XC Requirements for PPL Certificate

[Kitch]

When I was training I had a period of time waiting for a DPE so I got signed off for a few extra solo XC flights when the weather was good. I learned to fly to travel not fly around in circles all the time. Although I find myself flying around in circles after work from time to time just to decompress.

 

[Pinecone]

Sounds like the solo cross-country requirements must have been relaxed quite a bit since I did my training.

This was discussed in another thread.

I was trying to remember what they were when I did mine. But there was at least one "short" XC with 3 legs, EACH at least 50 miles long. And one "long" one, with 3x legs, EACH at least 100 miles long.

I am trying to remember if there was a second "short" one. And Commercial had a 3 leg, 200 mile legs requirement. I did my XC to Com standards when working on my Private Helicopter, so I only had to do the one for the add-on.

I can't check my logbook, as my original log book went missing years ago. I suspect when I have to clean our my parents house, it will show up.

 

[RussR]

Whose poor planning though? .2 can be the difference between a good tailwind or a headwind.

Poor planning IF the intent is to meet the minimum required time on that flight. Not poor XC flight planning, but poor in-flight planning. "Okay, I need to get 2.0 on this flight, but I'm halfway done and only have 0.8. Maybe I should see if I can find Grandpa's farm on the way back. Yeah, that will be a practice diversion, and I'll get the time I need. Good idea, self!"

 

[Dana]

I was trying to remember what they were when I did mine. But there was at least one "short" XC with 3 legs, EACH at least 50 miles long. And one "long" one, with 3x legs, EACH at least 100 miles long.

Same here; two short and one long with three 100 mile legs. As I recall, I worked out how to do it with legs of 101, 102, and 110 miles.

 

[brcase]

Why is this an issue, you need 10 solo hours anyway. Almost all of my solo time was XC. Plus if you go for instrument that XC time will be counted towards the 50 anyway.

What's with everyone doing minimums?

It been a few years since you did yours (quite a few years), back in the 90's they reduced the required XC hours from 10 to 5, and added the 3 hour requirement for training in Reference to Instruments, along with a number of other changes.

I had to do the 10 hours of cross country and ended up showing up to the checkride with only 9.8 hrs, because I had aborted my 1st cross country and landed at an airport 48miles away before returning. I logged it as cross country time and neither my instructor or I caught that is wasn't a 50nm cross country.

Delayed me getting my certificate a week, while I redid the cross country, which I happened to get lost on. Something about my destination airport being right on the corner of 3 sectional charts of which I only could get 2 of them. Obviously way before we could get current electronic charts.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[brcase]

For whatever it's worth, remember that the extra time is kept forever. If you apply for renters insurance, or owners insurance, they want flight time. They're not going to be picky about whether the time was as a result of previous poor planning. XC is XC. Also, as stated above, this will be less flight time you have to do for later certificates if you decide to pursue them.

As a final cheery thought, flying is probably not going to get much cheaper any time soon, so now is actually the cheapest time to make up the flight.

And Solo Cross country time counts toward the 50hours of cross country time required for you Instrument rating if you decided to pursue that.

Brian
CFIIG/aSEL

 

[EdFred]

It been a few years since you did yours (quite a few years), back in the 90's they reduced the required XC hours from 10 to 5, and added the 3 hour requirement for training in Reference to Instruments, along with a number of other changes.

I had to do the 10 hours of cross country and ended up showing up to the checkride with only 9.8 hrs, because I had aborted my 1st cross country and landed at an airport 48miles away before returning. I logged it as cross country time and neither my instructor or I caught that is wasn't a 50nm cross country.

Delayed me getting my certificate a week, while I redid the cross country, which I happened to get lost on. Something about my destination airport being right on the corner of 3 sectional charts of which I only could get 2 of them. Obviously way before we could get current electronic charts.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

I was talking total solo hours. You can do 8.5 solo XC hours and 1.5 in the pattern/practice to get the 10 hours. You DON'T need 5 XC and an additional 5 that MUST BE non-XC. So if the OP goes out, and goes from 4.8 to 6.8 XC, he still only needs 3.2 to satisfy the 10. Not like it needs to be 11.8. Still just needs to be 10 total.

