The length of the CPL XCQ

[Mikehotel152]

Lasors says the flight must total 540km (300nm) and include landings at 2 intermediate aerodromes.

My problem is that my chosen flight is 298nm if you take straight lines between aerodromes. This is annoying because the flight is much longer than 300nm when you take into account the actual routing, but I accept that the CAA like to keep things simple by simply measuring straight lines between aerodromes rather than wasting time asking each candidate to prove their routing.

In any case, the switched-on amongst you will already have noticed that 540km is in fact 291.57nm. Does this mean that my 298nm XCQ does comply with the rule? I could change my intermediate aerodromes, but i quite like the idea of visiting each of them tomorrow.

I wonder whether the original rules merely refers to 540km and Lasors simply gives a rough conversion?:confused:

Any thoughts much appreciated.

MH152

[BigGrecian]

No 300nm or more sorry.

It's an expensive game to start playing with 0.9 of a mile, just change your route.

[Mikehotel152]

Thanks for the input BigGrecian. Can you expand on your opinion and give a reason?

The figures "540km (300nm)" are taken from JAR–FCL 1.155 Experience and crediting. But 540km is 7nm longer than 300nm!

I can easily change my route but it seems to me that clarifying this point would help others.

[sikeano]

MH152, what seems to be confusing about 300NM
(540KM if you fly in the continent),and last time i looked 298NM is less than 300NM I agree with BigGrecian, it is too expensive to start worrying about that difference, as CAA will ask you to redo the whole XC, and you will waste money and time

(I am assuming you are flying in UK/US if you are flying in an area where they are using KM then you should be ok)

[Mikehotel152]

Yes, I know I'm being a pedant to an extent, but there is a difference between the figures. To excuse the difference without comment is similar to flying airspeeds in mph on an ASI displaying kts on the basis that it's roughly the same thing and at least you're not going too slow!

You get these sorts of issues throughout the ATPL groundschool, where the JAA expect you to be incredibly precise in one field, yet in another presumably equally exacting field their range of answers is all a bit slapdash.

If the CAA raise a query I'll just say that my xcq is in excess of 540km....or I'll use a different aerodrome...:p

[Wilton Shagpile]

As others have said, you can either take the risk or do what I would do and just pick another airfield a bit further down route and go there instead.

Getting into an argument with the CAA has the potential to cause you a lot of grief and cost you a lot of money! :ooh:

I hope you enjoy your trip - if you tell us what route you're planning to use I am sure there will be a few suggestions how to extend it a little....

[spinnaker]

I agree that 540km is not 300nm. So the solution is to make the trip longer than 300 nm as it is a minimum distance, not a target. It might be worth writing to the CAA asking for clarification on the requirements. Is there a minimum straight line distance between airports? if there is, and your route satisfies that part of, why not just put a dogleg in the plan?

[smith]

yeah my mate did exactly that he flew overhead eshott en route from dundee to carlisle via fife and the caa accepted it as long as you annotate it in your log book. The straight line distance between dundee/fife to carlisle was way short of 300nm however doglegging over eshott there and back made it up

[Mikehotel152]

The CAA work out the distance based on straight lines between the aerodromes. They don't care that your actual flight might be 350nm. Mine's probably longer still, once you take into account travelling around London and my various doglegs.

Don't worry, I'm not planning to have an argument with the CAA.

It's interesting to hear that the CAA accepted Smith's xcq because it was annotated in his logbook. There was a previous thread on doing just that a few weeks/months back and the original poster was shot down in flames for suggesting that he might do just that.

[jb5000]

My CPL QXC was 350nm in the logbook, but straight line would have been really quite significantly less.

This was accepted by the UK CAA, and I flew the same route as the other 11 guys in my class, and this route was the same as the hundreds that have gone through the same training school after me.

Personally, I would photocopy your map and PLOG, providing a legal document that proves that your flight was over 300nm and don't stress over it.

[HappyFran]

Has anyone flown a route were they cover the 300 nm but do not return to the origin.
My mate and I are planning on building some houre in next few weeks. It is entirely possible that one of us could, as PIC fly from A to D stopping at B and C on way. (greater than 300 nm).Stop overnight at D and then the other person would fly the return route.
Would that be OK with CAA ?

[G SXTY]

My QXC route was just under 300nm in a straight line but more than 300 with my actual routing. I noted the route in my logbook and kept the plog just in case, but never received any comment from the CAA.

Unless you're setting out to deceive, which would be very silly, they've probably got better things to do than sit down with a half-mil chart and a ruler.

[Nashers]

about the question on if you can finish your qxc at another airfield to the one you started with:

an instructor at my FTO said there is nothing that stops your from doing that and it is what he did in south africa when he did his qxc. i myself did come back to my starting airfield but it was not a straight as otherwise i would have flown over central london (heathrow zone).

the last leg i did was from manston to stapleford via clacton and everyone i asked about it at the FTO said it was fine. ive not had the licence issued yet as going to send it all of at one time but from the info i dug up i dout the CAA will have a problem with it.

[glush]

... I really enjoyed my CPL QXC. I looked on it as an excuse to get some mileage under my belt and visit some far away places that I would probably not bother with under other circumstances. I also took a friend along with me to take photos, and all told we had a great day out.

It's supposed to be enjoyable isn't it? This flying lark?

If you look upon it as an opportunity to get out and about, and discover some new places, the mileage and km thing becomes a bit of a sideshow really...:)

[Cobalt]

HappyFran

Has anyone flown a route were they cover the 300 nm but do not return to the origin.
My mate and I are planning on building some houre in next few weeks. It is entirely possible that one of us could, as PIC fly from A to D stopping at B and C on way. (greater than 300 nm).Stop overnight at D and then the other person would fly the return route.
Would that be OK with CAA ?

Definitively acceptable - got my CPL on the back of a route from A to B and then C. That was actually a weather diversion as I planed A - B - A originally but did not make it back... didn't know at the time I would ever go for a CPL.

On a different note - I think your idea of going further afield with 2 pilots ad share the trip is great. This way you will see more of the world... I just don't get the pilots who don't want to fly a single mile further than the minimum - surely while hourbuilding you can stretch your wings a bit? What else will you fly in the other dozens of hours? Circuits???

[edited to add: glush beat me to it]

[Mikehotel152]

Cobalt - This raises yet another query I had about the crosscountry qualifier:

The rule is that you have to complete a 540km/300nm flight with landings at two intermediate aerodromes. The use of the word intermediate suggests that if you take off from A, land at B and then C (your two intermediate aerodromes), you then land back at A or at D in order to complete the flight.

Unless I've misunderstood your post, you simply went from A to B and then on to C. Is that acceptable to the CAA? Last year I flew from Stapleford to Retford Gamston and then on to Prestwick. That was about 300nm in straight lines and more like 400nm considering our routing up to Newcastle and then through to Carlisle. But I decided that it might not comply with the rules, so I did another flight today.

Today I flew North Weald in Essex to Dunkeswell in Devon and then up to Shobdon in Herefordshire before returning to North Weald. In straight lines that's 338nm, but in reality it's more like 375-400 considering the routing. Seeing as I'm very close to completing my hour-building I guess that's my long navigation complete...for now. Good luck to all the rest of you on your forthcoming flights.:ok:

[Cobalt]

The rules actually say 2 aerodromes other than the aerodrome of departure. That's it. Nothing about "intermediate".

[HappyFran]

Thanks Cobalt, That is what I thought but was concerned that I might be missing something.
Interesting point about only needing A-B-C. I had assumed that I needed an extra one to cover the '2 intermediate stops'. To some extent I would prefar not to have the extra stop as it is just an extra landing cost, but I will see what happens when I get down to the actual planning.
Got to finish these pesky ATPL exams 1st :* Only 1 week till Gatwick :eek:.

Thanks for help

Fran :)

[Mikehotel152]

Um, Cobalt you're not quite right there mate. I quote the CPL Experience requirements direct from Lasors below: -


a. i.
100 hours as Pilot-in-Command, or 70 hours as

Pilot-in-Command if completed during a course
of integrated flying training;
ii.



20 hours of VFR cross-country flight time as

Pilot-in-Command, including a cross-country
Flight* totalling at least 540 km (300 nm) in
the course of which full-stop landings at two
aerodromes different from the aerodromes of


departure shall be made.



*The cross-country flight should be regarded as a single
planned exercise including landings at two intermediate
aerodromes and completed during the course of a single
day. Flights completed over the course of more than one
day will not normally be acceptable towards licence issue.
Should an applicant claim that there were mitigating
circumstances that prevented the flight from being
completed as originally planned, the applicant must send
in a written submission to PLD explaining what happened
together with any relevant supporting documentation/


information for consideration.

[Leezyjet]

To some extent I would prefar not to have the extra stop as it is just an extra landing cost, but I will see what happens when I get down to the actual planning.

Get a copy of Pilot and Today's Flyer magazines and use the free landing vouchers and plan your route around that. What you save on 1 landing fee alone will be enough to pay for both mags.

:ok:

[Cobalt]

...including a cross-country

Flight* totalling at least 540 km (300 nm) in
the course of which full-stop landings at two
aerodromes different from the aerodromes
of departure shall be made

...including across-country flight totalling at least 540 km
(300 NM) in the course of which full-stop
landings at two aerodromes different from the
aerodromes of departure shall be made

so a cut-and-paste job, including the conversion error from km to NM.

The footnote in LASORS is not regulation. It implies you have to return to the aerodrome of departure, which the rules clearly do NOT say. Not the only error in LASORS...

As I said earlier, I got an A-B-C flight accepted without even a question asked.

[Mikehotel152]

Yep, the whole thing is badly explained. Typical CAA, backed up by typically wooly JAR....:ugh: