Recreational Pilot Certificate Questions

S

SkyFire

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
2
Display Name
Display name:
SkyFire
Hello!

I've recently been considering learning to fly and getting a pilot certificate. I've been spending some time watching videos and learning a bit in Flight Simulator. I've also been investigating some flight schools nearby and plan to visit a couple in the new year.

Piror to that I've been reading up on the requirements for the different certificates (Sport, Recreational, Private). The one I can't find a lot of information on is the Recreational certificate. I saw that it has limitations like not flying beyond 50 miles from a pilot's home airport, only flying during the day, etc. However, I came across the regulations and it seems like some of these restrictions can be removed with endorsements.

While understanding that most people go for Sport or Private licenses, I would like to understand the Recreational one a bit better. What endorsements can be added and how far can someone go with that certificate?

My questions are mainly out of curiosity, but it's been difficult to find any solid information beyond the basics through Google. Does someone here previously or currently hold a Recreational Pilot certificate?
 
There are only a couple hundred of those in the country. Even any CFI you find will have to look it up, talk to you about it and will likely talk you out of it.
Just get the private, then you can actually fly planes that you can rent. It's going to take you more time than published to get the ratings anyway...

Recreational Cert is in the CFI exam as "You know this exists right? Lets move on."

I've never seen anyone in person that wanted or had the Rec pilot, I have spoke to a few online. And there is at least 1 here, unless he upgraded since.

That being said. Read Part 61.101
FAA is the source, but the Cornell Site has better formatting.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/61.101
 
The Recreational has a lot of restrictions, and there's pretty much no advantage. To go for Private instead involves only a moderate outlay of additional training upfront, but carries way more privileges, so is a far greater "bang for your buck". If flying with some restrictions (like no night, etc.) is OK with you, then Sport carries a major advantage that the Recreational does not: use of a driver's license instead of a medical.
For most folks, the "medical or not?" question determines whether they go for Private or Sport. There's no good reason for a Private candidate to limit themselves to Recreational, or for a Sport candidate (who wants the no-medical option) to have to get a medical for Recreational. So the Recreational is kind of "lost" to history, subsumed by better options on both sides of it.
Hope that helps,
 
61.101 Recreational pilot privileges and limitations.
(a) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may:

(1) Carry no more than one passenger; and

(2) Not pay less than the pro rata share of the operating expenses of a flight with a passenger, provided the expenses involve only fuel, oil, airport expenses, or aircraft rental fees.

(b) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft on a flight within 50 nautical miles from the departure airport, provided that person has—

(1) Received ground and flight training for takeoff, departure, arrival, and landing procedures at the departure airport;

(2) Received ground and flight training for the area, terrain, and aids to navigation that are in the vicinity of the departure airport;

(3) Been found proficient to operate the aircraft at the departure airport and the area within 50 nautical miles from that airport; and

(4) Received from an authorized instructor a logbook endorsement, which is carried in the person's possession in the aircraft, that permits flight within 50 nautical miles from the departure airport.

(c) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft on a flight that exceeds 50 nautical miles from the departure airport, provided that person has—

(1) Received ground and flight training from an authorized instructor on the cross-country training requirements of subpart E of this part that apply to the aircraft rating held;

(2) Been found proficient in cross-country flying; and

(3) Received from an authorized instructor a logbook endorsement, which is carried on the person's possession in the aircraft, that certifies the person has received and been found proficient in the cross-country training requirements of subpart E of this part that apply to the aircraft rating held.

(d) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft in Class B, C, and D airspace, at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace, and to, from, through, or at an airport having an operational control tower, provided that person has—

(1) Received and logged ground and flight training from an authorized instructor on the following aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation, as appropriate to the aircraft rating held:

(i) The use of radios, communications, navigation system and facilities, and radar services.

(ii) Operations at airports with an operating control tower to include three takeoffs and landings to a full stop, with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern at an airport with an operating control tower.

(iii) Applicable flight rules of part 91 of this chapter for operations in Class B, C, and D airspace and air traffic control clearances;

(2) Been found proficient in those aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section; and

(3) Received from an authorized instructor a logbook endorsement, which is carried on the person's possession or readily accessible in the aircraft, that certifies the person has received and been found proficient in those aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(e) Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (i) of this section, a recreational pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft—

(1) That is certificated—

(i) For more than four occupants;

(ii) With more than one powerplant;

(iii) With a powerplant of more than 180 horsepower, except aircraft certificated in the rotorcraft category; or

(iv) With retractable landing gear;

(2) That is classified as a multiengine airplane, powered-lift, glider, airship, balloon, powered parachute, or weight-shift-control aircraft;

(3) That is carrying a passenger or property for compensation or hire;

(4) For compensation or hire;

(5) In furtherance of a business;

(6) Between sunset and sunrise;

(7) In Class A, B, C, and D airspace, at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace, or to, from, through, or at an airport having an operational control tower;

(8) At an altitude of more than 10,000 feet MSL or 2,000 feet AGL, whichever is higher;

(9) When the flight or surface visibility is less than 3 statute miles;

(10) Without visual reference to the surface;

(11) On a flight outside the United States, unless authorized by the country in which the flight is conducted;

(12) To demonstrate that aircraft in flight as an aircraft salesperson to a prospective buyer;

(13) That is used in a passenger-carrying airlift and sponsored by a charitable organization; and

(14) That is towing any object.

(f) A recreational pilot may not act as a pilot flight crewmember on any aircraft for which more than one pilot is required by the type certificate of the aircraft or the regulations under which the flight is conducted, except when:

(1) Receiving flight training from a person authorized to provide flight training on board an airship; and

(2) No person other than a required flight crewmember is carried on the aircraft.

(g) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate, has logged fewer than 400 flight hours, and has not logged pilot-in-command time in an aircraft within the 180 days preceding the flight shall not act as pilot in command of an aircraft until the pilot receives flight training and a logbook endorsement from an authorized instructor, and the instructor certifies that the person is proficient to act as pilot in command of the aircraft. This requirement can be met in combination with the requirements of §§61.56 and 61.57 of this part, at the discretion of the authorized instructor.

(h) A recreational pilot certificate issued under this subpart carries the notation, “Holder does not meet ICAO requirements.”

(i) For the purpose of obtaining additional certificates or ratings while under the supervision of an authorized instructor, a recreational pilot may fly as the sole occupant of an aircraft:

(1) For which the pilot does not hold an appropriate category or class rating;

(2) Within airspace that requires communication with air traffic control; or

(3) Between sunset and sunrise, provided the flight or surface visibility is at least 5 statute miles.

(j) In order to fly solo as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, the recreational pilot must meet the appropriate aeronautical knowledge and flight training requirements of §61.87 for that aircraft. When operating an aircraft under the conditions specified in paragraph (i) of this section, the recreational pilot shall carry the logbook that has been endorsed for each flight by an authorized instructor who:

(1) Has given the recreational pilot training in the make and model of aircraft in which the solo flight is to be made;

(2) Has found that the recreational pilot has met the applicable requirements of §61.87; and

(3) Has found that the recreational pilot is competent to make solo flights in accordance with the logbook endorsement.

(k) A recreational pilot may act as pilot in command of an aircraft without holding a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter provided the pilot holds a valid U.S. driver's license, meets the requirements of §61.23(c)(3), and the operation is conducted consistent with this section and the conditions of §61.113(i). Where the requirements of this section conflict with §61.113(i), a recreational pilot must comply with this section.
 
I would add that at one time Recreational may have made sense. But now we have Sport Pilot, and even more recently Basic med. Making what was once a weird option a no longer relevant option.

From Wikipedia, the all knowing source.


As of the end of 2017, in the US, there were an estimated 609,306 active certificated pilots.[30] This number has been declining gradually over the past several decades, down from a high of over 827,000 pilots in 1980. There were 702,659 in 1990 and 625,581 in 2000. The numbers include:

  • 120,546 student pilots (128,663 in 1990 and 93,064 in 2000)
  • 220 recreational pilots (87 in 1990 and 340 in 2000)
  • 5,157 sport pilots (did not exist until 2005)
  • 174,883 private pilots (299,111 in 1990 and 251,561 in 2000)
  • 104,322 commercial pilots (149,666 in 1990 and 121,858 in 2000)
  • 152,933 airline transport pilots (107,732 in 1990 and 141,596 in 2000)
  • 19,927 glider-only pilots (9,567 in 1990 and 7,775 in 2000)
  • 15,511 rotorcraft-(helicopter)-only pilots (7,833 in 1990 and 9,387 in 2000)
  • 554,177 male pilots end of 2014
  • 39,322 female pilots end of 2014
These numbers are based on the highest
 
Rec Pilot and Primary Category aircraft were an early attempt to achieve more or less the same thing as Sport Pilot and LSA. When it was proposed it was anticipated (or hoped) that the medical requirement would be dropped which would have made it attractive for many pilots, but when the final rule came out the medical was still required, so there wasn't much point to it.
 
Recreational Pilot license lets the student pilot end their training after achieving their solo. It grants only the privileges of a solo student such as daylight flights only and flights only close to home. It adds the privileges of carrying ONE passenger and flying in the local area without an instructor endorsement. If a student pilot feels comfortable flying Mom around the patch without ever getting cross-country training or night time training, then it makes sense to save those training dollars for avgas.
 
I briefly looked into recreational at one time, but quickly came to the conclusion, as the others above have noted, that it is not worth it. Put in a few more dollars, a little more time, and get your private.

The big deal-breaker to me is the restricted distance you can fly. A 50 nm radius around your home airport would get very small even for a lowly C152 or Piper Tomahawk. By getting your private, you can fly from Florida to Alaska, or California to Maine, if you want to, as long as you stay in VMC.
 
IIRC the rationale for Recreational was for ag support. Owners and others could monitor and manage farm without needing all the benefits and additional training for Private.

At least that’s how it was explained to me back in the Dark Ages.
 
Fallsrider said:
I briefly looked into recreational at one time, but quickly came to the conclusion, as the others above have noted, that it is not worth it. Put in a few more dollars, a little more time, and get your private.

The big deal-breaker to me is the restricted distance you can fly. A 50 nm radius around your home airport would get very small even for a lowly C152 or Piper Tomahawk. By getting your private, you can fly from Florida to Alaska, or California to Maine, if you want to, as long as you stay in VMC.
Click to expand...

c) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft on a flight that exceeds 50 nautical miles from the departure airport, provided that person has—

(1) Received ground and flight training from an authorized instructor on the cross-country training requirements of subpart E of this part that apply to the aircraft rating held;

(2) Been found proficient in cross-country flying; and

(3) Received from an authorized instructor a logbook endorsement, which is carried on the person's possession in the aircraft, that certifies the person has received and been found proficient in the cross-country training requirements of subpart E of this part that apply to the aircraft rating held.
Click to expand...

Seems like cross country is perfectly legal.
 
EppyGA said:
Seems like cross country is perfectly legal.
Click to expand...
If you get the endorsement, that does seem to be the case. But does that endorsement allow you to go anywhere you wanted as long as you stayed outside of controlled airspace? Or can you also get an endorsement for that, too?
 
Seems like it might be easier to get an ultralight instead of Recreational.

I remember looking into Recreational way back when I got started, for similar reasons as the OP - curiosity on just what advantages that rating has. It doesn't seem there really are any other than to putter around the local area and for some people that's good enough.

Out of the 200 or so recreational pilots out there, I wonder how many actually use it?
 
Fallsrider said:
If you get the endorsement, that does seem to be the case. But does that endorsement allow you to go anywhere you wanted as long as you stayed outside of controlled airspace? Or can you also get an endorsement for that, too?
Click to expand...

(d) A person who holds a recreational pilot certificate may act as pilot in command of an aircraft in Class B, C, and D airspace, at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace, and to, from, through, or at an airport having an operational control tower, provided that person has—

(1) Received and logged ground and flight training from an authorized instructor on the following aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation, as appropriate to the aircraft rating held:

(i) The use of radios, communications, navigation system and facilities, and radar services.

(ii) Operations at airports with an operating control tower to include three takeoffs and landings to a full stop, with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern at an airport with an operating control tower.

(iii) Applicable flight rules of part 91 of this chapter for operations in Class B, C, and D airspace and air traffic control clearances;

(2) Been found proficient in those aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section; and

(3) Received from an authorized instructor a logbook endorsement, which is carried on the person's possession or readily accessible in the aircraft, that certifies the person has received and been found proficient in those aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
Click to expand...

You realize I'm just quoting what someone posted earlier?
 
