61.109 (a)(2)(i) One cross-country flight of over 100 nautical miles total distance

RyanB

RyanB

Super Administrator
Management Council Member
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
17,161
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Display Name
Ryan
Just to make sure I am interpreting correctly…

This would be 100nm round trip or one way? The flight for example is CHA-GKT-CHA. GKT is 95.8nm from CHA, but the round trip total distance covered exceeds 100nm. Good?

I assume without any “straight line” or “from the point of departure” it assumes just a round trip distance flown.
 
(i) One cross-country flight of over 100 nautical miles total distance;

vs the commercial in .129 which says:
(a)(3)(iii) One 2-hour cross country flight in a single engine airplane in daytime conditions that consists of a total straight-line distance of more than 100 nautical miles from the original point of departure;

I was going to say it's dumb they word it that way, BUT...they say you can reposition for XC flights. So you could reposition 40 miles away, start the XC from your new original point of departure, go 50 miles over flying where you started the day and then back to where you actually started the day for only a 60nm XC.
 
EdFred said:
(i) One cross-country flight of over 100 nautical miles total distance;

vs the commercial in .129 which says:
(a)(3)(iii) One 2-hour cross country flight in a single engine airplane in daytime conditions that consists of a total straight-line distance of more than 100 nautical miles from the original point of departure;

I was going to say it's dumb they word it that way, BUT...they say you can reposition for XC flights. So you could reposition 40 miles away, start the XC from your new original point of departure, go 50 miles over flying where you started the day and then back to where you actually started the day for only a 60nm XC.
Click to expand...
I just don’t wanna get caught with my pants down during my students check ride because I interpreted the reg wrong. I had one DPE interpret an instrument reg differently than another and one accepted and the other didn’t. This is all too subjective.
 
My baseline on any cross country requirement is what qualifies as a “cross country” to begin with. In the case of the private, instrument, etc requirements, that’s one “That includes a point of landing that was at least a straight-line distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the original point of departure.”

You ain’t got that, you ain’t got a cross country at all. If you do it with an out and back, you’ve >100 total distance.

Your flight exceeds that by a lot.
 
Last edited:
We got burned by this one:
1 solo cross country flight of at least 150nm total distance with full stop landings at 3 points and one segment of at least 50nm between T/O and landings

We initially planned a 3 point cross country flight that was 148 nm total distance, figured that was short so we added 1 more airport to make it a 4 point 175 nm total distance flight. The examiner refused to accept it.
 
My long xc I had planned 3 different airports before coming home. First airport was a Charlie. 95 outside and got stuck on the ground for 10 minutes waiting for a citation. Next stop was a Delta. Screw it. Doing a touch and go. 3rd stop was going to be for fuel before heading home. Awos is direct crosswind gusting just outside my personal limits. Carried on and flew home. After re reading regs. 3 FULL STOP landings. Instructor asked are you ssssuuuurrrreeee that wasn't full stop? So i redid it on on my own.

During the oral, dpe pulls up flightaware for the second flight and asks questions about it.
 
FORANE said:
We got burned by this one:
1 solo cross country flight of at least 150nm total distance with full stop landings at 3 points and one segment of at least 50nm between T/O and landings

We initially planned a 3 point cross country flight that was 148 nm total distance, figured that was short so we added 1 more airport to make it a 4 point 175 nm total distance flight. The examiner refused to accept it.
Click to expand...
Why was it not accepted?
 
FORANE said:
We got burned by this one:
1 solo cross country flight of at least 150nm total distance with full stop landings at 3 points and one segment of at least 50nm between T/O and landings

We initially planned a 3 point cross country flight that was 148 nm total distance, figured that was short so we added 1 more airport to make it a 4 point 175 nm total distance flight. The examiner refused to accept it.
Click to expand...
Yep. The reg says “three points,” not something like a “minimum of three points.”

BTW, I spoke with a local DPE this past year who told me that the #1 problem they see in the area of meeting requirements is screwing up the cross countries.
 
Salty said:
Well, it’s technically correct
Click to expand...
:D
I remember some years ago using the word “technically” in a phrase like “technically correct” or “technically illegal.” It was pointed out that you can remove the word “technically” without changing the meaning of the sentence.

The FAR has no problem the phrase ”at least” when that’s what they mean.
 
Low Level Flyer said:
It did go to 3. It also went to 4. Look Mr. DPE, I can play silly games too. That is just a ridiculous interpretation.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the words I emphasized in the long commercial solo requirement are meaningless since it means exactly the same without those words?

One cross-country flight of not less than 300 nautical miles total distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is a straight-line distance of at least 250 nautical miles from the original departure point.​
 
midlifeflyer said:
Yep. The reg says “three points,” not something like a “minimum of three points.”

BTW, I spoke with a local DPE this past year who told me that the #1 problem they see in the area of meeting requirements is screwing up the cross countries.
Click to expand...
The reg also says “150 nautical miles total distance”, not at least 150, or greater than, etc. If a flight doesn’t qualify because of full stop landings at more than three, then how does the same logic not apply to the distance? Any flight not exactly 150 NM doesn’t meet the wording of the reg.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Are you saying that the words I emphasized in the long commercial solo requirement are meaningless since it means exactly the same without those words?

One cross-country flight of not less than 300 nautical miles total distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is a straight-line distance of at least 250 nautical miles from the original departure point.​
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. If the the cross country met the 150NM requirement with only 3 airports (not the case in this example, now that I reread it and it was only 148NM), surely going to a 4th and extending the cross country shouldn't negate it. I missed the part that it wasn't 150NM with the original 3 airports. But I would hope the DPE wouldn't not accept it solely due to a 4th airport. I do agree that it needs to meet 150NM with 3 airports though.
 
To clarify, I thought the DPE wasn't accepting the flight simply due to landing at a 4th airport. I wouldn't agree with that. But yes, if the original 3 airports didn't meet the distance requirement, I would expect the DPE to not accept it, regardless of the distance with the 4th airport.
 
Tspin said:
The reg also says “150 nautical miles total distance”, not at least 150, or greater than, etc. If a flight doesn’t qualify because of full stop landings at more than three, then how does the same logic not apply to the distance? Any flight not exactly 150 NM doesn’t meet the wording of the reg.
Click to expand...
Valid point
 
midlifeflyer said:
Are you saying that the words I emphasized in the long commercial solo requirement are meaningless since it means exactly the same without those words?

One cross-country flight of not less than 300 nautical miles total distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, one of which is a straight-line distance of at least 250 nautical miles from the original departure point.​
Click to expand...

My son flew from the Denver Co area to Orlando Fl, over 3 days, but no one leg was over 300 miles so the dpe wouldn't accept it.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Yep. The reg says “three points,” not something like a “minimum of three points.”

BTW, I spoke with a local DPE this past year who told me that the #1 problem they see in the area of meeting requirements is screwing up the cross countries.
Click to expand...
But most sane examiners won’t ding you for exceeding a requirement, as long as the minimum is met.
 
Mikey52 said:
My son flew from the Denver Co area to Orlando Fl, over 3 days, but no one leg was over 300 miles so the dpe wouldn't accept it.
Click to expand...
Which rating required a single leg over 300 miles? Or did the DPE refuse to accept a single “flight” that included a horizontal rest period between legs?

midlifeflyer said:
:D
I remember some years ago using the word “technically” in a phrase like “technically correct” or “technically illegal.” It was pointed out that you can remove the word “technically” without changing the meaning of the sentence.

The FAR has no problem the phrase ”at least” when that’s what they mean.
Click to expand...
Technically correct is like very unique or coming to a full stop. When you know and employ the actual meaning (there’s another one!) of the word, it doesn’t require any qualifiers. Something that is less than 100% unique isn’t unique. Something that isn’t technically correct is also known as incorrect. And, with apologies to whoever it was that posted in the “sober DUI” thread about stop sign violations being a gray area, if your car is in motion, even slow motion, it’s not stopped.

That being said, as a Futurama fan, I’m not able to let a “technically correct” pass without quoting Bureaucrat 1.0’s assessment: The best kind of correct.
 
RyanB said:
But most sane examiners won’t ding you for exceeding a requirement, as long as the minimum is met.
Click to expand...
I certainly didn’t have that particular quibble come up. My commercial-qualifying solo cross country included full stop landings at 11 points.
 
iamtheari said:
I certainly didn’t have that particular quibble come up. My commercial-qualifying solo cross country included full stop landings at 11 points.
Click to expand...
Case in point why I say it can all be so subjective.
 
Mikey52 said:
My son flew from the Denver Co area to Orlando Fl, over 3 days, but no one leg was over 300 miles so the dpe wouldn't accept it.
Click to expand...
Then the DPE doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Unless he only made one stop.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The FAR has no problem the phrase ”at least” when that’s what they mean.
Click to expand...
Aside from all of the inconsistencies in the FARs in general I will point out that the phrase "at least" is in the parent paragraph; besides, if a flight included four points of landing, then it also included three. It doesn't say ONLY landings at three points.
 
dmspilot said:
Aside from all of the inconsistencies in the FARs in general I will point out that the phrase "at least" is in the parent paragraph; besides, if a flight included four points of landing, then it also included three. It doesn't say ONLY landings at three points.
Click to expand...
I think the argument to be had (or, for students and instructors, best avoided) is whether you can include points after the third one toward the total distance.

Example flight plan to set up the argument:

A to B: 40 miles
B to C: 50 miles
C to D: 40 miles
D to E: 30 miles

Does A-B-C-D-E totaling 160 miles qualify, or do you have to get over 150 miles with just 3 legs?

I think that the general consensus has been that it counts, but it seems there are examiners who go against the grain.
 
iamtheari said:
I think the argument to be had (or, for students and instructors, best avoided) is whether you can include points after the third one toward the total distance.
Click to expand...
This is a somewhat circular argument which assumes the fourth landing is the excessive one. Why not count the first, second, or third point as extraneous?

Let's say you plan a precise cross country that just meets the requirements exactly. During the first leg, you land short of your destination due to weather. The weather clears and you continue on and finish the flight. Now it doesn't count?
 
iamtheari said:
I think the argument to be had (or, for students and instructors, best avoided) is whether you can include points after the third one toward the total distance.

Example flight plan to set up the argument:

A to B: 40 miles
B to C: 50 miles
C to D: 40 miles
D to E: 30 miles

Does A-B-C-D-E totaling 160 miles qualify, or do you have to get over 150 miles with just 3 legs?

I think that the general consensus has been that it counts, but it seems there are examiners who go against the grain.
Click to expand...
It's possible to do that flight without going more than 50 from original point of departure.
 
EdFred said:
It's possible to do that flight without going more than 50 from original point of departure.
Click to expand...
On my sectional, these airports happen to be lined up in alphabetical order, so you can just add the distances together to get a total. I’m focusing on the question of whether you can count a fourth landing toward the total trip distance. That is, if neither ABCD nor BCDE qualifies, does a flight of ABCDE qualify?

As I implied, this thread is the first time I’ve heard anyone suggest it doesn’t. But I’m curious if there are DPEs out there actively rejecting flights like my 11-landing epic road trip because the total requirements were not met with 3 consecutive landings.
 
dmspilot said:
This is a somewhat circular argument which assumes the fourth landing is the excessive one. Why not count the first, second, or third point as extraneous?
Click to expand...
That would solve the problem, I guess. Log an intermediate point as a touch and go and now it doesn’t count “against” you.
 
iamtheari said:
On my sectional, these airports happen to be lined up in alphabetical order, so you can just add the distances together to get a total. I’m focusing on the question of whether you can count a fourth landing toward the total trip distance. That is, if neither ABCD nor BCDE qualifies, does a flight of ABCDE qualify?

As I implied, this thread is the first time I’ve heard anyone suggest it doesn’t. But I’m curious if there are DPEs out there actively rejecting flights like my 11-landing epic road trip because the total requirements were not met with 3 consecutive landings.
Click to expand...
Well, I hope so, because I'd have to give back my 18 state 12 day 4200 mile epic cross country!
Actually I only used FMN -> BGD -> 1K4 -> OUN out of that trip because the other days were just 2 stops (fuel/food and overnight)
 
EdFred said:
Well, I hope so, because I'd have to give back my 18 state 12 day 4200 mile epic cross country!
Actually I only used FMN -> BGD -> 1K4 -> OUN out of that trip because the other days were just 2 stops (fuel/food and overnight)
Click to expand...
Small world, sort of. 1K4 and OUN were two stops on my commercial solo xc last month.
 
Matthew said:
Small world, sort of. 1K4 and OUN were two stops on my commercial solo xc last month.
Click to expand...
Only reason I stopped at 1K4 is I owed someone for a night at Gaston’s (they cancelled, I took the cabin) and dropped em off a check on the way through. Can't remember who it was though.
 
Mikey52 said:
For the CPL. re post #23
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. It requires a total distance of over 300 nm, not a single leg that long. If the DPE didn't allow it, that's a complete misreading of the reg by the DPE.

By far, the most common reason long flights like this don't count is because they weren't done solo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top