CPL cross countries - what's the point?

[mtuomi]

For a commercial certificate, you need two cross countries with a CFI, one day, 100 miles, 2 hours. One night, 100 miles, 2 hours. Isn't this pretty much a waste of time? I don't really see what you should learn by doing those, especially because you still need the long solo XC which obviously is much more "demanding" than a 2 hour dual XC.

 

[denverpilot]

It says you have to end up 100 miles away. It doesn't say you can't land at airports and do stuff along the way to make it more "challenging".

Oh that's a lovely flight plan you have there... but I smell smoke... better put this thing on the ground somewhere... how you going to get down from up here? Is there an airport somewhere nearby? ;-) ;-) ;-)

Plus the long XCs tend to be designed to get you out of the local area you're probably intimately familiar with by the time you've got enough hours to pursue the Commercial, and more importantly, out of the local weather pattern.

But if your instructor isn't making you work at least a LITTLE and is just napping over there while you burn fuel in cruise, what are you paying them for?

The day XC to unfamiliar airports, if you do that a lot anyway, probably not a tough challenge. But weather can intervene.

The night one to unfamiliar airports can be very challenging, and if weather comes up, more. My "official" night long XC was to South Dakota and it was a no moon, overcast, and hazy night. I'd say even though the entire thing was legal VFR, I was on solid instruments for 1/2 hour with no real great ground references, but when we did see farmhouses and roads, we had perfectly legal VFR visibility and cloud clearances... not to mention the 40 knot crosswind aloft that night...

But if you want "challenge", I'm sure any good CFI would be more than willing to add some "challenge" to either one of them. LOL!

 

[mtuomi]

It says you have to end up 100 miles away. It doesn't say you can't land at airports and do stuff along the way to make it more "challenging".

Oh that's a lovely flight plan you have there... but I smell smoke... better put this thing on the ground somewhere... how you going to get down from up here? Is there an airport somewhere nearby? ;-) ;-) ;-)

Plus the long XCs tend to be designed to get you out of the local area you're probably intimately familiar with by the time you've got enough hours to pursue the Commercial, and more importantly, out of the local weather pattern.

But if your instructor isn't making you work at least a LITTLE and is just napping over there while you burn fuel in cruise, what are you paying them for?

The day XC to unfamiliar airports, if you do that a lot anyway, probably not a tough challenge. But weather can intervene.

The night one to unfamiliar airports can be very challenging, and if weather comes up, more. My "official" night long XC was to South Dakota and it was a no moon, overcast, and hazy night. I'd say even though the entire thing was legal VFR, I was on solid instruments for 1/2 hour with no real great ground references, but when we did see farmhouses and roads, we had perfectly legal VFR visibility and cloud clearances... not to mention the 40 knot crosswind aloft that night...

But if you want "challenge", I'm sure any good CFI would be more than willing to add some "challenge" to either one of them. LOL!

Well, we filed IFR, flew in actual, and did a Mooney checkout all in that one night flight - I think I got enough challenge in that flight

The question is - your comments perfectly describe what I expect the PPL standard to be - what useful does adding 50 miles really do compared to what you do in your private pilot training - that is, why did we have to disguise these lessons into a pseudo-cross-country. The XC just felt completely pointless. 50 vs 100 miles (PPL vs CPL level) isn't a meaningful difference in the required skill level.

 

[denverpilot]

Well, we filed IFR, flew in actual, and did a Mooney checkout all in that one night flight - I think I got enough challenge in that flight

The question is - your comments perfectly describe what I expect the PPL standard to be - what useful does adding 50 miles really do compared to what you do in your private pilot training - that is, why did we have to disguise these lessons into a pseudo-cross-country. The XC just felt completely pointless. 50 vs 100 miles (PPL vs CPL level) isn't a meaningful difference in the required skill level.

I think mainly it's about the weather. But you'd have to ask FAA to be sure. ;-)

For the majority of folks flying them during the time building phase to the minimum total time, it's really not much cost difference other than paying the CFI.

And the CFI can always come up with something to teach. Or should. Even if it's just oral prep while you're flying so you have additional workload on your brain.

Plus you should plan it to go somewhere very different than "home". Many folks fly out of uncontrolled fields, or always out of controlled fields, so that's an obvious one... or maybe a really narrow runway, if all you've flown off of is wide jet runways at Small City International... out east and on the west coast, population and airport density make that easier, lots of targets... but you'd in theory want to make at least the day one more "interesting".

And of course, there's always the list of decent restaurants in the CFIs head... might as well fly somewhere and get a decent bite to eat at the other end. Airport vending machines suck... haha.

And of course, if you're here... there's always PoA folks to meet up with! Heh.

 

[jordane93]

To satisfy the lawyers.

 

[Clip4]

For a commercial certificate, you need two cross countries with a CFI, one day, 100 miles, 2 hours. One night, 100 miles, 2 hours. Isn't this pretty much a waste of time? I don't really see what you should learn by doing those, especially because you still need the long solo XC which obviously is much more "demanding" than a 2 hour dual XC.

If you are flying at a puppy mill flight school, yea it pretty much is a waste of time. If you are flying with a CFI with a lot of XC experience, you will walk away with a lot.

 

[MauleSkinner]

If you are flying at a puppy mill flight school, yea it pretty much is a waste of time. If you are flying with a CFI with a lot of XC experience, you will walk away with a lot.

You also get out of it what you put into it.

Keep in mind that a commercial applicant only needs 50 hours cross country time to start with, and possibly hasn't had anybody observing those skills and techniques since the Private Pilot checkride. Bad habits may be developing, there may be some things that have been forgotten...it's good to get another set of eyes on the process occasionally.

 

[nosehair]

To prepare yourself for that charter flight in the middle of a dark and stormy night to a grass unlit field to rescue a kid needing a heart transplant.
With no GPS or radio navs to find it.
You looking to work?

 

[RussR]

While I can't speak to the reason the requirement exists, I will say that as a CFI I try to make it as valuable as I can.

Case in point - I just flew these last week with a student. What I like to do is fly to somewhere about 2 hours away during the day, eat dinner, then fly back at night. Students generally like this too, since it gets both requirements done in one "lesson". So we flew from the OKC area (KPWA) down to Dallas Executive (KRBD) - 175 nm (direct). The student got to experience the following things, many of which were new to him:

- Contacting the FBO and restaurant to determine hours of operation, where to park, how to get fuel, any fees, etc. (we don't do enough of that in training but it's vital as a commercial pilot)
- Flying into the busy DFW Class B airspace.
- Receiving a STAR as part of his IFR clearance (I am so glad they removed the "VFR" part of the requirement a few years ago)
- Negotiating shortcuts on the STAR.
- For the return trip, both the towered fields (departure and destination) were closed, so uncontrolled operations at a towered field.
- Possibility of a SID clearance on the way back (didn't happen though)
- Weather avoidance at night (there were strong storms around Denton)
- IFR approaches at both ends (simulated)

According to him, it was a very valuable flight and he learned a lot more in that 4+ hour round trip than he would have on a shorter flight in the "local" area.

 

[BrianNC]

Case in point - I just flew these last week with a student. What I like to do is fly to somewhere about 2 hours away during the day, eat dinner, then fly back at night. Students generally like this too, since it gets both requirements done in one "lesson".

Same thing my instructor did with me. Ours was VFR though. Flew from Milton FL (2R4) to Falcon field (FFC), ate at a Longhorn, then went back when it got dark.

 

[oregonboy109]

I flew to an airport within a class B, dodged thunderstorms, and got a good dinner out of my commercial xc. It is what you make it.

 

[Kritchlow]

Sheesh.... prove your worth for Petes sake.
You (not "you", just in general) speak of how easy and what a joke the CPL is, and now want to reduce the quals even more...!!!??

You guys have it easy from what it used to be.

 

[Lance F]

To prepare yourself for that charter flight in the middle of a dark and stormy night to a grass unlit field to rescue a kid needing a heart transplant.
With no GPS or radio navs to find it.
You looking to work?

With Commercial ACS and its risk assessment aspects kicking in, this flight would be a no go . Better just fly 100nm straight to a 24/7 FBO with cookies and be done with it.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Sheesh.... prove your worth for Petes sake.
You (not "you", just in general) speak of how easy and what a joke the CPL is, and now want to reduce the quals even more...!!!??

You guys have it easy from what it used to be.

I remember having a time limit for planning a cross country flight near the max range of the airplane for the oral...I did Ames, IA to Dallas, TX. With sectionals, since I wasn't instrument rated yet.

Of course, they had also just added eights-on and some other stuff back into the PTS, and my instructor and I had to figure those maneuvers out ourselves since we couldn't find anybody that had done them.

 

[pburger]

Did something change? Those cross countries did not used to require a CFI. Is that something new, or is the OP mistaken? I plan to go for my commercial either this year or next, and I think flying those cross countries with a CFI would be a big waste of my time. (I've been flying for 28 years and have had those requirements for probably 27 years now)

 

[BrianNC]

Did something change? Those cross countries did not used to require a CFI. Is that something new, or is the OP mistaken? I plan to go for my commercial either this year or next, and I think flying those cross countries with a CFI would be a big waste of my time. (I've been flying for 28 years and have had those requirements for probably 27 years now)

It's listed as training, which means with an instructor:

1. 20 hours of training in the areas of operation required for single-engine or multi-engine rating that includes at least:

I did mine 15 years ago, and it was the same then.

 

[RussR]

Sheesh.... prove your worth for Petes sake.
You (not "you", just in general) speak of how easy and what a joke the CPL is, and now want to reduce the quals even more...!!!??

You guys have it easy from what it used to be.

I am curious how the Aeronautical Experience requirements for the Commercial have changed over the years. In what ways were they tougher in the past? I can only find back to 1978 on the FAA's web site http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet

but the requirements look basically the same as today, including the 2-hour day and 2-hour night instructional XC flights that are being discussed here (except then they had to be in VFR, which was removed a few years ago - though this doesn't seem to make it any "easier" to me).

What were the requirements like prior to 1978?

 

[MauleSkinner]

Did something change? Those cross countries did not used to require a CFI. Is that something new, or is the OP mistaken? I plan to go for my commercial either this year or next, and I think flying those cross countries with a CFI would be a big waste of my time. (I've been flying for 28 years and have had those requirements for probably 27 years now)

So don't waste your time.

 

[jordane93]

Did something change? Those cross countries did not used to require a CFI. Is that something new, or is the OP mistaken? I plan to go for my commercial either this year or next, and I think flying those cross countries with a CFI would be a big waste of my time. (I've been flying for 28 years and have had those requirements for probably 27 years now)

The two shorter cross countries have to be with an instructor. The long one can be solo or with a CFI.

 

[denverpilot]

While I can't speak to the reason the requirement exists, I will say that as a CFI I try to make it as valuable as I can.

Case in point - I just flew these last week with a student. What I like to do is fly to somewhere about 2 hours away during the day, eat dinner, then fly back at night. Students generally like this too, since it gets both requirements done in one "lesson". So we flew from the OKC area (KPWA) down to Dallas Executive (KRBD) - 175 nm (direct). The student got to experience the following things, many of which were new to him:

- Contacting the FBO and restaurant to determine hours of operation, where to park, how to get fuel, any fees, etc. (we don't do enough of that in training but it's vital as a commercial pilot)
- Flying into the busy DFW Class B airspace.
- Receiving a STAR as part of his IFR clearance (I am so glad they removed the "VFR" part of the requirement a few years ago)
- Negotiating shortcuts on the STAR.
- For the return trip, both the towered fields (departure and destination) were closed, so uncontrolled operations at a towered field.
- Possibility of a SID clearance on the way back (didn't happen though)
- Weather avoidance at night (there were strong storms around Denton)
- IFR approaches at both ends (simulated)

According to him, it was a very valuable flight and he learned a lot more in that 4+ hour round trip than he would have on a shorter flight in the "local" area.

