Exempt from FOI at FSDO checkride?

Chewie von Nubbins

Chewie von Nubbins

New Member
Got a question for you guys regarding the FOI come checkride time. If you have the AGI or IGI completed, along with the FOI and go to the FSDO for your checkride, what is the deal with being exempt from having to spend an hour with the examiner and going over FOI stuff?

I see where surreal posted in his checkride that he was exempt from the FOI because he had his AGI done. Is this a common thing to expect, or just the opposite?
 
Chewie von Nubbins said:
what is the deal with being exempt from having to spend an hour with the examiner and going over FOI stuff?
Click to expand...

Myth.

Here is a letter I wrote to our FSDO a year and a half ago:
There is a rumor going around our flight school that having a GROUND instructor certificate PRIOR to the CFI checkride eliminates the requirement to be tested on FOI during the checkride ORAL. A number of the new instructors have made this statement and I'm not sure where it's coming from. One of the examiners?
​
Anyway, neither the PTS nor the Pilot Examiner's Handbook supports this idea. Is there an unpublished FSDO or FAA policy on this issue, or are these people misunderstanding that the certificate removes the need to take the FOI written again?
​
Thank you.

​
The response was thus:
We at the FSDO have not heard or seen any changes to this.

As long as the PTS cites the FOI area to be tested (and it should) we (both the DPEs and Inspectors) will continue to test them and the applicants are responsible for demonstrating that knowledge.

Theo A. Mavridoglou, POI
ASO-FSDO-07, Jackson, MS
601-664-9812


​
 
The only thing different is that you don't hand him or her your FOI test results and as a result he or she can not home into areas you made mistakes on or decide to dig dig if your score on the FOI was low.

Its individual examiners discretion. The examiner who did my initial CFI (was a DPE not a ASI) would only go over FOI stuff very lightly if you already had an AGI or IGI.
 
i wouldnt sweat the FOI anyway. Of the 8 hours worth of oral exam for my CFI only about 10 minutes of it was about FOI stuff, alot of that stuff is such common sense its hardly worth going over.
 
montanapilot said:
i wouldnt sweat the FOI anyway. Of the 8 hours worth of oral exam for my CFI only about 10 minutes of it was about FOI stuff, alot of that stuff is such common sense its hardly worth going over.
Click to expand...
This guy had an easy oral. It is not the norm. Many have failed the CFI oral on FOI. It is a big deal. If you know it, it isn't, but if you don't know it, that is where you first fail.
 
nosehair said:
Many have failed the CFI oral on FOI.
Click to expand...

That's true. Unfortunately, it seems that most Examiners test your ability for rote memorization. The irony should be apparent to all. My view is that unless Examiners can test this in an appropriate way, it should be deleted from the requirements.
 
Call it a myth tgrayson. . .but it happened. So, myth-busted.

And, my inspector had two other inspectors in the room. So, I'm sure he wouldn't have "skipped" the FOI on my initial ride if he didn't have the documentation to confirm it. And just to confirm, yes - three FAA inspectors were taking part in my MEI initial. . .just to confirm that it's not an automatic failure when you have an audience.

Let me also mention that this inspector was not some wet behind the ears inspector, but rather a very high up inspector at the ATL FSDO.

Also tgrayson, notice this line. . .

or are these people misunderstanding that the certificate removes the need to take the FOI written again?
Click to expand...

You're not required to re-take the written. The ground certificate confirms that you have passed it, and the FAA has the original copy that is sent to OKC after going to the FSDO to get your ground certificate.

Do you go and re-take the FOI written before your CFII or any additional flight instructor certificate? I didn't think so. You take it once, and that's it.

Certainly don't mean to come off harsh, but I just want you to understand that I don't make the rules. One FSDO will either not know about a policy, or evaluate a policy one way, or totally ignore it. The guys/gals that work at the FSDO's are obviously human.

I will though confirm the actions of my inspector, with the audience. Now if someone else's FSDO does not offer the same courtesy, then well. . .I can't speak for that.
 
surreal1221 said:
Call it a myth tgrayson. . .but it happened. So, myth-busted.
Click to expand...

I believe it happened, but the myth is that the ground instructor certificate removes the need to be examined on the FOI. It does not.

So, I'm sure he wouldn't have "skipped" the FOI on my initial ride if he didn't have the documentation to confirm it.
Click to expand...
I'm not not so optimistic about human nature. :) Ask him to provide it.

You're not required to re-take the written.
Click to expand...
I didn't say you were. You misread the line.

Now if someone else's FSDO does not offer the same courtesy, then well. . .I can't speak for that.
Click to expand...
The same rules apply to everyone. If your FSDO waived them, then they should be able to document the justification, or they were wrong.

Even the whole idea is absurd. Since you don't take an oral test for the ground instructor certificate, there's no justification whatsoever for eliminating it from the flight instructor oral.
 
How did I misread the line regarding "the need to take the FOI written again."?

Looks to me like having to take the written again (as in sitting down and doing the 50 questions again) was somewhere in your train of thought. Do you mean presenting the test score, again? As you won't have the original copy, if you hold a Ground certificate prior to a flight instructor practical as the original is in OKC (or should be on it's way).
 
surreal1221 said:
How did I misread the line regarding "the need to take the FOI written again."?

Looks to me like having to take the written again (as in sitting down and doing the 50 questions again) was somewhere in your train of thought. Do you mean presenting the test score, again? As you won't have the original copy, if you hold a Ground certificate prior to a flight instructor practical as the original is in OKC (or should be on it's way).
Click to expand...

You read it properly, you just misunderstood what he was asking. He is saying that it DOES eliminate the need to take the FOI written (again), and was wondering if they are confusing this with a need to eliminate the FOI ORAL.
 
I've sent a question on Atlanta FSDO's apparent policy to the Designee Standardization Branch at Oklahoma City. They're the ones that make sure that examiners are evaluating by the same criteria. I'm not sure what role they have in making sure FAA Inspectors do the same thing, but perhaps they can provide guidance.

Now that I think about it, ATL FSDO is probably the reason I had to send the email I posted above to our FSDO. An instructor had just arrived at our flight school after getting all his ratings at ATP in Atlanta, and he was the one spreading this news. That was over a year and a half ago, so this idea isn't new.

I'd be surprised if the FAA allowed this discrepancy to stand. Studying the FOI for the oral for the CFI checkride is very time-consuming and ultimately worthless. If there were an easy way to avoid it, most of us would take it.
 
I don't know about everyone else, but I didn't go after the AGI to avoid the FOI portion.

Up through the first 30 minutes of my CFI oral, I was still under the impression Task I - Fundamentals of Instructing was still going to be covered.

So - seeking an easy way to avoid something in aviation, is highly not recommended. Certainly not something I would be supportive of.

Hope you get a prompt response from OKC, and I also hope it curbs your curiosity in regards to this subject. Don't want you to lose any further sleep :sarcasm: :)
 
I had my AGI. We did FOI stuff for an hour or more, then FOI questions were mixed in with questions throughout the oral. It is a catch 22 anyway, try telling him he can't ask you the questions then be ready for a morning of nothing but FOI.

Good luck.
 
Exactly. . .I would hope that most applicants would know not to "Tell" an examiner what areas you are going to do. But hey, some people here may think some of us are just that naive.

The inspector(s) / examiner(s) run the show - not the applicant.

And you'll also be darn sure any examiner / inspector giving a CFI checkride will be evaluating an applicants instructional technique, professionalism, and other subject areas from the Aviation Instructor's Handbook throughout the WHOLE practical.
 
surreal1221 said:
Hope you get a prompt response from OKC
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't, so I called ATL FSDO and spoke with the branch Manager, Karen Adams. She said she'd investigate. Here is her followup:

=====================================================


Mr. Grayson,

I am sorry for the delay in this response. The primary inspector involved was out of the office for most of this week.

I have spoken with all the inspectors involved in this practical test. The lead inspector, ( a regular Principal, not a "senior" or supervisor) did misquote the requirements. However, all three inspectors present assured me that all FOI areas were covered by incorporating them into the remaining part of the oral and flight portions of the practical test.

The lead inspector did realize his error in his statement and all inspectors in the ATL FSDO have been reminded of the requirement to test on the FOI in the CFI practical test.

I thank you for bringing this to our attention and allowing us to correct any misinformation in the Aviation and FAA community.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

Regards,

Karen M. Adams
Manager, ATL FSDO
404-305-7200

=======================================================
 
We could argue semantics, but I'd rather not.

So sure, you got truth. I'll call it clarification.

I would call it truth, if someone lied to you or provided some amazing work of fiction that you initially thought was non-fiction.

Let's also hope that the message was transmitted, and was received, and any transmitted symbols were able to be understood. Otherwise, this little problem may continue.
 
Perhaps just a little bit. . .but this thread is dead to me. Grayson got the answer he was looking for - and the rest of us got a little bit of clarification.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top