FAA seeks pilot feedback on examiners as check ride pressures mount

The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is preparing to roll out a nationwide system allowing pilots to give feedback on designated pilot examiners (DPE) after check rides for new licenses and ratings, a move that comes as growing strain on the pilot certification system fuels scrutiny of examiner availability, cost, and testing consistency. 

In a Federal Register notice published December 29, 2025, the FAA said it is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget to introduce a voluntary “post-activity survey” for pilots who complete practical tests conducted by DPEs. The survey would include roughly a dozen yes-or-no questions covering examiner professionalism, the testing environment, exam content, and the duration of both the ground and flight portions. 

The agency said the information will be used to track the performance and merit of individual examiners, as required under Section 833 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024. The FAA estimates that approximately 49,000 pilots would complete the survey each year, with an average response time of seven minutes. 

While the FAA has long overseen DPEs through audits, renewals, and complaint-driven reviews, the proposal marks the first time the agency has sought to collect routine, standardized feedback directly from check ride applicants on a national scale. The FAA framed the effort as “a data-driven oversight tool” rather than a customer satisfaction exercise. 

The timing reflects mounting pressure within the training community. In many parts of the United States, pilots and flight schools report difficulty securing check ride dates due to limited examiner availability. Long wait times have become common in some regions, particularly for initial and advanced ratings. At the same time, examiner fees have climbed sharply as demand has outpaced supply. 

Pilots and instructors have also raised concerns about uneven checkride experiences, pointing to wide differences in how exams are structured, how long they take, and how they are conducted. Many checkrides are professional and fair, but others have drawn criticism for feeling overly subjective or inconsistently applied. The FAA has not explicitly tied the proposed survey to those complaints, though Congress directed the agency to strengthen oversight as part of broader concerns about the health of the pilot certification system. 

Discussion among pilots following the notice’s publication suggests awareness that informal feedback mechanisms already exist, including occasional phone calls or emails from FAA inspectors after check rides. Those contacts, however, have been sporadic and inconsistent. The proposed survey would formalize feedback collection and apply it more broadly, allowing the FAA to identify patterns rather than rely on isolated reports. 

The FAA’s move also comes as the agency looks to reduce reliance on external DPEs by encouraging more Part 141 flight schools to pursue examining authority. Schools granted that authority can conduct practical tests internally and issue certificates directly, easing pressure on the DPE system. Although the pathway has existed for years, only a small number of schools have taken advantage of it, often citing administrative burden. 

Taken together, the survey proposal and the push for expanded examining authority signal a shift in how the FAA is managing delegated testing. Rather than expanding the DPE pool alone, the agency appears focused on improving visibility, accountability, and alternative testing options within an increasingly strained system. 

Public comments on the proposed DPE survey will be accepted through February 27, 2026. If approved, the program would represent a meaningful change in how examiner performance is monitored and one of the most direct ways pilots have been formally invited to provide input on a process that plays a critical role in aviation training. The post FAA seeks pilot feedback on examiners as check ride pressures mount appeared first on AeroTime.

Go to Source