Sport Pilot cuts off special issuance at the knees

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message ...
If you let it expire you did not meet the requirements to have the medical,
so by definition it is either revoked or suspended.

Bull****. It's just expired...you can't use it anymore. There's a difference between
expiration (which is without prejudice) and having it terminated by an explicit action.

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...
Todd Pattist wrote in
:

I disagree. "Expiration" is different from "revocation."
The latter implies affirmative action by the issuing
authority to withdraw the medical, presumably for cause.
The former does not carry that implication.

If you let it expire you did not meet the requirements to have the
medical,
so by definition it is either revoked or suspended. You can't use it. For
the purposes of the LSA that is how it can be interpreted. It is one thing
to allow a normal medical to expire, but anyone who has a special
issuance,
by definition, does not qualify for a normal medical certificate. The
letter that you are sent when you receive a special issuance medical is
VERY specific: "You are ineligible for third-class medical certification
under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR's)," blah blah...

Gee, along with just about everyone in this thread, the AOPA seems to
disagree with you too:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...rt.html#miller

"...Under the rules, if his special issuance medical certificate lapses, he
can still fly exercising the privileges of a Sport Pilot certificate with a
driver's license, providing that he self-certifies that he is medically fit
to fly."

You may be proved correct (I don't think so), but until that distant time, I
think I'll believe all the doctors and lawyers on the various AOPA panels.

-cj

"Ron Natalie" wrote in
m:


"Juan~--~Jimenez" b*d&5^-*@()--b(d)5+.!c#o$m wrote in message
...
From the Sport Pilot final rule:


It sounds like you can just continue to keep your Special Issuance/3rd
class in line until it expires and then you are free. Special
issuances always have a time limit on them (usually a year) anyhow.

I wish it were, but that does not seem to be the case...

"Ron Natalie" wrote in
m:


"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...
If you let it expire you did not meet the requirements to have the
medical, so by definition it is either revoked or suspended.

Bull****. It's just expired...you can't use it anymore. There's
a difference between expiration (which is without prejudice) and
having it terminated by an explicit action.

No, Ron. Suppose you get a letter from the FAA asking you for an update
of... say... your diabetic situation, from your doctor. What do you think
will happen if you ignore the letter and try to wait until the special
issuance expires, so that you can then fly LSA aircraft with a DL? (This is
no different than not sending in the required medical reports needed to
renew the special issuance medical; that request is made when you get the
medical in the first place.)

I'll give you one guess, and a hint: it's not an expiration and it will be
highly prejudiced. Make sure you check your sources, because I have the
answer right in front of me, in black and white, on FAA letterhead.

Juan

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...

I'll give you one guess, and a hint: it's not an expiration and it will be
highly prejudiced. Make sure you check your sources, because I have the
answer right in front of me, in black and white, on FAA letterhead.


And so what *is* the definition of "is"?

This is the archtypical example of phony news hacks trying to make something
out of nothing. I already posted the specific response of the FAA with
regard to this specific question. Read it again. If you can't find it, ask
for help.

This is a dip**** bull**** response that is trying to stir up a non-existant
issue.

*PLONK*

Rich S.

"cj" wrote in
:

Gee, along with just about everyone in this thread, the AOPA seems to
disagree with you too:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...rt.html#miller

"...Under the rules, if his special issuance medical certificate
lapses, he can still fly exercising the privileges of a Sport Pilot
certificate with a driver's license, providing that he self-certifies
that he is medically fit to fly."

You may be proved correct (I don't think so), but until that distant
time, I think I'll believe all the doctors and lawyers on the various
AOPA panels.

You know what, CJ? I hope AOPA is right. However, this is what the final
rule says:

"The FAA has reconsidered the circumstances in which a current and valid
U.S. driver's license should be allowed in lieu of a valid airman medical
certificate and has made substantive revisions to the medical provisions in
the final rule. These revisions are based on the FAA's concern that pilots
whose airman medical certificates have been denied, suspended, or revoked
or whose Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate
(Authorization) has been withdrawn would be allowed to operate light-sport
aircraft other than gliders and balloons under the proposed rule.
Therefore, possession of a current and valid U.S. driver's license alone is
not enough to dispel this concern. For this reason, this final rule
permits using a current and valid U.S. driver's license as evidence of
medical qualification based on certain conditions. If a person has applied
for an airman medical certificate, that person must have been found
eligible for the issuance of at least a third-class airman medical
certificate. If a person has held an airman medical certificate, that
person's most recently issued airman medical certificate must not have been
revoked or suspended. If a person has been granted an Authorization, that
Authorization must not have been withdrawn."

