Commercial Cert

[Vindicated0721]

Hey all,

I am currently in the process of getting my instrument and commercial certs. One of my instructors recently got an email notification of a change in the commercial cert requirements. In short the new requirements are all the same except now it says you no longer need 10 hours of solo (5 day VFR/ 5 night VFR) and you can choose to do those 10 hours solo or with an instructor.

 

Myself and another instructor can not find these changes listed anywhere on the FAA's website and the FARAIM 2010 still has those 10 hours listed as solo. Has anyone else heard of these changed and/or know where to find where they are listed.

[helopilot2be]

Google 14 cfr 61 and click on eCFR. Go to part 61.129( c )(4). Also note 61.129

( c )(3)(i) Instrument familiarization has changed as well.

Chris

Hey all,

I am currently in the process of getting my instrument and commercial certs. One of my instructors recently got an email notification of a change in the commercial cert requirements. In short the new requirements are all the same except now it says you no longer need 10 hours of solo (5 day VFR/ 5 night VFR) and you can choose to do those 10 hours solo or with an instructor.

 

Myself and another instructor can not find these changes listed anywhere on the FAA's website and the FARAIM 2010 still has those 10 hours listed as solo. Has anyone else heard of these changed and/or know where to find where they are listed.

4

[Vindicated0721]

Thanks for the help. I really appreciate it.

[r22butters]

I wonder why they changed that?

 

I flew with a CFi once who had almost 1000hrs. When the topic of solo time came up, he said he just had the minimum (didn't get many opportunities to fly solo while teaching).

 

If I were you, I would tell my students to do it solo. Dual PIC is nice, but its good experience being the only one in the helicopter.

 

Plus, from what I've heard, solo time is like night time, grab as much as you can get!

[R22139RJ]

The changes came out last year in October and also changed some of the cross country requirements for the aeronautical experience. The Day/Night cross country flights can be done under the hood and the solo requirements can be flown with instructor as long as the pilot is performing duties of PIC. The required time of instrument training also decreased to 5 I believe. Got to love the FAA making things easier.

 

I send my students to check rides with the 2010 FAR/AIM and a binder with all the additional changes to the regulations that aren't printed in the FAR/AIM.

Edited July 2, 2010 by R22139RJ

[Trans Lift]

I would still do it solo, it will be more beneficial that way.

[Tenacious T]

Spending it solo would be a confidence builder, spending it on night x-country with your instructor could be even more beneficial. Many jobs have night requirements but I have never heard of one with solo requirements. Just my 2 cents.

[r22butters]

...Many jobs have night requirements but I have never heard of one with solo requirements. Just my 2 cents.

 

Tell me about it!...I have over 400hrs solo, and it hasn't helped me land a job.

 

If you really want to get your money's worth, make those 10hrs solo/night/cc. You could also try dual/night/cc/under the hood, if you think your stomach's up to it?

[heligirl03]

Tell me about it!...I have over 400hrs solo, and it hasn't helped me land a job. <_>

 

If you really want to get your money's worth, make those 10hrs solo/night/cc. You could also try dual/night/cc/under the hood, if you think your stomach's up to it?

 

Solo time is good for confidence but the bottom line is that it won't qualify you for anything but ratings. Unless you are having confidence issues (which should be discussed with your CFI before doing anything else), dual/nt/xc/hood would give you the most bang for your buck, hands down. If you do your IR before your Commercial (piggyback the PIC) do as much of your hood time as possible as night/xc and really make a dent in the things you'll need to get a job...which is the primary reason we do this to begin with. My 2 cents.

 

HG03

[iChris]

I wonder why they changed that?

 

 

Your answer is in the summary of the final ruling..

 

DATES: This final rule is effective October 20, 2009.

 

 

 

ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY:

 

 

 

64. This revision of Sec. 61.129 amends the commercial pilot certification solo aeronautical experience requirements to allow the aeronautical experience to be performed either solo or while performing the duties of PIC with an instructor on board

 

This final rule revises Sec. 61.129(a)(4), ©(4), (d)(4), (e)(4), and (g)(2) to allow the commercial pilot certification aeronautical experience to be conducted either solo or while performing the duties of PIC with an instructor on board. Even though the commercial pilot certification aeronautical experience requirements for a multiengine airplane rating allow the aeronautical experience requirements to be conducted either solo or with an authorized instructor on board (See Sec. 61.129(b(4)), the solo aeronautical experience requirements were purposely written differently for other aircraft categories. This is because comments received in response to Notice No. 95-11 (60 FR 41160­41284; August 11, 1995) indicated that some insurance policies prohibit persons who do not already hold the multiengine airplane category and class rating on their pilot certificate from flying solo in multiengine airplanes.

 

 

 

Five commenters supported the proposed provision permitting flights previously required to be performed solo with an instructor on board. One commenter stated the knowledge requirements are unchanged, and an additional pilot scanning for traffic enhances safety. Three commenters asserted that upon receiving private pilot certificates, pilots are permitted to fly solo and carry passengers, and should have no further solo flight requirements.

 

 

 

Thirteen commenters opposed the provision with seven arguing that solo flight contributes to the development of essential self-reliance, decision-making, and command skills. Two commenters stated that, under the proposed rules, a pilot could progress all the way to an ATP certificate with only 10 hours of solo flight early in training. One commenter recommended pilots completing a commercial certificate with zero solo time in class be issued ratings limited to second in command (SIC) privileges. One commenter suggested if it is not possible for an applicant to perform the flights solo, then dual instruction requirements should be increased. Two commenters believed the proposed provision is driven by insurance and cost concerns, rather than safety or education concerns and insurance concerns should not restrict solo flight by commercial pilot candidates. The commenter stated most commercial pilot training is performed in either a single engine fixed gear airplane or in some low performance single engine retractable gear airplane, neither of which is difficult to insure.

 

 

 

The Greater St. Louis Flight Instructor Association rejected the argument that flights with an instructor on board foster cockpit resource management (CRM) skills, noting that the purpose of part 61 training is to prepare pilots to fly to single-pilot standards, not to prepare them for a future airline career. The association also asserted the proposed provision subverts the intent of Sec. 91.3, which defines the PIC as directly responsible for, and the final authority on, the operation of the aircraft. Finally, the association asserted students ostensibly acting as PIC will defer to flight instructors and Examiners.

 

 

 

One commenter recommended solo cross country experience be required, but that pilots working toward a commercial multiengine airplane rating be permitted to perform the flights in a single engine airplane to avoid potential insurance conflicts. Two commenters, including AOPA, recommended permitting performance of cross country flights solo or with an instructor on board and that commercial pilot candidates be permitted to perform the flights with passengers on board. One commenter recommended all pilots who hold a private or sport pilot certificate be permitted to fulfill solo flight requirements for additional certificates or ratings with an instructor on board, or while carrying passengers, arguing that carrying passengers allows pilots to share costs and expose potential future students to the experience of flight without degrading safety. Finally one commenter opposed the underlying requirement for a long cross-country flight from commercial pilot candidates because it is only meant to conform to ICAO standards.

 

 

 

Since the adoption of Sec. 61.129, the FAA has learned that some operators of the other categories and classes of aircraft also have the same insurance policy restrictions. Many of these aircraft operators also believe solo provisions for commercial pilot certification multiengine airplane rating is beneficial in teaching crew resource management (CRM). These provisions permit the training to be performed solo or with an instructor on board while the applicant is performing the duties of PIC in a multiengine airplane. Some operators have said that they will be agreeable to their commercial pilot applicants practicing abnormal and emergency procedures if the applicant's instructor was on board. Therefore, this final rule provides for commercial pilot certification for the single engine airplane, helicopter, gyroplane, powered-lift, and airship ratings to be performed either solo or while performing the duties of PIC with an authorized instructor aboard.

 

We believe the negative comments against this proposal are more of a philosophical disagreement than a safety issue. The existing rule, Sec. 61.129(b(4), has permitted the commercial pilot-airplane multiengine training to be performed either solo or with an instructor on board since August 4, 1997, and there has not been any difference noted in safety or the quality of the skills and abilities of commercial pilot-airplane multiengine applicants. We believe applicants and instructors have used this training for commercial pilot-airplane multiengine applicants to achieve proficiency in crew resource management and coordination with an SIC designated pilot. For the stated reasons, the FAA is adopting the revision as proposed in the NPRM.

 

http://rgl.faa.gov/R...11?OpenDocument

Edited July 3, 2010 by iChris

[DynamicallyUnstable]

I couldn't agree with butters and Heligirl more. Do as much dual/night/xc/hood time as you possibly can! This will be a huge benefit for you in the future. I tried to get my students plenty of night/xc as I could and added flights through and stops in Class D, C and B (stops in LAX were fun) so they'd be super comfortable with that and it'd help their resume later. After having to pay additional for Instrument time to qualify me for my ATP, I realized that I should have put them under the hood for at least one way of all of those flights. It would have helped them in the future with Instrument time AND it would have made them better at flyng instruments for the instrument checkride as a bonus.

Do it like that, it won't be as fun as just flying but you'll be really glad you did later in your career!

 

I also agree that more solo is not going to matter. Nobody cares about solo time (after mnimums of course). It's more productive to do dual and get something more from it.

 

Fly Safe

[r22butters]

... Nobody cares about solo time (after mnimums of course). It's more productive to do dual and get something more from it.

 

Fly Safe

 

That seems to be the consensus. Its too bad. I thought being the only one in the cockpit, only one set of controls, and no one to rely on but yourself, would count for something,...but I guess not?...Oh well.

[JDHelicopterPilot]

I did all my Commercial solo time night XC except for the required Day XC. I agree, solo time is good and should do what you can. If you can do solo night XC as much as you can then I would. Night time is a big issue for many. Even more so those going into EMS.