Private cross country requirements

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Not wanting to hijack the commercial cross country thread I thought I'd start a new one.

I'm planning a cross country. It's not my long one but it might be long enough to satisfy the Private Pilot greater than 150nm rule anyway. It depends on whether flying to intermediate VORs or waypoints counts as part of the total flying distance.

If I do KFDK KLUA KOKV KMRB KFDK, that's only 147.9nm. But I wouldn't fly that really, because I'd have to traverse the Bravo and I'd be too busy flying to get approval from ATC or jot down any numbers they wanted me to call. So I'd fly something like KFDK MRB KLUA KOKV KMRB KFDK, which would give me 153.5nm.

What do you think, can I count the route to the VOR as part of the flight?

 

[penaltyvectors]

No. Distances flown don’t matter, only distances between landing points. For my first attempt at my long XC, one of my intended destinations was a little too snow-covered for my liking, so I wasn’t able to land there. I flew 180 miles and 2.0 Hobbs and couldn’t even log it as XC, much less count as my long XC.

 

[Trogdor]

No. Distances flown don’t matter, only distances between landing points. For my first attempt at my long XC, one of my intended destinations was a little too snow-covered for my liking, so I wasn’t able to land there. I flew 180 miles and 2.0 Hobbs and couldn’t even log it as XC, much less count as my long XC.

No, that can’t be right either.

You can always log XC time if you land at another airport. Full stop.

However, for your *long* XC for PP one of the legs has to be 50nm point-to-point and the total between all three points (Base-AP1-AP2-Base) has to be at least 150nm.

Note the 50nm rule also applies to other ratings as well to count toward a rating. But again, it depends on how you want to organize “just XC time” vs “XC time I want to count toward a rating/license” etc.

See: https://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-fly/regulations/logging-cross-country-flight-time/

 

[penaltyvectors]

No, that can’t be right either.

You can always log XC time if you land at another airport. Full stop.

However, for your *long* XC for PP one of the legs has to be 50nm point-to-point and the total between all three points (Base-AP1-AP2-Base) has to be at least 150nm.

Note the 50nm rule also applies to other ratings as well to count toward a rating. But again, it depends on how you want to organize “just XC time” vs “XC time I want to count toward a rating/license” etc.

See: https://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-fly/regulations/logging-cross-country-flight-time/

True, I misspoke. While it technically does count, the only other airport I landed at (besides my departure/destination) was about 30nm from my start point, and therefore I couldn’t count it as XC for rating experience. Nearly every flight I did during my flight training involved a flight to the towered airport ~6nm away, but I never found a good reason to log those any differently than doing local patterns. If there’s a reason for the future that I’m missing please let me know so I can adjust my practices, but I couldn’t find a reason why I would want to log <50nm flights as XC.

 

[BrianNC]

...but I couldn’t find a reason why I would want to log <50nm flights as XC.

You don't for XC that counts toward your ratings. But once you're done with those, say to qualify for part 135 minimums you can count all flights where you landed at another airport even if it's under 50NM. It's called 'point to point'. So you could log it as point to point XC to go back later and add to your >50NM xc's.

 

[Larry in TN]

If I do KFDK KLUA KOKV KMRB KFDK, that's only 147.9nm.

Why not change KLUA to 8W2? That gives you 162.2nm and keeps you clear of the CBA.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

The part in the regs about at least one leg being greater than 50nm I have covered. "one segment of the flight consisting of a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles between the takeoff and landing locations". In my case, both options easily meet that part of the requirement -- straight line kfdk to klua is 69.2nm and flying to the VOR first makes it 74.9nm -- so no problem logging it as a cross country.

But my confusion comes with the "One solo cross country flight of 150 nautical miles total distance". This part of the requirement doesn't specifically mention having to use straight line distance between all legs (segments) to get the total distance ... hence my question about short vs. long XC. There have to be many cases when you have to fly to an intermediate VOR before reaching your destination airport. <Shrug> To me, it seems like it could be argued either way.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Why not change KLUA to 8W2? That gives you 162.2nm and keeps you clear of the CBA.

Thanks for the suggestion! Unfortunately 8W2's runways are closed by NOTAM

 

[Matthew]

You guys are making me want to fly another XC just for fun!

 

[MauleSkinner]

The part in the regs about at least one leg being greater than 50nm I have covered. "one segment of the flight consisting of a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles between the takeoff and landing locations". In my case, both options easily meet that part of the requirement -- straight line kfdk to klua is 69.2nm and flying to the VOR first makes it 74.9nm -- so no problem logging it as a cross country.

But my confusion comes with the "One solo cross country flight of 150 nautical miles total distance". This part of the requirement doesn't specifically mention having to use straight line distance between all legs (segments) to get the total distance ... hence my question about short vs. long XC. There have to be many cases when you have to fly to an intermediate VOR before reaching your destination airport. <Shrug> To me, it seems like it could be argued either way.

As a practical matter, the examiner who looks at your logbook to determine your eligibility for the checkride is most likely going to make the “straight line distance” argument.

 

[penaltyvectors]

The part in the regs about at least one leg being greater than 50nm I have covered. "one segment of the flight consisting of a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles between the takeoff and landing locations". In my case, both options easily meet that part of the requirement -- straight line kfdk to klua is 69.2nm and flying to the VOR first makes it 74.9nm -- so no problem logging it as a cross country.

But my confusion comes with the "One solo cross country flight of 150 nautical miles total distance". This part of the requirement doesn't specifically mention having to use straight line distance between all legs (segments) to get the total distance ... hence my question about short vs. long XC. There have to be many cases when you have to fly to an intermediate VOR before reaching your destination airport. <Shrug> To me, it seems like it could be argued either way.

Okay, I see your point now. I did a quick search and you’re right, I couldn’t find anything specifically referring to flight distance as using airports only. However, as I’m sure you know, nearly every CFI and DPE is familiar with this interpretation, and so you may have a hard time getting either one of those to sign off on you having completed the requirements.

As a practical matter, I think that would be tough to argue too. Could you fly 50nm away and back with an intermediate stop along your route, then spend an hour in the pattern, counting each lap as another 3nm on your cross-country? What if you just bounce back and forth between two VORs near your airport several times before coming home? Obviously neither of those meet the spirit of the regulations, and while your example is much more reasonable, I still think you’d have trouble getting it past a DPE.

Finally, unless you’re part 141, if you eventually want to get your IR, you’ll need to get 50 hours XC PIC, and your PPL solos count toward that. I progressed rapidly through my training and got to a point where I needed to eat up hours, so I convinced my CFI to let me do a XC to an airport 200 miles away and I went to the checkride with 14 hours XC PIC. In retrospect I should have gone a bit farther so I could have knocked out the long commercial solo - not sure if that would have actually worked.

 

[TommyG]

Logging x country time less than 50NM is pointless except for ratings. If I was hiring a pilot and saw 1000 hours of x country time to airports that are 10 miles away, I would have doubts about your experience. It would show that you don’t like to go too far from home out of your comfort zone.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Logging x country time less than 50NM is pointless except for ratings. If I was hiring a pilot and saw 1000 hours of x country time to airports that are 10 miles away, I would have doubts about your experience. It would show that you don’t like to go too far from home out of your comfort zone.

Actually it's pointless for ratings. All pilot certificates and ratings use the >50 nm definition (even ATP, although you don't have to land there).

The only regulatory use I'm aware of is meeting baseline Part 135 requirements. Whether the market will hire someone who meets a portion (they already have at least 50) of the 100 cross country hours for VFR PIC or the 500 cross country hours for IFR PIC probably varies with the market, the job and the pilot's overall experience.

Yes, I agree. A pilot applying for an IFR PIC Part 135 job who needs to show 450 hours of 10 NM lunch runs in order to meet minimum qualifications is not too likely to get the job in the 21st century. OTOH, I wonder how many brand new commercial pilots used a lot of point-to-point cross country to help qualify for their first job flying canceled checks in a Cherokee from a rural location.

 

[TommyG]

Actually it's pointless for ratings. All pilot certificates and ratings use the >50 nm definition (even ATP, although you don't have to land there).

The only regulatory use I'm aware of is meeting baseline Part 135 requirements. Whether the market will hire someone who meets a portion (they already have at least 50) of the 100 cross country hours for VFR PIC or the 500 cross country hours for IFR PIC probably varies with the market, the job and the pilot's overall experience.

Yes, I agree. A pilot applying for an IFR PIC Part 135 job who needs to show 450 hours of 10 NM lunch runs in order to meet minimum qualifications is not too likely to get the job in the 21st century. OTOH, I wonder how many brand new commercial pilots used a lot of point-to-point cross country to help qualify for their first job flying canceled checks in a Cherokee from a rural location.