The recreational certificate was a dud for a couple of reasons. It was touted as a low cost way of getting a pilot's license. The problem is that it is heavily restricted against cross-country flight as it omits the cross-country training. The problem is that doing cross-countries for most people is the "gravy" of getting the private. The hard part is learning to land and most people take more than the minimum hours of aeronautical experience doing it. That you need to do for either certificate.

Had they cut the medical requirement out for the recreational, it probably would have enjoyed a bit more success. As it was I think they only issued a few hundred of them.

Oddly, the recreational certificate spawned another goofy reg, the annual flight review. There was such a hue and cry from the flight instructor lobby that the FAA proposed making flight reviews done annually for lower time/non-instrument rated pilots. Fortunately, they kept bumping the effective date of that reg further and further out into the future until they finally eliminated it entirely.
 
Thanks for the responses so far. The regulations that were posted are the ones I found in my search. I guess my question boils down to this:

Since the regulations say the 50nm and cross-country restrictions can be removed via endorsements, what would be the harm in getting the Recreational certiricert on the way to a Private Pilot Certificate?

Just wondering if I'm missing something as it doesn't seem like the Recreational requires anything that the Private does not, so it doesn't seem like it side tracks getting a Private in any way. Or can someone not get a Private once they have a Recreational?

Also, one thing I was not able to find or make sense of - the regs above mention "Part E" when talking about removing the 50nm and cross-country restrictions. What does Part E refer to? I thought it was the section labeled "(e)", but it doesn't make sense.
 
From Chesapeakesportpilot.com:

Recreational Pilot Certificate: Abbreviated or Full

Pros: Quickest way to earn a pilot certificate. Allows pilot to fly almost all single engine airplanes anywhere in the country in the daytime with one passenger.

Cons: Requires an FAA medical certificate.

The recreational pilot certificate is the most misunderstood and underutilized pilot certificate offered. In its abbreviated form, a pilot simply needs to take a knowledge test attain proficiency at a handful of airborne maneuvers, solo the aircraft, and learn short and soft field take off and landing technique before taking their FAA exam. The FAA minimum flight time requirement for this is 30 hours and this is realistic for many.

In its abbreviated form, pilots may only fly near their home airport but this restriction is easily lifted either during the pilot's initial training or after the pilot FAA exam by the pilot taking training with a flight instructor which covers basic navigation and cross country planning. In its full form (including the navigation and planning training) recreational pilot training is identical to sport pilot training but offers higher privileges.
 
You can get a recreational pilot if you want. It will cost you the price of a checkride (now pushing $500) which probably could be better spent on instruction.

Not Part E, subPart E. subPart E are 61.102 through 61.120 covering the Private Pilot Certificate. It says before you can be signed off for cross-country, you have to do all the cross-country stuff in the Private (which really is by and large all that you skipped doing the recreational).
 
What would be the benefit of getting the recreational cert first? You can do a lot of solo or CFI flying after you solo working on your private.

I wouldn’t do 2 check rides for no benefit..
 
I think rec to private is a good plan. If you're not bothered by a second check ride, you can do a lot of flying with your rec before getting your ppl.
 
If you are ready for the rec checkride, you are going to be within spitting distance of ready for the private. I don't see the point.

Compare the ACS to the 12 year old Recreational PTS (2006). There aren't that many more tasks.
 
ja_user said:
There are only a couple hundred of those in the country. Even any CFI you find will have to look it up, talk to you about it and will likely talk you out of it.
Just get the private, then you can actually fly planes that you can rent. It's going to take you more time than published to get the ratings anyway...

Recreational Cert is in the CFI exam as "You know this exists right? Lets move on."

I've never seen anyone in person that wanted or had the Rec pilot, I have spoke to a few online. And there is at least 1 here, unless he upgraded since.

That being said. Read Part 61.101
FAA is the source, but the Cornell Site has better formatting.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/61.101
Click to expand...

No offense, but I think this attitude is largely responsible for the lack of Rec ticket holders. For a lot of us with different goals it makes a lot of sense, but there's a lot of resistance from the "We know better than you, gear up, flaps up, shut up and stall the ship". LOL

Somebody want to explain the last section in that longwinded CFR?
"(k) A recreational pilot may act as pilot in command of an aircraft without holding a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter provided the pilot holds a valid U.S. driver's license, meets the requirements of §61.23(c)(3), and the operation is conducted consistent with this section and the conditions of §61.113(i). Where the requirements of this section conflict with §61.113(i), a recreational pilot must comply with this section."

So, under what conditions exactly does a rec ticket holder NOT need the medical cert? Color me confused!

Don
 
Lantraxco said:
So, under what conditions exactly does a rec ticket holder NOT need the medical cert? Color me confused!

Don
Click to expand...

I know it's tough to untangle all that, but it comes down to this. A Rec Pilot, just like a Private Pilot, doesn't need a medical certificate if

1) The pilot is exercising Sport Pilot privileges (i.e., flying a light sport aircraft under daytime VFR)​
OR
2) The pilot is using Basic Med, having once held a medical certificate after July 2006. See part 68 for info about Basic Med.​

It's no different from Private in that regard.
 
Half Fast said:
I know it's tough to untangle all that, but it comes down to this. A Rec Pilot, just like a Private Pilot, doesn't need a medical certificate if

1) The pilot is exercising Sport Pilot privileges (i.e., flying a light sport aircraft under daytime VFR)​
OR
2) The pilot is using Basic Med, having once held a medical certificate after July 2006. See part 68 for info about Basic Med.​

It's no different from Private in that regard.
Click to expand...
Okay thanks. Kind of what I guessed, but we dare not assume. And as per usual, why the hell can't they just SAY that?
 
Lantraxco said:
Okay thanks. Kind of what I guessed, but we dare not assume. And as per usual, why the hell can't they just SAY that?
Click to expand...


You expect clarity from the USG? You must not have ever filed a federal tax return.... :D
 
Half Fast said:
You expect clarity from the USG? You must not have ever filed a federal tax return.... :D
Click to expand...
Nope, just wishing in my left hand! I'm kinda self-enjoyed, so yeah, gotta love tax time.... NOT! :eek:
 
Lantraxco said:
No offense, but I think this attitude is largely responsible for the lack of Rec ticket holders.

Don
Click to expand...


No offense at all.
But either
A. The attitude of the FAA and the CFI's are reflecting poorly on the recreational cert..

Or.

B. The FAA which created the cert, now realizes that it is not a direction people are going to go. So much so that the PTS hasn't been updated in a lot of years, so the CFI checkride and there for the CFI's themselves reflect the fact that there is no demand...


I don't know which caused which, and frankly don't care. Because I've never had someone decide that they wanted a recreational cert, why would I learn all about it? It would be like me learning all about the Multi Sea checkride (there are couple places to do this in the US), or what it takes to get a Navigator Cert... It doesn't apply to me, and I've never had anyone ask.

The lack of Rec Ticket holders is due to the fact that the marginal difference in training requirements was not offset by the biggest hurdle at the time, the medical. Since then we have the sport Pilot (got around the medical, but really limited on planes), and now the Basic Med for Privates.

If their was a real use for this certificate, don't you think some people would have figured this out, and the recreational cert numbers would be growing over the hundreds? Or at least growing?
 
ja_user said:
No offense at all.
But either
A. The attitude of the FAA and the CFI's are reflecting poorly on the recreational cert..

Or.

B. The FAA which created the cert, now realizes that it is not a direction people are going to go. So much so that the PTS hasn't been updated in a lot of years, so the CFI checkride and there for the CFI's themselves reflect the fact that there is no demand...


I don't know which caused which, and frankly don't care. Because I've never had someone decide that they wanted a recreational cert, why would I learn all about it? It would be like me learning all about the Multi Sea checkride (there are couple places to do this in the US), or what it takes to get a Navigator Cert... It doesn't apply to me, and I've never had anyone ask.

The lack of Rec Ticket holders is due to the fact that the marginal difference in training requirements was not offset by the biggest hurdle at the time, the medical. Since then we have the sport Pilot (got around the medical, but really limited on planes), and now the Basic Med for Privates.

If their was a real use for this certificate, don't you think some people would have figured this out, and the recreational cert numbers would be growing over the hundreds? Or at least growing?
Click to expand...

You may be right, and as you say it doesn't really matter. Final comment from me though is it's pretty hard to build a market for something nobody wants to sell, even if there is a demand. Hell where I live you have to be a tracker to catch the scent of CFI, I may end up driving two hours one way to get any dual time, talk about lack of supply.
 