Exact same experience and similar stuff with my CFI and I plan on doing similar when teaching whenever possible. Mixing the day and night is a good real-world commercial pilot style experience.

You often get to toss in a little discussion about fatigue doing that, too... without pushing it way over the line into exhaustion. Most students will be a bit tired during the return leg.

Heck. It even makes them remember the flashlight batteries and their headlamp if they use one of those. Or they get to preflight by cell phone flashlight mode. LOL. ;-)

 

[dtuuri]

I don't really see what you should learn by doing those, especially because you still need the long solo XC which obviously is much more "demanding" than a 2 hour dual XC.

If you say these same words to your CFI, maybe what you'll learn is to keep your mouth shut. How good are you at pilotage and dead reckoning from the minimum legal altitude? No gyros, hand-held contraptions nor geo-referenced anything, of course. Are you pretty good at calculating unkown wind direction on an E-6b, too, during a diversion? Oh, btw, did you figure how much weight you needed to quickly move from rearward to forward right before takeoff, while the engine and hobbs are running? Dispatch apparently got word to you there was a mistake on the weight manifest--there's a whole lot more of that badly needed serum on board than expected it seems. Etc., etc., etc.

dtuuri

 

[midlifeflyer]

If you say these same words to your CFI, maybe what you'll learn is to keep your mouth shut. How good are you at pilotage and dead reckoning from the minimum legal altitude? No gyros, hand-held contraptions nor geo-referenced anything, of course. Are you pretty good at calculating unkown wind direction on an E-6b, too, during a diversion? Oh, btw, did you figure how much weight you needed to quickly move from rearward to forward right before takeoff, while the engine and hobbs are running? Dispatch apparently got word to you there was a mistake on the weight manifest--there's a whole lot more of that badly needed serum on board than expected it seems. Etc., etc., etc.

dtuuri

I doubt most CFIs go that deeply, but the point is well-taken. A halfway decent CFI is going to create a few scenarios that many applicants at that level usually don't face in the ordinary course of their flying If not, then "what's the point" is an appropriate question.

 

[midlifeflyer]

To satisfy the lawyers.

I can't figure out how a dual cross country requirement would satisfy lawyers. Unless of course the lawyer supplements income with flight instruction.

 

[pburger]

It's listed as training, which means with an instructor:

1. 20 hours of training in the areas of operation required for single-engine or multi-engine rating that includes at least:

I did mine 15 years ago, and it was the same then.

Thanks! Being humbled is a good thing. I guess I didn't look very closely at the requirements.

 

[mtuomi]

...so what everyone is saying is, you can do a lot of things during that cross country, that have nothing to do with a cross country flight...
I'd rather add a few hours of training, than having to do a forced cross country where you have to come up with scenarios to make it worth the 2 hours.

"How good are you at pilotage and dead reckoning from the minimum legal altitude? No gyros, hand-held contraptions nor geo-referenced anything, of course. Are you pretty good at calculating unkown wind direction on an E-6b, too, during a diversion? "

Useless skills. And not needed with ACS. I use my EFB now. Chances of everything(EFB and backup, gyros etc) failing are so low it's kinda pointless to prepare for that.
(And yes, I can do all you mentioned, pretty well actually. I don't see myself ever needing those skills though).

In my opinion, ACS lowers the standards(stalls etc), while keeping this useless requirement. Would have been so much better if they added 4-5 hours of required training in other areas, instead of that silly XC.

 

[MauleSkinner]

"How good are you at pilotage and dead reckoning from the minimum legal altitude? No gyros, hand-held contraptions nor geo-referenced anything, of course. Are you pretty good at calculating unkown wind direction on an E-6b, too, during a diversion? "

Useless skills. And not needed with ACS. I use my EFB now. Chances of everything(EFB and backup, gyros etc) failing are so low it's kinda pointless to prepare for that.
(And yes, I can do all you mentioned, pretty well actually. I don't see myself ever needing those skills though)

How and why are you proficient in flying pilotage at 600 AGL with a mile vis if it's "useless"?

 

[dtuuri]

"How good are you at pilotage and dead reckoning from the minimum legal altitude? No gyros, hand-held contraptions nor geo-referenced anything, of course. Are you pretty good at calculating unkown wind direction on an E-6b, too, during a diversion? "

Useless skills. And not needed with ACS. I use my EFB now. Chances of everything(EFB and backup, gyros etc) failing are so low it's kinda pointless to prepare for that.
(And yes, I can do all you mentioned, pretty well actually. I don't see myself ever needing those skills though).

LOL! You tickle my funny bone! If there's a God in heaven your CFI will humble you good! "I don't see myself ever needing those skills," he says. Ha,ha,ha, ha... Whew, boy. There's a good one! <wipes tears away from eyes>
EDIT: Btw, THIS is an E6B:

dtuuri

 

[midlifeflyer]

Do we detect a wee bit of invulnerability here? Or is it merely trolling at this point?

I like to say that the private certificate is about basic safety, the instrument rating is about operating within a system where your actions have immediate effects on others, and the commercial certificate is about not scaring the passengers.

Seriously, being a commercial pilot is 90% about the attitude one brings to it. I'm not sure telling a potential customer, "I thought the FAA's requirements that I have some extra training over longer distances in order to be a commercial pilot and charge you money was stupid and a waste of time; heck, it wasn't even on the test!" would be a contract winner.

 

[mtuomi]

Do we detect a wee bit of invulnerability here? Or is it merely trolling at this point?

I like to say that the private certificate is about basic safety, the instrument rating is about operating within a system where your actions have immediate effects on others, and the commercial certificate is about not scaring the passengers.

Seriously, being a commercial pilot is 90% about the attitude one brings to it. I'm not sure telling a potential customer, "I thought the FAA's requirements that I have some extra training over longer distances in order to be a commercial pilot and charge you money was stupid and a waste of time; heck, it wasn't even on the test!" would be a contract winner.

Slight trolling, I admit. But you're missing the point. The LONG distance is done solo or with a CFI, the short ones are the ones I'm questioning. Why don't we just drop the 2hr night/day XC's and require the long XC to be done with a CFI? Would make much more sense, than the current requirement.

 

[mtuomi]

LOL! You tickle my funny bone! If there's a God in heaven your CFI will humble you good! "I don't see myself ever needing those skills," he says. Ha,ha,ha, ha... Whew, boy. There's a good one! <wipes tears away from eyes>
EDIT: Btw, THIS is an E6B:

​

dtuuri

Don't worry, I know how to use an E6B. And don't worry, my CFI knows his stuff. And no, I don't see when I would ever need that skill. When would you? When your electrical and vacuum system has failed in the plane, and your required 2 EFB's have failed too? This at night. When do you really see that? I'll tell you - never.

And no, I don't see him humbling me on a silly short XC flight. That's what the real training flights are for.
You can load a ton of crap to a cross country flight, sure. But what's the purpose of masquerading those exercises behind a XC flight?

 

[Caramon13]

Always thought it was a waste as well...I did my night long XC up to Brooksville and back, though the REALLY fun part was that it was done in a C150 and what was supposed to be a 2 hour RT flight turned into over 4 hours due to a MASSIVE headwind on the way back. I think I could hear the horns of the cars below me honking at me to get out of the way...

I did so much XC work for my instrument that taking an instructor up for commercial was...meh.

 

[dtuuri]

Don't worry, I know how to use an E6B. And don't worry, my CFI knows his stuff. And no, I don't see when I would ever need that skill. When would you?

Picking up a brand new Decathlon at the factory comes to mind.

When your electrical and vacuum system has failed in the plane, and your required 2 EFB's have failed too? This at night. When do you really see that? I'll tell you - never.

When you reach for your flight bag and discover you left it in the taxicab.

And no, I don't see him humbling me on a silly short XC flight. That's what the real training flights are for.

You mean where you're learning chandelles, lazy eights, on-pylons and other useful stuff?

You can load a ton of crap to a cross country flight, sure. But what's the purpose of masquerading those exercises behind a XC flight?

Pilotage and dead reckoning and diversions and recalculating wind you're gonna do in the practice area?

dtuuri

 

[mtuomi]

Picking up a brand new Decathlon at the factory comes to mind.

You do it at night? You actually pick up a brand new plane you've never flown before, fly it at night with no electricity and you choose to leave your EFB in the taxi? That doesn't go well with the ACS risk management. I bet my DPE would fail me if I said "yeah, I would do that flight".

When you reach for your flight bag and discover you left it in the taxicab.

Well, you don't have any sectionals, so I guess you'll just turn back and go get them. Thankfully sectionals aren't required anymore.

You mean where you're learning chandelles, lazy eights, on-pylons and other useful stuff?

You don't have to. But you can if you want.

Pilotage and dead reckoning and diversions and recalculating wind you're gonna do in the practice area?
dtuuir

No, you do this when you get your private.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Slight trolling, I admit. But you're missing the point. The LONG distance is done solo or with a CFI, the short ones are the ones I'm questioning. Why don't we just drop the 2hr night/day XC's and require the long XC to be done with a CFI? Would make much more sense, than the current requirement.

It might. Except that the long commercial solo requirement isn't completely the FAA's; it's the FAA's implementation of an ICAO commercial solo requirement. (Remember, aviation is not all about us.) The current version of the FAA's implementation allows for the presence of a CFI, but that is a concession for practical insurance reasons and it is not considered an instructional fight.

Much less specific than the solo, the ICAO requirement includes a cross country training requirement and a night navigation training requirement. Doesn't say how much. If you are really curious, you'd have to go back to the Proposed Rules in which the FAA requirement was created in order to get the rationale for the specific implementation.

 

[dtuuri]

You do it at night? You actually pick up a brand new plane you've never flown before, fly it at night with no electricity and you choose to leave your EFB in the taxi? That doesn't go well with the ACS risk management. I bet my DPE would fail me if I said "yeah, I would do that flight".

Your DPE probably has done worse things, but I digress. I was referring to no gyros, just a whiskey compass a chart and an E6B.

Well, you don't have any sectionals, so I guess you'll just turn back and go get them. Thankfully sectionals aren't required anymore.

Thankfully, I always keep one in the airplane. Of course, it wasn't ME that left the flight bag in the taxicab, I'm predicting what YOU'RE gonna do someday.

No, you do this when you get your private.

Recalculating wind inflight has always been a commercial task IIRC. Private pilots just estimate it. The new commercial ACS says, "Update/interpret weather in flight."

dtuuri

 

[jordane93]

I can't figure out how a dual cross country requirement would satisfy lawyers. Unless of course the lawyer supplements income with flight instruction.

It was my poor attempt at being funny.

 

[Kritchlow]

I am curious how the Aeronautical Experience requirements for the Commercial have changed over the years. In what ways were they tougher in the past? I can only find back to 1978 on the FAA's web site http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet

but the requirements look basically the same as today, including the 2-hour day and 2-hour night instructional XC flights that are being discussed here (except then they had to be in VFR, which was removed a few years ago - though this doesn't seem to make it any "easier" to me).

What were the requirements like prior to 1978?

