X/C Time for Commercial

[papa77]

Do duel X/C as a primary student count for the requirements for the commercial ticket?

Example:

FAR 61.129(a)(3)(iv)

Once X/C flight of at least 2 hours blablabla single engine blablabla night VFR blablabla total straight line distance of 100nm blablabla.

I did a flight that satisfies these requirements with my primary instructor. So, it was logged as X/C and duel received and NOT X/C PIC.

I know it does not count for any PIC flight requirement, but does it satisfy the above FAR???

 

[PeterPilot]

I'll stick my neck out and say "yes" it would count. The regulation says "as a pilot." It doesn't specify what flavor pilot and a student pilot is "a pilot".

 

[Douglas]

x2 - I know there are some dissenters, but I think it counts.

 

[tgrayson]

Do dual [X/C as a primary student count for the requirements for the commercial ticket?

Given that you must have a Private pilot certificate before you can get your Commercial, if the pre-Private training were acceptable to meet the requirements of the Commercial certificate, why have a separate set of training requirements for the Commercial at all? Every candidate would have almost all of it already done.

The FAA stated this position in their defunct Part 61 FAQs:

QUESTION: Must the training specified in § 61.129(a)(3) be accomplished after a private certificate is acquired and the decision was made to start commercial training?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.123(e)(1) and (f); Yes. The training must be accomplished after getting a private pilot certificate first. And also look at the words of § 61.123(h). We didn’t specify the category and class of the rating, it only requires the applicant hold a private pilot certificate first.

§ 61.123(e) states: Receive the required training and a logbook endorsement from an authorized instructor who:

1. Conducted the training on the areas of operation listed in § 61.127(b) of this part that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought; and
2. Certified that the person is prepared for the required practical test.

Properly endorsed training per § 61.123 would certainly seem to indicate someone has made a decision to start commercial pilot training.

§ 61.123(f) states: Meet the aeronautical experience requirements of this subpart that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought before applying for the practical test;

An applicant cannot use pre-private pilot training to also be used to meet the commercial training requirement. The applicant must FIRST hold a private pilot certificate. Remember the “building-block” concept of training.​

 

[Blackhawk]

Given that you must have a Private pilot certificate before you can get your Commercial, if the pre-Private training were acceptable to meet the requirements of the Commercial certificate, why have a separate set of training requirements for the Commercial at all? Every candidate would have almost all of it already done.

The FAA stated this position in their defunct Part 61 FAQs:

QUESTION: Must the training specified in § 61.129(a)(3) be accomplished after a private certificate is acquired and the decision was made to start commercial training?

ANSWER: Ref. § 61.123(e)(1) and (f); Yes. The training must be accomplished after getting a private pilot certificate first. And also look at the words of § 61.123(h). We didn’t specify the category and class of the rating, it only requires the applicant hold a private pilot certificate first.

§ 61.123(e) states: Receive the required training and a logbook endorsement from an authorized instructor who:

1. Conducted the training on the areas of operation listed in § 61.127(b) of this part that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought; and
2. Certified that the person is prepared for the required practical test.

Properly endorsed training per § 61.123 would certainly seem to indicate someone has made a decision to start commercial pilot training.

§ 61.123(f) states: Meet the aeronautical experience requirements of this subpart that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought before applying for the practical test;

An applicant cannot use pre-private pilot training to also be used to meet the commercial training requirement. The applicant must FIRST hold a private pilot certificate. Remember the “building-block” concept of training.
​

And since the FAQ are defunct, it is worthless to quote them as they have no authority and therefore no relevence aside from being the opinion of one person. I can list the opinions of many government agencies that are no longer listed as opinions and are therefore no longer valid government opinions, although they may still be the opinion of the specific individual.
Saying a person must make a decision to begin commercial training in order for it to count is a non sequitor argument. The seperate set of training requirements is listed because they are more stringent for the commercial- no distance requirement for private pilots, 100 NM for commercial. But if the dual cross country was long enough as a student pilot I see nothing in the regulations that says it can not count. Just as the solo cross country time as a student pilot counts toward further ratings as PIC cross country time. Using your argument, none of a pilot's experience would count unless he/she has made the decision to pursue a commercial certificate since it also states in 61.123 that the applicant must meet the experience requirements.
But what you and I argue will matter little in this case. What will matter is what the DE in question thinks. If the DE accepts it, great. If not, oh well. Now if there is a current FAA legal letter on file I take it all back as my opinion matters little if the FAA has a current, standing opinion on the matter.

