Commercial versus Instrument Rating

VWGhiaBob

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
884
Display Name

Display name:
VWGhiaBob
Having recently gotten my IFR in my Cirrus, this 63 year old is already missing the challenge of training, so I'm considering my Commercial. Under new FAA rules, because Cirrus is TAA (Technically Advanced Aircraft), I can use it...no need for complex / retractable time. So that makes this next step more doable for me.

Any thoughts on how the two compare? I've heard commercial is more fun / easier...but is that true? Is the written just as onerous? How much study is required, comparing the two?

Any advice appreciated a lot!
 
Having recently gotten my IFR in my Cirrus, this 63 year old is already missing the challenge of training, so I'm considering my Commercial. Under new FAA rules, because Cirrus is TAA (Technically Advanced Aircraft), I can use it...no need for complex / retractable time. So that makes this next step more doable for me.

Any thoughts on how the two compare? I've heard commercial is more fun / easier...but is that true? Is the written just as onerous? How much study is required, comparing the two?

Any advice appreciated a lot!

Seems to me I heard you still some complex time but thats probably not true. Which is more fun I guess is what you consider fun. Easier? Commercial is probably easier unless you're really weak with stick n rudder skills. Commercial test should be a snooze after having done your IR. I'm basing that on my experience a long time ago but I doubt if it's changed much. Advice? Just do it
 
Commercial is easy. It’s all about fine tuning your skills as a private pilot and finessing the aircraft. You’ll learn how to get the aircraft to do whatever you tell it to
 
I'm in a similar boat. Tempted to do commercial, but where as IR is a fun challenge that makes you a better pilot and opens up a ton of doors for you the commercial doesn't really seem to do the same, unless you want to make a career / job out of flying, doing CFI work, etc.
 
The commercial written does have a good bit of somewhat-complex math problems related to fuel burn, weight/balance, and time/distance. Not terribly heavy on the approach plate/charts material. Also, quite a few questions on regs. A number of POA users have used GoldMethod for their instruments test. We just released GoldMethod 2.0 and it now also includes commercial.
 
I’m in the same boat as well. Finished my IR and doing commercial and multiengine commercial this year. Thought about doing an accelerated course.
 
what a ballpark training time to get ready for checkride? i'm working on IR, and then need to decide to either get ASES and AMEL private, or push through and get commercial ASEL first. I don't really need commercial for anything, but like the original poster, like the idea of a little challenge and if you're going to get commercial, it seems worth getting it earlier so that all of your class checkrides thereafter will be commercial with instrument
 
For IR, you can benefit from using a sim, because it is mostly learning procedural stuff. For commercial, you need to be in an airplane.
 
does have a good bit of somewhat-complex math problems related to fuel burn, weight/balance, and time/distance.
Correct.

But with a good electronic E6B, you can quickly figure out the methods to perform the calculation, and the computations get easy to do. Especially the weight shift problems.
 
For IR, you can benefit from using a sim, because it is mostly learning procedural stuff. For commercial, you need to be in an airplane.
Agree! I work long hours, and the only way I learned the complex avionics well enough to as IFR in a Cirrus was with my FlyThisSim at home. It was expensive, but probably saved me money overall, because it drastically reduced flying hours. For those concerned about cost, there's a robust aftermarket for Flythissim. So many buy new for $5.6K, get their rating, and then sell for a thousand or so less. Trust me, this saves a boatload of money. A bonus: If you keep your Flythissim, you can now log IFR currency without an instructor at home (FAA just announced rules this week).
 
Correct.

But with a good electronic E6B, you can quickly figure out the methods to perform the calculation, and the computations get easy to do. Especially the weight shift problems.

Yea the computations are stupid easy with my electronic e6b.
 
Correct.

But with a good electronic E6B, you can quickly figure out the methods to perform the calculation, and the computations get easy to do. Especially the weight shift problems.
Absolutely. Having good skills with a good electronic E6B will make the test immeasurably easier.
 
Was thinking of King Schools again for commercial written. Any thoughts?
 
I used Sheppard for my written and got a 96. I had two complex planning questions and simply skipped them. All the other questions were so easy there was no point bothering with them.
 
