FAA Removes Complex Requirments for CPL/CFI Practical Test

Seems odd that they would discontinue a requirement that’s so prevalent among commercial operations.

Whatever works, I suppose.
 
Last edited:
61.129 still requires 10 hours of retract (or turbine) time to be eligible to take the CPL checkride, so...

Although this will probably change in the future. I know there is a proposed rule change out there, but don't know what the status is.
 
Ryanb said:
Seems odd that they would discontinue a requirement that’s so prevalent among commercial operations.

Whatever works, I suppose.
Click to expand...
I assume too many applicants failed the checkride because they never flew anything but a C150 to build those 250 hours as cheaply as possible? Just a WAG.
 
Ryanb said:
Seems odd that they would discontinue a requirement that’s so prevalent among commercial operations.

Whatever works, I suppose.
Click to expand...

I suspect some big schools with money petitioned the government to do away with the requirement so they wouldn't have to keep their fleet of complex singles. To me, the elimination of the requirement is no big deal because there are only a handful of multiengine airplanes that are not complex and most of the real jobs require a multi rating anyway. The complex training can happen at that time.

BigBadLou said:
I assume too many applicants failed the checkride because they never flew anything but a C150 to build those 250 hours as cheaply as possible? Just a WAG.
Click to expand...

I've never had nor seen anyone locally fail for any reason related to complex airplane operation. I'm sure there are some cases of an applicant forgetting the gear or how the systems work but I'd venture to guess those cases are rare compared to other reasons for failure.

From what I've seen, finesse and making the airplane do what you want it to while flying maneuvers are far bigger struggles and failure points.
 
mondtster said:
I've never had nor seen anyone locally fail for any reason related to complex airplane operation. I'm sure there are some cases of an applicant forgetting the gear or how the systems work but I'd venture to guess those cases are rare compared to other reasons for failure.

From what I've seen, finesse and making the airplane do what you want it to while flying maneuvers are far bigger struggles and failure points.
Click to expand...

Agree with this point. Or they bomb the systems part of the oral massively because they don’t really understand the aircraft systems. Or they simply fail to do things in an organized professional way, no checklist, no performance numbers. Or they bomb the FARs because the game goes up a bit and they shouldn’t be looking up everything.

Or they do what I did and let nerves or something get to them and can’t even land their own damn airplane. My lord that was the strangest feeling.

Flew everything perfectly on that ride and couldn’t land my own airplane to save my ass. I mean like letting the thing tip over so far on one main in a crosswind that I wondered how much further I had until it drug a wingtip.

Went back up a few days later, two landings, done. So stupid. Ha. At least I have a story for nervous students... “Oh I bet I can tell you a story of a dumber way to flunk this ride...” LOL. :)

Worst landings I’ve made in over half a decade of owning the airplane. Seriously. It was surreal. I had a serious case of the stupids that day.

But yeah. Not too common to see someone bomb that ride for lack of tossing the gear out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top