There is NOTHING in the rules that say that if a special issuance medical
lapses, you can use your DL as a replacement, but there is SPECIFIC text in
the rule that says that if your special issuance is withdrawn, you cannot
use your DL.

"Rich S." wrote in
:

And so what *is* the definition of "is"?

Hello, Mr. Clinton. Didn't know you were a pilot.

This is the archtypical example of phony news hacks trying to make
something out of nothing. I already posted the specific response of
the FAA with regard to this specific question. Read it again. If you
can't find it, ask for help.

This is a dip**** bull**** response that is trying to stir up a
non-existant issue.

*PLONK*

Ah, so your real agenda finally popped up. Hmm. Oh, well, no loss to the
thread.

Juan Jimenez wrote in
:

"cj" wrote in
:

Gee, along with just about everyone in this thread, the AOPA seems to
disagree with you too:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...rt.html#miller

"...Under the rules, if his special issuance medical certificate
lapses, he can still fly exercising the privileges of a Sport Pilot
certificate with a driver's license, providing that he self-certifies
that he is medically fit to fly."

You may be proved correct (I don't think so), but until that distant
time, I think I'll believe all the doctors and lawyers on the various
AOPA panels.

You know what, CJ? I hope AOPA is right. However, this is what the
final rule says:

"The FAA has reconsidered the circumstances in which a current and
valid U.S. driver's license should be allowed in lieu of a valid
airman medical certificate and has made substantive revisions to the
medical provisions in the final rule. These revisions are based on
the FAA's concern that pilots whose airman medical certificates have
been denied, suspended, or revoked or whose Authorization for Special
Issuance of a Medical Certificate (Authorization) has been withdrawn
would be allowed to operate light-sport aircraft other than gliders
and balloons under the proposed rule. Therefore, possession of a
current and valid U.S. driver's license alone is not enough to dispel
this concern. For this reason, this final rule permits using a
current and valid U.S. driver's license as evidence of medical
qualification based on certain conditions. If a person has applied
for an airman medical certificate, that person must have been found
eligible for the issuance of at least a third-class airman medical
certificate. If a person has held an airman medical certificate, that
person's most recently issued airman medical certificate must not have
been revoked or suspended. If a person has been granted an
Authorization, that Authorization must not have been withdrawn."

There is NOTHING in the rules that say that if a special issuance
medical lapses, you can use your DL as a replacement, but there is
SPECIFIC text in the rule that says that if your special issuance is
withdrawn, you cannot use your DL.



EAA also disagrees with you:

Read the following from EAA’s page:
http://www.sportpilot.org/becoming/index.html :



"However, a pilot who has specifically been denied a medical certificate
because of a medical condition that the FAA has judged would make the
person unable to operate an aircraft in a safe manner is not eligible to
use a drivers lecense as a medical. When a pilot is denied a medical, he
or she obtains a letter from the FAA that has the specific word "denied"
in the letter. If you have not received sucha letter, then you can use a
drivers license as a medical. If you have obtained such a letter, your
recourse is to obtain at least one special issuance 3rd class medical
before acting as a sport pilot."



--
ET


"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...
*PLONK*

Ah, so your real agenda finally popped up. Hmm. Oh, well, no loss to the
thread.

Main Entry: stu·pid
1 a : slow of mind : b : given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting
in an unintelligent or careless manner c : lacking intelligence or reason
too dumb to figure out what's going on.

Main Entry: agen·da
2 : an underlying often ideological plan or program a political agenda

I have no agenda, stupid.

"Rich S." wrote in
:

When is a plonk not a plonk? When it comes from a dimwit with an agenda.

Since you really didn't mean it, I'll show you how it's done.

KER-plonk!