Yesterday at 13:34 UTC I was shaking hands with my MEP / IR examiner for the second time just after he said it was definitely a “passed” test. This was the happy result of a very intense, 1h30 long flight in the DA42.

The planned flight was from ETHN to EDTY and back with some asymmetrical flying, holdings, IFR approaches and airwork. The procedures have nothing unusual but one must be up to the speed, particularly as the two airports are only 18 miles apart !

This was the second attempt for this flight as the first one was cancelled because of weather. Frequent readers know that my previous DA42 flight was a concentrate of errors, so I was glad that I first had to fly to ETHN with my instructor to pick-up the examiner. This was also the aircraft’s first flight after maintenance. The battery was quite low and starting the first engine was not easy. The trick is to switch the engine master off and on again to re-activate the glow plugs. The positioning flight was fully uneventful and it boosted my confidence level. The weather conditions were acceptable but with a lot of thermal turbulence and scatered stratocumulus layer between 4′000 feet and FL 70.

After a short briefing with my instructor and the examiner we started. No engine start problem as the battery got loaded during the positioning flight. This was to be a stressful flight but the examiner did a great job and helped me to relax. The first exercise was to abort the take-off. The examiner simulated a “fire fire” call from the tower. I retared both throttles and applied brakes. He said it was fine and we resumed the take-off.

The first “engine failure” occurred during the initial climb. Engines were at full power so I could immediately start the “identify – verify – feather” drill. I said all what I would do loudly but all actions were simulated, as decided during the briefing. Identify, check engine instruments and retard throttle to verify, then engine master off, alternator off, fuel valve closed. The examiner was happy with that and told me that for the other cases I would just have to fly the aircraft, the drills were good enough. Cool, a pragmatic man…

Upon reaching our cruise altitude came the part I was not really looking forward to: airwork. The first steep-turn was slightly out of tolerance so I had to repeat that. The second one was much better even if (or because ?) it was flown partly in IMC. The examiner wanted to see both clean and landing configuration stalls. I did it, and it went fine. We resumed our navigation to the IAF after that. Instead of letting me use the autopilot the examiner took over the controls and flew towards the beacon while I was briefing the approach. I took over the controls again few seconds before entering the holding.

The forecast called for 15 knots of wind, almost perpendicular to the hold inbound / outbound courses. My wind correction angles worked fine and I was well established on the inbound track without having to use aggressive turns or corrections. Maintaining altitude accurately was not easy because of the thermal activity but I did my best. While on the inbound leg, the examiner asked me: “Are we ready to take the approach now ?”. This sounded to me like a question to draw my attention to something going wrong. I thought twice, rapidly scanned the cockpit, and finally answered that yes, we could start the approach. The answer come quickly: “Ok, so do it”. Ok, may be I was a bit too paranoid.

This was a 12 miles long ILS approach with reduced power on one engine, go-around on one engine and right turn back to the beacon. There is not a lot to tell about it, it went just fine. As expected during my preparation, the go-around sequence was intense: minimums at 1′600 feet, and right turn at 1′700 on the SID we used as go-around procedure. Pitch, power and rudder on the live engine side, turn, gear up, flaps up, wings level, switch NAV receiver and OBS, all within 30 seconds. But it went all fine, and soon we were heading towards ETHN again for one NDB and one ILS approach. As the runway is a bit short, both had to be full-stop with backtrack.

I used the short en-route time to brief the approaches. I made the briefings shorter than usual, focusing on the most important points: altitudes, courses, minimums, go-around procedures. My standard briefing includes frequencies, lighting system, available distances, and exit taxiway, but this was not possible in the short time available. The examiner liked my abbreviated briefings. Apparently we had the same ideas about which components of an approach briefing are essential.

The NDB approach went fine. I did reach the minimums 1 mile before the missed approach point. Not as good as it could be, flying a level segment at low altitude is never good, but it’s much better then reaching the missed approach point at an altitude well above the minimum. The JAA standards call for an altitude tolerance of -0 / + 100 feet for a non precision approach and -0 / +50 for an ILS. This was not easy in thermals but I almost kept it and bounces were on the positive side. The rule giving the examiner some flexibility according to weather conditions made the rest.

I made a beginners mistake on the ILS approach: I looked out a too early and ducked a bit under the glide-slope. Any deviation close to the minimums rapidly busts the JAA standard of maximum 1/2 scale deviation. This was in no case unsafe but I had to repeat it to satisfy the criterion. To make it funnier, the examiner called for a no-flaps ILS approach and a highly accurate landing. Any point of the cherckride can be repeated, but only once. So here I was, after 1h20 of intense flying, re-taking the ILS approach in thermals, flapless. I applied the old pricinple of IFR: make decisions using the ILS deviation indicator and implement corrections on the artificial horizon and wait for the very minimums to look outside…

Good principle, stable approach, good landing. What else ? I was wondering what would come in the debriefing. It was the first time I had to repeat an approach during a check and was not feeling exactly comfortable. I can’t re-publish here all what was said, but in the end I felt like the decision to make a second ILS approach was more formal than based on my skills. The form contains only two checkboxes: passed and failed but I always try to get a more detailed opinion from the examiners. It seems that my IFR skills still match a good standard and the “pass” deicison was clear and not marginal. Happy me !

I’m now officially a multi-engine rated pilot. I inaugurated this new privilege while bringing my instructor back to our homebase. The next step is to send all the forms to the Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation and get my license re-issued with the new ratings. This sounds easy, but I know how complex these things can be. After that, I’ll have to find some money to fly more DA42. But right now, I’ll celebrate this passed skill test with my wife and our daughther. This will certainly include some asian food and good drinks. If you feel like celebrating as well, raise your glass for me !