowerPoint slides later, it was time for lunch. Chief Pilot's office bought us all Chick-fil-A for lunch, then we talked about risk assessment and how it works out on the line. Dispatch even has a system they use to determine if a ferry flight is gonna go based on risk factors (we get a copy of the form on Thursday). So, we were told to sorta do the same thing ourselves based on our experience in the plane, the FO's experience, how bad the MELs affect performance and safety, the weather, runway conditions, etc. Basically, score each thing. Once you get a high enough score, it's not safe, so don't do it.
Then we dug a little bit into the Flap Airworthiness Directive that came out a while back. This was a result of all the flaps fail incidents that are notorious on the CRJ-200. A Canadian carrier had to do a missed approach, the flaps failed at 45, and they had to go to their alternate. Apparently, they landed with about 500 lbs of fuel left, which is bad juju. So, the new rule is if you don't think you'll have the visibility to land (or ceiling as well if it's a non-precision approach), you can't take the flaps out of zero. So, we got a couple of scenarios tossed at us. ILS 18R into MEM, 1 1/2 mile visiblity, GS out of service, ceiling is VV001. Sure, you could legally shoot the approach, but you'd have to do it zero flaps since with the GS out of service it becomes a non-precision. Same thing if you're holding waiting for the visibility to improve on an ILS, then it starts dropping below mins again on your way in.
Wrapped the day up with the sexual harassment policy and more homework for tonight. Pretty much the same as last night, but the WX is crappier. Still have to do a manual W&B, determine V speeds, T/O weight, trim settings and N1 settings.
Wound up meeting with my sim partner in one of our new touchscreen trainers after class and running through flows and checklists. I'm pretty happy with the progress there so far. We work well together, and both of us seem to have the flows and checks down fairly solid. That means we can move on to double checking the profiles and going over the sim syllabus.
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
It's a "GFS" or Graphic Flight Simulator.... I believe. Basically a CRJ cockpit mockup much like the paper tiger, however it is touchscreen with feedback.... ie.... you do your fire test and you get all the bells and whistles and lights.
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
Suuuuweeet! Here at Eagle, we apparently believe in "keepin' it real" - i.e., we're still usin' the paper tiger.It's a "GFS" or Graphic Flight Simulator.... I believe. Basically a CRJ cockpit mockup much like the paper tiger, however it is touchscreen with feedback.... ie.... you do your fire test and you get all the bells and whistles and lights.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Here's the run down for day three:
Went over last night's performance problem, which was pretty straight forward. Then we went over the company rules for alternates, more performance data dealing with PTOG, what we can use the closeout MGL for, XTOG and how we get the difference types of XTOGs (ie landing limit, flight plan limit, runway limit, climb limit, structural limit, etc).
Then one of the scheduling trainers came in to talk to us. She spent probably close to an hour to an hour and a half doing nothing but fielding questions. This coulda been a bloody mess, but she was professional, and it really helped us to see their side of the situation. Puts a different spin on things when you realize that over HALF of the schedulers we have right now have been on the job less than 6 weeks. Went over duty requirements, Whitlow rest requirements and what they can (and more importantly CAN'T) do to you on reserve. She was pretty honest about saying "They're gonna TRY to do this to you, but they're not supposed to. Don't let them. If you're getting pushed, ask for a supervisor, but do it nicely."
After lunch, one of the FAA inspectors came in to talk to us about ASAP and FOQA programs. He spent some time talking about PIC/Dispatch's joint responsibility, and he reminded us that the JOINT part of the responsibility ends when we push back from the gate. If we think something needs to happen....DO IT. Don't let dispatch try to talk you out of it. Once you block it, they're in a support role ONLY.
We got the risk assessment chart I mentioned yesterday and used it to evaluate the Traverse City accident from last year. That was pretty eye opening. Several things set up the link in that chain. Turns out the crew had been on duty for over 15 hours, the last time they'd eaten was 12 hours ago, they were fatigues, it was an IOE flight and the FO had less than 200 hours in type. All of that along with the weather conditions was listed on the risk assessment chart. In addition to that, there were some training issues to do with how to apply brakes on a contaminated runway. According to the chart, anything with a score higher than 25 is deemed too risky to dispatch. TVC's score? 53, and that was before they even left the gate.
We went over some of the good things that have come out since the ASAP program started. For example, we now know that most pilot deviation occur between 10 am and 2 pm. Why? Lack of food. As a response, the FAA is starting to put pressure on our management to make it easier for us to meet nutritional requirements. For a while, we had a serious problem of people landing with the thrust reversers not armed. Thanks to ASAP data and some tweaking, that dropped almost 80%. Heading deviations in DTW used to occur on average once a month. We haven't had one heading deviation in 8 months. Other trends that have been spotted thanks to ASAP and FOQA data is that a lot of our guys seem to be letting the automation fly the airplane. FMS errors are common, thus taking the airplane off course. Same with letting the airplane get too fast below 10,000 ft. One of the things that got me is what the FAA is doing to encourage participation in the program. If an ASAP is accepted (which it almost always is unless it's the result of an INTENTIONAL deviation), the company has a side letter with the union to not discipline the pilot as a result of what happened. Heck, the FAA and the company don't even know who the pilot was, when it was or what flight it was on. ALPA is the gatekeeper for that data, and they don't let that stuff go very easily. Even if you wind up with an administrative letter in your file, it rolls off in 24 months. Even better, if you filed an ASAP on it, it won't show up in your FAA record if another airline runs your record report as a result of an interview.
