Commercial long cross country woes

eman1200 said:
I may specify "local flight with 3 strippers, maintained at or above 5280' "
Click to expand...

I'm taking the under on this at 0.

Yeah, I am saying this has happened (-1) times or less.
 
RussR said:
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the requirement. But, if you consider that the likely intent is for somebody to complete a longer flight by themselves, without assistance, it makes sense. Just because someone isn't a pilot doesn't mean they couldn't be very helpful. I know non-pilots who can do all the navigating, communicating, looking out for traffic, all that stuff just as well as any pilot. Basically the pilot in these situations could just be a meat-servo for the passenger's instructions. Heck, if they had an autopilot, the pilot could literally do nothing other than takeoff and land for the whole flight. Hence, the only way to make sure they're not getting help is to not have anyone else on board.
Click to expand...

i believe one can get CFI onboard for this cross country (someone correct me if i am wrong) as long as the candidate is PIC and not receiving dual. so in other words I can bring a CFI along to ensure i am not doing something incredibly dumb and instruct him not to interfere unless there is a impending archer shaped whole in the ground , but i cant bring my neighbors girlfriend along for moral support (mostly). I wonder what they were smoking when they wrote this
 
WannFly said:
i believe one can get CFI onboard for this cross country (someone correct me if i am wrong) as long as the candidate is PIC and not receiving dual. so in other words I can bring a CFI along to ensure i am not doing something incredibly dumb and instruct him not to interfere unless there is a impending archer shaped whole in the ground , but i cant bring my neighbors girlfriend along for moral support (mostly). I wonder what they were smoking when they wrote this
Click to expand...

No smoking involved, that I know of. The "ballast CFI" addition to that rule was a fairly recent nod to the insurance industry, and first appeared in the multiengine paragraph. I have done these flights. The CFI is supposed to sit there and not do anything at all - no training, no helping, nothing, just there to meet insurance requirements.
 
WannFly said:
I find it super odd that you cannot count it if you have a non-pilot pax. just doesnt make any sense.
Click to expand...
I find it super odd that you can count it if you have an instructor as a pax.
 
Salty said:
I find it super odd that you can count it if you have an instructor as a pax.
Click to expand...

odd that you can't have a instructor as a passenger on a XC that you're not supposed to have passengers on? I don't find that odd.......
 
eman1200 said:
odd that you can't have a instructor as a passenger on a XC that you're not supposed to have passengers on? I don't find that odd.......
Click to expand...
You CAN have an instructor as a pax.
 
RussR said:
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the requirement. But, if you consider that the likely intent is for somebody to complete a longer flight by themselves, without assistance, it makes sense. Just because someone isn't a pilot doesn't mean they couldn't be very helpful. I know non-pilots who can do all the navigating, communicating, looking out for traffic, all that stuff just as well as any pilot. Basically the pilot in these situations could just be a meat-servo for the passenger's instructions. Heck, if they had an autopilot, the pilot could literally do nothing other than takeoff and land for the whole flight. Hence, the only way to make sure they're not getting help is to not have anyone else on board.



No, a solo flight is one that is "solo" - "alone". There was a time decades ago (like the 40's), where "solo" just meant "non-dual received" (I found it in an old FAR once), but that is not the case now. It means "sole occupant".



You can, and should for the flights you need to meet the experience requirements of 61.129 for a commercial certificate. Some logbooks have a column for this, most electronic logbooks can handle this easily as well.
Click to expand...

It would make more sense to say solo flight in an airplane with no electrics or no other portable electronic communication or navigational assistance.
 
sarangan said:
It would make more sense to say solo flight in an airplane with no electrics or no other portable electronic communication or navigational assistance.
Click to expand...

...and no fuel or wings. :D
 
I dunno about others, but my "headspace" is very different when I'm genuinely solo, rather than with non-pilot pax. When flying with others, I do *use* them as a resource in various ways. Even if it's just to keep me alert with conversation, or use as a sounding board with respect to decisions about weather, and that kind of thing.
When solo, I have to hold my own attention, and be my own sounding board, with no one to lean on. I think that's part of the point.
 
kath said:
I dunno about others, but my "headspace" is very different when I'm genuinely solo, rather than with non-pilot pax. When flying with others, I do *use* them as a resource in various ways. Even if it's just to keep me alert with conversation, or use as a sounding board with respect to decisions about weather, and that kind of thing.
When solo, I have to hold my own attention, and be my own sounding board, with no one to lean on. I think that's part of the point.
Click to expand...
I agree. I also think there's just a level of comfort you get with an instructor present even if they aren't talking. You know they aren't going to let you kill them. So it makes no sense to me to allow it.
 
sarangan said:
It would make more sense to say solo flight in an airplane with no electrics or no other portable electronic communication or navigational assistance.
Click to expand...
it would give a whole new meaning to “pilot shortage”.
 
eman1200 said:
only if I know it's for a rating, like commercial. otherwise I'm mostly the opposite, I won't specify 'solo' but I may specify "local flight with 3 strippers, maintained at or above 5280' "
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
I'm taking the under on this at 0.

