Topic Deleted By OP

[drseti]

Reading the language of HR4441 has been a true education. Right on top, it's purpose is stated as:

To transfer operation of air traffic services currently provided by the Federal Aviation Administration to a separate not-for-profit corporate entity, to reauthorize and streamline programs of the Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes .

It is those other purposes that result in unrelated riders getting attached to most legislation.

[SportPilot]

.......

[N918KT]

According to H.R. 4441 as it is currently written, with regards to 3rd class medical reform, just a driver's license with the completion of a medical education course and self certification is just needed to fly 6-seat aircraft weighing at most 6,000 lbs. They lowered the maximum altitude from 18,000 feet MSL down to 14,000 feet MSL. No need for doctor visits every 4 years, no one-time medical for those who don't have one or who's medical is 10 years after their expiration date, and no denied medical clause.

Of course I believe this is most likely to change, maybe also conform with the Senate version of PBOR2.

[SportPilot]

.......

[designrs]

EDIT: Looking at the House proposal, it does not include the 10 year look-back.

Well alright! Much better!

[SportPilot]

.......

[Jack Tyler]

The consensus of congressional reporters that I've read (as e.g. mentioned in WaPo) is that HB 4441 will experience heavy rewriting now that it's being referred back to Committee with hearings suspended.

Logic suggests (to me, at least) that PBOR2 (as passed by the Senate) will sit on the sidelines until HB4441 has been reported out of Committee for a vote -or- is abandoned once sufficient opposition has been aligned against it (as e.g. the Senate Transportation Committee demonstrated earlier this week). And at that point, post-4441, one wonders how much patience will still exist in the House to take up other aviation-related issues such as PBOR2. Shutter's decision to continue his efforts towards ATC privatization was IMO an unhelpful circumstance for PBOR2.

[SportPilot]

.......

[3Dreaming]

That's assuming that the 10 year part makes it into the final rule.

[Cluemeister]

There is a certain percentage of pilots who let their 3rd class medical lapse because of a concern they may have failed the next one. Is the government now going to say go ahead and fly again because 8 years ago you were fine?

I'm not arguing against the bill, I think it would be great to pass, I'm all for fewer government controls, especially when there is little or no data to support that their required medical evaluations make the airways safer.

I'm just saying I doubt that part will make it into the final version.

[SportPilot]

.......

[Cluemeister]

It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me to say we're ok with a bill that still requires an 18 year old to get a medical, but not a 70 year old who last had a medical at 62.

Assuming rare medical conditions as an exception, if medical evaluations are not keeping skies safer, why are we supporting a 10 year go back instead of eliminating it entirely?

[SportPilot]

.......

[Cluemeister]

I'll bet I'm as safe to fly as you are.

You are obviously safer based on talent as a pilot. I wouldn't fly with me right now.

But if you want to make the claim you are medically as safe, that's just not so. Just as I am not as medically safe as a 20 year old. There's a reason medical and life insurance rates go up significantly with age, as the risk goes up significantly.

[SportPilot]

.......