BEagle - I'm in agreement with you. IF he has done his QXC then very well done to him BUT there are many things which do not ring true.
I was taught to
a) Round UP the height to the nearest 100' then
b) Add 1,000' and
c) Add a further 300' for any unmarked obsacles.
For heights with a height recorded obstacle it was just a &b.
I can't comment on MrS's route as I don't know the area and also, I find it very difficult to follow what he has been doing as that Plog seems very chaotic, but if that is what he has been used to and has been taught ,it, hopefully, means something to him.
I was taught to use a different plog for each leg to make things simpler and easier to follow, and also the QXC is three seperate flights, so mine went;
Sheet 1EGBO to EGNR
Sheet 2 EGNR to EGBJ
Sheet 3 EGBJ to EGBO
This left me plenty of room to put in halfway points and the radio frequencies relevant to each airfield.
There are lots of things which make me wonder. The title of the thread itself "Qualify Cross Country" instead of Qualifying and statements such as: Leg 1 Cranfield to Connington. ....I flew to Olney where i would start my navex from.
Leg 2 Connington to Retford Gamston
Now this leg was alot longer, longer then anything i have flown yet on my own and it would mean going through military airspace or MATZ. Prior to departure here and at Cranfield, i have been calling NATS (national air traffic service) this is not nromal, but i have a problem with the transponder i have been followed on radar by them to try and work out why the transponder sometimes says that i am at 20,000ft which i am not ever. Why would he fly to the start of his QXC? Surely the QXC starts from your home airfield? Mine certainly did as did those of the rest of the group of us who were all learning at about the same time. Olney is a VRP.
What does he mean when he says he was calling NATS? It certainly isn't normal,and, as far as I know,(and I'm prepared to be told I'm wrong about this) the only way you can call them is by phone. Does he mean London Info? If so, why not say so. Why didn't he just switch the transponder to Mode A?
He was also using a chart which is apparently well out of date. I have both my current (Edition 33) and my first practice (Edition 30) charts here and what he is using must have been issued well before then. Cranfield does not have a large ATZ on either of my charts. The area does not appear on Editions 32 or 32A either. Why would his FI apparently allow him to use an illegal chart? I should hate to discourage someone from learning to fly but I'm beginning to have serious doubts about this person's claims. I hope I am wrong and that it turns out to be just a very poor command of the English language.