Combine IFR X-Country with Commercial?

Pachong

Pachong

Well-Known Member
Hey guys, just was wondering if there was any reason i should not/cant, kill two birds with one stone by flying 250 miles straight line distance under IFR while flying through VFR conditions in order to fulfill both requirements for the Instrument Rating X-Country and Commercial X-Country. Thanks a lot!
 
to mojo: just to clear up i was talking about staying in VFR conditions in order to meet the requirements of the commercial x-country....were on the same page right?

and to the other guy: are you sure it has to be solo? what would the point of that be since i'd already have my PPL obviously and then might as well just take whoever...any ideas?
 
DaveC said:
The commercial XC is a solo flight, and therefore can't be done under the hood.
Click to expand...

Ahh, it used to be a solo flight, but a recent regulation change allows an instructor to ride along for insurance purposes. No instruction is allowed however, so it still couldn't be flown under the hood, in my opinion, and count toward the commercial requirement
 
Mike H said:
Ahh, it used to be a solo flight, but a recent regulation change allows an instructor to ride along for insurance purposes. No instruction is allowed however, so it still couldn't be flown under the hood, in my opinion, and count toward the commercial requirement
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't it, or shouldn't, it count since 61.129 doesn't say anything about an instructor not being able to give instruction along the way? If anything that sounds like a flight school rule to keep students from cutting costs.
 
You guys are getting 2 things mixed up.

There are 3 xc requirements for the commercial:
a) 1 xc of 300 nm total length with one stop at least 250nm from the departure point. Until just a few months ago this was required to be made solo but it can now be dual, or solo.
b) one dual, day, and one dual night x/c or at least 100 nm distance from the departure point each, with each being 2 hours in length. *Generally*, people do this as one flight; out in the day, back at night.

Theoretically, one could fly out 250 nm under the hood, with 2 landings (300 nm total). Then fly 100nm and 2 hours x/c dual in VFR conditions, then, fly 2 hours x/c VFR night and knock out all of the commercial, and IFR x/c's in one trip. (well, that sorta makes sense :insane: )
 
Thats what im saying....im planning on flying about 260 miles straight line distance....under the hood. that way i meet the IFR required 250 miles along atc instructed airways. it seems to me that if i do this while flying in VFR conditions this would be counted for both the ifr and commercial long X-countries. so after i do an instrument approach at the first stop, ill do another at some other place around there then come back home and do a third and call it a day....any objections?
 
esa17 said:
Why wouldn't it, or shouldn't, it count since 61.129 doesn't say anything about an instructor not being able to give instruction along the way? If anything that sounds like a flight school rule to keep students from cutting costs.
Click to expand...

Don't have the reference handy, but as I recall because the reason for the change was due to insurance requirements on certain high performance & complex airplanes, the instructor was allowed to ride along but with the condition that no instruction was to take place on the flight. Originally, the change was intended for multi engine airplanes, but was also extended to singles. I don't care for the change for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the "no instruction" part of it is unenforceable.
 
Mike H said:
Don't have the reference handy, but as I recall because the reason for the change was due to insurance requirements on certain high performance & complex airplanes, the instructor was allowed to ride along but with the condition that no instruction was to take place on the flight. Originally, the change was intended for multi engine airplanes, but was also extended to singles. I don't care for the change for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the "no instruction" part of it is unenforceable.
Click to expand...

Here here!
 
There are two dual XC's required for the Commercial:

100NM Day
100NM Night

They used to be "in VFR conditions", but they took that out. You can combine one or both of these with the IFR XC requirement if you like.
 
The instrument x/c requires instrument instruction by a CFII and is required to be a part of the 15 hours instrument instruction.
61.65(d)(2)(iii)

The commercial 300 mi x/c which used to be solo can now be with an instructor, but still under training listed in 61.127(b) which lists navigation, but not instrument instruction. The navigation TASKs on the Commercial PTS list "Pilotage and Dead Reckoning", "Lost Procedures",etc. VFR related x/c skills, not instrument skills.

If you're flying 260 miles straight line, then you can knock out both with a little extra: fly a vfr 'dog-leg' stop and go to total 300 miles at your destination, then make it along ifr airways under the hood back, and you've completed the intent and the letter of the reg.
 
VFR cross country procedures have been the #1 failure item on the Commercial Practical exam according to the DPEs around here. Everybody spends all their time on the maneuvers during training and forget about the XC portion so you may want to actually brush up on those VFR XC skills.
 
yea. i believe you...at least i could do shorter flights to brush up instead of an extraaa 250 mile one ya know?
 
Mike H said:
Don't have the reference handy, but as I recall because the reason for the change was due to insurance requirements on certain high performance & complex airplanes, the instructor was allowed to ride along but with the condition that no instruction was to take place on the flight. Originally, the change was intended for multi engine airplanes, but was also extended to singles. I don't care for the change for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the "no instruction" part of it is unenforceable.
Click to expand...

The intent of the law is irrelevant, the letter of the law isn't. Use the rules to find a reason to say yes, not no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top