New X-C "Time.." Considerations

[T56Maniac]

Ok, so this is my understanding of the "New X-C Time....." being thrown at us from Atlanta FSDO.

1. Cannot log landing(s) (more than 1) on "...X-C time...":banghead:
2. Sooooo, those 10 night landings (PPL) to a full stop are NOT considered part of the X-C flight time.:banghead: No more 5 t.o/landings before departing for the X-C and finishing the rest on the way back.

How I see the outcome of this fiasco:
Individuals needing landing practice on X-C flights (night or day) will log only 1-2 even though they ACTUALLY did 7-8 landings.........!!!?????

Who cares that the student/instructors use part of the X-C time to complete several landings at the beginning/end? Student Pilot time is met, over 50n.m met, and experience is increased on landings!

This oversight BITES!!!!

 

[subpilot]

someone at the Atlanta FSDO has too much free time on his hands.

 

[colossus]

someone at the Atlanta FSDO has too much free time on his hands.

Cant but agree with you Subpilot.
Personally..,my X-C landings were a great help and I
got to log them.
Like you said too much free time.

 

[Crockrocket94]

Unless its changed in the FARS or an AC is sent out....


What and why is this coming out now?

 

[bLizZuE]

It's an order from the FAA, basically superceeding any FAR/AC.

It came about because the FAA does not like to see cross country time logged for the entire flight when half the flight was spent doing landing practice, or in the practice area doing maneuvers.

Hopefully they'll re-evaluate this ruling and change it or tweak it some way. This will have a HUGE impact on flight training EVERYWHERE.

 

[nosehair]

It came about because the FAA does not like to see cross country time logged for the entire flight when half the flight was spent doing landing practice, or in the practice area doing maneuvers.

!!?? My Gosh !! What a concept, huh? That cross-country time should ACTUALLY be time spent navigating across the country,...man what kind of hard-asses those FAA people are, huh?

(Sheeesh!)

 

[nosehair]

It's an order from the FAA, basically superceeding any FAR/AC.

I know nothing about this. Does anybody have any reference?

 

[slushie]

!!?? My Gosh !! What a concept, huh? That cross-country time should ACTUALLY be time spent navigating across the country,...man what kind of hard-asses those FAA people are, huh?

(Sheeesh!)

Agreed, but not in harshness. anic:


I would think that an extra landing or two at the XC airport(s) could fit into this (for student pilots), because you're applying things you've learned previously to an unfamiliar airport.

 

[CN94559]

I think you should be able to log those landings, your getting familiar with another airport that was x/c from you.

dont see the problem

 

[slushie]

I think you should be able to log those landings, your getting familiar with another airport that was x/c from you.

dont see the problem

 

[slushie]

I think you should be able to log those landings, your getting familiar with another airport that was x/c from you.

dont see the problem

I think the problem is that at landing #10, you're probably "familiar"

 

[pilot4higher]

From what I gather you can log the landings, but the time going in the X/C column is only that for which was spent on the X/C. The difference of the time used in the touch and go's + the X/C goes into the total time. Or I could be wrong.

 

[bLizZuE]

No, you're absolutely right.

If it takes you 2 hours to get from one place to another, and you do 10 landings when you get there which takes one hour: Your total flight time is logged as 3 hours, cross country is logged as 2.

 

[bLizZuE]

!!?? My Gosh !! What a concept, huh? That cross-country time should ACTUALLY be time spent navigating across the country,...man what kind of hard-asses those FAA people are, huh?

(Sheeesh!)

:whatever:

 

[surreal1221]

Interesting.

Anyone actually seen this new "FAA Order?"

 

[subpilot]

The idea makes since. I just know that this is not the standard practice right now and when you hear of a policy change coming from a FSDO it just sounds like someone is on a power trip. If it came out as "The FAA is changing the way XC time is to be logged," I would not raise an eyebrow to the thought.

 

[T56Maniac]

My concern is that its left up to "interpretation" of the examiner.

For example, what if the pilot(s) need to divert around a thunderstorm in Florida (imagine that) and that time spent around the storm is 1hr....still X-C time. The examiner could say that he/she does not see it taking 2hrs to go from KVRB to KFMY!! I asked if we put in the remarks the situations of the flight would they reconsider the X-C time. The DE said "NO!"

This same DE also told me of something else coming down the "pipe-line." She said that X-C distance of (for example) 50.3 n.m will not count as a X-C!!!!?????? Again, this is starting to get out of control.

I agree with you Subpilot. As long as the FAA hands me (in black and white) a piece of paper that states these new requirements, I would have no "heart-burn" over the situation. I mean, COME ON! Everything is a hand shake and a wink these days.........simply telling me that I should do it is not LEGAL. I'm bound to the regulations only, NOT interpretation.

My 2 cents, rave on:banghead:

 

[Crockrocket94]

50.3NM is not XC time? Guess that big book of regs is all a lie!

Who told you this stuff?

 

[T56Maniac]

50.3NM is not XC time? Guess that big book of regs is all a lie!

Who told you this stuff?

DE who is completing checks for our program..........

 

[SIUav8er]

My concern is that its left up to "interpretation" of the examiner.

For example, what if the pilot(s) need to divert around a thunderstorm in Florida (imagine that) and that time spent around the storm is 1hr....still X-C time. The examiner could say that he/she does not see it taking 2hrs to go from KVRB to KFMY!! I asked if we put in the remarks the situations of the flight would they reconsider the X-C time. The DE said "NO!"

This same DE also told me of something else coming down the "pipe-line." She said that X-C distance of (for example) 50.3 n.m will not count as a X-C!!!!?????? Again, this is starting to get out of control.

I agree with you Subpilot. As long as the FAA hands me (in black and white) a piece of paper that states these new requirements, I would have no "heart-burn" over the situation. I mean, COME ON! Everything is a hand shake and a wink these days.........simply telling me that I should do it is not LEGAL. I'm bound to the regulations only, NOT interpretation.

My 2 cents, rave on:banghead:

yeah, thats pretty ridiculous. if you really want to throw them a curveball, ask if a cross country flight has to be non-stop. As of now, it doesnt. you can land somewhere short of the destination for basically any amount of time and still count it all as cross country per the definition of "Cross country"

I wonder if all these changes are a result of studying accident statistics? probably not, just some paper pusher at a FSDO trying to justify his job...