Why do SkyHigh legs have to be done back to back?

[aviatingnvestr]

Curious why do all of the legs in a Skyhigh scenario have to be done back to back? Seems like it could be a fairly simple implementation to have progress monitored towards the rating even if they are broken up or with longer pauses in between. Some of the longer ones require a lot of time when cruising in a GA airplane. Bit frustrating to spend 1.5 hours flying legs 1 and 2, then parking on the ramp while I put my kids to bed, etc... then coming back to proceed and being told I have to restart from scratch. It can't be that hard to see my flight history even if my last leg was before the current ATC's shift. I never logged off - kept the sim on, etc. Pretty annoyed by that and also by the controller's rudeness but that is besides the point.

If you don't want the build this into your system, at least define what "minimum turnaround time is" to avoid this frustration.

[Keith Smith]

Seems like it could be a fairly simple implementation to have progress monitored towards the rating even if they are broken up or with longer pauses in between

It wouldn't be simple. It would require a completely new system to be stood up. Given that there is no incremental charge for user participation in the ratings, we feel comfortable placing the restrictions that are required in order to facilitate the grading of ratings within the existing operational constraints.

We avoided ratings with interim stops as the SKY Ratings were further developed, but some of the earlier ratings were released prior to realizing the issues that the stops can cause.

It can't be that hard to see my flight history even if my last leg was before the current ATC's shift

Again, I'd disagree. If you're working 10+ aircraft and are task-saturated, there is literally no time to do this. Even if there was, simply verifying that you flew the leg doesn't provide enough context as to where things stand with regards to your rating attempt.

If there is a controller swap while you're enroute, the rating details are communicated from the departing controller to the arriving controller, but if you're on the ground, between legs, and you've been there for quite some time, it's very likely that the departing controller will not brief the arriving controller regarding your status.

That is precisely why the rating text emphasizes the importance of "minimum turnaround time." The operational definition of that is, "....the minimum time it takes for you to review updated weather for the next leg, file a plan plan, and get going." Some of the ratings ARE long, and fatigue-inducing by design. It's a replication of a Part 135 charter operation, for the most part. The solution I'd recommend is to set aside more uninterrupted time to complete those legs, not to alter the system to allow longer breaks between the legs. The latter requires a commitment to developing new tracking systems for a handful of ratings and that's not something I'm prepared to do, especially when doing so would give license for someone to now take many hours between the legs which is absolutely not in the spirit of the rating. Hopefully that helps.

[aviatingnvestr]

Thanks Keith for the explanation. Makes sense. Didn't mean to sound critical - was a bit peeved on the spot but it's understandable and your explanation is very reasonable.