Should I do CPL just for the skills if I only want to fly privately?

[nvestr]

Hi all,

Facts:
I am nearing the end of my PPL training in a 172S. I do my training flights at first light weekdays before work.
Don't intend to fly professionally as I already own a business/established career. Always a plan B I guess.
32 years old
Lined up to purchase a 2-way share of a T182T G1000 this summer
My arrangement with the plane's current owner (who will retain remaining share) is that I will have PPL + Night Rating + 20 hour dual checkout in the 182 prior to flying it solo. The 20 hour dual is also requirement for insurance.

I am looking at the idea of enrolling in CPL at my flight school and progress at my own pace (probably a bit less intensively than I did PPL). From my understanding, first phase of CPL is night rating, which was the plan to do next anyway.

My question is: Beyond the night rating, would you guys recommend that I continue with CPL as a way to gain some good skills from the CPL lessons/exercises to apply to my personal flying. Not sure if I would actually fly the checkride to actually get the CPL, but who knows.

Another perk of going the CPL route is that flight training can become eligible for the tuition tax credit. This tax relief effectively buys me some "free" flight training.

My initial plan was to start Gp 3 IFR training within 1 year of getting my PPL/Night Rating. Not sure if doing a bit of the CPL stuff first would be beneficial or not.

Would love some opinions!

[ayseven]

Any education is good. Flying safely is a mindset, and CPL training cannot hurt.

[CpnCrunch]

Yes, I did something similar to you, and I would definitely recommend it. There is a certain amount of overlap with the instrument rating, so it makes sense to at least start a PTR for your CPL, and you can then do it at whatever speed you want.

[photofly]

If you don't intend to seek employment as a pilot, you can't claim tax credit for commercial pilot training.

Beyond the night rating, would you guys recommend that I continue with CPL as a way to gain some good skills from the CPL lessons/exercises to apply to my personal flying. Not sure if I would actually fly the checkride to actually get the CPL, but who knows.

Do you want to do a whole bunch more dual and solo training flights? Exercises taught for a CPL are largely identical or very similar to those taught for a PPL, some to a stricter standard. The skills are the same. Fly accurately and with understanding. There is no "magic" to a CPL. There is no secret sauce, the recipe to which is taught only to commercial pilot students. If you enjoy being ragged on by an instructor because your steep turns suck moose cock, or you can't help but crater the runway when you pretend to land on a soft surfaced field, you will enjoy CPL training. CPL training doesn't improve your standard of flying. YOU improve the standard of your flying.

I do recommend you find a different instructor for further training. Every instructor sucks at something, but you won't know what it is, until you try someone else. Hopefully by the time you get a PPL and some solo time you will have wisdom to take from every instructor that which benefits you.

[KissPlusOne]

I would recommend doing the CPL training, especially if you are going to be doing your Instrument Rating in the near future. You need 40 hours of instrument time to qualify for the IR. As of right now, you likely have 5ish.

The way I describe the levels of instrument training between PPL,CPL, and IR to my students (and this is just in general terms) is this:
PPL: oops, you flew into cloud. Get out quickly before you rip your plane apart mid air.
CPL: If you needed, you could fly your whole cargo haul in the cloud and be fine
IR: You are now doing approaches in the cloud too.

Obviously these are in very general, very liberal terms, but it gets the point across.

CPL training requires 20 hours instrument post PPL. It will also (hopefully) allow you to understand more fully the relationship between pitch, power, and attitude (your attitude). By the time you finish the instrument, and finally land straight, accurately, and gently, you might as well just take the test. (Provided you have done the written as well, which is another bump up from PPL that will give you an intro to IR.)

Just my thoughts, unedited and un proofread

[AirFrame]

If you don't intend to seek employment as a pilot, you can't claim tax credit for commercial pilot training.

True, but if he intends it to be a backup option for his current career it still applies. Or he can intend to change careers once he gets his CPL, but change his mind at a later date and never fly again. The tax credit is still applicable.

[photofly]

CPL training ... will also (hopefully) allow you to understand more fully the relationship between pitch, power, and attitude (your attitude)

@#$!. If you don't understand 110% that after your first ten hours of PPL training, sack your instructor. You've no business being solo in an airplane (let alone getting a PPL) unless you understand that fully.

CPL: If you needed, you could fly your whole cargo haul in the cloud and be fine
IR: You are now doing approaches in the cloud too.

So it's ok to fly in IMC with no instrument rating as long as you don't have to fly an approach?

[AirDoan]

If you don't need the CPL, go for the night and IFR first. Fly a bunch of IFR along side normal manoeuvrs to build time and experience where it will count. Once your close to your 200, then do the CPL. The only reason I'd go for the CPL first if I was in your shoes would be if I wanted to part time instruct, tow gliders, ferry flying or drop skydivers on weekends. If you do your CPL in the 182 you could find a weekend gig dropping meat bombs pretty easily. Keep in mind that without the CPL you can not fly for any reason that your not paying for. So even flying for a tow company or ferry flying a friend's plane for free is not allowed.

[photofly]

. If you do your CPL in the 182

You will need at least one other airplane beside a C182 because it is not approved for intentional spins - a compulsory exercise for the CPL flight test.

You can split your flight test between two different airplanes, but then you will have to be competent with all manoeuvres in two different airframes - at which point you might as well take your instruction and solo practice in the other, spin-approved, aircraft.

