You know....that's a darn good way to frame it. Or at least point out "The money you're wasting on keeping people with marginal risk factors or illusionary risk factors from flying is money you could be spending on NEXGEN!" *POOF* CAMI's budget goes down and we get them off our collective butts.Unloading the cost for processing a sizable portion of medical certificates would save the agency a bundle.
Now, I know it would never happen like that but hey....a man can dream.
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.
If we step back and look at the "big picture", what we have is a typical conflict between two groups. The GA pilot population represented by AOPA and EAA are proposing a change that would benefit the group they represent, while a second group sees that change as a threat. Clearly the AME population will loose $ and the FAA's AeroMedical Div will loose power and maybe a bit of funding. Given the current state of federal debt and revenue, it would seem that at some point the cost savings coming from this proposal will have an impact on the outcome. Just like all the "issues" that come out of Washington, in the end, it's about who pays and who benefits. That's as close to politics as I'll get on this, but I think if we're patient we'll win in the end.
Joe
It's what SOME of the members want (emphasis on the bold). After having dealt with some of the LSA fliers that don't have medicals (who are typically older), I saw some who really had no business in an 120 knot LSA. Now you want them to be able to jump in a 200 knot Cirrus or 160 knot Bonanza? No thanks. I don't want to share the skies with these people that aren't mentally up to flying the aircraft.Originally Posted by WLIU
Because the first incident of one of these pilots doing something to either a group of people on the ground or doing something interfering with an airliner, and GA goes away totally.
KSCessnaDriver
ATP MEL, Commercial Lighter Than Air-Airship, SEL, CFI/CFII
Private SES
I think you're painting with a very broad brush. I refer you to this thread:
http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?...accident-study
I have yet to take a lesson, however, I have done some research about GA accidents. I've reviewed a couple dozen and not one was an E-LSA or S-LSA pilot and none were caused by mechanical malfunction. Now, I'm not saying that LSA pilots are any better or worst, but to say that "Because the first incident of one of these pilots doing something to either a group of people on the ground or doing something interfering with an airliner, and GA goes away totally" is a bit much. With this statement, you infer that a Private Pilot certification guarantees that he or she won't do something stupid. I'm 61 years old, by the way, and I would think that it's a good possibility that some of the older pilots here would take exception to your assessment.
David
They are not interested in saving money in exchange for safety. The problem with the medical proposal is the proponents fail to prove their case. All the emotional testimony in the world isn't going to win the argument. Gotta get the facts and they have to be convincing. Good luck.
Agreed, for my own purposes and protection of vested interests and those of GA. Look, we are already one of the most publicly misunderstood and maligned groups of individuals on the planet. The uninformed/misinformed public and media(especially the media) already think we're just a bunch of yahoos flying around in little airplanes and that makes us dangerous. Just think about how upset you get and roll your eyes at the ignorant statements expressed when a GA accident is covered in the press.
That will be a walk in the park compared to the seisimic fallout when the public learns that the pilot in the reported accident had no medical and was not required to have one. The proverbial s**t will hit the fan with such force that the resulting spray will negatively impact GA like never before and put us back into the stone age!
But there have been some LSA accidents where medical incapacitation was a factor. Perhaps the pilot should not have been flying, which is not helping with the medical exemption.
I'm sure there have, Marty, just as there have been with a Private certificate. In an earlier thread, there was a post about PP that had NINE maladies that was still flying! How did that happen? I'm coming into this late in the game, but apparently some entity thought that the Sport Pilot certificate wouldn't be any more a problem than the Private certificate. I read an article in P&P that stated that the accident stats are no worse in the Sport group than the Private group. I suppose the author could be wrong, but if that's the case, I have a difficult time squaring the negative press of medical vs non-medical. Just so you know, when the time comes, I'll have to take the physical because I do want a Private certificate. But if the statisitics bare it out, then I don't understand the angst.
A case in point would be if the media reported the accidents you hear about in the news with the findings from NTSB saying that, as is the case of the video that I linked to, the Private Pilot made a decision to take a chance so that he could get his child back to college in one hour as opposed to a four hour car ride, there would be an outcry to stop allowing small planes rain down from the sky because these PP are incapable of making proper decisions. Stupid, I know, but such is the way of things. Thousands of flights are made without incident, yet the one that goes haywire is the one that gets the press. As I was told in another thread, you can't force someone to make a sound decision. You can teach him that going into marginal VFR carries a very high risk that it can quickly turn to IMC. However, that lesson seems to be lost on some Private Pilots.
I guess it comes down to my lack of experience and thinking that if a guy just gets his Sport certificate and makes the proper decision about how and when he flies, there is a very good chance that he'll live to be an old pilot regardless of time in the left seat.
David
The problem here is that Sport Pilot wasn't meant to create a bunch of new airplanes, it was meant to regulate a bunch of people who already couldn't follow regulations (in regards to Part 103 ultralights that weren't). That's where it was meant to be, regulate the guys who had little ultralights that did 60-80 knots, stayed low and local to their location. Not 120 knot airplanes that people turn into X/C machines.
KSCessnaDriver
ATP MEL, Commercial Lighter Than Air-Airship, SEL, CFI/CFII
Private SES
Nonsense. The purpose of LSA was not limited to regulating overweight ultralights. If that were true, rules could have easily been written to accomplish that without opening the door for new aircraft.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote