Page 1 of 5

The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Tue Apr 27, 2010 1:09 pm
by Rex

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:11 am
by drseti
BREAKING NEWS:
Effective today, the FAA has relaxed the LSA rules to allow Sport Pilots to fly aircraft weighing up to 6,000 pounds, carrying no more than 6 occupants.
Happy April First!

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2019 2:35 pm
by WDD
Yes, but the cup holder rule will still be a roadblock for a lot of folks.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 4:42 pm
by acensor
Hi drseti....

Well you had me there for a second until I saw you signed it "happy April first." :wink:

Alex.
P.S., As you probably know there actually IS a move in the works to expand what Sport Pilots can fly.
IIRR it will, if eventually accepted allow sport pilots to fly heavier (up to 3600 lbs IIRR) aircraft, will pull aircraft such as the Cessna 150 (and more) into sport pilot turf. IIRR the proposed changes have been in the works now for about a year, and a good guess is one more year before we see if they are implemented. IIRR while the change would allow sport pilots to fly some four-seaters they still would be allowed to carry only one passenger. Again, IIRR it does ad some more restrictions. I think it removes the right to apply ultralight flying experience toward getting a sport pilot certificate.
https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/articl ... T9mjk1Yaos

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2019 5:19 pm
by drseti
acensor wrote: IIRR the proposed changes have been in the works now for about a year, and a good guess is one more year before we see if they are implemented.


The first announcement was made last year at Oshkosh 2018. It was speculative in nature, promising a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking by the end of the year. The NPRM has yet to materialize. Once it does, the process can be expected to take another two years, and the final rule (if any) may bear very little resemblance to what's being speculated. In other words, don't hold your breath.

I think it removes the right to apply ultralight flying experience toward getting a sport pilot certificate.


That window of opportunity actually closed several years ago. :( I find it unlikely that they will reopen it.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:02 am
by bryancobb
This is my first time on the forum in a while. Although Dr. Paul is correct that the Sport rules will take some time to get changed, if they ever do, the changes to the regs made by adding Part 68 ARE already in effect.

This new section is more commonly called "Basic Med."

I speculate that a large majority of Sport rules participants are previously-rated pilots who had concerns about being able to pass a Class III so they just let theirs lapse and started flying Light Sport. Maybe I'm wrong but if I'm not, Basic Med may give these pilots reason to at least go get an "off-the-record" Class III preliminary physical from an AME to SEE if they could pass a REAL one. The AME's are routinely doing this now. They can advise you on those medical conditions that will require a Special Issuance and how cumbersome it would be to get that.

Once the AME helps you through the physical that single time, you are eligible to do Basic Med. If you are a pilot that held a Class III or above within the past 10 years, you are already eligible for Basic Med.

What Basic Med does for you sounds very, very similar to the possible changes to the Sport Pilot / Light Sport regs. You can fly an aircraft that has up to 6 seats, up to 6000 pounds, day/night, IFR/VFR, turbine/piston, and below FL180 and below 250kts IAS...Without an FAA Medical Certificate. Nothing related to you medically, is even sent to the FAA except the AOPA "passed" status every two years. You DO have to have a Driver's License and you DO have to certify on the AOPA quiz page that you haven't had a DUI, or drug-related incident since your last quiz.

A rated pilot who is eligible for Basic Med needs to do two things to be legal to fly under the rule. One - Take the simple quiz on the AOPA Website every TWO years that makes sure you have a very basic understanding of current "aeromedical" things. The quiz materials covers things like medications, alcohol and drug use, mental health, and conditions affecting your heart and brain. Two - Go to your Family Doctor every FOUR years get a regular physical exam and discuss your health and form an "informed medical opinion that you are safe to do the type flying you wish to do." Your Family Doctor signs a form showing that the checkup has occurred, the discussion has happened, and the opinion is there's nothing apparent that indicates safety will be negatively affected by you flying in your present health.

THIS FORM GOES IN YOUR WALLET OR LOGBOOK AND NEVER GOES TO THE FAA. YOU ALSO GET A LITTLE CARD TO SHOW THE DATE YOU PASSED THE AOPA QUIZ, THAT YOU NEED ON YOU WHEN YOU FLY.

Notice NO FAILURE results ever get in the FAA's hands. Your name only gets to the FAA when you PASS the AOPA quiz. Some would argue THIS IS A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE. I say it is not. The only REAL FAA interaction in this process is their insistence on continuing to maintain a database of pilots who have a have a history of Alcohol or Drug Abuse. The AOPA quiz was the negotiated way to collect this information on airmen. Everyone would agree that addicted or alcoholic pilots do not need to be flying and everyone would agree that a short quiz every two years to insure pilots are not totally ignorant about medical stuff, is a good thing. Also, everyone needs a push to go see their Doctor more often and tend to their health better.

