In short: At a 2016 Flying magazine expo, Rod Machado and John King debated the then-new Airman Certification Standards, which replaced the Practical Test Standards for private and instrument applicants. King, who helped develop the ACS, argued that teaching pilots to identify and manage risk will save lives. Rod argued that primary accidents stem mostly from weak flying skills, and that the ACS adds cost and subjectivity without proven benefit.
Video: “ACS Debate Rod and John – 2016” by Rod Machado, from his YouTube channel.
What you’ll learn
- Why the ACS was created, according to John King
- Rod’s defense of the old knowledge test questions and their purpose
- The core disagreement: risk management versus stick and rudder skills at the primary level
- Competing claims about how much longer checkrides were taking
- Why Rod saw the ACS as more subjective than the PTS
- The slow flight and stall warning question discussed by both
John King’s case for the ACS
King explained that the ACS did not change the flight skills required. What it added were standards for knowledge and for risk management. Without knowledge standards, he said, test questions had drifted toward tricky, trivial and obscure items, while pilots he knew were dying from risks they failed to manage. Asking the audience how many had lost someone in an airplane, he argued that skill failures are often the end result of getting in over your head. Teaching pilots the habit of spotting and mitigating risk, much like teaching children to look both ways, should improve outcomes, and he pointed to scuba diving training as an example of a similar shift.
Rod’s objections
Rod began by stressing his friendship with John and Martha King and his belief that the ACS authors meant well, while noting that good intentions alone do not guarantee good results. He defended many knowledge test questions, arguing that ADF principles still apply to bearing pointers in modern glass panels, and said he had been told the written test was designed to make applicants study broadly rather than to measure specific knowledge.
His central argument was that a large human factors study of general aviation accidents found most involve skill-based errors. In his view, primary students need more airplane handling, not more higher-order thinking requirements. He reported hearing of much longer oral exams, worried about rising checkride costs, and argued that the ACS risk management elements made an objective test more subjective.
Points of friction and agreement
King countered that examiners in his region reported checkrides running only 20 to 30 minutes longer, that examiners can combine elements into scenarios, and that writing standards down actually reduces subjectivity. Both discussed the change in how slow flight was to be flown relative to the stall warning, which King said had surprised him too and was being reviewed by the working group. The session ended, fittingly, with the two agreeing to disagree, and you can watch and decide for yourself.
Go deeper with Rod Machado
For instructors who share Rod’s focus on teaching the fundamentals clearly, his collection of ground school images makes those lessons easier to present. Learn more in Private Pilot Ground School Images for Flight Instructors.
Looking for a flight instructor or flight school near you? Browse instructors and training programs on Skyfarer.
Affiliate disclosure: Skyfarer may earn a commission from qualifying purchases via our links. This funds our content for pilots.