61.109(a)(5)

10 hours of solo flight time in a single-engine airplane, consisting of at least -
(i) 5 hours of solo cross-country time;

(ii) One solo cross country flight of 150 nautical miles total distance, with full-stop landings at three points, and one segment of the flight consisting of a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles between the takeoff and landing locations; and

(iii) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop (with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating control tower.

 

[Brad W]

This was discussed in another thread.

I was trying to remember what they were when I did mine. But there was at least one "short" XC with 3 legs, EACH at least 50 miles long. And one "long" one, with 3x legs, EACH at least 100 miles long.

I am trying to remember if there was a second "short" one. And Commercial had a 3 leg, 200 mile legs requirement. I did my XC to Com standards when working on my Private Helicopter, so I only had to do the one for the add-on.

I can't check my logbook, as my original log book went missing years ago. I suspect when I have to clean our my parents house, it will show up.

right...that seems more familiar....
I think I'll go back to see if any of mine measure on google something like 49.9 miles....

edit: Hilarious, my 1st solo student XC was JGG to EMV and back. According to Skyvector it's 50 NM exact! Using the measure tool on google maps to an eyeball approx. center point of the airport it's about 57.1 SM which = 49.6 NM Yikes!

so I had a couple "extra" student trips logged as XC that were short...an abort, and two solo's to ORF where the examiner was based
but for the required ones I had 10.5 total time logged
using skyvector distances
50 NM out and back
51.8 NM out and back
64.0 NM out and back
100 NM + 108 NM + 119 NM three leg

 

[ateamer]

If you get heartburn paying for than the absolute minimum, then flying is not going to be a good fit for you.

 

[Pinecone]

Same here; two short and one long with three 100 mile legs. As I recall, I worked out how to do it with legs of 101, 102, and 110 miles.

Really wish I could find that log book.

I know first XC leg was 0W3 to KRDG. Fore Flight says exactly 50 NM.

And one leg was KMRB to 0W3, which is 83 NM, but not sure if that was supposed to be a long leg. I remember that one, because I was chased by a line of thunderstorms. Landed, taxied in. My instructor was waiting, we pushed into the hangar and then got to sit and watch it POUR for a while

 

[Pinecone]

right...that seems more familiar....
I think I'll go back to see if any of mine measure on google something like 49.9 miles....

edit: Hilarious, my 1st solo student XC was JGG to EMV and back. According to Skyvector it's 50 NM exact! Using the measure tool on google maps to an eyeball approx. center point of the airport it's about 57.1 SM which = 49.6 NM Yikes!

Remember, we were measuring on a sectional with a plotter.

And the DPEs would glance at the airports and know they were close to legal. I would not EVER using a DPE that got bent over a 1/2 mile on a leg.

 

[brcase]

Hilarious, my 1st solo student XC was JGG to EMV and back. According to Skyvector it's 50 NM exact! Using the measure tool on google maps to an eyeball approx. center point of the airport it's about 57.1 SM which = 49.6 NM Yikes!

We have the same issue with KEUL to U76. I have seen a number of checkrides rescheduled because instructors (not really the students fault) keep trying to use it for cross country time. The examiner's issue is the FAA and in the event of an accident maybe have lawyers looking over their shoulder, and they don't want any hint that might be passing applicants that don't meet the standards. I have had an examiner tell me he will accept it if you can show him a reasonable application (EFB, Google, etc) that shows it is MORE than 50nm. He will take a photo of the source and put it in his file so if anyone ever questions it he can produce documentation showing that the instructor and applicant had a reasonable expectation that it was really GREATER than 50nm.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

 

[francisco collazos]

If you get heartburn paying for than the absolute minimum, then flying is not going to be a good fit for you.

Pilots are a fickle bunch because that same person that flies will also fly another 10 mi for 5c/gal cheaper gas or complain that foreflight costs too much.

 

[Brad W]

If I recall correctly, my student cross countries were all part of the schools syllabus..... they had figured out the destinations to fly and in which order to fly them, for reasons in addition to the distance requirement. Airspace differences, etc....
Kind of took some of the adventure out of it, but it was ok...still great memories

 

[EdFred]

If I recall correctly, my student cross countries were all part of the schools syllabus..... they had figured out the destinations to fly and in which order to fly them, for reasons in addition to the distance requirement. Airspace differences, etc....
Kind of took some of the adventure out of it, but it was ok...still great memories

I was given, and give my students, the choices of where they want to go. We obviously review it. One went to meet up with a friend for lunch, another met 3 other airplanes for lunch at another destination (myself included, different departure airports) another did almost an entire tour of the Lower Peninsula. Of course I also give them an envelope to open over one of their visual checkpoints that has a diversion in it which adds to their adventure.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I was given, and give my students, the choices of where they want to go. We obviously review it. One went to meet up with a friend for lunch, another met 3 other airplanes for lunch at another destination (myself included, different departure airports) another did almost an entire tour of the Lower Peninsula. Of course I also give them an envelope to open over one of their visual checkpoints that has a diversion in it which adds to their adventure.

I chose my own as well. In one, I got together with some close friends I hadn't seen in a few years.

I love the diversion in an envelope idea! Fantastic!

I diverted for real on both of my solo cross countries (radios crapped out on the first; weather diversion on the other) but most solo students aren't as lucky.

 

[somorris]

Remember, we were measuring on a sectional with a plotter.

And the DPEs would glance at the airports and know they were close to legal. I would not EVER using a DPE that got bent over a 1/2 mile on a leg.

That is the way I did it also. I guess a lot of folks can get hung up on the minutiae and lose sight of the reason for the requirement. Difficult to measure to the nearest 0.1 mile using a plotter!

 

[EdFred]

I chose my own as well. In one, I got together with some close friends I hadn't seen in a few years.

I love the diversion in an envelope idea! Fantastic!

I diverted for real on both of my solo cross countries (radios crapped out on the first; weather diversion on the other) but most solo students aren't as lucky.

They never read their XC endorsement close enough. If they look at it, they will see I've approved the XC for an airport they didn't have in their planning. Only works the first time, though.

 

[RussR]

They never read their XC endorsement close enough. If they look at it, they will see I've approved the XC for an airport they didn't have in their planning. Only works the first time, though.

It's a clever idea, and I do like it, but how did you comply with the requirements of 61.93 to review their planning, if they didn't plan to go to that airport?

 

[EdFred]

It's a clever idea, and I do like it, but how did you comply with the requirements of 61.93 to review their planning, if they didn't plan to go to that airport?

How do you plan for something unplanned?

I pick a diversion airport that's well within the crosswind component, runway length, etc. It's not like I'm sending them into a 1200' grass strip when they've only done 5000' paved. A diversion isn't ever planned.

 

[RussR]

How do you plan for something unplanned?

I pick a diversion airport that's well within the crosswind component, runway length, etc. It's not like I'm sending them into a 1200' grass strip when they've only done 5000' paved. A diversion isn't ever planned.

Hey, I said I like the idea, and it is certainly valuable and non-standard, and being able to safely divert is an extremely important skill.

But 61.93c says "The endorsement must -

(ii) State that the student's preflight planning and preparation is correct..."

And from 61.93d, "An authorized instructor may not permit a student pilot to conduct a solo cross-country flight unless that instructor has:

(1) Determined that the student's cross-country planning is correct for the flight;"

How do you comply with reviewing the student's planning for the flight if they don't know you're sending them somewhere else and therefore they haven't planned anything for that route or airport?

 

[EdFred]

Same way someone lands with less than 30 minutes of fuel, VFR day. It's not against the regs to do so. It's against the regs to PLAN to land with less than 30 minutes.

I reviewed the student's plan, and determined that the planning is correct. Compliance achieved.

We talk about diversions and what to do and how to do it, and on the dual XC we always have at least one diversion due to zombies, a nuclear bomb, etc... so I know the student knows how to deal with it, and change on the fly.

Am I going to get busted as an instructor if a REAL diversion comes up for some reason? Student is covered under 91.3, but what provision is allowed under 61.93d for me an instructor if the student has to divert? Nothing. I put this in the same category.

 

[TCABM]

…
How do you comply with reviewing the student's planning for the flight if they don't know you're sending them somewhere else and therefore they haven't planned anything for that route or airport?

What do you expect your students to do if they have an emergency within range of an airport?

 

[RussR]

@EdFred, @TCABM, guys, I'm not disagreeing that preparing for diversions is important. Come on now.

But if your student planned a flight from A-B-C-A, and you sneakily want for them to actually fly A-B-D-A, and plan to endorse it as such, how can you endorse that you reviewed their planning? You reviewed it for A-B-C-A but are endorsing A-B-D-A. Therefore, you didn't review what you planned for them to do. You didn't review their route from B-D-A, selection of checkpoints, knowledge of the runway layout at D, etc., etc.

Again, I'm not opposed to the IDEA, and knowing how to divert is important and a normal part of training. I just can't see the idea squaring with the regulations requiring you to review their planning, if they're not flying their plan because of an intentional mid-flight change by you.

And the issue of a real emergency or divert is a red herring. That's not what we're discussing. I would expect the student to take appropriate actions in those situations. And if they end up at an airport not in their original plan or endorsement with a flyable airplane (let's say they diverted for a door that popped open or something), then I am required to review their planning to get home and issue them an additional endorsement for that flight.

 

[midlifeflyer]

@EdFred, @TCABM, guys, I'm not disagreeing that preparing for diversions is important. Come on now.

But if your student planned a flight from A-B-C-A, and you sneakily want for them to actually fly A-B-D-A, and plan to endorse it as such, how can you endorse that you reviewed their planning? You reviewed it for A-B-C-A but are endorsing A-B-D-A. Therefore, you didn't review what you planned for them to do. You didn't review their route from B-D-A, selection of checkpoints, knowledge of the runway layout at D, etc., etc.

Again, I'm not opposed to the IDEA, and knowing how to divert is important and a normal part of training. I just can't see the idea squaring with the regulations requiring you to review their planning, if they're not flying their plan because of an intentional mid-flight change by you.

And the issue of a real emergency or divert is a red herring. That's not what we're discussing. I would expect the student to take appropriate actions in those situations. And if they end up at an airport not in their original plan or endorsement with a flyable airplane (let's say they diverted for a door that popped open or something), then I am required to review their planning to get home and issue them an additional endorsement for that flight.

The regulatory deviation, if indeed there is one, doesn't bother me.

 

[TCABM]

@EdFred, @TCABM…
But if your student planned a flight from A-B-C-A, and you sneakily want for them to actually fly A-B-D-A,…

Plan A-B-C-D-A. Open envelope between B-C, Divert to D. Flight ends up A-B-D-A. Ground brief contingencies.

That’s one way that comes to mind. It’s not much different than what happens if a student arrives at an XC destination and it’s outside any limits the CFI has established for them (for ex: cross winds gusting to 25).

 

[Half Fast]

Plan A-B-C-D-A. Open envelope between B-C, Divert to D. Flight ends up A-B-D-A. Ground brief contingencies.

That’s one way that comes to mind. It’s not much different than what happens if a student arrives at an XC destination and it’s outside any limits the CFI has established for them (for ex: cross winds gusting to 25).

You guys are making this waaaay too difficult. It's easier if you just write the endorsement after the student returns.

 

[Jim K]

You guys are making this waaaay too difficult. It's easier if you just write the endorsement after the student returns.

Bonus... if they crash or get a phone number, your name isn't in their logbook....

 

[Lindberg]

What do you expect your students to do if they have an emergency within range of an airport?

Land and stay where they are. Call for help.

 

[Half Fast]

Land and stay where they are. Call for help.

Is that what you expect them to do after they get their certificates?

 

[Lindberg]

Is that what you expect them to do after they get their certificates?

Irrelevant.

 

[TCABM]

Land and stay where they are. Call for help.

How do they get there…that’s the point of the divert.

 

[Half Fast]

Irrelevant.

Nope. Very relevant.

 

[TCABM]

I’m going to hate myself in the morning for saying this, but the solo XCs are huge opportunities to employ scenario based training in a realistic environment.

 

[Lindberg]

Nope. Very relevant.

Only if your expectations for licensed pilots and students are the same. Mine aren't. Neither are the applicable regulations.

 

[Lindberg]

How do they get there…that’s the point of the divert.

A CFI's secret plan isn't an emergency and doesn't excuse noncompliance with the FARs.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Plan A-B-C-D-A. Open envelope between B-C, Divert to D. Flight ends up A-B-D-A. Ground brief contingencies.

I think you are on track. The amount of complexity any particular CFI is comfortable with is going to be a personal choice, but if you have a bit of ROCD, you might consider...

Preflight planning - which the endorsement covers - is required to include consideration of "alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed". You, the CFI, covered that, didn't you? Even talked about several potential diversion possibilities when discussing the route. And, of course, did one on a dual cross country.

The "magic envelope" contains the diversion airport and the updated endorsement including it. It no longer being 1995, you might update the endorsement by email, text, or directly into their digital logbook after they leave.

 

[EdFred]

@EdFred, @TCABM, guys, I'm not disagreeing that preparing for diversions is important. Come on now.

But if your student planned a flight from A-B-C-A, and you sneakily want for them to actually fly A-B-D-A, and plan to endorse it as such, how can you endorse that you reviewed their planning? You reviewed it for A-B-C-A but are endorsing A-B-D-A. Therefore, you didn't review what you planned for them to do. You didn't review their route from B-D-A, selection of checkpoints, knowledge of the runway layout at D, etc., etc.

Again, I'm not opposed to the IDEA, and knowing how to divert is important and a normal part of training. I just can't see the idea squaring with the regulations requiring you to review their planning, if they're not flying their plan because of an intentional mid-flight change by you.

And the issue of a real emergency or divert is a red herring. That's not what we're discussing. I would expect the student to take appropriate actions in those situations. And if they end up at an airport not in their original plan or endorsement with a flyable airplane (let's say they diverted for a door that popped open or something), then I am required to review their planning to get home and issue them an additional endorsement for that flight.

I think you're reading too much into how much needs to be reviewed. I think a general overview covers it, and you're looking at it to the point of micromanagement. If the student "needs" to slow down because of what the OP brought up, is doing some 360s or S turns part of the plan? No. So is that now a violation because I approve the student's plan to do xyz on leg BC because the student didnt present that to me in his plan? I mean if we want to get picky we can say that is is impossible to comply because, well of a whole lot of things.

I have reviewed the students plan. Full stop.

 

[RussR]

Land and stay where they are. Call for help.

Is that what you expect them to do after they get their certificates?

Irrelevant.

Nope. Very relevant.

If they have an emergency and have to land somewhere else, then as a student pilot they are no longer allowed to continue the flight home without a new endorsement. What I expect them to do AFTER their checkride IS irrelevant, because that falls under a separate set of rules. So as a student I do expect them to call me, we'll figure out the issue together, and if it's something that can be resolved so they can fly home they will have to plan that flight. And I'll have to review their planning and endorse it. Of course I do. That's pretty clear in the regulations.

 

[RussR]

I think you're reading too much into how much needs to be reviewed. I think a general overview covers it, and you're looking at it to the point of micromanagement. If the student "needs" to slow down because of what the OP brought up, is doing some 360s or S turns part of the plan? No. So is that now a violation because I approve the student's plan to do xyz on leg BC because the student didnt present that to me in his plan? I mean if we want to get picky we can say that is is impossible to comply because, well of a whole lot of things.

I have reviewed the students plan. Full stop.

I don't think that reviewing the student's checkpoints, nav log, making sure they did proper math or wind correction angle, got the correct forecast, applied magnetic variation properly, etc., is micromanagement at all. I'd say it was proper, responsible and ordinary CFI review actions that occur every day.

You endorsed the student for a flight different from the one they planned. To me, that doesn't meet the letter of the regulations. In your view, can you change all the airports from their plan? How far does this go? Can you call them on the radio after takeoff and tell them "Instead of A-B-C-A, why don't you fly A-D-E-A instead? I want to see if you can do it. I know you didn't plan any of that route, but don't worry, I endorsed it that way in your logbook."

Again, I do LIKE your diversion envelope idea. I think it would be extremely valuable. But I can't see where it's permitted under the strict controls placed on student pilots.