Renting/Owneing/Flying 4-place a/c without a Medical

Here's the place to ask all of your medical questions. But don't believe everything you read!

Moderator: drseti

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Renting/Owneing/Flying 4-place a/c without a Medical

Postby Jack Tyler » Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:32 am

(Unfortunately, there's no appropriate category for this subject...so I'll post it here)

Today (Saturday) the EAA and AOPA jointly announced that they are soon to propose to the FAA expanding the use of the 'Driver License Medical' to include 4-place Part 23 a/c. It's an interesting approach, since it both broadens flight privileges for pilots without medicals AND establishes a new training and refresher training curriculum on flight-related medical issues for such pilots. While this wouldn't directly impact pilots flying under the SP rule, it would allow them to upgrade to a PP license without requiring medical certification and thereby also greatly expand the rental fleet available for those pilots. Here's the formal announcement:

"Imagine keeping your four-seat airplane but not dealing with the high cost and stress of renewing your third-class medical. AOPA and the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) on Sept. 24 unveiled plans that, if successful, could greatly expand the number of pilots who could use the driver's license medical standard currently available only to sport pilots.

On the final day of AOPA Aviation Summit, AOPA President Craig Fuller and EAA President Rod Hightower said the two groups are working together to finalize a request to create an exemption allowing pilots flying recreationally to use the driver's license medical standard. In order to ensure and even enhance safety, pilots would be required to complete a comprehensive course on aeromedical factors and self-certification.

“We have more than five years' experience now with the sport pilot certificate and the driver's license medical standard,” said Hightower. “In that time, we have not had a single medical incapacitation accident. The standard works.”

“Furthermore, our petition would enhance safety by requiring initial and recurrent training about health awareness and medical self-certification for any pilot choosing to use the driver's license standard,” added Fuller. “And it will provide data that can be used to continually refine and evaluate the effectiveness of the standard.”

AOPA and EAA plan to file their request for exemption after the first of the year. Under the proposed exemption, pilots holding recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot certificates who only fly recreationally could choose to use the same driver's license medical self-certification standard currently available to sport pilots.

In addition to holding a driver's license as proof of adequate health, a pilot also would be required to participate in a recurring online education program that would reinforce and expand a pilot's understanding of aeromedical factors and self-certification requirements. AOPA andEAA believe such an education program, developed by the Air Safety Institute in consultation with AOPA's Board of Aeromedical Advisors and EAA's Aeromedical Advisory Council, would provide an equivalent level of safety as a third class medical.

As envisioned, the exemption would be limited by aircraft size and type of operations—for example, a single-engine aircraft, with 180 horsepower or less, four seats or fewer, and fixed gear and operations limited to day VFR, with one passenger. That would greatly expand the number of aircraft a pilot might fly while operating under a driver's license medical standard.

AOPA and EAA estimate that the exemption could save pilots who currently fly with medical certificates nearly $250 million over 10 years, and save the federal government more than $11 million over the same period.

The associations believe the exemption they plan to request is the next logical step in the journey begun when the FAA permitted sport pilots to use the driver's license medical standard. Further, the associations believe the exemption will maintain or enhance aviation safety by improving knowledge and awareness of aeromedical factors through recurrent education for all pilots utilizing the exemption, and by encouraging pilots to continue flying aircraft with which they are already familiar."

Cite: Saturday's 'AOPA Summit' News, see aopa.org
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org

bryancobb
Posts: 371
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:35 pm
Location: Cartersville Georgia

That

Postby bryancobb » Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:11 am

I say THAT will never happen, but those folks are more "in-the-know" than I.
Bryan Cobb
Sport Pilot CFI
Commercial/Instrument Airplane
Commercial Rotorcraft Helicopter
Cartersville, Ga
bryandcobb@att.net

User avatar
dstclair
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:23 am
Location: Allen, TX

Postby dstclair » Sat Sep 24, 2011 9:18 am

Reading through the high-level language, looks like they are proposing to do away with the medical for the Recreational Pilot cert. Certainly opens up more planes to the medical-less pilots. Don't think this increases the new pilot population but could certainly increase the active pilot group.

Cessna 152/172 and Piper Warriors/Archers (and similar) will get a bump in the used market.