You are right, I mis-worded my post.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

As a practical matter, the examiner who looks at your logbook to determine your eligibility for the checkride is most likely going to make the “straight line distance” argument.

This is what I was hoping to get from this thread ... what are the generally accepted interpretations of this requirement. This wasn't planned to be my long XC, I'm planning a flight close to 200nm for that. But when I saw the wording in the FAR and I saw how close this particular flight might be to meeting the requirement .... I thought it would be a great chance for me to learn from others on how they view it.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Okay, I see your point now. I did a quick search and you’re right, I couldn’t find anything specifically referring to flight distance as using airports only. However, as I’m sure you know, nearly every CFI and DPE is familiar with this interpretation, and so you may have a hard time getting either one of those to sign off on you having completed the requirements.

As a practical matter, I think that would be tough to argue too. Could you fly 50nm away and back with an intermediate stop along your route, then spend an hour in the pattern, counting each lap as another 3nm on your cross-country? What if you just bounce back and forth between two VORs near your airport several times before coming home? Obviously neither of those meet the spirit of the regulations, and while your example is much more reasonable, I still think you’d have trouble getting it past a DPE.

Finally, unless you’re part 141, if you eventually want to get your IR, you’ll need to get 50 hours XC PIC, and your PPL solos count toward that. I progressed rapidly through my training and got to a point where I needed to eat up hours, so I convinced my CFI to let me do a XC to an airport 200 miles away and I went to the checkride with 14 hours XC PIC. In retrospect I should have gone a bit farther so I could have knocked out the long commercial solo - not sure if that would have actually worked.

It seems to me that aviation is built on trust that you've met the spirit of the regs. With the wording of the regs sometimes a bit confusing, I was trying to get a notion of the spirit (and the letter) of the regs here. I'm cool following the rules, I was just using this question as a way to understand how others are generally interpreting them. Thanks for explanation!

 

[unsafervguy]

Actually it's pointless for ratings. All pilot certificates and ratings use the >50 nm definition (even ATP, although you don't have to land there).

The only regulatory use I'm aware of is meeting baseline Part 135 requirements. Whether the market will hire someone who meets a portion (they already have at least 50) of the 100 cross country hours for VFR PIC or the 500 cross country hours for IFR PIC probably varies with the market, the job and the pilot's overall experience.

Yes, I agree. A pilot applying for an IFR PIC Part 135 job who needs to show 450 hours of 10 NM lunch runs in order to meet minimum qualifications is not too likely to get the job in the 21st century. OTOH, I wonder how many brand new commercial pilots used a lot of point-to-point cross country to help qualify for their first job flying canceled checks in a Cherokee from a rural location.

is it really pointless? I hold an ATP. far 61.1 states:
Cross-country time means -

(i) Except as provided in paragraphs (ii) through (vi) of this definition, time acquired during flight -

(A) Conducted by a person who holds a pilot certificate;

(B) Conducted in an aircraft;

(C) That includes a landing at a point other than the point of departure; and

(D) That involves the use of dead reckoning, pilotage, electronic navigation aids, radio aids, or other navigation systems to navigate to the landing point.

since i will not be using any of it for a rating, why not log it as what it is defined as.

 

[midlifeflyer]

is it really pointless?

I didn't say it was pointless. I said "It's pointless for ratings." Every FAA pilot certificate and rating is part of the "Except as provided in paragraphs (ii) through (vi)." Never said it was pointless for other things. That's up to you.

Actually, although I've never specifically logged them, I can pull up the number . I think I did once maybe 10 years ago out of curiosity.

 

[Marshall Alexander]

In 1977 when I did my "long" solo XC, I went from home base to an airport 150 sm miles away. From there I went to another airport that was 150 sm away, then home (another 150 miles). I was in that 150 (8700G) for 6 1/2 hours that day. That was a triangle with 150 sm on each leg. My butt was sore when I got home.

 

[BrianNC]

In 1977 when I did my "long" solo XC, I went from home base to an airport 150 sm miles away. From there I went to another airport that was 150 sm away, then home (another 150 miles). I was in that 150 (8700G) for 6 1/2 hours that day. That was a triangle with 150 sm on each leg. My butt was sore when I got home.

Mine was 6.2 hours in a 152.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Mine was 6.2 hours in a 152.

I never realized how fast Tomahawks were Mine was only 4.6 hours. But to make up for lack of butt hurt, I had butt clench. I did a weather diversion due to mountain obscuration and then continued home in lowering ceilings. Not low enough to be scud running, but low enough to concern a lowly student pilot.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

In 1977 when I did my "long" solo XC, I went from home base to an airport 150 sm miles away. From there I went to another airport that was 150 sm away, then home (another 150 miles). I was in that 150 (8700G) for 6 1/2 hours that day. That was a triangle with 150 sm on each leg. My butt was sore when I got home.

That just seems inconceivable to me. Finding a day where a working rental plane was available for 6.5 hours AND the weather being acceptable at 3 different airports approximately 150SM away from each other? From my experience these last few months, that's like hitting a hole in one while riding a unicorn.

I wonder if flight schools are more conservative now in what they sign off for cross countries due to insurance.

 

[midlifeflyer]

That just seems inconceivable to me. Finding a day where a working rental plane was available for 6.5 hours AND the weather being acceptable at 3 different airports approximately 150SM away from each other? From my experience these last few months, that's like hitting a hole in one while riding a unicorn.

I wonder if flight schools are more conservative now in what they sign off for cross countries due to insurance.

450 NM for a student solo cross country is a bit extreme, but there was also a big change in 1997 regarding the minimum length of the student long cross country. OTOH, depending on the season and the part of the country, a full 24 hour day of good weather is not unusual. In my case, my 4.6 flight time was almost 8 hours of real-time, including the soccer match.

Here is the pre-1997 student solo cross country:

One flight of at least 300 nautical miles with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is at least 100 nautical miles from the original departure point.​

I actually barely made it. When I diverted for mountain obscuration, my planned 315 NM barely cleared the 300.

 

[Marshall Alexander]

That just seems inconceivable to me. Finding a day where a working rental plane was available for 6.5 hours AND the weather being acceptable at 3 different airports approximately 150SM away from each other? From my experience these last few months, that's like hitting a hole in one while riding a unicorn.

I wonder if flight schools are more conservative now in what they sign off for cross countries due to insurance.

Well, we owned the airplane. So availability was never an issue. We're in Oklahoma so weather in January, February, March (when I did my xc) was pretty easy to figure out. It'd be my guess that my dad never had insurance on the airplane anyway. Either one of them, the 150 OR the 172.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Here is the pre-1997 student solo cross country:

One flight of at least 300 nautical miles with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is at least 100 nautical miles from the original departure point.​

I ended up doing a 193nm long cross country the other day. The first leg was 93nm. I was intimidated about flying that leg due to length and me expecting turbulent airflow off of mountains along the path (note: east coast mountains, west coasters would call them hills). But it gave me a decent amount of time to practice controlling the plane through different kinds of turbulent conditions. So much so that the high cross wind landings I ended up having to do on landings #2 and #3 didn't faze me.

I'd say a 100nm leg is a good idea. But it would be hard to fit in a 300nm trip. I've been trying for the past week or so to do a 250nm trip and have had to cancel it multiple times due to weather or plane issues. Couldn't even manage to do a shorter 186nm trip recently.

 

[elvisAteMySandwich]

Well, we owned the airplane. So availability was never an issue. We're in Oklahoma so weather in January, February, March (when I did my xc) was pretty easy to figure out. It'd be my guess that my dad never had insurance on the airplane anyway. Either one of them, the 150 OR the 172.

I can't convey how envious I am that you had your own planes to use. There have been more than a few instances where I've pulled up barnstormers.com in frustration and considered just buying a 150 or cheap 172 in order to have some control over my training equipment. But I always end up calming myself down with the reality that neither one is what I want for cross country trips after I get my cert.

 

[Marshall Alexander]

I can't convey how envious I am that you had your own planes to use. There have been more than a few instances where I've pulled up barnstormers.com in frustration and considered just buying a 150 or cheap 172 in order to have some control over my training equipment. But I always end up calming myself down with the reality that neither one is what I want for cross country trips after I get my cert.

I have a 150, an RV9A, Rans S6s, and my dad's 172 now, that he bought new in 1971. My daughter used my 150 to get her PPL about 6 years ago. She's flies corporate now.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I'd say a 100nm leg is a good idea.

There was no 100 nm leg requirement. There is currently a 50 nm leg requirement.