Lantraxco said:
You may be right, and as you say it doesn't really matter. Final comment from me though is it's pretty hard to build a market for something nobody wants to sell, even if there is a demand. Hell where I live you have to be a tracker to catch the scent of CFI, I may end up driving two hours one way to get any dual time, talk about lack of supply.
Click to expand...

I understand that. But I guess what I'm saying is that I don't believe ANYONE, including the FAA considers the Recreational cert a viable certificate.

I would teach someone if they insisted, but frankly I'd have to be bored or unable to find a regular student because I'd have to do a fair amount of legwork between re-adjusting my normal syllabus and working with a DPE..
 
Rec is one of those certs that is dying on the vine. You'll have a hard time finding anyone, CFI, DPE, or FAA, that knows anything about it. I bet over half don't even remember it exists. It was one of those " Do you know about this??" on my CFI ride kinda like "Do you know what an AWSS is?". My certificate training in the FAA only had the recreational certificate as a small bullet point. I'm surprised the FAA hasn't sunsetted the certificate and grandfathered the ones already issued.

I'd either go for the Sport Pilot or a Private.
 
Yeah, I guess I'm one of the few that can see the obvious benefits and the logic of a license to fly with an incremental path forward. It sounds like anybody interested in pursuing a rec ticket would quickly have that notion beaten out of them anyway, lol. I understand all the points favoring a PPL, but just because that's the way it's always been doesn't mean there aren't people interested in other options. In my view the Light Sport thing is basically useless, UNLESS you fit that exact mold, or want to use it as a stepping stone to a PPL and you weigh something like the FAA standard weight. Fully dressed I weigh around 270, so unless I can find an anorexic CFI we can't haul enough fuel to leave the pattern in most LSA.

Blue skies and tailwinds.
 
The problem is with the recreational as incremental path to Private, is there's just not that much EXTRA time involved in that "increment." All you get at it is the ability to log PIC time for a few extra dual flights.
 
Nah, makes the CFI gag.... now solo on a nice day, and I always drape a towel over the seat as a courtesy to next pilot, lol.
 
flyingron said:
The problem is with the recreational as incremental path to Private, is there's just not that much EXTRA time involved in that "increment." All you get at it is the ability to log PIC time for a few extra dual flights.
Click to expand...

I believe the idea was A) To attract people that want to begin flying hey, recreationally, and maybe take along a friend while working toward the PPL, or not, in a certified airplane. B) To lower that first rung of the ladder toward more advanced tickets or some point in between. The PPL may not seem hard to achieve from the other side of it, and "We all did it, what's the problem?" seems the common thread. But for people that find themselves unable or unwilling to commit to $10K and loads of time in pursuit of a career flying it can pretty daunting. Being able to get a ticket that allows you to tool around the local countryside with a friend or relative when you please (and the weather allows of course) with the ability to have your own CFI sign off on longer range, flight to controlled fields, night flying, etc. before taking the PPL checkride might just lower the price of admission enough to attract a few more players.

In the end what I think doesn't matter a grain of sand, but I have to laugh at the airline industry as a whole. Years ago we had a downturn in construction and all the trades cut off their apprentice programs to protect the rank and file. When it turned around a few years later panic set in as a large number of older workers retired from plumbing, electrical work, etc., licensed trades. The about face in attitudes and recruitment was laughable. The airline industry had a surplus of pilots for a long time as the deregulation and restructuring went along. I have to guess a lot of ATP pilots didn't care about the ones coming up, they were just trying to hold onto what they could get. Now the fruit has come ripe and airlines are crying, regionals are paying unheard of signing and training bonuses (and wow, living wage salaries!) to recruit entry level pilots. Now I know the 1500 hour deal caught the industry unprepared, but really, there's been damn little recruiting going on, because the jobs just weren't all that attractive until you've put in what, ten or fifteen years?

The only thing I know for sure is, we're going to see some pretty exciting changes in the next twenty or thirty years, some good, some not. Hope i live long enough to see how it turns out!
 
I thought about getting my Rec Pilot cert partway through my training. Wasn’t worth the extra checkride fee, though. There was really no upside to it.
 
When I was just getting into flying, I remember wondering why getting a recreational pilot certificate was not even mentioned as something to consider. If I had bothered to find out how limited it was, I would have understood!
 
Last edited:
The Recreational is a viable certificate, but was under-utilized and under-appreciated from the beginning. It is basically like Sport pilot, but you get to fly real planes (C172, Piper PA-28's, Grumman AA5s, etc. with no more than 180 HP) with one passenger in day VFR conditions. The 50 NM restriction and airspace restrictions can be removed with logbook endorsements from a CFI after a little training and it is a short hop from Recreational to Private. CFI's and Flight schools don't want to do anything that involves fewer billable hobbs hours. Sport pilot took off better than Recreational because you don't have to be a full-on CFI to teach sport pilots, you can become a sport pilot CFI without becoming a commercial pilot and getting your instrument rating, so it takes fewer hours and costs a lot less to be a Sport CFI. If you want to fly a typical light airplanes like C150/152, C-172, 177, PA-28, PA-38, BE77, Sports, Sundowners, etc. in day VFR conditions, all you need is a Recreational Pilot certificate. You could legally fly coast to coast if you like. I say go for it!
 
SbestCFII said:
It is a short hop from Recreational to Private
Click to expand...
And that's the problem. It's too short a hop. In fact, if you went over the book mininums getting your ticket, you almost certainly exceeded them on tasks that are common to the recreatational and private certificates. As I said, the post-recreational stuff on the private is pretty much gravy. You spend ALMOST as much money to get NOT AS MUCH function. Now if they had allowed it to not require a medical or something that SERIOUSLY reduced the instructional costs, that would be another story. While there was a bunch of complaining about the "loss of revenue" back when it was proposed, frankly, I don't buy the "greedy flight school" argument for why the Recreational ended up being a turkey.
 
A second check ride a few years down the road can be a good thing. It means more continuous training during your early flight years, and another oral and practical test of your skill set. Getting a PPL also resets the clock on the biennial flight review.
 
SbestCFII said:
The Recreational is a viable certificate, but was under-utilized and under-appreciated from the beginning. It is basically like Sport pilot, but you get to fly real planes (C172, Piper PA-28's, Grumman AA5s, etc. with no more than 180 HP) with one passenger in day VFR conditions. The 50 NM restriction and airspace restrictions can be removed with logbook endorsements from a CFI after a little training and it is a short hop from Recreational to Private. CFI's and Flight schools don't want to do anything that involves fewer billable hobbs hours. Sport pilot took off better than Recreational because you don't have to be a full-on CFI to teach sport pilots, you can become a sport pilot CFI without becoming a commercial pilot and getting your instrument rating, so it takes fewer hours and costs a lot less to be a Sport CFI. If you want to fly a typical light airplanes like C150/152, C-172, 177, PA-28, PA-38, BE77, Sports, Sundowners, etc. in day VFR conditions, all you need is a Recreational Pilot certificate. You could legally fly coast to coast if you like. I say go for it!
Click to expand...

You are making a lot of assumptions there, and stating them as fact.
Its only mildly insulting to assume that CFI's and FBO's don't push recreational cert because of billed time. But this is the internet, so be it.

You are saying Sport Pilot was popular because everyone was learning from Sport -CFI's? Do you know how many of those certs were even issued? Sport pilot was popular due to the "drivers license Medical".....

Sport Pilot around here is now less popular because of lack of availability of planes at the FBO's to get the rating in, and more importantly Basic Med. It still has its place.

https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/

TABLE 17
ORIGINAL AIRMEN CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CATEGORY
CALENDAR YEARS 2008 - 2017

Category of Certificates 2017

Pilot--Total 74,130
Student 38,401
Recreational 10
Sport 308
Airplane
Private 17,752
Commercial 10,506
Airline Transport 4,449


Rotorcraft (only) 2,552

Glider (only) 152

Flight Instructor Certificates 5,310
Instrument Ratings 11,443
Remote Pilot Certificates 48,854

Non Pilot--Total 11,931
Mechanic 6,398
Control Tower Operator 3/ 249
Repairman 4/ 2,468
Repairman Light Sport Aircraft 5/ 171
Parachute Rigger 372
Ground Instructor 1,353
Dispatcher 897
Authorized Aircraft Instr. 0
Flight Navigator 0
Flight Engineer 23
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top