After that, we dove into radar usage. We talked about different techniques, what the radar will see and what it won't see. Bottom line: do what works for you. There's 1400 pilots at PCL, so there's probably 1500 ways to use the radar.
Tomorrow the folks from dispatch are coming to talk to us, and I THINK we'll all get to shadow a dispatcher for a while.
BTW, Stan. THIS:
http://www.icare.fr/en/FTD27_.php
the GFS I was talking about.
Went over last night's performance problem, which was pretty straight forward. Then we went over the company rules for alternates, more performance data dealing with PTOG, what we can use the closeout MGL for, XTOG and how we get the difference types of XTOGs (ie landing limit, flight plan limit, runway limit, climb limit, structural limit, etc).
Then one of the scheduling trainers came in to talk to us. She spent probably close to an hour to an hour and a half doing nothing but fielding questions. This coulda been a bloody mess, but she was professional, and it really helped us to see their side of the situation. Puts a different spin on things when you realize that over HALF of the schedulers we have right now have been on the job less than 6 weeks. Went over duty requirements, Whitlow rest requirements and what they can (and more importantly CAN'T) do to you on reserve. She was pretty honest about saying "They're gonna TRY to do this to you, but they're not supposed to. Don't let them. If you're getting pushed, ask for a supervisor, but do it nicely."
After lunch, one of the FAA inspectors came in to talk to us about ASAP and FOQA programs. He spent some time talking about PIC/Dispatch's joint responsibility, and he reminded us that the JOINT part of the responsibility ends when we push back from the gate. If we think something needs to happen....DO IT. Don't let dispatch try to talk you out of it. Once you block it, they're in a support role ONLY.
We got the risk assessment chart I mentioned yesterday and used it to evaluate the Traverse City accident from last year. That was pretty eye opening. Several things set up the link in that chain. Turns out the crew had been on duty for over 15 hours, the last time they'd eaten was 12 hours ago, they were fatigues, it was an IOE flight and the FO had less than 200 hours in type. All of that along with the weather conditions was listed on the risk assessment chart. In addition to that, there were some training issues to do with how to apply brakes on a contaminated runway. According to the chart, anything with a score higher than 25 is deemed too risky to dispatch. TVC's score? 53, and that was before they even left the gate.
We went over some of the good things that have come out since the ASAP program started. For example, we now know that most pilot deviation occur between 10 am and 2 pm. Why? Lack of food. As a response, the FAA is starting to put pressure on our management to make it easier for us to meet nutritional requirements. For a while, we had a serious problem of people landing with the thrust reversers not armed. Thanks to ASAP data and some tweaking, that dropped almost 80%. Heading deviations in DTW used to occur on average once a month. We haven't had one heading deviation in 8 months. Other trends that have been spotted thanks to ASAP and FOQA data is that a lot of our guys seem to be letting the automation fly the airplane. FMS errors are common, thus taking the airplane off course. Same with letting the airplane get too fast below 10,000 ft. One of the things that got me is what the FAA is doing to encourage participation in the program. If an ASAP is accepted (which it almost always is unless it's the result of an INTENTIONAL deviation), the company has a side letter with the union to not discipline the pilot as a result of what happened. Heck, the FAA and the company don't even know who the pilot was, when it was or what flight it was on. ALPA is the gatekeeper for that data, and they don't let that stuff go very easily. Even if you wind up with an administrative letter in your file, it rolls off in 24 months. Even better, if you filed an ASAP on it, it won't show up in your FAA record if another airline runs your record report as a result of an interview.
After that, we dove into radar usage. We talked about different techniques, what the radar will see and what it won't see. Bottom line: do what works for you. There's 1400 pilots at PCL, so there's probably 1500 ways to use the radar.
Tomorrow the folks from dispatch are coming to talk to us, and I THINK we'll all get to shadow a dispatcher for a while.
BTW, Stan. THIS:
http://www.icare.fr/en/FTD27_.php
the GFS I was talking about.
skidz
Well-Known Member
Is this a joke? When does one ever do that and why?
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
From what the FAA guy I was talking to said, at this level, if you've got an ATP and bust the ride, they might just take you down to the CMEL level. Might yank your type. Since it was an FO, if they busted the ride, I'm guessing the SIC type got yanked, which would probably nix employment status. If it was a REALLY bad ride, they might be down the PPL level. Like I said, I don't know the details on the person's ride, so that's all I can say.
On to day four....
