ATP with Class 3 medical?

stratobee

stratobee

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
1,112
Display Name
Display name:
stratobee
Am I right in assuming that I can hold an ATP with a Class 3 medical as long as I'm not using the privileges of it?
 
Sure. You can hold a cert with no medical at all!

You only need a medical if you're going to be exercising some sort of crew privileges. I know of pilots who have taken checkrides without a medical, when their examiner agreed to act as PIC. As far as I know this is still permitted, though not usual.
 
I'm a ATP with a 2nd class, my AME can't do 1st so c'est la vie.

At work I'm just exercising my CPL, however remember if anything happens the feds will still hold you to the standard of an ATP.
 
James331 said:
I'm a ATP with a 2nd class, my AME can't do 1st so c'est la vie.

At work I'm just exercising my CPL, however remember if anything happens the feds will still hold you to the standard of an ATP.
Click to expand...

...meaning?
 
TMetzinger said:
Sure. You can hold a cert with no medical at all!
Click to expand...
However, you need at least a Third Class to take an ATP practical test.

You only need a medical if you're going to be exercising some sort of crew privileges.
Click to expand...
...or taking a practical test for a certificate/rating which requires a medical to exercise its privileges. See 14 CFR 61.39(a)(4)
(4) Hold at least a third-class medical certificate, if a medical certificate is required;
Click to expand...
...and FAA Order 8900.2:

b. Medical Certificate. [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]If any portion of the practical test is being performed in an aircraft, an applicant for original issuance of an airman certificate or a rating to be added to an existing certificate (except for a glider category rating or a balloon class rating) must hold at least a third-class medical certificate. An applicant for an original issuance, renewal, or reinstatement of an flight instructor certificate is not required to hold a medical certificate; however, the pilot examiner must be the PIC for such practical tests and for this reason may choose not to administer the test. Balloon and glider applicants are no longer required to certify their medical qualification on FAA Form 8710-1 to be PIC for a practical test. An applicant for sport pilot or sport pilot instructor certificate must hold at least a third-class airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license.
[/FONT][/FONT]
Click to expand...

I know of pilots who have taken checkrides without a medical, when their examiner agreed to act as PIC. As far as I know this is still permitted, though not usual.
Click to expand...
Not permitted for ATP -- just the specific exceptions listed above. And this isn't one of those "at the examiner's option" deals like giving a practical test in an E-AB aircraft.
 
stratobee said:
Am I right in assuming that I can hold an ATP with a Class 3 medical as long as I'm not using the privileges of it?
Click to expand...

Yes, with your ATP cert and 3rd class medical, you may execute the privileges of a Private Pilot. With a lapsed medical, you may execute the privileges of a Sport Pilot. You may take the ATP ride while holding a third class as well.
 
Ron Levy said:
However, you need at least a Third Class to take an ATP practical test.

...or taking a practical test for a certificate/rating which requires a medical to exercise its privileges. See 14 CFR 61.39(a)(4)

...and FAA Order 8900.2:


Not permitted for ATP -- just the specific exceptions listed above. And this isn't one of those "at the examiner's option" deals like giving a practical test in an E-AB aircraft.
Click to expand...

Ok. Is this within the last decade?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
MauleSkinner said:
Specifically, what kind of "dumb crap" would they treat you differently for?
Click to expand...

The general opinion I've heard (and I'm sure people will chime in their respective belief or disbelief) is that if a private pilot, for example, goes flying with a valid medical but after being diagnosed with kidney stones, or accepts fifty bucks from his friend in return for ferrying his plane back from where it was parked for maintenance, and somehow against all odds gets caught at it, he can respectfully say "oops, I didn't know that rule" and the FAA's response might be, "well, it's been 20 years since you've had any reason to look at the regs. Just don't do it again."

Whereas if a commercial pilot (assume a third-class), or even moreso a CFI or ATP, does the same thing, the FAA's response will be, "my god, this is a professional pilot! My children's lives could be in his hands and he's breaking the rules!? Outrageous! Emergency suspension ahoy!" So it's not that different rules apply, just that ATPs have a harder time playing the "oops, that was a mistake; I didn't know and I won't do it again" card.

I'm clearly intentionally exaggerating this on both sides, and I'm not in a position to know whether there's any grain of truth to it. Just that it's a popular opinion.
 
Last edited:
KSCessnaDriver said:
So, you would have to have a medical to take a combined ATP/type ride in a Level D sim?
Click to expand...
I doubt it. The link Ron posted started out...

b. Medical Certificate. If any portion of the practical test is being performed in an aircraft,
Click to expand...

I also know they give type ratings to instructors at sim facilities who are unable to hold a medical. I think I asked a sim instructor that once. They always ask for license, medical and passport before class starts. I think the answer was that if you didn't have a medical they wouldn't turn you away, but I'm not sure what they would put on the 8410 under "medical information".
 
Last edited:
TMetzinger said:
Ok. Is this within the last decade?
Click to expand...
Not to my knowledge. IIRC, that subparagraph of 61.39 has been the same since at least 1997, and before that, you needed the requisite medical for the privileges of the certificate for which you were testing, i.e., to take CP-Airplane, you needed a Second Class, and for ATP, a First Class. I remember I had to get a SODA for uncorrected vision in order to get that Second Class back in 1972 so I could take the CP-Airplane ride, and I had to get a First Class to get my ATP 20-some years ago.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Specifically, what kind of "dumb crap" would they treat you differently for?
Click to expand...