 

[tgrayson]

it is worthless to quote them

No, it isn't. The interpretation doesn't have to be authoritative in order to be informative. The FAQ is an indication of how the FAA was thinking a few years ago and it hasn't likely changed. The basic argument rests in the regulations. Any other interpretation means the Commercial training just becomes a few hours in complex and send 'em for a checkride. It's absurd.

Just as the solo cross country time as a student pilot counts toward further ratings as PIC cross country time.

It counts as experience, but not training. But, using your logic, just make the student pilot "long" cross-country a little longer, and that will count as his Commercial solo x/c. If any FSDO were approving this sort of thing, you'd see everyone front-loading the private training and offering token 10 hour Commercial training. Have you heard of such? I haven't.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

No, it isn't. The interpretation doesn't have to be authoritative in order to be informative.

In addition, many of the Flight Standards statements and even FAA Chief Counsel opinions that have come out recently dealing with issues applicable to training (the most recent being, no you can't count safety pilot time on a cross country as cross country time) have parroted Lynch's opinions in the defunct FAQ.

"Not authoritative" does not mean "worthless."

Saying a person must make a decision to begin commercial training in order for it to count is a non sequitor argument.

No one's saying that at all. They're saying that a person must already have a private pilot certificate (or at least completed private pilot training*) before counting training toward additional certificates requirements.

(* I say that because of the stories of people who start training very young and then do things like their private and instrument rating checkrides the same day - this is policy more than law so doesn't have to be completely logical)

 

[eliteflight]

61.129(a)(3) requires "20 hours of training on the areas of operation listed in §61.127(b)(1) of this part...", and then goes on to list some specific types of training within that 20 hours, including the cross-country flights 61.129(a)(3)(iii) and (iv). 61.127(b)(1) lists the areas of operation for the Commercial certificate. Therefore, the training required by 61.129(a)(3) must be training specifically towards the Commercial certificate.

By comparison, the flight time requirements listed in 61.129(a)(1) and (2) include include everthing, including all your pre-Private time. The difference between the flight time requirements and the training requirements is often a source of confusion.

It would be difficult to prove that a pre-Private flight was really Commercial training. It would have to be logged as commercial training, and not counted towards any Private requirement, to have any hope of being counted. Even then, most examiners would probably turn you away, and tell you to come back after you complete the requirements. They wouldn't want to pass you, and then have the FAA come back and revoke your newly-earned Commercial certificate because you didn't meet the requirements.

 

[papa77]

61.129(a)(3) requires "20 hours of training on the areas of operation listed in §61.127(b)(1) of this part...", and then goes on to list some specific types of training within that 20 hours, including the cross-country flights 61.129(a)(3)(iii) and (iv). 61.127(b)(1) lists the areas of operation for the Commercial certificate. Therefore, the training required by 61.129(a)(3) must be training specifically towards the Commercial certificate.

By comparison, the flight time requirements listed in 61.129(a)(1) and (2) include include everthing, including all your pre-Private time. The difference between the flight time requirements and the training requirements is often a source of confusion.

It would be difficult to prove that a pre-Private flight was really Commercial training. It would have to be logged as commercial training, and not counted towards any Private requirement, to have any hope of being counted. Even then, most examiners would probably turn you away, and tell you to come back after you complete the requirements. They wouldn't want to pass you, and then have the FAA come back and revoke your newly-earned Commercial certificate because you didn't meet the requirements.

Thanks All! This is pretty cut and dry as to why it does not count. My situation is this: Ready to schedule my instrument check ride but, I am 5.8 hours of total X/C PIC short of the requirement for the instrument ticket (50). My instructor suggested that I read up on the commercial X/C requirements so I don't just slice the sky in a 152, bouncing from airport to airport 50 nm apart with no real purpose.

My understanding now is that I cannot complete any X/C under 61.129(a)(3) unless I have received training under 61.127(b)(1). But, I have received training under all areas of 61.127(b)(1) except high altitude training. Does this mean that I can sit in a sim and do high altitude training for 2 hours with an instructor, and then say I have received training in all areas of 61.127(b)(1)? Or, is this a "spirit of the FAR's" thing and I should not worry about 61.129(a)(3) unless I have officially started commercial training???


Edit: For what it's worth, I made a deal for a block rate at my training center for the Instrument ticket and commercial single. With the same instructor. All of my instrument training has been done knowing that I would transition straight into the commercial training.