To be honest it's more the attitude.... as expressed in this thread.
Today the CPL is viewed as a joke. In reality I'm betting most CPL chandelles today are basically 180 degree climbing turns.

Truth is at one point in history it was actually not extremely easy to pass this ride.

Today, at least on POA, it's viewed as somewhat of a joke. It didn't used to be that way.

And the OP wants to dumb it down even more...???

 

[denverpilot]

In reality I'm betting most CPL chandelles today are basically 180 degree turns.

Chandelles are so bank limited now they're boring. But I'm glad I just got it done prior to the ACS change.

I wouldn't have even been allowed to let the stall horn blow through the final 20 degrees or so of the turn now, even in my STOL 182 that'll just hang there from the prop uncomplaining at the top of the thing in old school slow flight.

Old school DPE didn't mind that at all. Said it looked good to him.

The SAFO "clarifying" the slow flight and stall testing of the Private and Commercial ACS came out today. It's super weak-sauce. Any stall indication, the maneuver wasn't done right.

Including ... Chandelles... as best as I can tell from reading the four pages of apologetics for the weaker standard.

I'll probably have to read it closer to figure it out. Total gobbledegook compared to "Just get the horn on and keep it on..."

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...afety/safo/all_safos/media/2017/SAFO17009.pdf

 

[Kritchlow]

Chandelles are so bank limited now they're boring. But I'm glad I just got it done prior to the ACS change.

I wouldn't have even been allowed to let the stall horn blow through the final 20 degrees or so of the turn now, even in my STOL 182 that'll just hang there from the prop uncomplaining at the top of the thing in old school slow flight.

Old school DPE didn't mind that at all. Said it looked good to him.

The SAFO "clarifying" the slow flight and stall testing of the Private and Commercial ACS came out today. It's super weak-sauce. Any stall indication, the maneuver wasn't done right.

Including ... Chandelles... as best as I can tell from reading the four pages of apologetics for the weaker standard.

I'll probably have to read it closer to figure it out. Total gobbledegook compared to "Just get the horn on and keep it on..."

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...afety/safo/all_safos/media/2017/SAFO17009.pdf

Whoa... they changed the chandelle??

It used to be first 90° variable pitch constant bank. Second ninety was constant pitch with variable bank.
Has that changed??

 

[denverpilot]

Whoa... they changed the chandelle??

It used to be first 90° variable pitch constant bank. Second ninety was constant pitch with variable bank.
Has that changed??

Nah. That's the same but you were supposed to pick a pitch angle to freeze at that would put you near to MCA at the top. Since you're also still slowing you'd need more back pressure as it got slower to maintain that frozen pitch angle.

You'd keep lowering the bank at the end so you could accelerate out of MCA without any altitude loss at the end.

Now to avoid any indication of a stall, even the horn, that frozen pitch will be mighty shallow. Can't even let the horn beep without having to immediately initiate a stall recovery.

You already had a 30 degree back angle limit.

Whether DPEs will enforce that or even call the maneuver a bust if you have to come out of it to deal with the horn beeping, especially after this has been the new standard for a number of years, remains to be seen.

So it's gotten to be a really begnign maneuver.

The "story" behind the requirement for the chandelle has always been that it was to prepare a pilot to reverse course and gain as much altitude as possible during the reversal. Kinda, but not the same as a "canyon turn" as we discuss them for mountain flying. A more simplistic version of that. Whether that was an OWT just used to justify it, I can't say.

But the new standard won't come anywhere near max performance on altitude gain-loss. It'll end up much more of a finesse maneuver like the lady eights, which are also bank limited and speed limited because of the need to cross the entry line very close to entry speed.

All very shallow and not "sloppy" but that's what you'll be fighting the most. Keeping the maneuver going with tiny bank and pitch changes.

The sad part is, at least for the chandelles, I bet many students will think the really shallow and limited ones are "hard to do" within a few years and will never see one that tops off at close to MCA.