Yeah, I am saying this has happened (-1) times or less.
Click to expand...

eman1200 said:
You’re right, I don’t actually log stripper flights.
Click to expand...

You left off the word “male” ... not that there’s any problem with that... :)

I’ll report myself.

WannFly said:
i believe one can get CFI onboard for this cross country (someone correct me if i am wrong) as long as the candidate is PIC and not receiving dual. so in other words I can bring a CFI along to ensure i am not doing something incredibly dumb and instruct him not to interfere unless there is a impending archer shaped whole in the ground , but i cant bring my neighbors girlfriend along for moral support (mostly). I wonder what they were smoking when they wrote this
Click to expand...

Back to more serious responses...

It’s really because the insurers won’t usually let a Commercial Multi student take the aircraft solo. FAA really just wants you alone and on your own, but was painted into a corner by the insurance industry.

For all intents and purposes that silly CFI as passenger thing can essentially be ignored for most single engine ops. The vast majority of us are kicking you out alone for the flight unless there’s some reason we feel like riding along technically not supposed to be saying anything.

Probably can’t even log it as dual given now that I think about it, but generally it’s going to fall under “if the insurance company wants me along as self-loading cargo, okay...”.

It’s a weird problem for FAA. They can’t make insurers cover a solo multi student.
 
I keep seeing this multi solo insurance thing. I don’t get it. Why would you need or want to pay for a multi to do the commercial cross country in anyway.
 
Salty said:
I keep seeing this multi solo insurance thing. I don’t get it. Why would you need or want to pay for a multi to do the commercial cross country in anyway.
Click to expand...

Many flights schools were skipping the commercial single and only doing commercial training in a twin. If your goal was flying for the airlines, the twin time was more valuable anyway.
 
Salty said:
I keep seeing this multi solo insurance thing. I don’t get it. Why would you need or want to pay for a multi to do the commercial cross country in anyway.
Click to expand...

Bunch of possible reasons.

Top of the list although rare, is some people never fly singles. Or not after initial Private.

There’s all sorts of paths to flying wherever one wants to fly and can afford.

Some just want as much multi time as possible for maybe finding a job.

Or in my case I wanted to eventually teach in both and figured more time in the multi couldn’t hurt. Wasn’t a financial problem for me, so why not?

Initial CFI was in the multi, also... since we were already flying it all the time. Didn’t seem to be any good reason to bounce back to my 182 in the middle of solid multi proficiency both under and out from under the hood.

Also supposedly would have made the add ons a piece of cake but man I stuck my head clean up my *** on landing my own 182 on one of those rides. I was hyper focused on practicing power off 180s and had a bad string of days of them and it completely psyched me out.

Couldn’t land my own airplane worth a ****.

Came back a couple of days later and nailed all of them. Ha. So stupid. Good experience for seeing what a pilot slump looks like for someone with bejlions of landings in the exact same aircraft though!

It’s ... weird. Just have to step back to basics, relax, and reset. :)
 
Salty said:
I keep seeing this multi solo insurance thing. I don’t get it. Why would you need or want to pay for a multi to do the commercial cross country in anyway.
Click to expand...
In addition to the reasons above, the reg was written when a complex airplane was required for the initial Comm. in an ASEL, and complex singles were getting harder to find and rent, so the easiest way to get it done was start with Comm AMEL.
 
MauleSkinner said:
In addition to the reasons above, the reg was written when a complex airplane was required for the initial Comm. in an ASEL, and complex singles were getting harder to find and rent, so the easiest way to get it done was start with Comm AMEL.
Click to expand...

Heck I forgot that was my other reason. My airplane isn’t a retract.

I guess I already wiped that reg from my brain with the whole “Technically Advanced” silliness of late 90s aviation “high tech”. LOL
 
denverpilot said:
Heck I forgot that was my other reason. My airplane isn’t a retract.

I guess I already wiped that reg from my brain with the whole “Technically Advanced” silliness of late 90s aviation “high tech”. LOL
Click to expand...
Spend some time with IFR pilots flying TAAs to see haw many don't really understand them and you might not think it's that silly. I try to toss in one realistic task when I give a checkout or IPC which I think from experience might not have been learned. It's easy and the tasks I give aren't crazy or designed to screw up the pilot.

I've gotten deer in the headlights from something as simple as intercepting a random course. I've gotten comments in those navigator videos I do saying things like "I didn't know I can do that!" Even from relatively experienced pilots.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Spend some time with IFR pilots flying TAAs to see haw many don't really understand them and you might not think it's that silly. I try to toss in one realistic task when I give a checkout or IPC which I think from experience might not have been learned. It's easy and the tasks I give aren't crazy or designed to screw up the pilot.

I've gotten deer in the headlights from something as simple as intercepting a random course. I've gotten comments in those navigator videos I do saying things like "I didn't know I can do that!" Even from relatively experienced pilots.
Click to expand...

Oh I didn’t say pilots know how to USE old tech. Just that it’s old.

Spent way too many years doing tech support.

Dilbert isn’t comedy. It’s a documentary.

94129ea60d62a8b0bd8f07ed49320e26.jpg
 
kath said:
I dunno about others, but my "headspace" is very different when I'm genuinely solo, rather than with non-pilot pax. When flying with others, I do *use* them as a resource in various ways. Even if it's just to keep me alert with conversation, or use as a sounding board with respect to decisions about weather, and that kind of thing.
When solo, I have to hold my own attention, and be my own sounding board, with no one to lean on. I think that's part of the point.
Click to expand...

It would make more sense if the FAA required commercial applicants to have flown with passengers rather than the other way around. Flying with non-pilot passengers is a major distraction and it is a unique skill pilots acquire only after their private pilot checkride. With the current method, a commercial applicant could have zero hours with real passengers.
 
Salty said:
I find it super odd that you can count it if you have an instructor as a pax.
Click to expand...

Not odd but stupid. It's a result of the FAA kowtowing to insurance companies and puppymill flight schools.
 
sarangan said:
It would make more sense if the FAA required commercial applicants to have flown with passengers rather than the other way around. Flying with non-pilot passengers is a major distraction and it is a unique skill pilots acquire only after their private pilot checkride. With the current method, a commercial applicant could have zero hours with real passengers.
Click to expand...
Figure out the minimum that same commercial applicant could have solo after the Private checkride (with no requirement for some level of instructor approval) and you’ll see it’s not far from zero.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Figure out the minimum that same commercial applicant could have solo after the Private checkride (with no requirement for some level of instructor approval) and you’ll see it’s not far from zero.
Click to expand...
I think that the bare minimum post-private solo time to qualify for a commercial license would be however long it takes to do 10 trips around the pattern at night. If I'm looking at the requirements correctly, you could theoretically get your commercial and a job flying passengers for compensation with only those 10 night landings as solo time after the 10 hours of solo flying you did to get your private, and you could receive instruction for the remainder of your 250 hours of total time. You could have as few as those 10 solo night landings and plus the 3 solo landings you did for your private and have only landed a plane 13 times without an instructor in the right seat. Your last solo flight could be separated from your first revenue-generating passenger flight by 50 years or more.

Granted, no insurance carrier or serious aviation business is going to put that pilot in the left seat of a single-pilot revenue flight. But it is legally possible and a clear loophole in the general foundation of "you can kill yourself, but not anyone else" that underlies most of the FARs.
 
iamtheari said:
I think that the bare minimum post-private solo time to qualify for a commercial license would be however long it takes to do 10 trips around the pattern at night. If I'm looking at the requirements correctly, you could theoretically get your commercial and a job flying passengers for compensation with only those 10 night landings as solo time after the 10 hours of solo flying you did to get your private, and you could receive instruction for the remainder of your 250 hours of total time. You could have as few as those 10 solo night landings and plus the 3 solo landings you did for your private and have only landed a plane 13 times without an instructor in the right seat. Your last solo flight could be separated from your first revenue-generating passenger flight by 50 years or more.

Granted, no insurance carrier or serious aviation business is going to put that pilot in the left seat of a single-pilot revenue flight. But it is legally possible and a clear loophole in the general foundation of "you can kill yourself, but not anyone else" that underlies most of the FARs.
Click to expand...
I know far too many pilots whose college training program shoots for that absolute minimum solo time...they figure more training is better, shared time for multiple pilot logging is better, and don’t understand (or at least share my opinion ;) ) that significant solo time is valuable.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I know far too many pilots whose college training program shoots for that absolute minimum solo time...they figure more training is better, shared time for multiple pilot logging is better, and don’t understand (or at least share my opinion ;) ) that significant solo time is valuable.
Click to expand...

In reality solo time is very important, especially cross country time. I've met guys with hundreds of hours, but are afraid to leave the pattern alone mainly because they never have.
 
midwestpa24 said:
In reality solo time is very important, especially cross country time. I've met guys with hundreds of hours, but are afraid to leave the pattern alone mainly because they never have.
Click to expand...
Same with logging dual received and PIC at the same time...legal, but doesn’t give the same (very important) experience of ACTING as PIC.
 
eman1200 said:
only if I know it's for a rating, like commercial. otherwise I'm mostly the opposite, I won't specify 'solo' but I may specify "local flight with 3 strippers, maintained at or above 5280' "
Click to expand...

The only stripper near your airplane should be paint stripper. :)
 
Well it is done! Prior to the flight I was in the field of “why is this necessary??” I have had may flights with family that would probably qualify but never true solo. So today was true solo. And I get it now. So was a bit over 3+hours. I keep a pilot ‘relief bottle’ for these longer flights. Anticipated use I brought. Well I had a salty weekend apparently and was retaining a bit. 40 min in. I gotta go-got this covered. About 30 min later...I gotta go again -ok. Well top off the relief bottle.. ok. 30 min later.... d@mnit! Gotta go again-pound my 16 oz water bottle and fill that thing. Crazy. After that was smooth sailing. So I learned- have less salt before flights or bring a bigger bottle!

Other then that was smooth sailing- got some IMC time in to boot which is always a bonus. Never been west of Pennsylvania in my plane-it’s FLAT out there!!!
Now on to the night work. Admittedly don’t do a lot of night stuff lately. Towered class D is close though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top