Was thinking of King Schools again for commercial written. Any thoughts?

I’ve used King for everything an always scored above 92%. I just finished the King commercial course and will take my written this month.
 
Having recently gotten my IFR in my Cirrus, this 63 year old is already missing the challenge of training, so I'm considering my Commercial. Under new FAA rules, because Cirrus is TAA (Technically Advanced Aircraft), I can use it...no need for complex / retractable time. So that makes this next step more doable for me.

Any thoughts on how the two compare? I've heard commercial is more fun / easier...but is that true? Is the written just as onerous? How much study is required, comparing the two?

Any advice appreciated a lot!
Bob - I would get the rating now with no delay. I got my instrument rating 15 years ago and intended to go straight for the commercial but work and family priorities pushed that aside. I finally decided to get the commercial this year. I am embarrassed how much I forgot over the years. There is some new material in the commercial written but a lot of it is overlap from private and instrument. AIr space, Nav questions, performance charts come to mind. I would strongly recommend you do the commercial written while the material is fresh in your mind.

I bought the ASA app earlier this year to start studying for the commercial. A few months ago @write-stuff (Russ Still www.goldmethod.com) put a post up here looking for beta testers for thier commercial written prep software. I signed up as a beta tester and have been using the software for about two months. They just released the production version. I would suggest you take a look at it. What I like the most - it removes questions from the question pool as you answer them correctly. It saves a lot of time and each pass through a subject, pares the questions down to just the ones that trip you up. It is a unique approach. Full - disclaimer, I got to try the software for free as a tester. I would definitely recommend it.
 
Give Gold Method a try. I was fortunate to be a part of the beta and it worked well for me.

Russel from Gold Method is poking around on POA so you get the side benefit of asking him questions or providing feedback if that matters to you.
 
Russel from Gold Method is poking around on POA so you get the side benefit of asking him questions or providing feedback if that matters to you.
He is also very responsive to questions posted on their Facebook group and sent by email.
 
Correct.

But with a good electronic E6B, you can quickly figure out the methods to perform the calculation, and the computations get easy to do. Especially the weight shift problems.

Electronic, shmectronic. Batteries are a crutch
 
Agree! I work long hours, and the only way I learned the complex avionics well enough to as IFR in a Cirrus was with my FlyThisSim at home. It was expensive, but probably saved me money overall, because it drastically reduced flying hours. For those concerned about cost, there's a robust aftermarket for Flythissim. So many buy new for $5.6K, get their rating, and then sell for a thousand or so less. Trust me, this saves a boatload of money. A bonus: If you keep your Flythissim, you can now log IFR currency without an instructor at home (FAA just announced rules this week).

K ?? lemme know when we’re talkin C
 
The commercial written is a bit tedious. Not difficult, just tedious and boring.

The commercial checkride flight is fun. The maneuvers are really about, just like @jordane93 said, making the plane do what you want it to do. They add a third dimension and energy management to private pilot maneuvers. Lazy 8's are great when you do them right - the plane pretty much flies it self. The only one that's challenging is the power off 180 "precision landing".

Maybe you could replace it with a power off "precision" chute pull in the Cirrus? :D
 
@VWGhiaBob - I don’t think you’ll get as much bang for the buck from the Commercial over the Instrument if you have no plans to fly for dollars.

Both fun, if you like to learn, but much more of the Instrument probably applies to your flying than the Commercial does.

Also note that even though you can take the Commercial checkride in your TAA you still need some retract time, if you don’t have it. They haven’t dropped that completely.
 
@VWGhiaBob - I don’t think you’ll get as much bang for the buck from the Commercial over the Instrument if you have no plans to fly for dollars.

Both fun, if you like to learn, but much more of the Instrument probably applies to your flying than the Commercial does.

Also note that even though you can take the Commercial checkride in your TAA you still need some retract time, if you don’t have it. They haven’t dropped that completely.

Based on the new changes to the FARs that were released, after Aug 27th you can use 10 hours of training in a TAA to replace the 10 hours of training in a complex aircraft. As long as your checkride is after that date you will not have to have any retract time for Commercial.
 
Last edited:
Based on the new changes to the FARs that were released, after Aug 27th you can use 10 hours of training in a TAA to replace the 10 hours of training in a com0lex aircraft. As long as your checkride is after that date you will not have to have any retract time for Commercial.

Ahhh. Right. Technically they’re still in NPRM and not released yet.

Their definition of “TAA” is sure to come under some fire in the NPRM process if it hasn’t already. But it’ll still happen, however they decide to describe it.

Seems kinda stupid really. A dual G5 equipped aircraft with a GTN 750 and 650 in the center stack and an integrated autopilot is as “TAA” as a true PFD/MFD setup, but I bet such a setup won’t qualify, by my reading of the NPRM “TAA” language.
 
Ahhh. Right. Technically they’re still in NPRM and not released yet.

Their definition of “TAA” is sure to come under some fire in the NPRM process if it hasn’t already. But it’ll still happen, however they decide to describe it.

Seems kinda stupid really. A dual G5 equipped aircraft with a GTN 750 and 650 in the center stack and an integrated autopilot is as “TAA” as a true PFD/MFD setup, but I bet such a setup won’t qualify, by my reading of the NPRM “TAA” language.

No longer in NPRM, the final rule was released on June 27th. That portion of the rule goes into effect on August 27th.

In § 61.129:
■ a. Effective August 27, 2018, revise paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (b)(3)(ii);
■ b. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (c)(3)(i), (d) introductory text, (d)(3)(i), and (i), remove the words ‘‘flight simulator’’ and add in their place the words ‘‘full flight simulator’’; and
■ c. Effective August 27, 2018, add paragraph (j).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
§ 61.129 Aeronautical experience.
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) 10 hours of training in a complex
airplane, a turbine-powered airplane, or a technically advanced airplane (TAA)
that meets the requirements of paragraph (j) of this section, or any combination thereof. The airplane must be appropriate to land or sea for the rating sought;
** * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) 10 hours of training in a
multiengine complex or turbine- powered airplane; or for an applicant seeking a multiengine seaplane rating, 10 hours of training in a multiengine seaplane that has flaps and a controllable pitch propeller, including seaplanes equipped with an engine control system consisting of a digital computer and associated accessories for controlling the engine and propeller, such as a full authority digital engine control;
* * * * *
(j) Technically advanced airplane. Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, a technically advanced airplane must be equipped with an electronically advanced avionics system that includes the following installed components:
(1) An electronic Primary Flight Display (PFD) that includes, at a minimum, an airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator, heading indicator, altimeter, and vertical speed indicator;
(2) An electronic Multifunction Display (MFD) that includes, at a minimum, a moving map using Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation with the aircraft position displayed;
(3) A two axis autopilot integrated with the navigation and heading guidance system; and
(4) The display elements described in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section must be continuously visible.
 
No longer in NPRM, the final rule was released on June 27th. That portion of the rule goes into effect on August 27th.

In § 61.129:
■ a. Effective August 27, 2018, revise paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (b)(3)(ii);
■ b. Effective July 27, 2018, in paragraphs (c)(3)(i), (d) introductory text, (d)(3)(i), and (i), remove the words ‘‘flight simulator’’ and add in their place the words ‘‘full flight simulator’’; and
■ c. Effective August 27, 2018, add paragraph (j).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
§ 61.129 Aeronautical experience.
(a) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) 10 hours of training in a complex
airplane, a turbine-powered airplane, or a technically advanced airplane (TAA)
that meets the requirements of paragraph (j) of this section, or any combination thereof. The airplane must be appropriate to land or sea for the rating sought;
** * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) 10 hours of training in a
multiengine complex or turbine- powered airplane; or for an applicant seeking a multiengine seaplane rating, 10 hours of training in a multiengine seaplane that has flaps and a controllable pitch propeller, including seaplanes equipped with an engine control system consisting of a digital computer and associated accessories for controlling the engine and propeller, such as a full authority digital engine control;
* * * * *
(j) Technically advanced airplane. Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, a technically advanced airplane must be equipped with an electronically advanced avionics system that includes the following installed components:
(1) An electronic Primary Flight Display (PFD) that includes, at a minimum, an airspeed indicator, turn coordinator, attitude indicator, heading indicator, altimeter, and vertical speed indicator;
(2) An electronic Multifunction Display (MFD) that includes, at a minimum, a moving map using Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation with the aircraft position displayed;
(3) A two axis autopilot integrated with the navigation and heading guidance system; and
(4) The display elements described in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section must be continuously visible.