 

[subpilot]

But, using your logic, just make the student pilot "long" cross-country a little longer, and that will count as his Commercial solo x/c. If any FSDO were approving this sort of thing, you'd see everyone front-loading the private training and offering token 10 hour Commercial training. Have you heard of such? I haven't.

I actually had one of my private students with the goal to go all the way through his ratings and had a tight budget do his solo cross country to commercial standards so that it would "knock out two birds with one stone". I thought it would be ok but maybe I was wrong. I wish I could look him up to see how that worked out for him.

 

[tgrayson]

In addition...even FAA Chief Counsel opinions...have parroted Lynch's opinions in the defunct FAQ.

I have the impression that many times the Chief Counsel's Office will consult the relevant branch in the FAA and ask "What opinion would you like us to render?" and, if the law supports that interpretation, will rule as the branch desires.

As for the safety pilot x/c thing, it does seem that the rationale changed a bit from Lynch's opinion to the Chief Counsel's. Lynch had said the time didn't count because only one person could perform the landing, but the Chief Counsel said something to the effect that the safety pilot wasn't a safety pilot the whole time and thus couldn't log it as x/c. Perhaps this is because the regulations don't actually require that the pilot logging the x/c time actually be the one performing the landing, only that the flight "includes a landing at a point other than the point of departure".

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

I have the impression that many times the Chief Counsel's Office will consult the relevant branch in the FAA and ask "What opinion would you like us to render?" and, if the law supports that interpretation, will rule as the branch desires.

As for the safety pilot x/c thing, it does seem that the rationale changed a bit from Lynch's opinion to the Chief Counsel's. Lynch had said the time didn't count because only one person could perform the landing, but the Chief Counsel said something to the effect that the safety pilot wasn't a safety pilot the whole time and thus couldn't log it as x/c. Perhaps this is because the regulations don't actually require that the pilot logging the x/c time actually be the one performing the landing, only that the flight "includes a landing at a point other than the point of departure".

I think your impression is correct (at least it's the same as mine).

But IMO they both used some iffy logic and while the iffy logic was different the goal was the same - to support the understandable Flight Standards policy position about safety pilots. A perhaps unintended consequence is to prevent some other type of cross country logging.

My old example was the two friends, both private pilots who fly a 3-hour leg on a cross country. Pilot A takes off and flies the first 1.5 hours; Pilot B takes over, flies the rest of the way and lands. Under both opinions, neither pilot may log it as a cross country.

 

[nosehair]

Pilot A takes off and flies the first 1.5 hours; Pilot B takes over, flies the rest of the way and lands. Under both opinions, neither pilot may log it as a cross country.

Why wouldn't pilot B's time count if it were a leg of at least 50nm? "includes a landing" ..does it have to begin with a T.O.?

 

[shdw]

Why wouldn't pilot B's time count if it were a leg of at least 50nm? "includes a landing" ..does it have to begin with a T.O.?

"...original point of departure" he didn't depart, so I would guess you are right with the he didn't do the t/o part.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Why wouldn't pilot B's time count if it were a leg of at least 50nm? "includes a landing" ..does it have to begin with a T.O.?

You're reading the reg, and looking at what it actually says. But first John Lynch at Flight Standards and now the Chief Counsel's office have messed with interpreting it, in two different ways.

The old FAQ said the safety pilot couldn't log it because the pilot logging has to do the takeoff and landing. The new Chief Counsel opinion says the safety pilot can't log it "because that pilot was a required flight crewmember for only a portion of the flight." You need to be required crew for the whole flight. http://tinyurl.com/nqkpvh

Personally, I think the Chief Counsel kept away from the Lynch " takeoff and landing" opinion because the logical consequence was that at least one member of a "real" 2-pilot-required aircraft or Part 135 passenger operation would also end up not being able to log cross country.

But under either either "reasoning" our intrepid private pilots in my example can't log cross country. Neither is Pilot A or B accomplishes both the takeoff and landing under the old FAQ. And neither of them is required crew for the entire flight under the Chief Counsel version.

OTOH, suppose the flying pilot i the safety pilot scenario has no medical or is out of FR currency. Then I guess, the safety pilot who is also PIC is indeed required crew for the whole flight and can log it under the Chief Counsel opinion.

Of course, I doubt that anyone who was involved in the writing either version intended this consequence of the reasoning. And I'll bet they find a way around it if asked.

All they wanted to do was justify a policy decision not to count safety pilot time toward cross country requirements for certificates and ratings. All they really had to do was say so. Instead they come up with justifications that don't really work.