Went over the insane performance problem from last night. The discussion was prefaced with "You won't get something this screwed up on your oral, and if it happens on the line, just call dispatch and start over." To start with, they gave us fuel for a 45 minute flight to an alternate that was over an hour away. It was a 3585 flight, but they only gave us ONE alternate when we needed two. We didn't have a takeoff alternate, and we needed that as well. Oh, and they added the fuel wrong on top of all of that. The way I wound up working it was bumping about 9 passengers (policy is we bump passengers and not bags....it's cheaper) for extra fuel, picking MOB as not only my take-off alternate (we were leaving PNS) but as my hard alternate for 3585 and adding LIT as my soft alternate. Of the 9 guys in class, we had 9 different ways this flight was changed. All of them were valid.
After that brain melting episode, we talked a bit about the MKE accident a few years back. We had a flight enroute to MKE when they got a HYD 1 LO PRESS message. Turns out something happened and they lost ALL the fluid in the #1 system. QRH says "land at nearest suitable airport." They contacted MX control to discuss things. This is where the first mistake came in. Dispatch never heard a word, so they were dropped out of the loop. MX said "What's the temp on your hydraulic pump." Crew's response "It's at zero." MX says "As long as it stays there, you're good to go to your destination."
Now, the CRJ guys that know the hydraulics are probably saying the same thing I did. Where the hell can you find the temp for the hydraulic PUMP? Answer: you CAN'T. The hydraulic synoptic page displays the temp of the FLUID. It probably said 0 b/c there wasn't any fluid to measure. Mistake number two. Mistake number three was not following the QRH when it said "land at nearest suitable airport." If MX tells me to do something contrary to the QRH, we can talk about it on the ground, not in the air. I'm gonnd do what the book says. Oh, mistake number 4.....all these conversation tooks place over ACARS....which was "deferred." Mistake number 5, going back to nearest suitable airport.....they flew over not only BUF but DTW as well. When they finally got to MKE, it was a contaminated runway, and the plane went off the edge, across some grass and finally ended up on the ramp......a few hundred yards from the gate. The final nail in the coffin was that they taxiied to the gate rather than being towed in after departing the runway and off-roading the airplane.
We're not going over these things to ridicule the pilots or the decisions they made. We're doing it to learn from their mistakes. TVC is a HUGE thing for me. The CA on that flight had the deck stacked against him from the start, so now I've got all of that in the back of my mind so I hopefully won't make those same mistakes. Hopefully, I can recognize that chain of events before it gets too far gone.
This led nicely into the performance discussion on contaminated runways. Went over performance weight reductions, V1 reductions, actual landing distance vs required runway length, and types of contaminates (snow, slush, ice, etc). Talked a little about how, why and what brought about our contaminated landing charts, and it about made my head explode. It also made me realize that I'm giving myself a buffer on that chart bigger than I had originally intended. For example, the charts are assuming max reverse thrust at the point of touchdown. It takes several SECONDS for the reversers to kick in. Meanwhile, you're merrily bolting down the runway at 130+ kts. Finished that part up with de-icing, hold over charts, and flex thrust (when, where and why we use it).
After lunch, a rep from dispatch came in to talk to us, and I learned a lot of things. For example, when we divert and use the "Divert" option in ACARS to notify them.....it actually cuts them off from communications until the new route is built and the flight is re-released. Meanwhile, the flight crew is screaming "Why isn't dispatch talking to me!" at the box. Answer: b/c they can't. I never knew that. They're suggesting notifying them of a divert using a free text message instead so the line of communications stays open. Rest of the afternoon was pretty much on our own wandering SOC talking to dispatchers, maintenance control and crew scheduling. One of my wife's friends is a scheduler who happened to be starting work right then, so I had her show my their side of the operation. CrewTrac looks a LOT different from that end than on my end.
Talked to several dispatchers, so I was able to put faces with names I see on the releases, and I learned what they can and can't do. Answer is they have access to a lot more stuff than I knew they did. So, that opens them up even more as a resource. After class, got together with my sim partner again and we did flows until we could go through them without missing a beat. I'm pretty confident I'd pass my checkride tomorrow if it were just on the Flight Deck Inspection checklist.
He has trouble with the electrical system, so I spent about an hour just grilling him with questions on the electrical system. Helped me out, too, since I was having to dig deep to come up with questions. He also came up with some I didn't know. Tomorrow's my turn to get grilled on my weak spot: the fuel system.
ERfly
Well-Known Member
No, it's serious. You'd have to screw up pretty bad, but it has happened. Violating the Nation's Most Protected Airspace comes to mind.
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
Kell, maybe I'm missing something, but in your ground classes, is it just captain upgrades and at some point you co-mingle with the FO's or is everyone in the same class?
I guess what I'm asking is: Are you getting some kind of "captain specific" training without the FO's present?
Not sure how it works here at Eagle. I'll find out in 376 more people though. :bandit:
I guess what I'm asking is: Are you getting some kind of "captain specific" training without the FO's present?
Not sure how it works here at Eagle. I'll find out in 376 more people though. :bandit:
Bumblebee
Commodore
maybe you'll be in the Captain club @ JC this year!?!
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
My money is on next year, bro.
At the rate of 30 upgrades a month (and that's highly optimistic), I'm looking at almost 10.5 months from now. Maybe .... hopefully..... first of next year.
Ya'll will be the THIRD to know!!
(wife, family.... ya'll.) :bandit: