Martha Lunken has privileges revoked

luvflyin said:
"..."I'm thrilled to be back in the air," Lunken said. "I would occasionally go down to the hangar and pet my 180 and cry a little bit … but I lived through it and all is well..."

That's cool. She was just feelin' the plane up. It's not like she was tryin to play tonsil hockey with spinner or something like that.:rofl:
Click to expand...
It's a 180 thing ;)
 
NoHeat said:
The AOPA article appears to indicate that she took the written tests again and a checkride again.

So that sounds like a new cert. However the FAA airman search still indicates “none” for certificates.
Click to expand...
Most likely completed in IACRA and the temp issued by the DPE. The database is not auto updated. That takes time.
 
Lowflynjack said:
There was no requirement to learn a lesson.
Click to expand...

Yep. True. She got her punishment, breezed through her private cert/IR and can go out and fly under as many bridges as she wants. Why not? There was no risk to others. She wasn't endangering anybody.

Salty said:
Then why not a permanent revocation?
Click to expand...

Good question. I wondered the same thing. My opinion is she deserves it. Meh whatever. Maybe she'll start youtooobing and compete with Jerry W. Maybe they can collaborate?? Ooohhh... I'd watch that.

EDIT - it just dawned on me - maybe she flies under JFR (Jerry Flight Rules) which, I'm sure, allows CFUB (Controlled Flight Under Bridges).... so the FAA should back off.
 
Last edited:
Lindberg said:
They were revoked. That's why this is a new cert. There's no "good character" requirement to hold a private certificate.
Click to expand...
Are you asserting that there is no way to prevent someone from flying if they keep passing the check ride every time their cert is revoked?
 
Evidently she took the tests at Red Stewart Airport in Waynesville. Her name was on their sign on Route 42. They were also the place that let her ramble on incoherently through their air show back in September, on a hill above the river where she did her stunt. She's a clown, but yet the publications can't help themselves but give her more press even though she makes GA look bad to the general public.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Most likely completed in IACRA and the temp issued by the DPE. The database is not auto updated. That takes time.
Click to expand...

Makes sense.

Something else in her airman record puzzled me: she got a first class medical certificate in September, then just four months later, in January she did the Basic Med course and medical. I wonder why she didn't just do a third class medical.
 
NoHeat said:
Makes sense.

Something else in her airman record puzzled me: she got a first class medical certificate in September, then just four months later, in January she did the Basic Med course and medical. I wonder why she didn't just do a third class medical.
Click to expand...
Doesn't seem too odd.

In her case, one less thing that can be "emergency revoked" for whatever real or made up reason. (Pick your poison.)

For most folks, if you're gonna switch, switch sooner rather than later. No accidental crap in the insurance database -- which is more and more about doctors playing games with codes to get paid -- that'll cost a fortune to "disprove" to OKC.

If you know you're not flying anything that needs a 3rd, dumping it and the process early seems quite reasonable.

If you're already on an FAA **** list, dumping it seems nearly mandatory.

I've got my own medical entertainment to deal with but privately quite a few folks have realized and shared that there's no reason whatsoever for them to be on the 3rd class treadmill. Too much risk, nothing significant to gain.

Just a standard risk analysis like any flight. :)

An all new form of scenario based training! Hahaha. Yeah... The scenario presented presents a risk they don't need. Especially monetary.
 
Deelee said:
and can go out and fly under as many bridges as she wants. Why not? There was no risk to others. She wasn't endangering anybody.
Click to expand...
My guess: what cost her the license wasn’t so much the “flying under the bridge” part (safe or not), it was turning off her ADS-B to (literally) cover her tracks, as she bragged about doing in the past with a Mode C - in a book.

“The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior”. My bet is this is not the most risky-to-others things she’s done - just the last one to get caught. And good odds is won’t be the last.
 
denverpilot said:
Doesn't seem too odd.

if you're gonna switch, switch sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

Agreed, about the advantage of not waiting to switch to Basic Med.

My thought was this: given that she indeed switched promptly to Basic Med, and before that she had to start with a fresh new medical, well, it seemed puzzling that she chose to start with a first class medical rather than a third class.
 
You don’t really have to “switch” to BasicMed. I think for many it’s just valuable as an “ace in the hole” while they continue to maintain a medical. I think the FAA has opined that a pilot should “declare” under which provisions a flight is made, with no reference as to who one would make that declaration to!
 
FastEddieB said:
You don’t really have to “switch” to BasicMed. I think for many it’s just valuable as an “ace in the hole” while they continue to maintain a medical. I think the FAA has opined that a pilot should “declare” under which provisions a flight is made, with no reference as to who one would make that declaration to!
Click to expand...
I+Declare+Bankruptcy.png
 
FastEddieB said:
You don’t really have to “switch” to BasicMed. I think for many it’s just valuable as an “ace in the hole” while they continue to maintain a medical. I think the FAA has opined that a pilot should “declare” under which provisions a flight is made, with no reference as to who one would make that declaration to!
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with an declaration associated with BasicMed. You either meet the requirements or you do not.
 
I found it interesting that neither my insurance company nor the NTSB forms I recently filled out for my accident had provisions for basic med. I had to put the information in other fields.
 
FastEddieB said:
I think the FAA has opined that a pilot should “declare” under which provisions a flight is made, with no reference as to who one would make that declaration to!
Click to expand...

Face Delphi, choose an Oracle...
 
About the only time that you’d have to “declare” anything is during a ramp check if asked for your medical. And depending on what you were flying that day, you could decide how to handle the ASI’s request. Flying a LSA, just say that you are exercising Sport Pilot privileges and show your driver license. Flying something bigger than an LSA but that qualifies for BasicMed, tell him you are BasicMed and it is in your logbook at home. Flying an aircraft that falls outside of those two categories, pull out your medical. But there is no requirement to declare beforehand. Just my opinion, YMMV.
 
FastEddieB said:
No, the declaration is supposedly for any given flight.
Click to expand...


Yeah, various versions of that have been kicking around for a while on line and in some printed pubs. For example, from https://www.leftseat.com/faa-general-aviation-basic-medical-rules/

Q7: Can I exercise BasicMed and hold a medical certificate at the same time?

A: Yes. If you are operating under BasicMed, then you must comply with the BasicMed operating limitations (e.g. flying only within the U.S. and at or less than 250 knots). When operating under BasicMed, you are not exercising the privileges of your medical certificate. You can’t operate under BasicMed and switch to operating using your medical, or vice versa, during flight.
Click to expand...
but they don't say why not nor how anyone would know.

At Oshkosh a few years ago, an AME told a large audience that a declaration was required, and then his statement was quoted in General Aviation News and elsewhere. https://generalaviationnews.com/2019/02/14/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-basicmed/
Many pilots still want a third class medical and it is required if your flying is beyond the requirements for BasicMed.

“You’re supposed to declare whether you are flying under BasicMed or a third class medical,” says Brent Blue, an AME who spoke to a standing room only crowd at Oshkosh. “Although I’m not sure who you are supposed to declare that to.”
Click to expand...


So how did this all start?

I think the confusion stems from a misinterpretation of 61.113(i)(2),
(2) The flight, including each portion of the flight, is not carried out -


(i) At an altitude that is more than 18,000 feet above mean sea level;


(ii) Outside the United States unless authorized by the country in which the flight is conducted; or


(iii) At an indicated airspeed exceeding 250 knots; and...​


That's fairly clear, but then the FAA tried to clarify it. In AC 68-1A the FAA wrote
Flight Limitation Applicability. A “flight, including each portion of the flight,” means that all of the flight limitations for the operation described above, set forth in § 61.113(i)(2)(i) (iv), apply to the entire flight. Accordingly, if BasicMed is being exercised in any flight, it must be applied for the entire flight (takeoff to full-stop landing) and all the operational restrictions apply for the entire flight. As such, on a flight in which two pilots are present, one holding a medical certificate and the other operating under BasicMed, if the pilot operating under BasicMed is acting as PIC, then no portion of the flight may go beyond the limitations set forth in this section even though the pilot holding the medical certificate may be able to act as PIC during the portion of the flight conducted outside the limitations.
Click to expand...

I don't think the AC is really quite correct. AFAIK, nothing in the regs says the PIC responsibility cannot be changed in flight. Furthermore, there's nothing anywhere that requires a formal written "declaration" of who is PIC or to whom that would be declared. And the AC doesn't address here a pilot who has both a class 3 and a Basic Med. If such a pilot launches into the wild blue, who is to say whether he is flying under Basic or his Class 3?

But the story continues to spread.

"I shot an error into the air.
It's still going. Everywhere!"
 
SkyDog58 said:
What model Stinson do you have?
Click to expand...
It's the L-9B (aka 10A) that for some inexplicable reason keeps being mistaken for a Cub, including by a still-wet-behind-the-ears ASI.
 
Last edited:
Lois said:
It's the L-9B (aka 10A) that for some inexplicable reason keeps being mistaken for a cub, including by a still-wet-behind-the-ears ASI.
Click to expand...
Well, you must admit, except for the fuselage, tail, struts, gear and wing, they are purd near identical.
 
Lois said:
It's the L-9B (aka 10A) that for some inexplicable reason keeps being mistaken for a Cub, including by a still-wet-behind-the-ears ASI.
Click to expand...
Well, the FAA has gotten into the bad habit of hiring people straight out of the military with absolutely no civil experience, especially light GA. Spend a few years swapping LRUs on a fighter jet and bingo! You are now qualified to be an ASI. But everyone loves the vet these days and want to bend over backwards to give them jobs, even when grossly under qualified. I do not know if that is the case with your ASI, but it definitely is with nearly all of the less capable ones that I know.
 
Half Fast said:
Yeah, various versions of that have been kicking around for a while on line and in some printed pubs. For example, from https://www.leftseat.com/faa-general-aviation-basic-medical-rules/


but they don't say why not nor how anyone would know.

At Oshkosh a few years ago, an AME told a large audience that a declaration was required, and then his statement was quoted in General Aviation News and elsewhere. https://generalaviationnews.com/2019/02/14/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-basicmed/



So how did this all start?

I think the confusion stems from a misinterpretation of 61.113(i)(2),
(2) The flight, including each portion of the flight, is not carried out -


(i) At an altitude that is more than 18,000 feet above mean sea level;


(ii) Outside the United States unless authorized by the country in which the flight is conducted; or


(iii) At an indicated airspeed exceeding 250 knots; and...​


That's fairly clear, but then the FAA tried to clarify it. In AC 68-1A the FAA wrote


I don't think the AC is really quite correct. AFAIK, nothing in the regs says the PIC responsibility cannot be changed in flight. Furthermore, there's nothing anywhere that requires a formal written "declaration" of who is PIC or to whom that would be declared. And the AC doesn't address here a pilot who has both a class 3 and a Basic Med. If such a pilot launches into the wild blue, who is to say whether he is flying under Basic or his Class 3?

But the story continues to spread.

"I shot an error into the air.
It's still going. Everywhere!"
Click to expand...
It’s a byproduct of the statute applying operational rules to the flight, rather the operation. A flight is defined as having a take off and a landing. I don’t know why the author of the bill chose “flight”, but the word “flight” has a specific meaning in the regs.

As for whether you operate under BasicMed or exercise the privileges of your 3rd class medical, IMO it’s a distinction without a difference. You’re just trying to establish medical eligibility under 61.3 and 61.23. I suppose if you left your medical at home, but qualified for BasicMed, you’d be operating under BasicMed. If you had your medical on you, but also qualified for BasicMed, it wouldn’t really matter. In either case, assuming the aircraft and the operation qualifies for BasicMed, you would be required to adhere to 61.53(b). That said, if the office of aerospace medicine determined that you had a medical condition that disqualifies you for a medical certificate, technically they could revoke the medical as long as it was still valid, thus invalidating BasicMed until you go back and get a special issuance.
 
NoHeat said:
given that she indeed switched promptly to Basic Med, and before that she had to start with a fresh new medical, well, it seemed puzzling that she chose to start with a first class medical rather than a third class.
Click to expand...

Maybe I thought of an answer to my own question. The two certificates expire at different times.

Her first-class medical expires after 6 months vs 24 months for a third class. So if she’s certain to succeed in applying for the first class, that’s advantageous because it expires sooner. If she is diagnosed with a condition later, she’s better off with Basic Med and the medical certificate that expired fastest.
 
NoHeat said:
Maybe I thought of an answer to my own question. The two certificates expire at different times.

Her first-class medical expires after 6 months vs 24 months for a third class. So if she’s certain to succeed in applying for the first class, that’s advantageous because it expires sooner. If she is diagnosed with a condition later, she’s better off with Basic Med and the medical certificate that expired fastest.
Click to expand...
A first class still confers 3rd class privileges for 2 years in her case unless specified otherwise.
 
Brad Z said:
A first class still confers 3rd class privileges for 2 years in her case unless specified otherwise.
Click to expand...

Ok, but “Confers privileges” … does that also mean “confers obligations?”

The additional 18 months sounds like an optional bonus that one can ignore, if one doesn’t want it.

As you mentioned, she can just choose not to exercise the privilege of using a certificate, for example by leaving her certificate at home when she flies.

So if in the seventh month, after the six-month duration of the first-class certificate ends, why would she be obligated to confer with an AME before flying with a newly diagnosed chronic condition, like asthma for example, if she’s not invoking any privilege offered by that certificate?
 
NoHeat said:
Ok, but “Confers privileges” … does that also mean “confers obligations?”

The additional 18 months sounds like an optional bonus that one can ignore, if one doesn’t want it.

As you mentioned, she can just choose not to exercise the privilege of using a certificate, for example by leaving her certificate at home when she flies.

So if in the seventh month, after the six-month duration of the first-class certificate ends, why would she be obligated to confer with an AME before flying with a newly diagnosed chronic condition, like asthma for example, if she’s not invoking any privilege offered by that certificate?
Click to expand...
Because the certificate has not expired. At month seven, it confers the same privileges as a third class. It's still a valid medical until month 25 (in her case).
 
Half Fast said:
I don't think the AC is really quite correct. AFAIK, nothing in the regs says the PIC responsibility cannot be changed in flight. Furthermore, there's nothing anywhere that requires a formal written "declaration" of who is PIC or to whom that would be declared. And the AC doesn't address here a pilot who has both a class 3 and a Basic Med. If such a pilot launches into the wild blue, who is to say whether he is flying under Basic or his Class 3?
Click to expand...

I agree. Even if I got ramp checked just before the flight and told the inspector I was going to fly under Basicmed, that would not preclude me later looking at the weather before I took off and changing my mind. Besides, if you have both, why would you ever "declare" to "someone" that you weren't using a medical? In this case, basicmed confers no privilege and comes with limitations.

Now, if the AC said "if you have both, the 1st/2nd/3rd class will be presumed unless you tell a briefer otherwise", that would make sense.
 
She was the guest on the most recent aopa " hangar talk" podcast. It was painful to listen to. Favorite quote: "I knew it was illegal, but it wasn't dangerous"

No remorse whatsoever. She spent most of the time complaining about the FAA.
 
Jim K said:
She was the guest on the most recent aopa " hangar talk" podcast. It was painful to listen to. Favorite quote: "I knew it was illegal, but it wasn't dangerous"

No remorse whatsoever. She spent most of the time complaining about the FAA.
Click to expand...
Remorse for what? She didn't hurt anyone, so no remorse is needed in my opinion. I'm sure she regrets doing it, mostly because of what she had to go through, but she did her time. She was given a punishment and complied with it.
 
What individuals like her fail to understand is that certain things are illegal not because they are immediately dangerous in a given moment with given personnel but that they have a high probability of being dangerous in most moments and with most personnel. The consequences can be deadly. Now, she may or may not have the skills required to pull off her stupid stunt in most circumstances. I do not know. What I do know is that far wiser and far more experienced people than me have determined that such a stunt with an average Joe schmuck pilot under less than favorable conditions could result in an accident, likely fatal. The rules are not written for a Kirby Chambliss type flying under the bridge on a clear calm day. The rules are there for the lesser skilled pilot and gusty days. And there is no mechanism in the rules, nor should there be, for any pilot on a given day to make a determination that they personally are up to the task. I was told a long time ago that just because no one died does not mean the operation was conducted safely. I believe that to be true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top