Results 1 to 10 of 32

Thread: Scoop on Driver's license as Medical for recreational flying up to 180HP

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    10

    Scoop on Driver's license as Medical for recreational flying up to 180HP

    I almost fell out of my chair when I read the article on the EAA main page this evening.

    "EAA, AOPA Announce Plan To Expand Driver's License Medical Option"

    BIG KUDOS to both organizations. I've been wondering when the next step was going to happen. This one seems to allow pilots to fly aircraft up to 180 HP using a DL as medical certifications with the limitation of 1 PAX and Day VFR.

    I do wonder why we can't just do what most are already thinking and allow a DL certification for the PPL rating for non-commercial use. That way (for the typical GA pilot) the airplane becomes USEFUL again at a lower cost and worry factor. One of the problems with the Sport Pilot reg (I currently fly as a sport pilot) is that if you have a family household of more than 2, they can't fly with you together. I'd argue that the night restriction is tough too, but probably not as big of a deal as the GW/PAX restrictions.

    At any rate - the Article says: "Under the proposed exemption pilots holding recreational, private, commercial or airline transport pilot certificates could opt to fly under the same driver’s license medical self-certification standards"

    I assume that a Sport Pilot could opt in as well with the appropriate aircraft training, correct?

    Any Scoop?
    Robert

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    2,236
    I assume that a Sport Pilot could opt in as well with the appropriate aircraft training, correct?
    I would guess not.

    The thing about this rule (which I agree with, and I'm a "pure" Sport Pilot), is that it allows a PPL to fly with restrictions without a medical.

    The big "however" is that in order to become a PPL one has to do all the things that require a medical - night flying in particular. Similarly, lots of ratings open to the PPL are closed to the Sport Pilot - no matter what the gross weight or HP of an aircraft, if it has retractable gear it's off limits (amphibs excluded). Ditto stall and cruise speed limitations.

    Plus the SP is limited by gross weight, while this rule is aimed at HP, like recreational pilots. Other than that, in reality there isn't anything a Sport Pilot can't do that's in the rule. Daytime VFR, one passenger. Bread and butter for a Sport Pilot.

    Mostly I'm in favor of the rule because in a few years I'm going to buy a Champ to go with my single seat Nieuport, and with a lot of PPL's wanting to fly under SP rules it's going to inflate the price for them!
    Last edited by Frank Giger; 09-26-2011 at 12:02 AM.
    The opinions and statements of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    384
    There will be restrictions on what you can do, I don't think anyone can predict what the FAA will allow. (I am making the assumption that this time the rule will go through). I see absolutely no reason why a SP could not upgrade their license to PPL with the appropriate training. The limit would be that the new PPL would have to hold to the rules put forth when operating without a medical. It has been a long time since I have acted as a CFI so don't yell if I am not entirely accurate. FAR 61.110 deals with night flying, it also has provisions for those pilot candidates who can not complete night flight training. (Yes I do know it "invalidates" your certificate if night training is not completed in a certain amount of time) The point is that the provision is already there to allow for exemptions, a precedent has been set. What I think will be more of an issue is "what" the FAA allows as acceptable regardng the A/C. In a perfect world this would allow PPL to operate single engine a/c with the performance and capabilities associated with a "typical" GA aircraft. What I would predict is that the SP a/c rules would be expanded (weight, speed etc...) to allow for simple (The 172's and Cherokee's of the world) type a/c. As a former commercial pilot/CFI who can now has to operate as a sport pilot, I will take whatever I can get
    Fingers crossed
    Rick

  4. #4
    Joda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin, United States
    Posts
    226
    What this would do is expand the ability to use a driver's license in lieu of an FAA medical certificate to the recreational pilot level. All the restrictions on a recreational pilot would still be there. (Check FAR Part 61 if you're not familiar with recreational pilot privileges and limitations.) This would NOT allow persons holding only a sport pilot certificate to expand to larger aircraft. It would, however, allow private pilots (and higher) to continue to fly aircraft that meet the limitations of the recreational pilot certificate using a driver's license. This would then include most of the Cherokee line, most if not all Cessna 172s, as well as the Cessna 120/140 and 150/152. It would include many of the vintage aircraft that don't quite make it as a light-sport aircraft due to gross weight or too many seats. It would include the Piper Tri-Pacer and Colt, the rest of the Ercoupe fleet, and a bunch of others.

    This is a step toward (maybe) someday allowing a private pilot to fly day-VFR non-commercially on a driver's license. But it would not be prudent to try to go that far in one "giant leap". Going to the recreational pilot level first will give a good "baby step" that the FAA might consider. Let's hope they see their way clear to (finally) allow this. (The FAA has turned down similar proposals in the past. Let's hope the time has come.)
    Cheers!

    Joe

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    10
    WacoJoe - that is what I am wondering - the Recreational license is limited to 50nm from 'home base'.

  6. #6
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    flying up to 180HP
    Eh....that's kind of disappointing and I imagine it would be subject to similar cross-border restrictions as the SP due to the ICAO requirements

    This is a step toward (maybe) someday allowing a private pilot to fly day-VFR non-commercially on a driver's license.
    It is a great potential step forward for those who simply fly day-VFR. It leaves those of us who fly for more than just $100 hamburgers and fun in the same predicament as we have been. If you're going to loosen the restrictions and say that people who can drive a car can safely fly as private pilots, then either **** or get off the pot.

    Honestly, what the FAA is doing is testing to see if the same rate of medical issues that crop up in study after study of car crashes (which are a lot more common than people often realize; one 1996 study in Accident Analysis and Prevention put it as high as 6% of crashes for drivers under 59 years of age and approximately 19% of cases involving drivers over that age of 60) will present themselves in the aviation community. Be safe out there guys.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by RBaptist View Post
    WacoJoe - that is what I am wondering - the Recreational license is limited to 50nm from 'home base'.
    cfr 14 pt61.101

    A person exercising the privileges of a recreational pilot certificate may act as PIC on a flight that exceeds 50 nautical miles from departure if that person carries a logbook endorsed by an authorized instructor certifying the person has received ground and flight cross-country training and been found proficient in cross-country flying.

Posting Permissions

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