Cross-Country Definition

HPNPilot1200

HPNPilot1200

En-Route
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
2,662
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Jason
I understand that the legal definition of "cross-country" in regards to meeting flight time requirements for various ratings is something along the lines of "a flight consisting of a full-stop landing at an airport at least 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure."

However, consider this situation: A certificated pilot flies from the original point of departure to another airport with a student pilot passenger. Could the student pilot fly the plane back to the airport solo and log that time? Or must a solo x-country consist of a minimum of 2 legs? (Or am I just making this stuff up..?)

Any interpretations appreciated.

Thanks,
 
Yes, the student could fly back solo, provided he or she has the proper endorsements, and log the time. There is no "multiple leg" requirement to define a cross-country other than when specifically required for a certificate or rating.

Fly safe!

David
 
MauleSkinner said:
Yes, the student could fly back solo, provided he or she has the proper endorsements, and log the time. There is no "multiple leg" requirement to define a cross-country other than when specifically required for a certificate or rating.

Fly safe!

David
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks for the clarification. That's what I thought.
 
Just to emphasize a point David made, there would have to be a CFI at the far point to endorse the student pilot's logbook for the return trip's flight planning and weather.
 
Ron Levy said:
Just to emphasize a point David made, there would have to be a CFI at the far point to endorse the student pilot's logbook for the return trip's flight planning and weather.
Click to expand...

Would not a CFI's endorsement at the home airport for the return trip be good enough? I can't recall seeing any reg that requires that the CFI be present at the airport to endorse the student. CFI could endorse the student at Bennigans or Taco Bell if he wanted, right?
 
KennyFlys said:
The originating CFI would endorse for the entire trip. But, taking a plane back as described would be comparable to a student being stuck enroute and needing a new endorsement to take off at a later time.

Any CFI could make the endorsement but most would not want to do so without at least speaking to that student's CFI.
Click to expand...


What regulation states that the CFI has to give the endorsement at the airport of departure? I can't find it (looked for a while). It appears that the CFI could give the endorsement before the departure to the other airport, allowing the student to solo the plane back, unless I'm missing something somewhere.

Kind of like meeting the CFI at Bennigans and having him give you the endorsement for your solo in an hour. The CFI is not at the airport that you departed from....
 
Ron Levy said:
Just to emphasize a point David made, there would have to be a CFI at the far point to endorse the student pilot's logbook for the return trip's flight planning and weather.
Click to expand...

Ron, can you elaborate? This just doesn't sound right?
 
Ron Levy said:
Just to emphasize a point David made, there would have to be a CFI at the far point to endorse the student pilot's logbook for the return trip's flight planning and weather.
Click to expand...

Echo alaskaflyer's question, could you elaborate?

What if the student flew both legs, but stopped to have lunch for a few hours. Would another CFI have to endorse the student back? I only had one endorsement and just made sure to call my CFI before the return leg home because of some weather that showed up on radar.
 
HPNPilot1200 said:
I understand that the legal definition of "cross-country" in regards to meeting flight time requirements for various ratings is something along the lines of "a flight consisting of a full-stop landing at an airport at least 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure."
Click to expand...

AFaIK there's nothing that says you need a full stop landing to qualify a flight as a valid cross country. And FWIW, you don't even need a landing if the x/c time is intended to apply only to the ATP x/c requirements.


Also, depending on whether or not the student pays for the return trip, the scenario you proposed could be construed as a ferry flight requiring a commercial certificate or better. This is something I believe is quite often "violated" and/or overlooked, but still something to be aware of.
 
kenny,

jason doesnt fly at your school, hes asking about the legality, not the requirements of individual schools or instructors.
 
lancefisher said:
Also, depending on whether or not the student pays for the return trip, the scenario you proposed could be construed as a ferry flight requiring a commercial certificate or better. This is something I believe is quite often "violated" and/or overlooked, but still something to be aware of.
Click to expand...

Hypothetically, the student pays for the return leg rental costs. This wouldn't be considered a ferry flight, would it?
 
KennyFlys said:
The CFI could give an endorsement a week ahead of the proposed XC but that wouldn't be prudent.
Click to expand...
...nor would it be legal. See Administrator v. Blair. The CFI must review the existing and forecast weather at the time of departure. "Respondent abdicated the important role the rules assign to him to supervise and assist Ms. Campbell in her analysis of the current and expected weather and her decision whether to fly her 3-leg, solo cross-country flight that day." [emphasis added].

However, the originally posted case involves a same-day endorsement, albeit at a different airport than the intended point of solo departure. What I see in the originally posted case is the potential for argument over just how far ahead on the day of the flight the instructor may review the student's planning, and that is not a point over which I would wish to quibble with the FAA, especially for a flight from an airport other than the one at which the review took place.

One could argue that this is no different than giving a student an endorsement for an out-and-back solo XC flight, just starting at the outlying airport rather than the home 'drome. However, I simply would not be comfortable doing it.
 
lancefisher said:
Also, depending on whether or not the student pays for the return trip, the scenario you proposed could be construed as a ferry flight requiring a commercial certificate or better. This is something I believe is quite often "violated" and/or overlooked, but still something to be aware of.
Click to expand...
Clearly, if the student paid the FBO a dime less than the full rental cost of the airplane, that would be a violation of the rules, as would accepting any money from anyone else contingent on making that flight. However, since this is a clearly-required solo XC flight, I see no problem, as long as the student pays for it -- no "quid pro quo" here.
 
so you put a limitation on the planning endorsement saying that the flight is not authorized unless the student calls the CFI and reviews the current weather just prior to departure. way i see it all regulatory requirements get met and the student gets his XC and everyone is happy.
 
So, the ALJ insured there is no vagueness in the FAR as "existing circumstances" is a pretty good catch all.

I stand corrected. Thanks Ron.
 
tonycondon said:
so you put a limitation on the planning endorsement saying that the flight is not authorized unless the student calls the CFI and reviews the current weather just prior to departure. way i see it all regulatory requirements get met and the student gets his XC and everyone is happy.
Click to expand...
How does the student document the phone call? :confused: It's just too complicated for me to sign my name to it.
 
Ron Levy said:
How does the student document the phone call? :confused: It's just too complicated for me to sign my name to it.
Click to expand...
In this scenario, if the student is departing from an airport where his own CFI (the one who endorsed for solo flight) is not located, another CFI could review his FP and endorse him. But, odds are that endorsing CFI would want to have a phone call with the CFI who endorsed for solo flight before signing off the student for the XC.

In Tony's scenario just now, why couldn't the student fax his FP, review it over the phone? If no changes are needed, the CFI signs it and sends it back by fax so the student has a signed copy with an endorsement written in and an added line the logbook would be signed upon return. Then, keep that endorsed flight plan as record. Seems complicated but would it cover such an event?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KennyFlys said:
In this scenario, if the student is departing from an airport where his own CFI (the one who endorsed for solo flight) is not located, another CFI could review his FP and endorse him.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I suggested originally.

But, odds are that endorsing CFI would want to have a phone call with the CFI who endorsed for solo flight before signing off the student for the XC.
Click to expand...
You bet. When a Student Pilot landed by mistake at SBY on an XC planned from the DC area to Georgetown DE and back, you can be sure I called and spoke with the original endorsing CFI before signing the SP's log for the return home.

In Tony's scenario just now, why couldn't the student fax his FP, review it over the phone? If no changes are needed, the CFI signs it and sends it back by fax so the student has a signed copy with an endorsement written in and an added line the logbook would be signed upon return. Then, keep that endorsed flight plan as record. Seems complicated but would it cover such an event?
Click to expand...
I suppose so, but as I said, it's too complicated for me to be part of. In any event, part of my endorsement process includes some Q&A on the flight, and that's too hard to do by fax. I'll stick with my original idea -- if the SP wants to start a flight somewhere else, it's best to have a CFI at that other location do the review and endorsement.
 
HPNPilot1200 said:
Hypothetically, the student pays for the return leg rental costs. This wouldn't be considered a ferry flight, would it?
Click to expand...

No. As long as the student is paying for the flight time there's no "compensation". The dark grey area is when a non commmercial pilot flies someone else's plane somewhere in return for the "free" flight time.
 
So...I, as a student pilot with my own airplane based at Airport X, want to help my Dad retrieve his airplane from Airport Y. He, naturally, is fully qualified in my airplane.

The plan is for him to fly from here to there, and I will bring my airplane back. 1 hour over, 1 hour to ensure that his airplane is airworthy coming out of maintenance, and 1 hour back.

If you were my instructor, Ron, and had signed me off for solo X-C previously, would you not meet me before departure from Airport X to review my flight planning and sign off the return X-C?

Fly safe!

David
 
MauleSkinner said:
So...I, as a student pilot with my own airplane based at Airport X, want to help my Dad retrieve his airplane from Airport Y. He, naturally, is fully qualified in my airplane.

The plan is for him to fly from here to there, and I will bring my airplane back. 1 hour over, 1 hour to ensure that his airplane is airworthy coming out of maintenance, and 1 hour back.

If you were my instructor, Ron, and had signed me off for solo X-C previously, would you not meet me before departure from Airport X to review my flight planning and sign off the return X-C?
Click to expand...
I might. I might not. Depends on how you've impressed me during training, and how I thought your dad might affect your decision-making (could be positive, could be negative). But if I did, there would be a definite understanding (not a log entry) that you'd call me for final approval before leaving Y. Yeah, it's not a legal mandatory, but what I'd do to you if you break my rules would be worse than anything the FAA is permitted to do to you if you break their rules.
 
im curious what you mean by "not a log entry" Personally in this situation I would put something in the endorsement requiring a phone consultation before departure.
 
tonycondon said:
im curious what you mean by "not a log entry" Personally in this situation I would put something in the endorsement requiring a phone consultation before departure.
Click to expand...
As I said above, I can't figure a convenient way to document such a phone consultation.
 
yes kenny we know about your school that insists on holding students hands when they are supposed to be solo. I guess if thats the way the airlines do it then thats the way everyone should do it.

way i figure, if the student cant fly what really is a pretty short cross country flight without calling me and checking in then he isnt ready for a solo XC flight and i shouldnt have signed him off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ron Levy said:
Yeah, it's not a legal mandatory, but what I'd do to you if you break my rules would be worse than anything the FAA is permitted to do to you if you break their rules.
Click to expand...

Break their legs?

Or most likely just not sign their logbook?


I fear the FAA more then you..But that's just me..
 
Last edited:
KennyFlys said:
He does and expects all his instructors to verify with TRACON a student has opened flight following.
Click to expand...

So, CFI's are expected to not trust their students? :eek:

Also, do the students have to go on a VFR flight plan? Do you call the FSS to verify that too?

Do you follow the students around on every preflight? Does the owner of your school understand the meaning of, and the purpose of, "Solo"?

The student is expected to call the school at each stop and provide the instructor an update on weather information.
Click to expand...

So when it's CAVU for hundreds of miles around and they flew for a half hour (in which the closest front went from 575 to 550 nm away), you make them call in?

Although these are not regulated requirements, they are required by the school should the student wish to complete training in an orderly, efficient and cost-effective manner in order to move forward in a professional pilot program. Failure to comply will cost completion of the next solo XC at an expected interval.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that if they were to, say, fail to call you from the other end of their cross country on said CAVU day, you'd have to make them do it over again?

These may seem stiff but considering the chief CFI has an airline background, he expects the professional students to train like they are already interviewing with the airline. They carry a pretty good weight with ASA and a few other regionals when it comes to recommendations.
Click to expand...

Final question... Is this stuff only done for "professional students" (ie airline bound), or everyone?

If this is how they train the average joe who's NOT going to go to the airlines, I'd say it's ****-poor teaching. Hand-holding is NOT teaching. Over-regulation does not allow a person to develop the decision-making skills necessary to be a Pilot In Command. :no:

This reminds me of an FBO not far from here which shall remain nameless. Their requirements are awful. Taking a plane for >4 hours? You're gonna pay a minimum of 3 (so much for a $100 burger). Are you an airline pilot with 30,000 hours who wants to rent a plane for a cross country? Well, you're gonna have to get some pimple-faced 300-hour CFI to sign off on your flight planning as if you were a student again, and you'd better be on a flight plan. Are you instrument rated? Well, you can't do more than punch up through a layer and back down through it, and approaches aren't allowed (how the hell you're supposed to maintain currency, I do not know).

These types of policies *sound* like a good idea, if you're an insurance company lawyer. However, they are NOT good for GA in the least bit, and they are NOT creating safe pilots.

That is why I purposely trained (and still do) at an FBO that has no daily rental minimums, allows operations at grass fields, and leaves ALL of the decision-making and risk management up to the Pilot In Command. (Oh, and they cover renters as named insured too... So even the insurance company is buying into their philosophy somewhat.) That is what GA needs, not a bunch of misguided overly regulated policies.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
So, CFI's are expected to not trust their students? :eek:
Click to expand...

My exact feelings when I read about CFIs putting a handheld GPS in a sealed baggie and tell the student "If this bag is opened, you must do it again."

Or the same with a tripped circuit breaker on a panelmounted GPS.

And Kenny's flight school is a joke, apparently. Call at every stop? Wow.
 
SkyHog said:
And Kenny's flight school is a joke, apparently. Call at every stop? Wow.
Click to expand...
My experience with more flight schools than I have fingers and toes suggests that Kenny's flight school is far from unique, and in this respect, in keeping with my idea of how to do things with student solo XC's. There's too much chance that something has changed en route (weather, airport situation, whatever), and I want to be certain that the student knows about it and is making a good decision with all the data. After all, I am responsible for whatever happens to the student.
 
Ron Levy said:
My experience with more flight schools than I have fingers and toes suggests that Kenny's flight school is far from unique, and in this respect, in keeping with my idea of how to do things with student solo XC's. There's too much chance that something has changed en route (weather, airport situation, whatever), and I want to be certain that the student knows about it and is making a good decision with all the data. After all, I am responsible for whatever happens to the student.
Click to expand...


If this is how PIC handles student cross countries, I'll be glad to talk at least 2 people out of the program. There's no excuse for such handholding.
 
PIC is instrument training only, no solo XCs
 
tonycondon said:
PIC is instrument training only, no solo XCs
Click to expand...

Ahh, ok, that's good.

I should clarify, I'm not just busting Ron's butt here for this one, I definitely understand his concerns since it is his butt on the line, but it is my opinion that CFIs should be trying to make good pilots, not make scared pilots. And moreover, the fear of "They might do something that will come back on me" should not be a concern if you are properly teaching the pilot everything that should be known pre-solo.

You can't teach judgment, that's a given, but I would hope that by the time you're signing off a student to solo, you can tell if he has the good judgment necessary.
 
SkyHog said:
If this is how PIC handles student cross countries, I'll be glad to talk at least 2 people out of the program.
Click to expand...
PIC does IR training, and there are no solos in IR training.
There's no excuse for such handholding.
Click to expand...
I think that with more experience in the flight instructing profession, your opinion may change. Such "handholding" may not be necessary for everyone, but there are situations where it is not only necessary, but appropriate. BTW, every air carrier requires checking in with dispatch before every departure, so those flight schools aren't exactly inventing the idea.
 
SkyHog said:
You can't teach judgment, that's a given, but I would hope that by the time you're signing off a student to solo, you can tell if he has the good judgment necessary.
Click to expand...
If there's anything I've learned in 34 years of flight instructing, it's that students are always finding new ways to surprise their instructors. I'm not saying that the phone call should be for the instructor to tell the trainee what to do, but rather for the trainee to tell the instructor the latest information he has for the next leg, and what his plan is based on that updated information. You never know when the trainee might miss a pop-up NOTAM or misinterpret a new forecast, and that's why they're still flying under a CFI's supervision.
 
KennyFlys said:
Seeing that I'm not making anyone happy with what are established policies for a particular school, I won't even bother further.
Click to expand...

Kenny,

We're not bashing YOU. But, you are the one who brought these policies up, and you seem to think they're a good idea (though I haven't figured that out for sure, because as soon as they came under fire you ran and hid).

This is a DISCUSSION board. If you agree with the policies, why? If not, why are you posting them, and more importantly, why are you patronizing such a school?

Oh, I suppose it may help if I mention there are a LARGE number of Indian students at this school.
Click to expand...

What the hell does that have to do with anything? :dunno:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
What the hell does that have to do with anything? :dunno:
Click to expand...
As I alluded to above, foreign students often bring with them considerably different attitudes and outlooks. In many cases, they will consider deteriorating conditions either a challenge to be met or something over which they have no control, and continue a flight which should be terminated. In some cases, they may even feel that failing to complete the flight will cause loss of respect, or that they cannot stop unless someone tells them to stop. Recognizing these cultural differences is important in training those of different backgrounds than our own, and sometimes that means creating what seem to those of our background unusually restrictive training rules.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
As I said above, I can't figure a convenient way to document such a phone consultation.
Click to expand...
I'm not as concerned as you are with the need to document such a phone consultation, but if I did, here are some options (this is 2007 after all)

cell phone record showing that some conversation took place.
email or fax - a lot of FBOs have them.
text messaging

Frankly, don't really don't have a personal problem as a CFI with okaying the return of, say, the student pilot who makes the good decision to divert due to weather and lands at a location that was not part of the original endorsement, or the one who has lunch at a destination.
 
Ron Levy said:
As I alluded to above, foreign students often bring with them considerably different attitudes and outlooks. In many cases, they will consider deteriorating conditions either a challenge to be met or something over which they have no control, and continue a flight which should be terminated. In some cases, they may even feel that failing to complete the flight will cause loss of respect, or that they cannot stop unless someone tells them to stop. Recognizing these cultural differences is important in training those of different backgrounds than our own, and sometimes that means creating what seem to those of our background unusually restrictive training rules.
Click to expand...

Maybe we shouldn't be training foreign students.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top