Victor Erik Wilson DPE Checkride Gouges
Designated Pilot Examiner
Preparing for an FAA checkride with Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE) Victor Erik Wilson? GougeHub has a first-hand Victor Erik Wilson checkride gouge report from a pilot who tested. Read oral exam questions, flight test patterns, and examiner insights.
↓ View 1 available gouge reportAs of this writing, only one report sits on file for Victor Erik Wilson, and it covers an IFR checkride. The applicant described an examiner who works through the regulations and flight planning with care. If you fly with Wilson next week, plan to spend real time on the oral. The ground portion is where this examiner puts the weight.
The pilot reported that Wilson covers regs thoroughly. So review your IFR currency rules, alternate requirements, and the regulations that govern instrument operations. Know what makes you legal to file and fly an approach. Have your sources ready and be able to point to them.
Flight planning got equal attention in the report. Build a complete plan and be ready to defend your choices. Know your route, your fuel, your weather, and your alternate logic. Wilson wants to see that you can think through the planning rather than just fill in boxes.
The flight on this checkride was rescheduled, so the report lacks practical maneuver details. That means there is no first-hand account yet of which approaches Wilson asked for or how the flight ran. Prepare for the standard IFR ACS tasks anyway. Practice your holds, approaches, and partial panel work so nothing catches you off guard.
This profile stays thin on the flying side until more pilots add their experiences. The ground emphasis is clear: regs and planning, covered in depth. Show up with a sharp oral and a clean plan, and you will match what this single report describes. If you fly with Wilson, write up your ride so the next applicant gets the maneuver picture too.
Examiner Patterns
Preliminary insight — based on 1 report
- Oral style: 1 pilot reported the examiner kept the oral conversational
- Logbook review: 1 pilot reported the examiner took a quick glance at the logbook
- Density altitude: 1 pilot reported the examiner did not cover density altitude
- Go/no-go discussion: 1 pilot reported the examiner discussed go/no-go as part of a scenario
- Equipment failure simulated: 1 pilot reported the examiner did not simulate an equipment failure
- Preflight briefing: 1 pilot reported the examiner gave a brief overview before flight
Based on self-reported pilot submissions. Data methodology
Ratings & Checkride Types
- IFR (Instrument Rating)
Transparency Disclaimer: This page summarizes patterns reported by applicants. It is not an endorsement, prediction, or guarantee of checkride outcome. Every checkride varies based on the applicant and circumstances.