Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32

Thread: A Modest Proposal

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    3

    Happy A Modest Proposal

    I post this with only a little of my tongue in cheek, in true Johnathon Swift style.Suppose FAA rejects the EAA AOPA proposal for the driver license medical? I say we do it anyway. What does FAA have to do with it? They only catch about one percent of the pilots who lie on their Medicals or fly without one.What about insurance, you ask? AOPA has an insurance company. EAA has some relationship with an insurance company. As long as a pilot complied with the training and restrictions proposed and AOPA and EAA developed the course and kept the records, how would that be different than FAA being involved?Enforcement, you say. And you're correct. But AOPA has a legal services plan. If their Lawyers would vigorously defend the first two or three cases, that might result in a positive result.This wouldn't be any different than when EAA was essentially granted authority over certain Part 103 ultrlight operations. Having said all this, I really hope FAA sees the light and allows this plan, but I was in college in the sixties, so my radical side emerges once in a while. Rich

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    3
    BTW, this is my first post on the new board, but I used to participate in the first one. Been reading this one and finally signed up.Rich Giannotti EAA 277491

  3. #3
    Joe Delene's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    327
    Looking back over the years there may be an item or 2 in the past where I did not dot every I or cross every T, not necessarily to do with aviation. I find it best to not discuss those on a public board.

    If one is not current, or legal in some way it does give an insurance company an easy out to not cover. If one was to do that may as well not have insurance.

  4. #4
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Delene View Post
    Looking back over the years there may be an item or 2 in the past where I did not dot every I or cross every T, not necessarily to do with aviation. I find it best to not discuss those on a public board.

    If one is not current, or legal in some way it does give an insurance company an easy out to not cover. If one was to do that may as well not have insurance.
    Not to mention that we really shouldn't intentionally try to bait the FAA or NTSB into further inspections, regulations or an all together shut down of general aviation.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    2,461
    Quote Originally Posted by Richgj3 View Post
    I say we do it anyway.
    Rich, I'll agree there are already folks who operate without a valid medical. There are pilots who never complete a flight review, do not meet other applicable recent experience requirements and there are folks that perform maintenance (ah, lets make that "complete rebuild and overhauls") without an A&P certificate. I doubt any have an AOPA legal plan cause it isn't going to do much good in those examples. Insurance? They simply don't have any.

    Would people do this on a large scale in an organized effort? Probably not. But I guess at some time, many have pondered "What would happen if?" I've known guys who say they would have no problem "going illegal" if they ever felt the regs became too onerous and I guess I'm in that category as well but it would be very low key and besides, I think my flying days will be over long before I have to resort to anything that radical.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    3
    Guys, I guess I wasn't clear...not unusual for me. I would never advocate breaking rules especially when there are good reasons for them, like safety. It was a silly "what if" that's probably better discussed in real time over coffee rather than an Internet forum.BTW, I'm using an iPad and even though I put returns in the text, they don't show up on the posting, so sorry for the long paragraphs. Rich

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Ponchatoula, Louisiana
    Posts
    6
    I hate to be snarky but.....considering the way the administration abides by the laws of the land, I agree that it should be done anyway as the OP suggested.
    Certainly I would not like to raise the ire and curiosity of the regulating bodies where many decent and conscientious lovers of aviation are employed, but we have
    to stand for one of the greatest freedoms known to man in a country where dreams can become reality for the "little guys" like myself and many others.

  8. #8
    danielfindling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    S.E. Michigan
    Posts
    152

    Goggles Insurance denials

    Quote Originally Posted by Richgj3 View Post
    But AOPA has a legal services plan. If their Lawyers would vigorously defend the first two or three cases, that might result in a positive result.
    A preliminary inquiry for most insurance companies is if there is a basis for denying the claim. Certainly, not complying with a medical requirement or flying contrary to the FAR's would be a basis for a denial under any policy. Civil disobedience is/was just under certain circumstances and has a place in American history. After all the Declaration of Independence was an act of civil disobedience, the ultimate "^%$@ &%#" to England.. The civil rights movement is another example. However, civil disobedience for a 3rd class medical? I prefer the legal route and wrote my comments in support of the waiver to the FAA. (As an aside, I also recognize that your suggestion was in jest - I am just providing my "What if" answer). My Answer: You probably won't get caught, but don't get in an accident and/or make an insurance claim.

    Daniel
    Last edited by danielfindling; 06-26-2012 at 05:06 PM.

  9. #9
    kscessnadriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    112
    And this mentality is the entire reason I'm against having no medical for a private pilot. Simply there will be too many idiots flying in the air. More air in their head than good decision making ability. People who think they know everything and can't be told anything. People who have zero regard for the established rules, that are more often than not, written in blood.

    As far as I'm concerned, the original poster should have any and all pilot certificates revoked for simply suggesting this outrageous idea.
    KSCessnaDriver
    ATP MEL, Commercial Lighter Than Air-Airship, SEL, CFI/CFII
    Private SES

  10. #10
    danielfindling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    S.E. Michigan
    Posts
    152
    KsCessnadriver, If you re-read Richgj3's post, he was not serious, rather satirical.
    Last edited by danielfindling; 06-26-2012 at 05:13 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •