Photon

From being at a part 141 school that also does part 61 to some extent.
If you are debating part 141 and 61 from the same school (i.e the per-hour cost is the same).
I would probably do the private 61, instrument 141, and commercial 141, then the instructor ratings 61.

Why? Well maybe my logic is flawed, but the way at least our 141 programs are structured, in Private you will be able to walk away with less hours. In our 141 private program, just finishing all the flights in the syllabus gave me close to 60 hours, you should be able to do it in 40 hours with the part 61 private.

For the instrument rating, the part 141 version lets you get away with less nasty cross countries, and less hours.
For the commercial, again you only need about 35 hours or so for the commercial course itself.
For the instructor ratings, part 61, just makes it easier to do it with your instructor the way you guys feel. The entire course is so theoretical that it's a lot easier to just work on the stuff you feel you need and then do the rest from home.
I'm a CPL now, did it all part 141 here in Florida, and walked away with about 150 hours after my commercial rating. I Expect around 190 hours or so after I have my single-commercial, CFI, CFII and MEI

floridaCFII

That does sound a little bit on the high side to me. What aircraft type is this for?

PearlPilot

Yeah it is, we had a discussion before and most people advised me to look at another place. They are 172s, 1997 or later (if that makes any difference). It takes me less than 20 minutes to drive to the FBO, plus since I am paying as I go, and since I have a funky schedule at my job, I really have no choice at this point...

the King

You must be doing a FITS Commercial if you have that few hours. Most schools don't do that. In fact, Part 141 requires 120 hours of training toward the Commercial alone. While that is, for most students, less than the 250 TT requirement in Part 61, there is still a substantial amount of time involved unless the school has a special syllabus allowing proficiency-based training. Again, that is an abnormal situation although it may become more popular.

As for the IFR, those nasty cross countries are really what soon-to-be Instrument pilots need. Any monkey can shoot an approach, but remember that your life will be spent flying from A to B in any kind of weather. Shooting the approach is 10 minutes out of a 2 or 3 hour flight. The stuff in between is very important as well. The biggest thing about Part 61 is the requirement of 50 XC hours before doing your IR. If you want the time and you are going to do the Commercial as a Part 61, then you should do the IR the same. If you do the Commercial under Part 141, then you have a choice to make.

PearlPilot

It is clear to me now that this is more complicated than I expected

Cubdriver

The emphasis in peoples thinking on this subject usually involves finding the path that requires the least flight time. They wish to shave off a few hours here or there to save some money. But this is not a very good strategy for a couple of reasons. One it presupposes that you are talented enough not to need those extra hours which is something you do not know until your actual checkrides are passed. Second for pilots wishing to go on to a professional flying career, they will need far more hours anyway; as many as four times more than a wet ticket commercial usually has. Saving a few hours on flight training is of no particular advantage for aspiring pros and as King said you probably need them anyway for better skill development. To save money in flight training there are definitely some things one should do but choosing Part 61 versus 141 based on the hours requirements is not really one of them.

Photon

I don't see the major difference in coming out of commercial with 150, 180 or 250 hours to be honest.
Maybe you have a little extra experience, but it's not like you're gonna go right to the airlines either way.
For my part, I'm planning on going right onto instruction now, and getting up to 800h + TT, so getting the extra hours while being paid for seems like a better alternative than racking up a few extra hours on a few cross countries here and there that I'm the one paying for.. Unless I'm missing something

de727ups

The X-C flights that 61 requires prior to the IFR rating are a great learning experience and confidence builder for a low time pilot. I believe that's a good thing, though some will find it a waste of time and money.

People should focus on being a good, well rounded, pilot, when they approach flight training. Not focus on being an "airline pilot". Airline pilots are simply regular pilots who fly for an airline.

You might think you're gonna be an airline pilot at 800tt, but what if you end up hauling river rafters off of dirt strips in the Grand Canyon in a 207 with no GPS?

That's where you'll be glad you had a little more X-C experience and focused on good stick and rudder fundamentals. 61 or 141, I'd implore you not blow anything off because, "I'm going to be an airline pilot".

Photon

What I'm saying is, you're gonna fly those XC as an instructor when you have IR students, over and over and over again.
What am I missing in regards to doing them as a student when you're going to do them 10x more at least as an instructor either way?

de727ups

You'd be a much better instructor if you had actual experience as a student before you start instructing, don't you think?

You know, being able to say "When I was a student, I made that same mistake". Should you be instructing someone in something you decided to bypass to save money?

I see your point, but you could make the same argument with many things involved with flying and teaching. Why bother perfecting slow flight as a student, you're gonna teach it a million times as a CFI anyway...

That argument doesn't impress me.