Commercial dual crosscountry definition

"Hilton" wrote in message
hlink.net...

The intent was a round-robbin flight. The start and ending point was the
same - it was not a repositioning flight unless I was specifically tring
to
get around the FARs. For example, if the FAA wants me to go on a long
100nm
XC, the intent is that I go far away from my 'home base' to gain
additional
experience in weather, flight planning, etc etc etc. To first fly 49nm
north, then 51nm is not at all what the FAA intended, nor does it give you
the aeronatical experience required by the FAA. Moreover, it makes a
mockery of every mention of "original point of departure" in the FARs.

But I did gain additional experience in weather and flight planning - it was
unusually low VFR for me, I minimized exposure to water and to towers, and I
was using a GPS model I'd never met before.

The legs were 40, 103, 67.

-- David Brooks

David Brooks wrote:
But I did gain additional experience in weather and flight planning - it
was
unusually low VFR for me, I minimized exposure to water and to towers, and
I
was using a GPS model I'd never met before.

The legs were 40, 103, 67.

With all due respect David, you asked the question, but don't seem willing
to accept any answers other than what you want to hear.

So... I would suggest calling the DE directly. If he says it's OK, then
it's OK for your checkride.

Hilton

"Hilton" wrote in message hlink.net...
David Brooks wrote:
But I did gain additional experience in weather and flight planning - it
was
unusually low VFR for me, I minimized exposure to water and to towers, and
I
was using a GPS model I'd never met before.

The legs were 40, 103, 67.

With all due respect David, you asked the question, but don't seem willing
to accept any answers other than what you want to hear.

actually, with all due respect hilton, you seem to be the one who continues
to push your own interpretation of the reg in spite of numerous others
pointing out the alternative interpretation (which is supported by the part
61 faq). now, i know you have pooh-pooh'ed the faq, but most of the
errors on it have been cleaned up, and in this instance i would surely
take it's word over yours -- especially since i have had many students do
this and no d.e. has ever called them on it. in fact, i did a similar thing
back when i got my private, and the long x/c had to be 300 nm with
landings at 3 points, at least one of which was 100nm away from the
original point of departure -- i flew to an airport ~70 nm away (repositioning),
then started my long x/c from there with legs of about 130, 110, and 80,
winding up back at my home airport. so i actually flew 390, but all of
the airports were within 100nm from my _home_base_, which was no
longer my original point of departure (after the repositioning.) that was
in 1978, and the faa didn't have any problem with it then, neither do they
have any problem with it now.



So... I would suggest calling the DE directly. If he says it's OK, then
it's OK for your checkride.

that's not a bad idea. probably unnecessary, but never hurts to double-
check.



Hilton

"Hilton" wrote in message
link.net...

So... I would suggest calling the DE directly. If he says it's OK, then
it's OK for your checkride.

Well, my instructor asked the DE (they happen to work for the same FBO, and
I figured he would be a good advocate) and he said it was cool. Thanks, all,
for the advice and the useful analysis.

-- David Brooks