Read what McManigle wrote, it's also common sense :dunno:


mcmanigle said:
The general opinion I've heard (and I'm sure people will chime in their respective belief or disbelief) is that if a private pilot, for example, goes flying with a valid medical but after being diagnosed with kidney stones, or accepts fifty bucks from his friend in return for ferrying his plane back from where it was parked for maintenance, and somehow against all odds gets caught at it, he can respectfully say "oops, I didn't know that rule" and the FAA's response might be, "well, it's been 20 years since you've had any reason to look at the regs. Just don't do it again."

Whereas if a commercial pilot (assume a third-class), or even moreso a CFI or ATP, does the same thing, the FAA's response will be, "my god, this is a professional pilot! My children's lives could be in his hands and he's breaking the rules!? Outrageous! Emergency suspension ahoy!" So it's not that different rules apply, just that ATPs have a harder time playing the "oops, that was a mistake; I didn't know and I won't do it again" card.

I'm clearly intentionally exaggerating this on both sides, and I'm not in a position to know whether there's any grain of truth to it. Just that it's a popular opinion.
Click to expand...
 
Ah...heard it from somebody on the internet, who heard it from their cousin's neighbor's dog's mother.:yes:
 
Here's what FAA Order 2150.3B says about certificate level and experience in enforcement actions:
c. Certificate Holder’s Level of Experience.
(1) Level of experience refers primarily to the type of certificate and ratings held (for example, student, private, commercial, airline transport pilot, or certified flight instructor), and the number of hours flown, by the certificate holder. Certificate holders with greater levels of experience may be held to a higher standard. Thus, for example, commercial pilots may be held to a higher standard than private pilots and airline transport pilots may be held to an even higher standard than commercial pilots.​
(2) In determining an appropriate sanction, the FAA may consider the extent to which the certificate holder’s action deviated from the degree of care and diligence normally expected of a person with the certificate holder’s level of experience. A significant deviation from the degree of care and diligence expected of the holder of that certificate may warrant a more aggravated sanction.​
Click to expand...
 
Ron Levy said:
Here's what FAA Order 2150.3B says about certificate level and experience in enforcement actions:
Click to expand...

Jesus, they actually had to make a FAA order for a common sense matter, guess with folks like MauleSkinner ya need to :rolleyes2:

MauleSkinner said:
Ah...heard it from somebody on the internet, who heard it from their cousin's neighbor's dog's mother.:yes:
Click to expand...

Lol, infuse common sense.

Hobby low time PPL or student pilot accidentally flys just outside the regs

Career high time ATP pilots flys outside a reg

One will likely get a little more understanding compared to the other.
 
James331 said:
Jesus, they actually had to make a FAA order for a common sense matter
Click to expand...
Law isn't about common sense, it's about the written law. Absent such a statement in that Order, the application of different standards to pilots of differing levels of certification for the same offense would be contestable on appeal.
 
Ron Levy said:
Law isn't about common sense, it's about the written law. Absent such a statement in that Order, the application of different standards to pilots of differing levels of certification for the same offense would be contestable on appeal.
Click to expand...

...and I've heard enough old wives' tales in aviation that if it's presented as one, I'll treat it as one until somebody provides appropriate documentation.

Thanks for providing that documentation, Ron.
 
Ron Levy said:
Not to my knowledge. IIRC, that subparagraph of 61.39 has been the same since at least 1997, and before that, you needed the requisite medical for the privileges of the certificate for which you were testing, i.e., to take CP-Airplane, you needed a Second Class, and for ATP, a First Class. I remember I had to get a SODA for uncorrected vision in order to get that Second Class back in 1972 so I could take the CP-Airplane ride, and I had to get a First Class to get my ATP 20-some years ago.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I'm 99% certain that in the late 90s a guy I know lost his medical, and while he was waiting for the SI to process, he did the training for his instrument rating, all with an instructor, of course. And then he took his ride with the examiner acting as PIC. And then about 3 weeks later he'd gotten his SI.
 
TMetzinger said:
Hmm. I'm 99% certain that in the late 90s a guy I know lost his medical, and while he was waiting for the SI to process, he did the training for his instrument rating, all with an instructor, of course. And then he took his ride with the examiner acting as PIC. And then about 3 weeks later he'd gotten his SI.
Click to expand...
Not saying the examiner fudged the rules, but IIRC, that wasn't legal. In any event, it's not a legal option today.
 
MauleSkinner said:
...and I've heard enough old wives' tales in aviation that if it's presented as one, I'll treat it as one until somebody provides appropriate documentation.

Thanks for providing that documentation, Ron.
Click to expand...

It's presented as one?

You don't get how someone with a higher level license and experince might be held to a higher standard? That doesn't make sense to you without quoting a reg??
 
James331 said:
You don't get how someone with a higher level license and experince might be held to a higher standard? That doesn't make sense to you without quoting a reg??
Click to expand...
Whether it makes sense or not isn't relevant to whether or not it can be acted upon by the FAA. If it isn't in the rules, they can't make such discrimination stick.
 
Ron Levy said:
Whether it makes sense or not isn't relevant to whether or not it can be acted upon by the FAA. If it isn't in the rules, they can't make such discrimination stick.
Click to expand...

You'd be fooling yourself if you didn't think your level of license and experience wouldn't be used if the matter made it to court.

Regs or not
 
James331 said:
You'd be fooling yourself if you didn't think your level of license and experience wouldn't be used if the matter made it to court.

Regs or not
Click to expand...
And the FAA would be fooling themselves if they thought they could make an increased sanction or other more aggressive action for higher level tickets stand up on appeal if it wasn't on the books. Which is why it is on the books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top