Sport Pilot cuts off special issuance at the knees

(C Kingsbury) wrote in
om:

Juan Jimenez wrote in message
.. .
"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...

There's always good reason to be cynical, but this document
(http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulat...edical_faq.doc) from the
FAA leaves a lot of doors open, albeit on both sides.

It is important to look at what the FAA did *not* do, which is to have
a clause specifically excluding everyone having cardiac conditions,
diabetes, loss of consciousness, etc. They could have referenced the
existing medicals certification standards and required everyone to
self-certify that they have none of the automatic disqualifiers.
Instead, for those that have never hald a certificate but have such
conditions, the document says,

They do indeed make reference to disqualifiers in part 67 if you have are
flying an LSA with a medical certificate. I wonder... I thought the NPRM
made reference to part 67 disqualifiers for BOTH medical certificate
holders and people flying with DL's. Was that a change? Hmm. If so, I'm
surprised that was relaxed.

What we are dealing with here is a sort of bipolar disorder.

chuckle

And yet, that same man could, in theory, be OK so long
as he had never tried to obtain a medical, and simply followed his
doctor's advice.

Then again, the same man could do that right now with an ultralight.

Another issue that has not been discussed is whether family doctors are
going to want to assume additional liability for telling someone they can
fly. How much you want to be that's going to become a big issue sooner than
later?

Juan

Don't ask if you are safe to fly; ask if you are safe to drive.

Jerry in NC

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
...
(C Kingsbury) wrote in
om:

Juan Jimenez wrote in message
.. .
"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...

There's always good reason to be cynical, but this document
(http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/regulat...edical_faq.doc) from the
FAA leaves a lot of doors open, albeit on both sides.

It is important to look at what the FAA did *not* do, which is to have
a clause specifically excluding everyone having cardiac conditions,
diabetes, loss of consciousness, etc. They could have referenced the
existing medicals certification standards and required everyone to
self-certify that they have none of the automatic disqualifiers.
Instead, for those that have never hald a certificate but have such
conditions, the document says,

They do indeed make reference to disqualifiers in part 67 if you have are
flying an LSA with a medical certificate. I wonder... I thought the NPRM
made reference to part 67 disqualifiers for BOTH medical certificate
holders and people flying with DL's. Was that a change? Hmm. If so, I'm
surprised that was relaxed.

What we are dealing with here is a sort of bipolar disorder.

chuckle

And yet, that same man could, in theory, be OK so long
as he had never tried to obtain a medical, and simply followed his
doctor's advice.

Then again, the same man could do that right now with an ultralight.

Another issue that has not been discussed is whether family doctors are
going to want to assume additional liability for telling someone they can
fly. How much you want to be that's going to become a big issue sooner
than
later?

Juan

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...sport_rule.doc

Look for page 156. This starts a fairly extended discussion of their
thought processes behind it.

On closer examination it seems to me like what they're aiming at is, a
requirement that you be able to get a special issuance at least once,
and then you're OK with a DL for a while. In their view, the number of
people who are rejected totally is small, most simply drop out
voluntarily part of the way through. Of course we'd all rather just
have the DL medical and be done with it, but the FAA is more lenient
in medical certification than most other agencies in the world.

In any case, it is at least a partial gain if they do not require
people to keep their special issuances current. Having to get a 3C
once every 2-3 years is OK, but if you need to get a bunch of tests
done every 12-18 months that can add up fast.

Of course, what this doesn't address are those who are unable to
obtain a special issuance because of current practices. This stinks
for them, but there is some hope. There are plenty of conditions that
used to be flat-out, not-a-chance disqualifying that can now be
cleared. Sport pilot is better than nothing but many of us will still
want to exercise PPL privileges.

-cwk.

"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
om...
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...sport_rule.doc

Look for page 156. This starts a fairly extended discussion of their
thought processes behind it.

On closer examination it seems to me like what they're aiming at is, a
requirement that you be able to get a special issuance at least once,
and then you're OK with a DL for a while. In their view, the number of
people who are rejected totally is small, most simply drop out
voluntarily part of the way through. Of course we'd all rather just
have the DL medical and be done with it, but the FAA is more lenient
in medical certification than most other agencies in the world.

In any case, it is at least a partial gain if they do not require
people to keep their special issuances current. Having to get a 3C
once every 2-3 years is OK, but if you need to get a bunch of tests
done every 12-18 months that can add up fast.

Of course, what this doesn't address are those who are unable to
obtain a special issuance because of current practices. This stinks
for them, but there is some hope. There are plenty of conditions that
used to be flat-out, not-a-chance disqualifying that can now be
cleared. Sport pilot is better than nothing but many of us will still
want to exercise PPL privileges.


And the EAA will be working with the FAA to establish "alternatives",
with one of the expectations being that special issuances for SP will
be easier to get than for PPLs.

In article , David D Cowell says...

Sure wish this was a moderated group......:0(

Actually Dave you really don't. Otherwise those of us who have had or are having
problems with the aviation media ,Aero News Network in particular would have no
place to tell the other side . zoom and jaun are a part of ANN news (I use that
term loosely) organization.Sometimes it gets petty but most of the time we get
to see both sides of an issue and the real personalities of those who claim the
title of Journalist.

Lastly I'd say if any of this offends you then hit the kill file,no muss no fuss
and it was just self moderated. Good luck

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret

David D Cowell wrote:
Hi Chuck,
I'm as much interested in Aviation news and events as the next guy, but
beating this dead horse has very little to do with Home Building.


David why don't you tell us what you have built and post some interesting facts
instead of bitching???? If you have been around aviation very long you would
know that this horse is not dead yet and this has everyting to do with aviation

Beat away Chuck

Jerry

rom: osite (RobertR237)
Date: 8/6/2004 10:51 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


Perhaps a solution to this problem would be to send Zoom to test fly the
Moller Skycar. ;o)

Tony



Only if he promises to roll it for us.


Bob Reed

You mean he hasn't done this already?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

In article , Andy Asberry says...
Note to Chuck: Tony also cautioned that some of the 15 were fair
weather friends. Your experience has proved him correct. He certainly
knew how to read people.

Hi Andy
He was right about the RAH-15 he warned me not to say anything to some people
that I wouldn't say to zooms face.I was sure fooled for a while but Tony backed
my suspicions.He was a true friend and an honorable man who I still miss. I
often wonder what Tony would do and lo and behold his voice comes ringing out
loud and clear via your post . It was good to read it again.
Thanks

see ya

Chuck S RAH-15/1 ret



From: Tony P. )
Subject: Chucked?


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Date: 1997/11/13

Andy:

Thank you for having an open mind. I apologize for the excessive
enthusiasm of some of the local inhabitants. Unfortunately, while it
tends to lend credence to Mr. Campbell's characterization of this
newsgroup as uniformly hostile to him, there's been so much verbiage
that folks tend to assume everyone knows the history. Some also tend
to assume that anyone popping off favorably to Mr. Campbell's position
is a mole or pseudonymous plant of some kind.

Unfortunately, there have been occasional provocateurs also, who have
come in flaming after either reading stuff Campbell posts or, perhaps,
being in contact with him. Some even seem suspiciously as if they may
BE him, which makes for some comical exchanges when some poor guy with
a new aol account blunders in and gripes about the Campbell threads
(many "popups" have been from aol, for some strange reason, and I
think some of his more benighted fans try to emulate his uh, unusual
writing style with startling results).

Anyway, the hardest thing for any human being to do is to acknowledge
NOT having all the answers and that admission is usually the solution
to most human problems (pardon me for the philosophy, but I think it
is also the answer to Mr. Campbell's problem, in part). As far as I'm
concerned, your initial reaction was appropriate to what you knew, and
your second reaction is appropriate to what you learned. Frankly
there is room even when the facts are known, to differ on what is
reasonable anyway.

Stick around. We need people who are willing to stick their heads up
and speak their minds around here. You'll fit right in. Just don't
think we are ALL completely crazy because some of us are. There are
some fine aviators and surprisingly good minds around here.

Tony Pucillo

[I speak only for myself unless I say otherwise. One personality is
quite enough, thank you.]

"Castigat ridendo mores" laughter succeeds where lecturing won't

"RobertR237" wrote ...

Perhaps a solution to this problem would be to send Zoom to test fly the
Moller Skycar. ;o)

Tony

Only if he promises to roll it for us.

That's silly. Even Jim couldn't roll the Skycar ... it would get wrapped in
the cable that's holding it up in the air.

Rich


But he would claim he did...even if only in his wet dreams.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

Richard Isakson wrote:

"RobertR237" wrote ...

Perhaps a solution to this problem would be to send Zoom to test fly the
Moller Skycar. ;o)

Tony

Only if he promises to roll it for us.

That's silly. Even Jim couldn't roll the Skycar ... it would get wrapped in
the cable that's holding it up in the air.

Rich


Naw, he'd loop it first, then run back through the loop and tie
a neat little square knot in the cable...