Ahh okay. I knew it was coming but didn’t know it was past NPRM and up to waiting for publication in the Federal Register.

That’s a seriously crappy definition of TAA. But it is what it is.
 
Apparently I did the commercial maneuvers “good enough” at one point in my life, but I never found them easy... or useful.
It’s just a right of passage in my opinion.
The oral was tough, no way around that. Things may have changed a bit as that was around 1986.

Many years ago folks were hired at major airlines with a commercial/multi/instrument, and not expected to get their ATP/type rating until upgrade. Obviously that has all changed.
 
@VWGhiaBob - I don’t think you’ll get as much bang for the buck from the Commercial over the Instrument if you have no plans to fly for dollars.

Both fun, if you like to learn, but much more of the Instrument probably applies to your flying than the Commercial does.

Also note that even though you can take the Commercial checkride in your TAA you still need some retract time, if you don’t have it. They haven’t dropped that completely.
I believe as of last week they further dropped it completely, per AOPA live. They did it in two stages.
 
I believe as of last week they further dropped it completely, per AOPA live. They did it in two stages.

Yeah they did, well will, as of publication in the Federal Register in late August. You’re correct, see above.
 
Ahh okay. I knew it was coming but didn’t know it was past NPRM and up to waiting for publication in the Federal Register.

That’s a seriously crappy definition of TAA. But it is what it is.
Same thing, really, with the complex definition...why are flaps necessary to be a complex airplane? It's just the set of equipment that the FAA arbitrarily determined was required.
 
Same thing, really, with the complex definition...why are flaps necessary to be a complex airplane? It's just the set of equipment that the FAA arbitrarily determined was required.

More handles? LOL. Nobody really knows what they’re supposedly protecting against or fixing safety-wise, in the Commercial certificate requirements. Apparently the new school is that you need lots of buttonology in constantly changing software products to get by when making money with airplanes.

Note there no TAA breaks for helicopters that I see on the proposed changes. Ha. They’ll be falling out of the sky soon because the pilot couldn’t set the Garmin and the autopilot if they’re lucky enough to have one. :)

Maybe we need TAA in gliders. Hahaha.
 
I have both my single and multi commercial. Lots of maneuvers that are a little challenging to learn and don't have any real life use as I don't plan on putting my plane into a crazy 8 anytime soon. However in my opinion any advanced training, for anyone who likes to fly, can only be a good thing. Maybe you will learn something in the training that could come in useful at the right time. The instrument rating was by far the hardest for me. But its been invaluable in several situations in the past and Im absolutely glad I have it. If you have the time and means, I say get your commercial rating. Insurance may also go down as well. Though I may never use it, Im personally going to go for my ATP when I have enough hours. Couldn't hurt (besides my wallet)!
 
Having recently gotten my IFR in my Cirrus, this 63 year old is already missing the challenge of training, so I'm considering my Commercial. Under new FAA rules, because Cirrus is TAA (Technically Advanced Aircraft), I can use it...no need for complex / retractable time. So that makes this next step more doable for me.

Any thoughts on how the two compare? I've heard commercial is more fun / easier...but is that true? Is the written just as onerous? How much study is required, comparing the two?

Any advice appreciated a lot!

The commercial Written is not difficult. A few extra calculations that you will never use in real life. A Cirrus is going to be a challenge for a couple of the Commercial maneuvers
 
Wait a second, is this a MUST or a MAY?
 
The commercial Written is not difficult. A few extra calculations that you will never use in real life. A Cirrus is going to be a challenge for a couple of the Commercial maneuvers

They've got rid of most of the calculations now. No more "heading x, time y, bearing change z, how far are you from the VOR" questions.
 
Back
Top