CPL Flight Experience Requirements

DesertNomad

DesertNomad

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
2,442
Location
Northern NV
Display Name
Display name:
DesertNomad
I understand that I need:

Dual:
- Daytime XC, 2 hours and 100+ miles
- Nighttime XC, 2 hours and 100+ miles

Can the above flights be conducted IFR?

Solo (or "performing the duties of PIC with an authorized instructor on board" a.k.a. supervised solo)
- 300+ mile XC, with landings at 3+ airports, one of which is 250+ miles from the original point.
- 5 hours night VFR conditions with 10 takeoffs and landings at a towered field.

According to this interpretation, the solo can be EITHER solo OR supervised solo, but not a mix-and-match of both.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/data/interps/2016/Grannis - (2016) Legal Interpretation.pdf

For the long solo XC I think it is ridiculous that I have to do it solo. I flew my wife and I to Cuba and Guatemala from Nevada and have landed in 30 states. Now I have to make a pointless flight to Utah by myself to prove that I know how to navigate and manage weather?

It looks like if I want to do the night as supervised solo, than I also have to bring a CFI with me on the useless trip to Utah.

I have close to 600 hours, but only 3.6 at night. I'd rather limit my night solo as much as possible - lots of terrain around here and I am not too fond of single engine at night.

How have most people here (especially in the Mountain West) done the night requirements?
 
Solo.
 
Solo, along with just about all the Colorado pilots I know who did commercial. 5 hours of local night flying including 10 takeoffs and landings at a Towered airport shouldn't be a big issue.
 
DesertNomad said:
I understand that I need:

Dual:
- Daytime XC, 2 hours and 100+ miles
- Nighttime XC, 2 hours and 100+ miles

Can the above flights be conducted IFR?
Click to expand...
Yes. The requirement they be VFR was removed quite a few years ago. But since they are instructional flights, the syllabus is to a large degree up to the CFI so the one you use might have some ideas of his or her own what should be covered..
 
DesertNomad said:
Now I have to make a pointless flight to Utah by myself to prove that I know how to navigate and manage weather?

It looks like if I want to do the night as supervised solo, than I also have to bring a CFI with me on the useless trip to Utah.
Click to expand...

Why do you have to fly to Utah?

Understand, the requirements for Commercial and different in nature than for the PP and IR. They really are "experience" requirements, to try to make sure that people applying for a CP have at least done some actual flying outside of their local area. Like you, I had a lot of experience before I went for my CP. Fortunately, I had a few solo trips that already qualified for the long XC flight - when I bought my airplane and brought it back, and when I flew to a conference in another state are a couple that stand out.

I guess they have to draw the line somewhere. It is what it is.

For me, the 2-hour 100 nm XC's (which at that time had to be done VFR) were the thing that seemed the silliest. Now, as a CFI, I usually do those as one big out-and-back - out to somewhere in the day for dinner, back at night. Fun.
 
It doesn't have to be to Utah, it could be most anywhere. I was just thinking that I would try to combine it with my night dual (I already have my day dual from buying the plane). That would mean the long XC would be "supervised solo" as I'd have to bring my CFI with me for the return. For the night trip, I don't want to fly over the Sierras, so Utah makes the most sense as a daytime "solo" trip to Wendover, then wait for night to do the return.

When I bought my airplane in TX, my insurance company required 6 hours of dual so I just don't have any long XC solo even though I have crossed the USA coast to coast 4 times with my wife as a passenger.
 
Last edited:
DesertNomad said:
According to this interpretation, the solo can be EITHER solo OR supervised solo, but not a mix-and-match of both.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind the "supervised solo" really is in the regs because FAA ran headlong into insurance companies when it comes to multi-engine commercial prep. None of them will rent out multi-engine airplanes solo to a non-rated non-multi certificated pilot, for the most part.

So the intent of that regulation is really that the CFI sits there and in theory does absolutely nothing, but it meets the insurance requirement for the multi-engine aircraft while the candidate "acts as PIC" for the entire long XC.

For singles, I don't know anyone who didn't just go do them solo/PIC with some ground prep by the CFI. Even the newbies. If they are newbies with almost zero XC experience, or doing the Commercial WITHOUT an Instrument ticket (rare, but it happens...) the long XCs become much more important... different weather systems, etc... and this is the last shot the FAA gets to set a minimum experience requirement before they're legally able to carry stuff for hire, including humans.

For your IMC question, the insurance company in a multi would certainly have something to say about that, also... at least about who's acting PIC. In the single, if you're current and qualified, you can do as you please. The VFR requirement was removed.

It's also pretty common to knock this out in one flight... start in the afternoon, land in daytime, fly back at night... especially if the candidate has significant VFR XC experience already as a Private certificate holder... you can just knock it out and get back to the stuff they're needing more work on.

It's a *minimum* standard... just keep that in mind... nobody's getting hired with CPL XC minimums in their logbook other than at jobs where the customers are either already wearing parachutes and can bail (hahaha... skydiving) or other non-passenger ops, for the most part... you're ahead of that game if you already flew around a bunch with your Private/Instrument tickets... but there's a LOT of people who haven't been anywhere "far" away who are candidates for the Commercial ticket.

FAA had to have them go somewhere... and then had to poke a hole in their "solo" requirement for multi-engine aircraft when everyone said, "We can't rent one solo, so how do we do this?"
 
Solo requirements seem strange to me. To me, solo is you're flying PIC and the sole manipulator, i.e., no CFI or safety pilot. But alas, that's not the definition....
 
I guess it just makes no sense that you can't mix and match solo vs supervised solo and that flying 8500 miles in February from Reno to Florida to Guatemala and back does not satisfy the XC requirement because my wife was sitting in the airplane with me.
 
DesertNomad said:
I guess it just makes no sense that you can't mix and match solo vs supervised solo and that flying 8500 miles in February from Reno to Florida to Guatemala and back does not satisfy the XC requirement because my wife was sitting in the airplane with me.
Click to expand...

Well now that you posted your wife was with you, kind of boned yourself. Otherwise no one would know that you had your wife with you.
 
TommyG said:
Well now that you posted your wife was with you, kind of boned yourself. Otherwise no one would know that you had your wife with you.
Click to expand...

It's not something I would lie about.

Our whole pilot group knows (including local DPEs) as do the other 25-30 people in the group we went with. I don't care if POAers know too since the time is not something I would count (though I think the FAA should recognize that this is just as good as doing it solo). My wife is with me on almost every single trip and I have only 5 hours of solo time since we bought our plane.
 
DesertNomad said:
I guess it just makes no sense that you can't mix and match solo vs supervised solo and that flying 8500 miles in February from Reno to Florida to Guatemala and back does not satisfy the XC requirement because my wife was sitting in the airplane with me.
Click to expand...

The only reason that the "supervised solo" is even an option is to offer a workaround for pilots that cannot meet the insurance requirements in the airplane they're using to complete the commercial pilot experience requirements (think multiengine airplanes here). What the FAA seems to want with the solo cross country is to establish that you can actually act as PIC and make decisions on your own, and not rely on an instructor or passenger to help you out. The line has to get drawn somewhere, and this doesn't seem like a bad place to draw the line to me since many of the commercial pilot applicants barely meet the requirements as it is. Would you really want to fly with a "professional" pilot who has had their hand held for their entire flying career?

Even flying as part of a group flight often minimizes the decisions you will make as PIC. It can also influence you to make decisions to fly in weather you normally wouldn't, just because the rest of the group thinks it is fine.
 
midlifeflyer said:
My favorite type of post: "The first step in becoming a commercial pilot is to lie about meeting the requirements."
Click to expand...

I would be willing to bet that a large percentage of pilots out there these days lie about the requirements. Whether it’s padding .5 on each flight. Making up flights, or the best I have seen is logging flight from the back seat. And that person is working for the regionals right now. At least the OP actually flew those flights. And he seems to do some real flying, not just logging hours flying around the pattern.

Gotta remember 99% of aviation is all honor system, and many young pilots want that 1500 mark, a lot of times at any cost.
 
DesertNomad said:
I guess it just makes no sense that you can't mix and match solo vs supervised solo and that flying 8500 miles in February from Reno to Florida to Guatemala and back does not satisfy the XC requirement because my wife was sitting in the airplane with me.
Click to expand...

Just think, you could have kicked her out for a few hundred miles to someone else's aircraft, and met the long-published requirement. Did you know you were going for the Commercial back then??? :) :) :)
 
Yes I knew I was going for the Commercial back then. On the Guatemala trip we came all the way from Nevada to Miami where the group met up to start the trip. I guess I could have put her in someone else's plane for the international crossing, but all the group members were new to me and I would not put her with an unknown pilot like that. It would also mean filing new international passenger manifests.

I'll just fly myself down to Vegas or out to Wendover sometime soon.
 
Not long after I got my PP I flew 251nm solo to have lunch with a friend but didn't know about the commercial requirements and didn't do a T&G at one of the many un-towereds along the way home. :mad2:
 
TommyG said:
I would be willing to bet that a large percentage of pilots out there these days lie about the requirements. Whether it’s padding .5 on each flight. Making up flights, or the best I have seen is logging flight from the back seat. And that person is working for the regionals right now. At least the OP actually flew those flights. And he seems to do some real flying, not just logging hours flying around the pattern.

Gotta remember 99% of aviation is all honor system, and many young pilots want that 1500 mark, a lot of times at any cost.
Click to expand...
It's nice to see someone more cynical than I.
 
denverpilot said:
Heh, ironically you've just described the entire point of the Commercial certificate in that one sentence. :) :) :)
Click to expand...

Yup - and I have no idea what sort of certificates the other guys held. I've had my certificate for a little over 5 years and nobody has ever asked to see it.
 
midlifeflyer said:
It's nice to see someone more cynical than I.
Click to expand...

"Dear applicant, 80% of your flights in 2020 through 2023 can't be found in the FAA ADS-B database under the tail numbers in your logs. Your application for the job is summarily dismissed, and FAA has indicated that they'll be in touch, which you agreed to as part of the submission process when you signed the form stating we could attempt "all means" to verify entries in your logbook and paid $100 for our FAA records research fee. We thank you for your interest in flying for XYZ Airline."

Won't be that long after the ADS-B mandate that cross-referencing a pilot's (electronic) logs against actual flights will be that difficult to do.
Like my database engineering instructor once said, "Be careful what you place in databases... they can be used for things other than originally intended."

It's coming. How fast it comes depends upon how many bad players FAA and the airlines decide snuck through their existing processes for catching fake log entries.
 
denverpilot said:
"Dear applicant, 80% of your flights in 2020 through 2023 can't be found in the FAA ADS-B database under the tail numbers in your logs. Your application for the job is summarily dismissed, and FAA has indicated that they'll be in touch, which you agreed to as part of the submission process when you signed the form stating we could attempt "all means" to verify entries in your logbook and paid $100 for our FAA records research fee. We thank you for your interest in flying for XYZ Airline."

Won't be that long after the ADS-B mandate that cross-referencing a pilot's (electronic) logs against actual flights will be that difficult to do.
Like my database engineering instructor once said, "Be careful what you place in databases... they can be used for things other than originally intended."

It's coming. How fast it comes depends upon how many bad players FAA and the airlines decide snuck through their existing processes for catching fake log entries.
Click to expand...

You make the assumption that all flights will be completed in Aircraft that are or will be equipped with transponders. Thankfully, many of us live in places where this is not a requirement. ;)

But I agree, the day when actual flights can be referenced against log entries isn’t too far off.

Also, for what it’s worth, not everyone gets away with padding their logbook. I know of one aspiring career airline pilot who was padding their flights. It happened to be in rental aircraft and the FBO discovered the discrepancy by accident. When they discovered it the FSDO was called and the FSDO ended up revoking all that pilot’s certificates and ratings.
 
mondtster said:
You make the assumption that all flights will be completed in Aircraft that are or will be equipped with transponders. Thankfully, many of us live in places where this is not a requirement. ;)

But I agree, the day when actual flights can be referenced against log entries isn’t too far off.

Also, for what it’s worth, not everyone gets away with padding their logbook. I know of one aspiring career airline pilot who was padding their flights. It happened to be in rental aircraft and the FBO discovered the discrepancy by accident. When they discovered it the FSDO was called and the FSDO ended up revoking all that pilot’s certificates and ratings.
Click to expand...

I hear ya on the transponder thing but it’s coming. And it’d be a rare bird who never went somewhere during training all the way to ATP who stayed away from all the places that’ll require it. The databases will get used when someone seems questionable.

I’ve never seen anyone get away with it forever. And honestly I only know of a couple who tried.

Most of the time once someone is in past the $10,000 mark or more, their logbook and time becomes more important to them rather than less. They’d hate to forfeit what they actually paid for by putting false entries in it. At the ATP level of that they’re already in for what, $30,000 minimum. More probably. (I don’t want to go do that math. LOL.)

It isn’t worth lying. Someone will eventually dig and it’d be like lighting hundred dollar bills on fire for days. Not to mention needing a new career.
 
Backing up a bit: Let's say I fly KALM - 174nm - KCVN - 343nm KBJC.
If I do this with a CFI, it counts?
If I do this with a non-pilot passenger, it does not count?
 
IMO the entire CPL requirements are effed up.
Thank goodness most operators don’t hire unless there’s experience after the CPL, or perhaps even require an ATP.... and then it’s usually just for right seat.
 
G-Man said:
Backing up a bit: Let's say I fly KALM - 174nm - KCVN - 343nm KBJC.
If I do this with a CFI, it counts?
If I do this with a non-pilot passenger, it does not count?
Click to expand...

No and no. At least the way I understand it. Solo is solo. 1 soul on board.
 
G-Man said:
Backing up a bit: Let's say I fly KALM - 174nm - KCVN - 343nm KBJC.
If I do this with a CFI, it counts?
If I do this with a non-pilot passenger, it does not count?
Click to expand...

Well, with a CFI it would count for the 2-hr 100nm dual XC (day or night).

But as far as the "solo or duties as PIC" long XC:
With a "CFI doing nothing", it does not count, since you don't have a landing at three points.
With a passenger, it doesn't count because it's not solo (and doesn't meet the 3 landings anyway).
 
denverpilot said:
I hear ya on the transponder thing but it’s coming. And it’d be a rare bird who never went somewhere during training all the way to ATP who stayed away from all the places that’ll require it. The databases will get used when someone seems questionable.

I’ve never seen anyone get away with it forever. And honestly I only know of a couple who tried.

Most of the time once someone is in past the $10,000 mark or more, their logbook and time becomes more important to them rather than less. They’d hate to forfeit what they actually paid for by putting false entries in it. At the ATP level of that they’re already in for what, $30,000 minimum. More probably. (I don’t want to go do that math. LOL.)

It isn’t worth lying. Someone will eventually dig and it’d be like lighting hundred dollar bills on fire for days. Not to mention needing a new career.
Click to expand...

I know some pilots who will burn their old logbook after they complete the 8710 for their ATP, and start a new one using the 8710 as the reference for past hours.
"I wonder why"...
 
Kritchlow said:
IMO the entire CPL requirements are effed up.
Thank goodness most operators don’t hire unless there’s experience after the CPL, or perhaps even require an ATP.... and then it’s usually just for right seat.
Click to expand...

They’re not that effed up. You’ll still have to meet 135 mins after the Commercial to do much else other than toss skydivers out the door, passenger wise.

Other than that, not much happening with passengers and nobody cares if you go stuff a Skyhawk into the ground doing pipeline patrol or aerial photography.
 
labbadabba said:
No and no. At least the way I understand it. Solo is solo. 1 soul on board.
Click to expand...
Agreed, the regs do say "solo". No matter how effed-up you think it is, those are the written regulations.
Reality, OTOH, could be different. If you find a DPE who has common sense and will accept your 3500nm actual "cross-country" trip around the US with your wife as the "long X/C" requirement, you'll be fine.
But if the FSDO catches a whiff of that practice and they investigate the common-sense DPE, you might lose your CPL and will have to re-test while meeting the requirement verbatim.
Whoever said life was easy? :D
 
denverpilot said:
They’re not that effed up. You’ll still have to meet 135 mins after the Commercial to do much else other than toss skydivers out the door, passenger wise.

Other than that, not much happening with passengers and nobody cares if you go stuff a Skyhawk into the ground doing pipeline patrol or aerial photography.
Click to expand...
That is true... I should’ve given credit for the 135 requirements in addition.
 
Some of the experience is kinda dumb I had a few long xc with passengers. Not gonna lie my solo xc was done in a fit of annoyance at 2650-2700 rpm wide open in a skyhawk gps direct and descending at vne for a full stop straight in at an airport 252 miles away before promptly doing the same thing on the way back
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top