This Reddit post, while brief, surfaces a recurring dynamic in flight training that professional pilots and CFI candidates recognize well: the outsized influence of individual Designated Pilot Examiners (DPEs) on the checkride experience, and the informal peer-networking that pilots rely on to navigate it. The original poster is seeking firsthand accounts of a CFI initial checkride with a specific examiner, Aram Basmadjian, reflecting the common practice among applicants to crowdsource intelligence on an examiner's style, question bank, oral exam depth, and flight maneuver expectations before sitting for a practical test. Given the absence of additional public reporting or FAA data on this specific examiner in available research, the substance of the post itself—rather than any confirmed facts about Basmadjian's examining record—is the more instructive element for the broader aviation community.
The CFI initial checkride is widely regarded as one of the most rigorous practical tests in the FAA certification pipeline, often exceeding the private, instrument, and commercial rides in both oral exam length and scrutiny of teaching technique, not just stick-and-rudder proficiency. Applicants are evaluated not only on their own flying but on their ability to teach it, including endorsements, logbook entries, TAA and complex/high-performance training documentation, and knowledge of the Fundamentals of Instruction. Because DPEs have latitude in how they structure the oral portion, sequence maneuvers, and probe risk management and scenario-based teaching, two examiners administering the "same" checkride under 14 CFR 61.183 and the corresponding Airman Certification Standards can produce meaningfully different experiences. This variability is precisely why threads like this one proliferate on r/flying, PilotsOfAmerica, and CFI-focused Facebook groups—applicants want to calibrate their preparation to the examiner's known tendencies rather than walking in blind.
For flight schools, Part 141 pilot academies, and independent CFIs preparing candidates, this kind of informal DPE vetting has real operational implications. Chief instructors often maintain internal notes on local examiners' pass rates, favored maneuvers, and oral exam focus areas, and increasingly steer students toward or away from specific DPEs based on this institutional knowledge. The FAA's Airman Certification Standards were designed in part to reduce this kind of examiner-to-examiner variability by standardizing scenario-based testing criteria, yet anecdotal evidence suggests meaningful differences persist in practice, particularly in how thoroughly an examiner drills into instructional technique versus raw flying skill. This matters beyond the individual applicant: DPE consistency and quality directly affect the pipeline of instructors entering flight training, which in turn affects instructor availability, training costs, and time-to-certificate figures industry-wide amid the ongoing pilot shortage.
More broadly, this thread is a small but telling data point in a larger conversation about DPE availability and standardization that has drawn scrutiny from the FAA, industry groups, and Congress in recent years. Examiner shortages in some regions have lengthened wait times for checkrides across all certificate levels, prompting the FAA to expand the pool of DPEs and revise oversight processes. As that pool grows, ensuring consistency in testing standards becomes more important, both for applicant fairness and for maintaining the credibility of the certification system that airlines, charter operators, and flight schools ultimately rely on when hiring new CFIs and building instructor cadres to feed the professional pilot pipeline.