[AirDoan]

. If you do your CPL in the 182

You will need at least one other airplane beside a C182 because it is not approved for intentional spins - a compulsory exercise for the CPL flight test.

You can split your flight test between two different airplanes, but then you will have to be competent with all manoeuvres in two different airframes - at which point you might as well take your instruction and solo practice in the other, spin-approved, aircraft.

I stand corrected. I had forgotten about that. Blame it on spending the day moving my mother (day 3 of 4!). Still. A couple hours dual in a 172 when getting ready for the CPL to gain proficiency shouldn't be the end of the world.

[photofly]

Right. Just be ready to demonstrate any of the exercises again, in the second airplane, if the examiner asks.

[kaoandy1125]

Right. Just be ready to demonstrate any of the exercises again, in the second airplane, if the examiner asks.

Can the examiner do that? I mean if an exercise was already performed and graded, the examiner can still ask me to do it again and grade it?

[photofly]

Right. Just be ready to demonstrate any of the exercises again, in the second airplane, if the examiner asks.

Can the examiner do that? I mean if an exercise was already performed and graded, the examiner can still ask me to do it again and grade it?

Looking in the TC documentation, this is the reference to incomplete flight tests:

flight  test  items  already  assessed  will  not  be  retested,  but  items  already  demonstrated  during  the initial  flight,  and repeated  for  the  purpose  of  the  second  flight,  may  be  reassessed  as  a  “1”  if  their aim  is  not  achieved  or  safety  is  compromised.

So no, but you can still fail on the takeoff or landing if you mess them up.

I had the same situation as I owned a 182 when I did my CPL. In the end it was easier to take the test in a rented 172.

[AirFrame]

....ferry flying a friend's plane for free is not allowed.

Incorrect. If you're doing it for free, you're not getting paid.

[nvestr]

Had not checked this post all weekend - thanks for all the info! Very useful.

I think no matter what I will enrol in CPL and start with the night rating portion. From there I will decide if I want to go straight to Gp 3 IFR or spend some time doing CPL stuff first.

As for CPL in my 182, I would probably do it in a school 172S. In reality, my 182 costs probably $140-150 per hour to fly from a purely variable cost perspective (fuel, prop and engine reserves, oil). Renting a 172S costs $160+tax (including a deductible waiver). Given the pure training nature of some of the CPL lessons, I would probably not want to use my 182 and risk a bent firewall on a hard landing while trying something new or something I'm less comfortable with. Would rather use the 172S at the school with 9500 hours on the clock. Also, as stated, the intentional spins makes the 172S a must, for the flight test anyway.

All good points about the instrument time needed for IFR anyway. That is something I will need to get anyways, so getting it while doing CPL seems like an efficient use of resources. Also, for what it's worth, I have thoroughly enjoyed the PGI's and dual lessons with my instructor.

[goingnowherefast]

Do the Night and Group 3 IFR, those will be quite valuable even if you never intend to fly under IFR. Commercial training is training for flying commercially, lots of useless info to a private pilot. Do you really need to know the 700 series CARs to fly a 182 privately?

Could always ask for additional flight training to the commercial standard. The flight test, written exam and fees would be worthless to a private pilot.

[AirDoan]

....ferry flying a friend's plane for free is not allowed.

Incorrect. If you're doing it for free, you're not getting paid.

Airframe, not to start an argument. But as I interpret CAR 401.26(1) (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/reg ... ml#docCont) logging hours at no cost is considered a reward, hence why they don't state "for hire" alone. And I have heard of TC striking out hours of pilots who have tried to get around this.

[piperdriver]

....ferry flying a friend's plane for free is not allowed.

Incorrect. If you're doing it for free, you're not getting paid.

Airframe, not to start an argument. But as I interpret CAR 401.26(1) (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/reg ... ml#docCont) logging hours at no cost is considered a reward, hence why they don't state "for hire" alone. And I have heard of TC striking out hours of pilots who have tried to get around this.

I have to agree with Air Frame on this one.
1. The aircraft is registered privately.
2. You are not being financially compensated.
3. The sole purpose of the trip is to re-position or ferry the aircraft and the aircraft is not making any revenue on this flight.

So where's the problem? And "you have heard stories" we have all heard stories but talk is cheap. Ink in your logbook is not compensation.

[AirFrame]

...logging hours at no cost is considered a reward, hence why they don't state "for hire" alone.

Be careful reading things into the regulations that aren't written there. "Because it doesn't say this it must mean this" is not how the laws work in Canada.

Free flying has been established as acceptable for Private license holders in a few instances. Ferrying without compensation, glider towing, etc. have all been presented to TC directly and approved in the past.

[broken_slinky]

Insurance companies will look at you more favorably the more training you do and ratings/licenses you get.

[digits_]

....ferry flying a friend's plane for free is not allowed.

Incorrect. If you're doing it for free, you're not getting paid.

Airframe, not to start an argument. But as I interpret CAR 401.26(1) (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/reg ... ml#docCont) logging hours at no cost is considered a reward, hence why they don't state "for hire" alone. And I have heard of TC striking out hours of pilots who have tried to get around this.

I would be very interested to see an example where TC struck out hours. I highly doubt that has happened for the reasons stated above.

If you like flying, does that mean you can only fly if you have a CPL? After all, the happiness you feel while flying could be considered a reward as well...

[photofly]

I essentially agree with you; but as long as you pay for your own happiness, all is unarguably good. It’s when other people pay the costs of the happiness you feel when flying that questions can be asked.