Sport Pilot inconsistency

Cub Driver wrote in message . ..

I am unclear on two Sport Pilot issues: First, a new pilot may qualify
for a Sport Pilot ticket even though he or she takes a medication that
would preclude a 3rd class medical. However, an experienced pilot with
a higher ticket may not operate as a Sport Pilot if he lost a medical
last year for taking the same medication. In other words, both pilots
have exactly the same medical history: One is allowed to fly as a
Sport Pilot and the other is not.

Think of it from the FAA's perspective: You have a license that has no
medical paper trail requirement, it just says, "don't be stupid and
fly if you can't," just like a 50' speedboat that can go 100MPH. A guy
who shouldn't be flying does, and crashes into a playground. Tragedy,
but not the FAA's fault. A second pilot is *on record* with the FAA as
being medically "unfit to fly," and the same accident happens.
Disregard the fine print of what can lead to a rejection for a moment
and imagine how that one will play on the evening news. There's your
explanation.

Sport Pilot is a Junior Birdman license--what Recreational Pilot was
meant to be, but got wrapped up in some many qualifications that it
never got off the ground.

It's natural that existing pilots grounded by senseless medical issues
focus so narrowly on the license aspect, but it's the new ways of
certifying, manufacturing, and maintaining aircraft that will make
Sport Pilot revolutionary. And as flying becomes more accessible in
terms of cost, more people will get into it, creating larger and more
powerful lobbies to increase medical options.

For the second issue, let's assume the medication is an SSRI where the
preponderance of medical opinion is that the medication does not
impair a pilot and makes them less of a risk if they need it.

AFAICT the FAA's concern is not so much with direct physiological
effects of the meds, but with the fact that the pilot's mental state
is such that they are necessary. Now, this raises the question of
whather you're better off with a cheerful Zoloft-ed captain or a
depressed and completely untreated one. As a layman this looks like a
real minefield no matter which way you go. Again putting myself in the
bureaucrat's seat, I'm thinking about how to make sure I don't get
blamed if something awful happens. That's who the current system
protects.

This is
the same medication that has been commonly prescribed to combat Navy
carrier pilots and Canadian fliers for years without issues.

If the government has spent years and millions of dollars training a
pilot, they're not going to kick him to a desk job without a damn good
reason. Plus they can invest a lot more effort in individual
evaluations of cases.

***

The truth is, the FAA is far more progressive about medical issues
than pretty much the rest of the world, and can reasonably argue that
it is truly trying to certify as many pilots as possible. Diabetes and
any kind of heart problems were once utterly unthinkable, and now
there are tens of thousands of pilots all the way up through 1st Class
flying with those. The pace of change is of course never fast enough
for those who have problems that remain off-limits, but medical
certification is one area where common sense seems to have prevailed
over the years.

Pharmaceutical treatment of minor depression is still a somewhat new
thing in many ways, but it's becoming so widespread I can't see the
FAA's more or less blanket ban on it lasting another decade. Pilots,
existing or would-be, who take these medications need to get together
and work with groups like AOPA and ALPA to figure out what the FAA
needs see to change course.

Best,
-cwk.