I know I'm long winded I know, but this Basic Med thing turns a lot of airmen into the equivalent of a Sport Pilot that can fly bigger,faster airplanes, in worse weather and at night, in all airspace except "A," without any additional logbook endorsements. Now a no-medical, Sport Pilot "equivalent," with enough money, can own and fly a Cessna Citation Mustang Jet, right through the Atlanta Class B, at 249 kts, in the clouds, at night, with five passengers.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:23 am
by drseti
Bryan is completely correct about Basic Med, and in fact many people on this forum (including me) have gone that route. The process of approval for this very sensible set of rules is a case study in FAA inertia, in that it took two decades from first proposal to implementation.

I jumped through the hoops more than two years ago, when Basic Med first launched. As far as its impact on my own flying is concerned, I must say that it's been minimal. Yes, I could fly my old Beechcraft, or any other plane with up to 6 seats, and a max gross up to 6000#. Yes. I could fly at night, or IFR. But I haven't actually exercised any of these privileges. Why? Because for the past ten years I've very much enjoyed flying these little LSAs, and the SP limitations have in no way interfered with my pleasure, or my mission.

So, why did I even bother to climb that mountain? Because it was there - and it wasn't particularly steep.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:58 am
by 3Dreaming
bryancobb wrote: Once the AME helps you through the physical that single time, you are eligible to do Basic Med. If you are a pilot that held a Class III or above within the past 10 years, you are already eligible for Basic Med.


Actually at this point it is 13 plus years. The FAA set a hard point of July 14, 2006. That means if you were under 40 and received a medical after June 2003, or if you were over 40 and received a medical after June 2004, and have not had one of the disqualifying conditions spelled out in CFR part 68 you can exercise the privileges of Basic Med after completing the training and exam.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 11:02 am
by TimTaylor
I missed out by 45 days. Bummer. However, even if I had qualified for Basic Med, I doubt it would have changed anything for me. At 71 years of age, I am perfectly happy flying LSA in VFR conditions in daylight hours.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:12 pm
by FastEddieB
drseti wrote:I jumped through the hoops more than two years ago, when Basic Med first launched. As far as its impact on my own flying is concerned, I must say that it's been minimal.


Ditto.

But I’m just running into cases where BasicMed can be a benefit.

The owner of out TN airport just bought a very nice Citabria 7GCBC. He got his tailwheel endorsement years ago, but felt quite rusty. So I had a chance a few days ago to fly with him.

Image

As an instructor, since he was legal to pilot his plane, I really didn’t need a medical to instruct him in it. But for my first orientation in it, I suppose having one helped avoid any issues as I acted as PIC in the front seat. I may also have occasional use of a Cirrus, and possibly a Maule, so there’s that.

Back to the Citabria - what a nice plane! I think it’s the first of the newer ACA planes I’ve flown and felt very new and solid. I had not flown a Citabria since 1996, but it all came back to me pretty quickly, both in the front and back seat. A couple of times I landed just a tad flat and fast, I think due to the increased back pressure needed in the flare compared to my Sky Arrow. And as a new example of negative transfer, shutting down the first time I instinctively just reached up and turned off the mags. When the owner said, “We generally do that with the mixture”, it actually took me a moment to get what he was saying!

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:55 pm
by Scooper
For me, flying an LSA as a sport pilot using my valid driver's license in lieu of a medical certificate worked just fine for 99% of my flying. Twice, though, I had unexpected headwinds on a long cross-country flight and had to land at an airport only fifty miles from home and spend the night in a hotel just because it was getting dark. Flying under BasicMed lets me finish flights like that at night and also lets me rent 172s and 182s if I want to carry more than one passenger.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 4:13 pm
by TimTaylor
I definitely wish I had been able to qualify for Basic Med. For one reason, I might be able to find something less expensive to rent than a $140 per hour plus $29 per month SkyCatcher, IDK.

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:13 pm
by Warmi
drseti wrote:Bryan is completely correct about Basic Med, and in fact many people on this forum (including me) have gone that route. The process of approval for this very sensible set of rules is a case study in FAA inertia, in that it took two decades from first proposal to implementation.
Q
I jumped through the hoops more than two years ago, when Basic Med first launched. As far as its impact on my own flying is concerned, I must say that it's been minimal. Yes, I could fly my old Beechcraft, or any other plane with up to 6 seats, and a max gross up to 6000#. Yes. I could fly at night, or IFR. But I haven't actually exercised any of these privileges. Why? Because for the past ten years I've very much enjoyed flying these little LSAs, and the SP limitations have in no way interfered with my pleasure, or my mission.

So, why did I even bother to climb that mountain? Because it was there - and it wasn't particularly steep.



Maybe I am remembering something wrong but I could swear you mentioned in some of your posts that you had an open heart surgery ( a bypass perhaps ) - I thought this sort of surgery was one of these automatically disqualifying conditions as far as basic med ... am I completely wrong here ?

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:26 pm
by TimTaylor

Re: The new Sport Pilot Rule Changes

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 5:30 pm
by drseti
Warmi wrote:am I completely wrong here ?


No, Warmi, only partially wrong. I had vascular disease, which was treated successfully. I never had cardiac disease, which you're correct would have been disqualifying.