If this makes it through, it will be interesting to see if SPs can upgrade to an RP with the appropriate additional training. And could an SP CFI do the training? Or is this new proposal only for downgrades of higher ratings?
dave

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Postby Jack Tyler » Sat Sep 24, 2011 11:26 am

Dave, it looks to me like the primary motivation here is to help the older pilot stay in aviation (so its primary effect will be on PP's, not SP's). But since older pilots usually have more discretionary income and also more expense and hassle keeping a current medical, it does seem like it would have a limited beneficial effect.
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org

theskunk
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:44 pm
Location: Garner, NC (nc99 via airnav)
Contact:

Postby theskunk » Sun Sep 25, 2011 5:18 pm

I'm personally hopeful that this makes its way through. I have several close friends who have 172's and cherokees that I could absolutely fly, but i'm not rated highly enough. I personally would also like to go a LOT faster, and an RV-9 or a DA-20 with a fixed pitch prop would be a whole lot easier for me to find in the used market... cheaper, too!

User avatar
dstclair
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:23 am
Location: Allen, TX

Postby dstclair » Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:03 pm

Skunk,

Don't think this potential change is going to help you out. I agree with Jack (after reading a few accounts of the proposal) that the intent of proposal is for higher rated pilots to operate essentially as an SP but able to fly a 180hp non-complex single. If I recall, you mentioned medical problems and did not yet have a PP or higher. This does not appear to be something you can earn as an initial rating or an SP progression.

I would also challenge that one can find a used DA20 cheaper than a used LSA. A 13 year old low time DA20 is listed for high 80s and 4 year old very low time Sting is listed for low 70s on Controller.com. The DA20 cruises around 135kts and the Sting comes close to 120kts (at 5300rpm). Not a material speed difference unless you're racing. There are other LSAs that cruise in this range as well. The used LSA market is starting to, well, become a market.

You certainly would have more rental choices, though.

I do like the initiative. Getting or keeping more people in the air is always a good thing!
dave

theskunk
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:44 pm
Location: Garner, NC (nc99 via airnav)
Contact:

Postby theskunk » Sun Sep 25, 2011 9:36 pm

The way I see it, unless they put specific wording in that states 'must have had a pp rating in the past' or 'passed a 3rd class medical prior to', then I don't see it as an objection to me flying.

My primary mission is that of needing 1-2 places at around 120-140kts in VFR conditions (I'd love night, but i'll keep dreaming;) ) That being said, there are only 2 LSA for rent within 2 hours of me. This would allow me to drive about 20 minutes and have no less than 2 172, 3 cherokee, and a liberty xl2, all rental on the same field. I'd like to think that the availability factor alone, for me personally, is enough to explore with AOPA/EAA and figure out what they are aiming for.

User avatar
dstclair
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:23 am
Location: Allen, TX

Postby dstclair » Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:20 pm

From AOPA:
AOPA and EAA plan to file their request for exemption after the first of the year. Under the proposed exemption, pilots holding recreational, private, commercial, or airline transport pilot certificates who only fly recreationally could choose to use the same driver's license medical self-certification standard currently available to sport pilots.


Looks like the current proposal is for those already holding a certificate but could still be an opportunity to reach out to AOPA/EAA to broaden.
dave

theskunk
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:44 pm
Location: Garner, NC (nc99 via airnav)
Contact:

Postby theskunk » Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:22 pm

After my last post i started reading into that and how it was specifically worded. I'll be calling them tomorrow to let my thoughts be known. Thanks for the clarification/pointing out of certain wordings -- perhaps you can help point out certain wording that'll allow for an SI for somebody with a prior diagnosis of bipolar ;)

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Postby Jack Tyler » Mon Sep 26, 2011 5:39 am

Keep in mind that nothing else changes. They are referring to (non-LSA) 4-passenger Part 23 a/c (which require a PP license to fly), and Flight Reviews, passenger carrying currency, night currency et al. requirements still would be in place per the FAR's. The differences as I read the proposal is that an otherwise legal PP would be allowed to pilot certain types of Part 23 a/c without a medical and with no more than 1 passenger. (I personally think they got ahead of themselves in how they wrote the intro, as I'll bet they want their proposal to cover 2-passenger Part 23 a/c like a Cessna 152, as well).

There IS a 'medical qualification' burden within this proposal, you'll notice. It isn't simply a 'the medical goes away' proposal.

'“Furthermore, our petition would enhance safety by requiring initial and recurrent training about health awareness and medical self-certification for any pilot choosing to use the driver's license standard,” added Fuller. “And it will provide data that can be used to continually refine and evaluate the effectiveness of the standard.” '

Personally, I think this is an excellent idea in its own right. E.g. many pilots who get to the point where they would like to fly without scrutiny from an AME have probably never had exposure to the flying-related effects of meds they began taking later in life, after earning their license, or how other health issues might impact their flying later in life (the topic of visual acuity comes to mind). IMO a significant improvement on the status quo.

