Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Yeah that's part of the problem with this reg... if you wanted to split hairs. Better to just stay conservative.
Maybe it was an assumption, but I always figured if an alternate was required (123 rule), then the reg applies. Same applies to a second alternate (enough gas to reach the furthest alternate, not both). How could the reg possibly legally require an alternate, but not require having enough gas to reach it? But I get that the FAA is driven by strict, bureaucratic interpretation of the law that'd defy any common sense bias.