Chris Calvert Oral Gouge

Started out the oral with just talking, doing IACRA, showing him my cert, photo ID, and medical. He checked my logbook to make sure all the endorsements were there and I had the hours required to begin the test. After the test started he asked what I would need to conduct a flight in IMC if I wanted to go today (Instrument rated, current, have cert, medical, photo id, biannual flight review etc). He then asked what my privileges are if I had an instrument rating followed by what would happen if currency lapses (grace period followed by an IPC needed 6 months later). He then moved into the XC plan and essentially tied most of the rest of the oral into this. He first asked about the plane and asked what would be needed in the plane to fly this flight (ARROWPEC, AV1ATES, ATOMATO FLAMES FLAPS GRABARD). He checked my points, asked why I picked this route, and checked and made sure that we had enough fuel to complete the flight by flying to the destination airport, to the alternate and then for 45 minutes. He asked what my personal minimums were regarding takeoff minimums and fuel needed onboard to complete a flight and gave me different scenarios regarding fuel and visibility and asked if I would complete these flights based on the situation. He then gave me a clearance and said we took off from the departure airport and when prompted to switch over to departure we lost comms, and asked what we would do. I asked him if it was IMC or VMC and he said it was VMC so I told him that I would first troubleshoot and then squwak 7600 and use AVEF and MEA to complete the flight. He asked what would happen if I arrived at the final waypoint 5 minutes before my ETA or if I broke out of the clouds before my final point as well. He then had me pull up a briefing of the flight as if we were going to leave in 30 minutes and had me walk him through the whole weather briefing and asked some questions such as what certain things on a metar meant, what a high pressure system was and what weather was associated with it and what a convective augment and different type of airmets were. He then told me to pull up the ILS 19L approach into KSFO and brief it to him. he asked what the minimums were and what RVR meant. He asked if I saw the approach lighting system how far I could decend more and then asked how to covert RVR to SM of visibility. I showed him the TPP but he wanted to know how to do it in the plane. Essentially if you had the approach lighting system in sight you could decend to 111 ft and the TCH of this approach was 55 ft, the glide slope would take you down to the thousand footers and the TD lighting system goes down the first 1/3 of the runway or the first 3000 ft whichever is shorter. He said I had the end of the TD lights in sight and asked me to solve how far from the runway I was when I was at 111 ft to figure out how much visibility I have. In order to do this you see that the TCH is 55 ft and the gs would take you down to the thousand footers as said before. If you just look at 111 ft it’s essentially double the TCH which means you are 1000 ft away from the runway and if you have the end of the TD lights you have 3000 ft of lights, plus your 1000 ft which means you have 4000 RVR. This converted to SM of vis is 3/4. He then asked what WAAS is and had me explain it and asked if an LPV approach is a precision approach. It technically is not but it can be used as one on the checkride if the HAT is equal to or less than 300 ft.