From an FAA perspective (understanding of FAR's; proper operation of the a/c; accident prevention; accident mitigation), it's hard to imagine a significant difference between a 180 hp or less Part 23 a/c incident and a <120 kt LSA incident.
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Postby Jack Tyler » Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:39 am

This is an interesting report from Roland Hedley's real-life counterpart, Dan Johnson, about the reaction of those attending AOPA's Summit this past week to the 'driver's license medical' proposal. A warm, supportive response from attendees (which you could actually view, real time, if on-line to 'attend' the Summit) but a somewhat opposite reaction from LSA retailers who picture a zero-sum game when it comes to a/c sales.

"On Saturday, EAA and AOPA made a joint announcement that they will petition FAA next year to drop the third class medical for certain GA aircraft, limiting such privilege to one passenger and no more than 180 horsepower in day VFR.... Though EAA and AOPA say doing away with the medical is supported by experience from Sport Pilot/Light-Sport Aircraft, the message was received warily by LSA sellers even as AOPA members gave loud approval at the morning session.

"Because many LSA are sold to pilots concerned about their medical, some felt the surprise announcement could chill sales that are already slow. However, other experts didn't perceive the negative and most pilots are aware the number of medically-related accidents is vanishingly small, plus generally, removing any barriers to more flying activity is a net gain. Yet even EAA and AOPA officials agreed the chance for victory is uncertain on this sixth try to go to a driver's license medical and approval may take two to five years, if ever. With disparate reactions to the announcement, only time will show how this new initiative might benefit aviation growth and activity. Regardless, it is fascinating to see the onetime rival member organizations harnessing their considerable horsepower in a combined effort. "
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org

User avatar
drseti
Posts: 5635
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Lock Haven PA
Contact:

Postby drseti » Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:56 am

Jack Tyler wrote:Roland Hedley's real-life counterpart,


Wait a minute, Jack -- are you telling me Roland Hedley isn't real-life? :o
The opinions posted are those of one CFI, and do not necessarily represent the FAA or its lawyers.
Prof. H. Paul Shuch, Ph.D., CFII, LSRM-A/GL/WS/PPC, iRMT
AvSport of Lock Haven
fly@AvSport.org
http://AvSport.org
http://facebook.com/SportFlying

User avatar
Daidalos
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: KHWV

Postby Daidalos » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:28 pm

Jack Tyler wrote:This is an interesting report from Roland Hedley's real-life counterpart, Dan Johnson, about the reaction of those attending AOPA's Summit this past week to the 'driver's license medical' proposal...........


Where did you see the report? I went to Dan Johnson's site and didn't find it. Isn't he also president of LAMA?
Marcus - WA2DCI
PP ASEL Instrument

Daidalos Greek: Δαίδαλος
Remember don't fly too close to the Sun.

Jack Tyler
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Jacksonville, FL

Postby Jack Tyler » Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:52 am

You're a funny guy, Paul. And I've asked Roland to stop by and interview you next month, now that he's wrapped up his synopsis of the Palin expose'.

The above quote can be found in Dan Johnson's current (as of this date) blog titled: "Lockwood Rotax and Bristell at AOPA Summit 2011" I should have included the cite but did assume everyone would go right to the LSA world's 'PR Major Domo' blog.

And yes, DJ is not just Mr. LSA on the promotional, beat-the-drum end of things but also President of a small clique of LSA business-related individuals who 'are' LAMA. In the Wild West, 'make the rules as you go along' LSA world, LAMA's original primary goal was to institute a voluntary manufacturing quality review program, and that probably made (and still makes) a lot of sense. But with an organization that had no prior professional experience in quality management, no technical staff, and with a plan to farm out the actual visits & reviews to Embry Riddle, their proposal probably looked - to many manufacturers - like they would be turning over management of their production activities to, at best, an unknown quantity. My impression, put succinctly, is that LAMA lacked/lacks the necessary credibility...and you need to have more than a good idea to be invited to mess around with someone's business.
Jack
Flying in/out KBZN, Bozeman MT in a Grumman Tiger
Do you fly for recreational purposes? Please visit http://www.theraf.org

User avatar
Daidalos
Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 12:19 pm
Location: KHWV

Postby Daidalos » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:39 am

Marcus - WA2DCI
PP ASEL Instrument

Daidalos Greek: Δαίδαλος
Remember don't fly too close to the Sun.


Return to “Medical Issues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest