Sport Pilot Talk

drseti wrote:

Windknot wrote:Does the proposal suggest that a former Class III medical holder, can fly their 4 place, >180hp etc airplane under revised "REC" pilot standards?

Sort of. If you are already a licensed pilot, Private or above, and the proposal is adopted by the FAA, then you will be allowed to let your medical certificate lapse, and fly under the Rec pilot rules. This does nothing to help the Private Pilot wannabe, who would still need to be able to pass a 3rd class medical exam in order to get licensed -- and then could let the medical lapse. As the proposal is written, if you're a Sport Pilot wanting to upgrade to Private, you'll still need a medical (which you can then let lapse after you get licensed).

I guess I'm a little confused.

Don't feel bad, Knot; we all are.

I'm 5'8" tall and weigh 250# and wear a size 50/52 sport coat. I've been that size for half of my 45 years. God built me short and extra wide. Suggestions that I "just lose weight" dont really work for me.

Certainly sounds to me as though you were designed for Cessnas and Cherokees! LSA isn't right for everyone, and nobody should imply otherwise.

Let's hope, for your sake, that the proposal goes through (and that you can pass that initial medical exam, and get licensed).

There are almost NO LSA for rent in Michigan period.

That problem is not unique to Michigan.

Jeeze....I think I'll just take up golf!!!

Now, don't give up so easily. Golf is a poor substitute for flying.

DrSeti......PM Sent.....

The problem is simply the training and checkout. I can fit in a $15,000 taylorcraft or chief by myself - which 95% or greater of my flying would be (Fair Wife has no interest in anything smaller than a 737) - but getting over that hump of the dual hours and then checkride are my issues.

Windknot wrote:The problem is simply the training and checkout.

Take a long vacation, Knot, come out here (or somewhere like this), fly every day with me (or someone like me), and get yourself licensed. After that, go find yourself an old T-craft, get your taildragger signoff, and have a ball!

You can give yourself a leg up by getting a Sport Pilot self-paced ground course (from Gleim, ASI, the Kings, Sporty's, or whoever), applying yourself, and getting your knowledge test out of the way first. You can also do pre-solo primary training in a Cherokee, C172, or what have you, as though you were going for a Private, but just never get the medical certificate. You won't be able to solo, but all those skills will help you when you go somewhere else for your Sport Pilot rating (and all the hours will count).

Good luck!

Sort of. If you are already a licensed pilot, Private or above

Paul -- not quite. You may be an RP or above not a just a PP. And, if you're only Day-VFR, an RP with a couple endorsements has essentially the same privileges as a PP.

Knot -- an RP is technically 10 hrs shorter in training than a PP (YMMV) and might provide a quicker route to what you're targeting. An RP can let there medical lapse and fly as an SP today since an RP is considered a higher rating.

All -- an interesting point in the proposal is the restriction on retractable gear but not complex aircraft. This means you can have a variable speed prop in your 180hp four seater. Of course a SP can only operate a plane with a fixed or ground adjustable prop.

dstclair wrote:You may be an RP or above not a just a PP.

Thanks for the correction, Dave. If the proposal is adopted, that's good news for the couple of hundred people in the world who are Rec Pilots.

drseti wrote:If the proposal is adopted, that's good news for the couple of hundred people in the world who are Rec Pilots.

This petition won't just benefit "the few hundred rec pilots". It will benefit Private pilots too, who don't want to keep their medical current. Right now, without a medical, a person may exercise the privilege of sport pilot. If this thing passes, pilots will now have a choice. They may exercise the privileges of rec or sport pilot.

comperini wrote:This petition won't just benefit "the few hundred rec pilots".

Well, yes, of course. My point is, by including RP along with PP in the proposal, they will potentially be benefiting a couple of hundred more folks.

Windknot, you are touching on some of the LSA-related and SPL-related issues that surface here regularly. Only a small minority of all GA flight training programs have embraced the SP curriculum, LSAs have to date sold in small numbers (when viewed from the perspective of a very large country with 5000+ public use airports - http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/stats/airports_state.html ) and often to private individuals vs. flight schools, and LSAs really are "light" (which in part means "small") as well as "sport" (aka: recreational) aircraft. The reality - for most Americans who aspire to do GA flying - is that the PPL is the more versatile license, by far. And especially if starting out in flight training, with possibly a lifetime of flying ahead of you. That's not a negative comment about the SPL, just an accurate comment about the PPL.

drseti wrote:

Windknot wrote:Does the proposal suggest that a former Class III medical holder, can fly their 4 place, >180hp etc airplane under revised "REC" pilot standards?

Sort of. If you are already a licensed pilot, Private or above, and the proposal is adopted by the FAA, then you will be allowed to let your medical certificate lapse, and fly under the Rec pilot rules. This does nothing to help the Private Pilot wannabe, who would still need to be able to pass a 3rd class medical exam in order to get licensed -- and then could let the medical lapse. As the proposal is written, if you're a Sport Pilot wanting to upgrade to Private, you'll still need a medical (which you can then let lapse after you get licensed).

Not quite drseti, I checked the proposal and it seems it does cover Student Private Pilots and Student Recreational Pilots. Check the table on page 5 of the AOPA EAA medical proposal.

N918KT wrote:I checked the proposal and it seems it does cover Student Private Pilots and Student Recreational Pilots.

But since you can't get a Student Pvt or Student Rec pilot license without a medical, it would seem you'd still have to be able to pass a medical to take advantage of this proposed rule change -- and then let it lapse. That doesn't help the person who can't pass an FAA Class 3 physical in the first place -- nor does it remove the risk of applying for a medical and having it revoked or suspended (which would then ground you totally).

This is going to sound simplistic, but what's the big overwhelming concern of the FAA about medical requirements for private pilots, 2 persons max permitted, under 10,000 feet, not high-performance aircraft?

LSA has proven the low risk of any medical related incidents, and that self assessment works.

We are not talking about military or commercial pilots here.
Where did this huge importance placed on the medical come from?

designrs wrote:what's the big overwhelming concern of the FAA about medical requirements

It's all about their "this is the way we've always done it" mentality.

Given the topic, perhaps it's worth mentioning that there are some AME's who have earned a sterling reputation (including among various pilot forums and owners' associations) over the years. These AME's aren't ignoring medical issues when earning solid reps. Instead, they seem to be especially knowledgeable about the medical bases for the requirements, they are effective at working with the regional and HQ FAA authorities, and they counsel applicants (and those considering application) effectively so that carts don't get in front of horses. E.g. visit the Pilots of America forum ( http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/index.php ) and 'search' for 'AME'. Some of the posts are well worth reading, as are the referrals. There are similar posts, I noticed, on the Vans Air Force , the CFO (Cardinal Flyers Online) and the AYA (American Yankee Association) websites & message lists.

For those new to general aviation, it's quite difficult to know how to assess a training program or judge the quality of an instructor. But knowing how to play the Class III medical 'game' is perhaps least knowable of all without some research. Yet it is sometimes what halts or at least frustrates a student's efforts moreso than the training curriculum or the instructor.

Interesting change down under: http://www.avweb.com/avwebbiz/news/Aust ... 882-1.html

Really like the normal doctor approach and online registration. I don't believe it will change what may be adopted by the FAA but this could bode well for adoption given there is now an international precedent.

Is a medical from another country valid as a medical in the US? One of the prior conditions that I have that is preventing me from even applying for a 3rd class medical is not even considered in europe. I'd rather not go into details on what it is, but if i could fly across, get a medical, and ocme back, i'd happily take a 'medical vacation' every so often!

theskunk wrote:Is a medical from another country valid as a medical in the US? One of the prior conditions that I have that is preventing me from even applying for a 3rd class medical is not even considered in europe. I'd rather not go into details on what it is, but if i could fly across, get a medical, and ocme back, i'd happily take a 'medical vacation' every so often!

You would have to have an FAA medical. The unfortunate thing is there are several things that are OK across the pound and in Australia that have been accepted for years that the FAA will not allow.