Commercial X/C

Murdoughnut · Oct 9, 2009

What if you flew the first leg one day, and the second three days later? Still count?

CoffeeIcePapers · Oct 9, 2009

tprops4me said:
So how do the guys at ATP get away with it with those cross countrys where there are two students placed together for the trips?

The initial commercial in a multieninge airplane doesn't require solo. It says solo or performing the duties of pic.

drunkenbeagle · Oct 9, 2009

Murdoughnut said:
What if you flew the first leg one day, and the second three days later? Still count?

Yes, that's what I did. Started and ended at different airports, across different days. Wasn't planning it to be for the commercial, but when I was flipping through my logbook, I realized it met the requirements.

minitour · Oct 9, 2009

mojo6911 said:
The initial commercial in a multieninge airplane doesn't require solo. It says solo or performing the duties of pic.

"...while under the supervision..."

-mini

jhugz · Oct 9, 2009

minitour said:
"...while under the supervision..."

-mini

Don't even get me started on how retarded the initial commercial multi is.

minitour · Oct 9, 2009

jhugz said:
Don't even get me started on how retarded the initial commercial multi is.

Actually the FAA did pretty decent there. At least they understand how insurance works with the multi-engine rating.

-mini

jhugz · Oct 9, 2009

minitour said:
Actually the FAA did pretty decent there. At least they understand how insurance works with the multi-engine rating.

-mini

It is just ridiculous that an instructor isn't logging dual or acting as PIC but his ass is still on the line during the babysit session.

minitour · Oct 9, 2009

jhugz said:
It is just ridiculous that an instructor isn't logging dual or acting as PIC but his ass is still on the line during the babysit session.

Why wouldn't he be acting as PIC? The student is performing the duties of PIC...not acting as PIC.

Big difference.

-mini

jhugz · Oct 9, 2009

minitour said:
Why wouldn't he be acting as PIC? The student is performing the duties of PIC...not acting as PIC.

Big difference.

-mini

Not according to the Baltimore FSDO. He is acting as a PIC even though he is not rated in the airplane.

Not saying I agree w/ them but this is what they are saying.

minitour · Oct 9, 2009

jhugz said:
Not according to the Baltimore FSDO. He is acting as a PIC even though he is not rated in the airplane.

Not saying I agree w/ them but this is what they are saying.

The FSDO doesn't have the authority to interpret regulations. If I were the instructor, I'd search legal counsel opinions and if there wasn't one, I'd write to them.

...it's free and you'll know for sure.....either way.

-mini

jhugz · Oct 9, 2009

minitour said:
The FSDO doesn't have the authority to interpret regulations. If I were the instructor, I'd search legal counsel opinions and if there wasn't one, I'd write to them.

...it's free and you'll know for sure.....either way.

-mini

I'm no longer aloud to go over the heads of anyone at work.

minitour · Oct 9, 2009

jhugz said:
I'm no longer aloud to go over the heads of anyone at work.

Wow...so it's going over their head when you want a legal interpretation? Do they realize it's your ass on the line?

Say it with me, "Would you like to Biggie Size that?". I have a feeling I'll be headed there soon, too.

-mini

jhugz · Oct 9, 2009

minitour said:
Say it with me, "Would you like to Biggie Size that?". I have a feeling I'll be headed there soon, too.

You're right.

minitour · Oct 9, 2009

jhugz said:
You're right.

I certainly hope I'm not...for both of our cases.

...it's got to turn around sometime, right?

-mini

jhugz · Oct 9, 2009

minitour said:
...it's got to turn around sometime, right?

That's what I keep telling myself.

BillPerryCFI · Oct 9, 2009

As far as the CFI logging pilot in command time during the "pseudo solo" for the initial commercial multi engine, read closely:

"(4) 10 hours of solo flight time in a multiengine airplane or 10 hours of flight time performing the duties of pilot in command in a multiengine airplane with an authorized instructor "

Note the key words there. The CFI is still the legal PIC of the aircraft however this FAR allows the student to perform the duties of PIC in lieu of being solo for obvious reasons. As a CFI you would simply log this as a multi-engine flight in which you were the pilot in command. You do not however log dual as you are not providing instruction to the student during this time.

vikingair · Oct 14, 2009

I am embarrassed to admit I got "bit' on a xc requirement for a students 141 comm multi..not the long one as PIC but one of the basic 2hr 100nm ones.

We took off at airport A..flew 5 miles to airport B to get gas then flew to airport C 200+ miles away. Kinda asinine that A-B-C didn't count (even more insane that we don't have fuel at our home airport) but by erasing A suddenly it was legal. Had nothing whatsoever to do with the training provided on the flight, was entirely a function of how it was logged.

vikingair · Oct 14, 2009

BillPerryCFI said:
Note the key words there. The CFI is still the legal PIC of the aircraft however this FAR allows the student to perform the duties of PIC in lieu of being solo for obvious reasons. As a CFI you would simply log this as a multi-engine flight in which you were the pilot in command. You do not however log dual as you are not providing instruction to the student during this time.

I know there is some argument concerning this..mostly due to guidance from various sources, including different FSDO locations BUT on more than one occasion I've successfully argued and backed up my claim to DPE's, POI's and the FAA that you most certainly CAN provide instruction during these flights AND log it as dual given/received. Nothing prohibits it whatsoever.

Its correct to say that the FSDO is not authorized to provide final legal interpretations of the FARS, which is the realm of the Office of Chief Counsel http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org.../agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/Interpretations/
They are however tasked with and allowed to disseminate offical policy on standardization and applaince of the regs..at least until god forbid some scenario arises in which a legal opinion is needed.

As far as the student being the official PIC.not unless he's rated in the aircraft. Period.

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 12"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSivartu%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><link rel="themeData" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSivartu%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_themedata.thmx"><link rel="colorSchemeMapping" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSivartu%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtmlclip1%5C01%5Cclip_colorschememapping.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style>  </style> This is an excerpt of the preamble of the final rule correction document that was issued in the Federal Register (78 FR 20284; Amdt. No. 61-104) on April 23, 1998:<o

></o

>
<o

> </o

>
[FONT=&quot]In addition, the FAA has revised § 61.129(b)(4) to permit an applicant for a commercial pilot certificate with a multiengine rating to credit the 10 hours of flight time performing the duties of PIC in a multiengine airplane required by that paragraph toward the 100 hours of PIC flight time required under § 61.129(b)(2). This revision is consistent with the provisions of § 61.129(b) as proposed in Notice No. 95‑11. As previously noted, proposed § 61.129(b)(4) would have required an applicant to accomplish solo flight time in a multiengine airplane. The solo flight time would have constituted PIC flight time; therefore, the applicant would have been able to credit that flight time toward the requirements of § 61.129(b)(2). However, under § 61.129(b)(4) as adopted in the final rule, an applicant would be performing the duties of PIC rather than acting as PIC. Consequently, that flight time does not constitute PIC flight time. Therefore, the FAA has revised § 61.129(b)(4) to permit the crediting of flight time accomplished under that paragraph toward the requirements of § 61.129(b)(2). However, this revision does not permit an applicant to log the flight time required under § 61.129(b)(4) as PIC flight time under § 61.51(e) unless the applicant holds a private pilot certificate with a multiengine rating and chooses to accomplish the requirements with an authorized instructor[/FONT]

Nihon_Ni · Oct 14, 2009

Nihon_Ni said:
So if he didn't log the legs with the pax (which he doesn't have to do) then it meets the requirement? What if he flew back to TOL? The regs don't say how much time can elapse during the fulfillment of the requirements.

minitour said:
What if he just said he had about 1500 hours of heavy jet time...and just did an ATP ride right after his commercial?

If you're going to fib, might as well fib big.

-mini

It's not a fib to only log part of your flight time. It's not at all like logging time you haven't experienced. The former is permissible by FAR 61.51(a), the latter is a violation of 61.59(a)(2)

Section 61.51: Pilot logbooks.

(a) Training time and aeronautical experience. Each person must document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the Administrator:
(1) Training and aeronautical experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this part.
(2) The aeronautical experience required for meeting the recent flight experience requirements of this part.

Section 61.59: Falsification, reproduction, or alteration of applications, certificates, logbooks, reports, or records.

(a) No person may make or cause to be made:
(1) Any fraudulent or intentionally false statement on any application for a certificate, rating, authorization, or duplicate thereof, issued under this part;
(2) Any fraudulent or intentionally false entry in any logbook, record, or report that is required to be kept, made, or used to show compliance with any requirement for the issuance or exercise of the privileges of any certificate, rating, or authorization under this part;
(3) Any reproduction for fraudulent purpose of any certificate, rating, or authorization, under this part; or
(4) Any alteration of any certificate, rating, or authorization under this part.
(b) The commission of an act prohibited under paragraph (a) of this section is a basis for suspending or revoking any airman certificate, rating, or authorization held by that person.

Commercial X/C

Murdoughnut

Well sized member

CoffeeIcePapers

Well-Hung Member

drunkenbeagle

Gang Member

minitour

New Member

jhugz

Well-Known Member

minitour

New Member

jhugz

Well-Known Member

minitour

New Member

jhugz

Well-Known Member

minitour

New Member

jhugz

Well-Known Member

minitour

New Member

jhugz

Well-Known Member

minitour

New Member

jhugz

Well-Known Member

BillPerryCFI

Well-Known Member

vikingair

Well-Known Member

vikingair

Well-Known Member

Nihon_Ni

Well-Known Member