Gotta love the FAA... who comes up with this stuff?

paflyer

paflyer

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
7,152
Location
PA
Display Name
Display name:
PAFlyer
For Commercial required flight experience....

"iii. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in day-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure
"iv. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in night-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure"
-------------------------

Maybe it's me, but don't these requirements seem goofy? In a typical bug smasher, this trip is about 200nm, unless you're also flying at MCA or doing donuts in the sky on the way. Or, you go out of your way to add time but still be at least 100nm from departure point.

Actually, this turns into a 4 hr, 400nm round trip. Why do they bother with a minimum distance as long as it's at least a legit XC?
 
I guess I can't qualify since I don't have any VRF experience (nor know what it is).

paflyer said:
For Commercial required flight experience....

"iii. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in day-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure
"iv. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in night-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure"
-------------------------

Maybe it's me, but don't these requirements seem goofy? In a typical bug smasher, this trip is about 200nm, unless you're also flying at MCA or doing donuts in the sky on the way. Or, you go out of your way to add time but still be at least 100nm from departure point.

Actually, this turns into a 4 hr, 400nm round trip. Why do they bother with a minimum distance as long as it's at least a legit XC?
Click to expand...
 
RotorDude said:
I guess I can't qualify since I don't have any VRF experience (nor know what it is).
Click to expand...
Well, OK- you pass the eye exam.:rolleyes:

Apparently someone re-typed the requirements and posted them online. Funny how you see what you expect!
 
Huh . . . When I was looking into my Commercial recently, it required a solo XC with landings at three airports, at least one of which was 250 nm or more from the starting point. Now it's 2 hours, which will require either a crazy, loopy flight path or a distance well beyond 250 nm in my plane.

By the older rules, I'm iffy; by these rules, no problem, it was longer than that solo to the Reunion last year.
 
Hank S said:
Huh . . . When I was looking into my Commercial recently, it required a solo XC with landings at three airports, at least one of which was 250 nm or more from the starting point. Now it's 2 hours, which will require either a crazy, loopy flight path or a distance well beyond 250 nm in my plane.

By the older rules, I'm iffy; by these rules, no problem, it was longer than that solo to the Reunion last year.
Click to expand...

You're confusing the solo XC with the dual XC requirements. The OP appears to be quoting the dual XC requirements...
 
There are three distinct commercial cross country requirements. The two 2-hour/100 mm flights, one day and one night, are dual. The 300/250 mm solo is, well, a solo flight. (Still there although the OP quotes an obsolete version)

The commercial requirements tend have more to do with meeting ICAO standards than something the FAA made up. That's true the solo, not sure about the two dual ones. The extra length is probably to give a better chance to see changing conditions.
 
Here it tis:


§ 61.129 Aeronautical experience.
(a) For an airplane single-engine rating. Except as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, a person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category and single-engine class rating must log at least 250 hours of flight time as a pilot that consists of at least:

(1) 100 hours in powered aircraft, of which 50 hours must be in airplanes.

(2) 100 hours of pilot-in-command flight time, which includes at least -

(i) 50 hours in airplanes; and

(ii) 50 hours in cross-country flight of which at least 10 hours must be in airplanes.

(3) 20 hours of training on the areas of operation listed in § 61.127(b)(1) of this part that includes at least -

(i) Ten hours of instrument training using a view-limiting device including attitude instrument flying, partial panel skills, recovery from unusual flight attitudes, and intercepting and tracking navigational systems. Five hours of the 10 hours required on instrument training must be in a single engine airplane;

(ii) 10 hours of training in an airplane that has a retractable landing gear, flaps, and a controllable pitch propeller, or is turbine-powered, or for an applicant seeking a single-engine seaplane rating, 10 hours of training in a seaplane that has flaps and a controllable pitch propeller;

(iii) One 2-hour cross country flight in a single engine airplane in daytime conditions that consists of a total straight-line distance of more than 100 nautical miles from the original point of departure;

(iv) One 2-hour cross country flight in a single engine airplane in nighttime conditions that consists of a total straight-line distance of more than 100 nautical miles from the original point of departure; and

(v) Three hours in a single-engine airplane with an authorized instructor in preparation for the practical test within the preceding 2 calendar months from the month of the test.

(4) Ten hours of solo flight time in a single engine airplane or 10 hours of flight time performing the duties of pilot in command in a single engine airplane with an authorized instructor on board (either of which may be credited towards the flight time requirement under paragraph (a)(2) of this section), on the areas of operation listed under § 61.127(b)(1) that include -

(i) One cross-country flight of not less than 300 nautical miles total distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is a straight-line distance of at least 250 nautical miles from the original departure point. However, if this requirement is being met in Hawaii, the longest segment need only have a straight-line distance of at least 150 nautical miles; and

(ii) 5 hours in night VFR conditions with 10 takeoffs and 10 landings (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating control tower
 
Not all airplanes are 100 mph cruise. it also takes into account the ever present 50 knot headwind you will find when flying a C150. Just sayin.
 
paflyer said:
Maybe it's me, but don't these requirements seem goofy? In a typical bug smasher, this trip is about 200nm, unless you're also flying at MCA or doing donuts in the sky on the way. Or, you go out of your way to add time but still be at least 100nm from departure point.

Actually, this turns into a 4 hr, 400nm round trip. Why do they bother with a minimum distance as long as it's at least a legit XC?
Click to expand...

No, doesn't seem goofy to me.
 
Yeah, in a Mooney you're going a lot further!

This should have been a total of two hours experience in both day and night environments, and the distance being 100nm between points.
 
Brad Z said:
No, doesn't seem goofy to me.
Click to expand...
Me, either...apparently the FAA thinks you should be able to fly more than 50 miles from home without getting lost in order to qualify as a commercial pilot.

They also think you should be able to fly more than 45 minutes without getting lost.

I would tend to agree.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
Me, either...apparently the FAA thinks you should be able to fly more than 50 miles from home without getting lost in order to qualify as a commercial pilot.

They also think you should be able to fly more than 45 minutes without getting lost.

I would tend to agree.
Click to expand...
You're missing the point.
 
So for 4(i) above, would the following be acceptable? I've been told both yes and no, but haven't discussed it with a CFI yet:

I needed to get my tanks resealed immediately after annual. So I fired up, went once around the pattern and landed full stop to make sure everything worked. Had no taxiway, and there were tall trees at the end of the 3000' runway, so no touch and go, I just back taxied and took off again right at sunset. Landed 318 nm later, should have been ~2:20 enroute, and spent the night. Next morning, fired up again and went an additional 447 nm and dropped off the plane (should have been a little over 3 hours, I was vectored from the Atlantic coast over Lake Okechobee, through the Everglades then 4 miles out to sea at 2000 msl before being turned back in to land).

That's about my only significant solo XC with three landings, I usually only make one landing unless I'm planning to go beyond 4 hours, as it sure feels good to get out and stretch at that point.
 
paflyer said:
Why do they bother with a minimum distance as long as it's at least a legit XC?
Click to expand...

I don't really understand what you are asking, but I will take a guess. Because you could go to an airport 50nm away and come back, either multiple times or just fly slowly?
 
Hank S said:
So for 4(i) above, would the following be acceptable? I've been told both yes and no, but haven't discussed it with a CFI yet:

I needed to get my tanks resealed immediately after annual. So I fired up, went once around the pattern and landed full stop to make sure everything worked. Had no taxiway, and there were tall trees at the end of the 3000' runway, so no touch and go, I just back taxied and took off again right at sunset. Landed 318 nm later, should have been ~2:20 enroute, and spent the night. Next morning, fired up again and went an additional 447 nm and dropped off the plane (should have been a little over 3 hours, I was vectored from the Atlantic coast over Lake Okechobee, through the Everglades then 4 miles out to sea at 2000 msl before being turned back in to land).

That's about my only significant solo XC with three landings, I usually only make one landing unless I'm planning to go beyond 4 hours, as it sure feels good to get out and stretch at that point.
Click to expand...
I am not the FAA DPE, but I do not think the first landing would count.
Now, when you brought the airplane back, that would be your third point, and for the distance probably when you stopped for fuel.
 
dmspilot said:
The regulation specifies the number of places you land at, not the number of landings. In other words, your lap around the pattern at your departure airport is immaterial.
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
paflyer said:
For Commercial required flight experience....

"iii. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in day-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure
"iv. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in night-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure"
-------------------------

Maybe it's me, but don't these requirements seem goofy? In a typical bug smasher, this trip is about 200nm, unless you're also flying at MCA or doing donuts in the sky on the way. Or, you go out of your way to add time but still be at least 100nm from departure point.

Actually, this turns into a 4 hr, 400nm round trip. Why do they bother with a minimum distance as long as it's at least a legit XC?
Click to expand...

I think you're reading something wrong, and I'm surprised nobody else has mentioned it. If A and B are 101 nm apart, you fly from A to B to A, that should take around 2 hours in most training airplanes and meets the requirements. Do that twice (to different airports preferably), once during the day and once at night. I don't think it seems strange at all. They wanted to make sure you got further away from home than a simple 50 nm XC but wanted to make it a reasonable distance to cover in normal training airplanes in a couple hours. Nobody says you have to go the bare minimum.

What I prefer to do for these flights is to fly to somewhere with a restaurant 2 hours away during the day, have dinner while the sun sets, then fly 2 hours back at night. Gets both requirements done in one "flight", and more importantly, is further away than just 100 nm. I have done this a few times with Commercial students with great success.
 
Do not confuse "flight" with "the time between a single set of takeoff and landings."
 
BillTIZ said:
I am not the FAA DPE, but I do not think the first landing would count.
Now, when you brought the airplane back, that would be your third point, and for the distance probably when you stopped for fuel.
Click to expand...
Look at the rules quoted above:

The dual flights:
One 2-hour cross country flight in a single engine airplane...that consists of a total straight-line distance of more than 100 nautical miles from the original point of departure;

The solo flight:
One cross-country flight of not less than 300 nautical miles total distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is a straight-line distance of at least 250 nautical miles from the original departure point​

What do you see there that suggests to you that any landings anywhere along the way don't count? :dunno:
 
paflyer said:
Well, OK- you pass the eye exam.:rolleyes:

Apparently someone re-typed the requirements and posted them online. Funny how you see what you expect!
Click to expand...

You also are apparently quoting an outdated version. The FAA removed the VFR requirement for the dual cross countries several years ago.
 
RussR said:
I think you're reading something wrong, and I'm surprised nobody else has mentioned it. If A and B are 101 nm apart, you fly from A to B to A, that should take around 2 hours in most training airplanes and meets the requirements. Do that twice (to different airports preferably), once during the day and once at night. I don't think it seems strange at all. They wanted to make sure you got further away from home than a simple 50 nm XC but wanted to make it a reasonable distance to cover in normal training airplanes in a couple hours. Nobody says you have to go the bare minimum.
Click to expand...
I think you are on to it. I suspect the minimum distance and minimum number of hours is to account for different aircraft with different performance. Do your commercial in your privately-owned Citation and the minimum distance would be covered in 15-20 minutes; not much of a challenge. OTOH, just using time would allow a pilot to do it all without going more than 51 NM from home, gain not much of a challenge.

Stupid rule or not is typically in the mind of the beholder.
 
paflyer said:
So how long have you been with the FAA?:cool:
Click to expand...

Nine years. But it didn't seem goofy to me 19 years ago when I began working on my commercial certificate, either.

For comparison, take a look at 20.44 in the regulations back in 1959. Commercial cross country distance requirements increased as pilots continued to get lost when they went beyond 25nm of their starting point.
 
RussR said:
If A and B are 101 nm apart, you fly from A to B to A, that should take around 2 hours in most training airplanes and meets the requirements.
Click to expand...

Really? What are you flying, one of these? ;)

images


RussR said:
What I prefer to do for these flights is to fly to somewhere with a restaurant 2 hours away during the day, have dinner while the sun sets, then fly 2 hours back at night. Gets both requirements done in one "flight", and more importantly, is further away than just 100 nm. I have done this a few times with Commercial students with great success.
Click to expand...

Agree with this as a strategy to meet the day/night requirements in one round trip.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Which is ?
Click to expand...
The apparent incongruity between the time/distance requirements. Very poorly written IMO. Plus to meet the requirement you will actually double the "minimum" times, unless you employ Russ's dinner break technique.
 
I get where your coming from.. and yes I love the FAA lol. The FAA does a lot of great things for us pilots... in my opinion.
but at the same time, im also surprised a commercial pilot isnt required to fly 500nm A-B.
 
paflyer said:
For Commercial required flight experience....

"iii. One cross-country flight of at least 2 hours in a single-engine or multiengine
airplane (as appropriate) in day-VRF condition, consisting of a total
straight-line distance of more than 100nm from the original point of
departure
Click to expand...

The straight-line distance is the 100nm. Wouldn't the 2 hours be for the entire flight?
 
To answer your question, as to why not just use the standard X/C definition. My understanding is that they (the FAA) wants you to demonstrate that you can manage flying in or around weather systems. With a longer X/C you're more likely to encounter changing weather and will be forced to utilize ADM to perform the flight properly.

That's my theory anyway...
 
labbadabba said:
To answer your question, as to why not just use the standard X/C definition. My understanding is that they (the FAA) wants you to demonstrate that you can manage flying in or around weather systems. With a longer X/C you're more likely to encounter changing weather and will be forced to utilize ADM to perform the flight properly.

That's my theory anyway...
Click to expand...
Well put.

I'll expand a littler more, if I may.
The FAA wants to ensure that the applicants actually fly and not just rack up Hobbs time sitting on the ramp. (seen it before)
They want the applicants to actually go the distance (pun intended) and fly out of their "comfort zone" which usually involves something like a 50-mile radius around their home 'drome which they have never ventured out of.
My $0.02.
 
paflyer said:
The apparent incongruity between the time/distance requirements. Very poorly written IMO. Plus to meet the requirement you will actually double the "minimum" times, unless you employ Russ's dinner break technique.
Click to expand...
The regs are written to allow the use of any airplane from a Champ to a Citation X...just because they're not normally used doesn't mean the FAA disallows them.

Russ' dinner break doesn't factor into it.
 
Is this one of those, "I really don't want to fly and don't really need any damn training, so anything that requires me to is stupid" threads?

That's been a pretty common theme through the years when it comes to the commercial requirements, although it usually takes place in discussions of the long solo cross country.
 
mscard88 said:
Agree.
Click to expand...

I deleted my post because I might have been wrong.

Hank S. took off from Airport A, then landed at airport A. He then took off and flew 318nm and landed at Airport B. Then he took off and flew 447nm to Airport C and landed. So I guess he did actually land at 3 different places. That's if I'm reading it right, the story was a little confusing.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Is this one of those, "I really don't want to fly and don't really need any damn training, so anything that requires me to is stupid" threads?

That's been a pretty common theme through the years when it comes to the commercial requirements, although it usually takes place in discussions of the long solo cross country.
Click to expand...
No. Just pointing out badly worded specifications.
 
paflyer said:
No. Just pointing out badly worded specifications.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree it's a bit clunky, but mostly because of the use of the awkward "in daytime conditions" phrase. And I guess the "2-hour flight" almost sounds like it has to be exactly 2 hours and not one minute more or less. But stripping out the former and ignoring the latter, what do you suggest would be a better (not just different) way than

One 2-hour cross country flight that consists of a total straight-line distance of more than 100 nautical miles from the original point of departure​

to mean a cross country flight that is at least 2 hours in duration and goes more than 100 miles from where the flight started?
 
paflyer said:
The apparent incongruity between the time/distance requirements. Very poorly written IMO. Plus to meet the requirement you will actually double the "minimum" times, unless you employ Russ's dinner break technique.
Click to expand...

I still can't figure out how you're misreading this. If you fly from A, fly 101 nm straight-line distance to B, then return to A, that meets the requirement and takes about 2 hours in most normal training airplanes. No, not the Wright Flyer as in your post above, but normal 172s and such.

200-ish nm at 100-ish knots = about 2 hours according to my math.

Truthfully, implementing my "dinner break" technique, if you're flying to somewhere 100-ish nm away, you actually have to incur some sort of delay to make it 2 hours. So you make a roundabout route with a diversion or such to make it work but still be effective training.

Or am I missing something in your post?
 
RussR said:
I still can't figure out how you're misreading this. If you fly from A, fly 101 nm straight-line distance to B, then return to A, that meets the requirement and takes about 2 hours in most normal training airplanes. No, not the Wright Flyer as in your post above, but normal 172s and such.

200-ish nm at 100-ish knots = about 2 hours according to my math.

Truthfully, implementing my "dinner break" technique, if you're flying to somewhere 100-ish nm away, you actually have to incur some sort of delay to make it 2 hours. So you make a roundabout route with a diversion or such to make it work but still be effective training.

Or am I missing something in your post?
Click to expand...
Point being, there are so many things a good CFI can incorporate into a training flight to add to the time. This does not have to be a "go straight there and return" scenario. Diversions, emergencies, scenario requiring a steep turn 180, go-around because there is an obstruction on one of the landing runways. Pretty easy to creatively add the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top