New chance to comment on medical petition

[FrankR]

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2 ... ition.html

This is AOPA's article, today, on opening another period of comment on the request by AOPA and the Experimental Aircraft Association to allow pilots to fly many common aircraft by completing a medical awareness online course and carrying a driver's license in lieu of a medical certificate.

In it is a link that takes you to the FAA's comment website.

[matthew]

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2 ... ition.html

This is AOPA's article, today, on opening another period of comment on the request by AOPA and the Experimental Aircraft Association to allow pilots to fly many common aircraft by completing a medical awareness online course and carrying a driver's license in lieu of a medical certificate.

In it is a link that takes you to the FAA's comment website.

One thing I can't figure out about this. Would this apply to new pilots (say those seeing a recreational licence, as that is what the restrictions sound like), or does it just grandfather those who currently hold a Class3 medical and Private Pilots License?

[dstclair]

Matthew,

This would apply to any pilot with a Recreational Pilot (RP) certificate or higher which means they had to have a 3rd class (or better) medical at one time.

The exemption does not create a path for a student to attain an RP without a current medical.

[N918KT]

Matthew,

This would apply to any pilot with a Recreational Pilot (RP) certificate or higher which means they had to have a 3rd class (or better) medical at one time.

The exemption does not create a path for a student to attain an RP without a current medical.

Where did you get the rule that student pilots doesn't fall under the exemption? Can you cite what regs in the exemption prohibits student pilots from participating in the AOPA EAA medical exemption?

I checked the proposal and it mentioned that student pilots fall under the exemption.

I asked the same question on AOPA Flight Training Magazine Facebook page a month ago.

N918KT: I have a question, does the medical exemption cover wanna-be pilots who want to obtain a student pilot certificate in addition to the student pilots, recreational pilots, and private pilots?

AOPA Flight Training Magazine: Kevin, presumably it would cover anybody who wants to be a pilot.

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/120319aopa ... mption.pdf

Check Page 5 of the exemption.

-Holds valid pilot certificate OR is training/applying for a pilot certificate

-Carries pilot/student certificate, driver’s license, and aeromedical course certification

[dstclair]

There has been some questions as to whether the proposal would just be for current RP and above pilots (who at one time had a medical) or would allow the RP to be earned without a 3rd class medical. The following is a clarification from EAA on the actual proposal:

The proposal EAA and AOPA intend to submit would not allow a path to initially obtain a recreational or private pilot certificate. To obtain either of these certificate would require a 3rd class medical. However, once the recreational or private certificate was obtained the pilot could then take advantage of the exemption and choose to not renew the 3rd class medical and under the exemption use a drivers license thereafter.

The proposal was carefully drafted to maximize its acceptability to the FAA and create progress where there has been none previously. Each additional expansion beyond the limits that are being proposed reduces the likelihood of success. If we are successful and the exemption is issued, it is possible that in future years the exemption could be modified in a way that might allow a path from sport pilot to recreational or private pilot without needing a 3rd class medical.

Additional information about the proposal including a series of FAQs, can be viewed by clicking these links:
http://eaa.org/news/2011/2011-09-24_medical-mm.asp
http://eaa.org/news/2011/2011-10-06_exemption.asp
http://eaa.org/news/2011/2011-11-14_faq.asp

Click here to sign up for e-mail alerts on the progress of EAA and AOPA’s petition to exempt pilots flying recreationally from the third class medical certificate requirement.

Thank you for your support of this initiative.

[N918KT]

I see. But I don't understand. Why is AOPA and EAA still proposing the exemption like it covers student pilots? Is there a discrepancy on views within the organization? Like do different officials of the organizations have different views regarding certain limitations on the medical exemption proposal and what the proposal cover or doesn't cover?

[dstclair]

Kevin,

Got to admit there are several inconsistencies not the least of which are in the proposal itself. The table you reference is cited to be a summary of the detailed proposal in the appendices but 'student' is not mentioned at all there (other than various references to prior tries at changing the medical requirements).

My opinion is that the exemption is initially designed to cover those who have achieved a rating that includes obtaining a medical. The exemption includes support for the petition by stating it would increase safety by allowing pilots to continue flying planes in which they are already familiar. This would be inconsistent or, at least, weaken the argument to claim a student is so familiar with a class of airplanes such that it would materially improve safety.

[matthew]

That is too bad, but what I expected.

It is only a temporary fix to the problem of declining # of pilots.

It does seem to be a double-hit to the Sport Pilot world too:

It does not help new pilots into the flow, yet it makes the SP world less attractive to FBO's, as there will be less usage (although arguably the same number of SP training starts, since those already holding a RP+ would not look for anything more than transition training anyway). So, if nothing else, it will lessen demand for FBO's / schools to have SP-rated aircraft on hand.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out. I'm sure it's a big deal for those already holding a license, so good for them!

[N918KT]

Last Friday, I sent an email to the AOPA staff to ask if student pilots are included under the medical exemption. So far they had not responded to me yet but hopefully they will respond to my email by tomorrow or Tuesday.

I will post the response from them as soon as I get the answer from them.

[N918KT]

I just called the AOPA Pilot Information Center and spoke with one of the AOPA officials. He told me that the AOPA EAA medical exemption WILL cover student pilots and student pilots who wish to obtain a student pilot certificate. I also asked if the exemption will cover pilots with denied medicals and he also said yes that may cover denied medical pilots provided that they are safe to fly on that day I think.

He said that the timeline on the proposal will take several months probably into 2013 I think.

[drseti]

Bear in mind, Kevin, that this is what AOPA is asking for. It may not be what FAA ultimately approves.

[N918KT]

I know that, drseti, when I said that student pilots and medical denied pilots are included in the exemption, I meant that they are included in the exemption as proposed by AOPA and EAA. You're right, I have no idea what the FAA is going to do about the exemption yet but hopefully it is good, although I'm not expecting it. It may have more restrictions than originally proposed.

[rab23us]

My question is are sport pilots hoping the exemption brings them into larger gross weight planes on a drivers license medical. Because when you read what a recreational pilot can do I personally would rather fly as a sport pilot.

[Jack Tyler]

"My question is are sport pilots hoping the exemption brings them into larger gross weight planes on a drivers license medical."

Perhaps some are. But my impression after listening to Craig Fuller speak on this topic and reading Hightower's comments is that the main thrust of the proposal is to help licensed pilots (RP and above) stay active in aviation and have a reason to maintain a/c ownership as they age and develop medical issues which may not prevent safety in flight but which do impose FAA-related medical requirements that can be expensive and certainly can have an uncertain outcome.

With the exception of relatively smaller numbers of younger and middle-aged pilots who develop early onset of medical issues, this proposal seems to me to resonate most with older pilots like me. And when I visit major aviation venues like Sun 'n Fun or the LSA Expo in Sebring, I see this in spades - lots and lots of older guys. It's disappointing how that population lacks women and ethnic diversity. That's one reason I find it encouraging to fly a Young Eagles event or visit a flight school, as one sees a broader cross-section of today's youth.

[theskunk]

I'm one of those early/middle aged pilots who had an early (as in high school) issue that doesn't bother me anymore, but is considered a life-long condition by the FAA.

I made it all the way to the financing part of buying a Cirrus SR22 before we decided that I should get a medical *just in case*. I was part of their 'buy to train' program, or whatever they called it about 2 years back. I'm seriously hopeful that I'll be able to get into a DA40, and eventually into an SR20 some years down the road. Right now I've put all aircraft purchase decisions on hold until this shakes out. If they want to talk about how this is affecting LSA sales, or how this has affected regular GA economies, while a small minority, i know that I make up at least one aircraft out there.

Further more, the part that bothers me the most, I recently found out that the US is the ONLY country that limits on what I've got as a 'life long condition'. Unfortunately getting a Canadian license will only help me in Canada... not in NC.