Medical reform is passed out of House

[azure]

Guys - make no mistake here. The FAA is now under the gun to make the next move, and they know the clock is ticking.

They will be absolutely *LIVID* over this affront to their authority, and are certain to fire back at GA.

This is just the first salvo. We won this round, but the battle is far from over.

- Patrick

The FAA was never the roadblock standing in the way of medical reform. In fact they proposed their own version some time ago, which ended up being stonewalled by the DOT. I expect they will try to come up fairly quickly with a proposal that reflects MOST of what the bill requires. There are still likely to be a few important sticking points, particularly over things the bill leaves ambiguous or doesn't really address explicitly. There will still be a lot of arguing over details and that will probably drag on for quite a while, maybe even a year or longer.

If it does, we'll need further guidance on just how we can "make a good faith effort" to comply with the bill's requirements so as to protect us from enforcement action when we try to fly under the exemption.

 

[Cogito]

That was the whole point of my post. There is now a very small market for people who need an LSA. I would guess 90% of the people buying those airplanes did so because of Medical issues. The rest are people with Sport Pilots license.

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Standard Category Aircraft that are "sport pilot eligible" like cubs, champs, and erecoupes may take a hit, but I wonder if you're right about LSA's. I wanted a new economic plane (with a parachute) on which I could do my own maintenance and annuals. I don't have the means for a Cirrus and am not an IA, so I guess I'm in your 10%. I think the percentage might be higher, most of the people I know who own LSA's (not light Standard Category planes) have their PPL. I may be wrong, I often am.

 

[Grum.Man]

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Standard Category Aircraft that are "sport pilot eligible" like cubs, champs, and erecoupes may take a hit, but I wonder if you're right about LSA's. I wanted a new economic plane (with a parachute) on which I could do my own maintenance and annuals. I don't have the means for a Cirrus and am not an IA, so I guess I'm in your 10%. I think the percentage might be higher, most of the people I know who own LSA's (not light Standard Category planes) have their PPL. I may be wrong, I often am.

If you can afford one of these new LSA airplanes then there are a lot more capable airplanes that you can afford too. The LSA planes often cost more than a standard experimental due to the use of carbon fiber and other light weight materials to get in under weight. The Rotax engine most of them use is really pricey too.

 

[FastEddieB]

One benefit to S-LSA is the easy path the E-LSA.

That permits an owner to do his or her own maintenance, make modifications (must still remain under LSA rules), substitute parts, add accessories, and with a 16 hour course do one's own annual condition inspections. That can cut ongoing maintenance costs by nearly an order of magnitude. None of this is available to an owner of a standard category aircraft.

Only practical limitations are the plane can no longer be used for flight instruction or for rent. That alone may slightly decrease the value of the plane, and may eliminate it for consideration to some.

To Grum.Man: is a ROTAX really more costly than say a O-200 or O-235? About $20k for the ROTAX 912ULS.

 

[Grum.Man]

One benefit to S-LSA is the easy path the E-LSA.

That permits an owner to do his or her own maintenance, make modifications (must still remain under LSA rules), substitute parts, add accessories, and with a 16 hour course do one's own annual condition inspections. That can cut ongoing maintenance costs by nearly an order of magnitude. None of this is available to an owner of a standard category aircraft.

Only practical limitations are the plane can no longer be used for flight instruction or for rent. That alone may slightly decrease the value of the plane, and may eliminate it for consideration to some.

To Grum.Man: is a ROTAX really more costly than say a O-200 or O-235? About $20k for the ROTAX 912ULS.

If you compare new to new no, the rotax is slightly cheaper. The difference is on the used market. You can find freshly overhauled o-200 for 8k. You would be hard pressed to find a mid timed 100 hp rotax under 10k. From what I've read the maintenance cost is slightly higher on the rotax but the fuel savings probably balances that out.

 

[Sundancer]

One benefit to S-LSA is the easy path the E-LSA.

That permits an owner to do his or her own maintenance, make modifications (must still remain under LSA rules), substitute parts, add accessories, and with a 16 hour course do one's own annual condition inspections. That can cut ongoing maintenance costs by nearly an order of magnitude. None of this is available to an owner of a standard category aircraft.

Only practical limitations are the plane can no longer be used for flight instruction or for rent. That alone may slightly decrease the value of the plane, and may eliminate it for consideration to some.

To Grum.Man: is a ROTAX really more costly than say a O-200 or O-235? About $20k for the ROTAX 912ULS.

Forgive my ignorance - it's an easy lift to move a LSA to E-LSA? And to take on those things you enumerated?

 

[FastEddieB]

Forgive my ignorance - it's an easy lift to move a LSA to E-LSA? And to take on those things you enumerated?

Yes.

An inspection to confirm the plane still meets S-LSA standards and some paperwork.

Details here:

http://www.sportaviationspecialties.com/Useful_Information.htm#What_Is_ELSA

Mike Huffman handled the conversion of my SkyArrow in 2009.

 

[Sundancer]

Fast Eddie, thanks for the link. . .So it's feasible to buy a S-LSA, convert it to E-LSA, so as to maintain it myself, equip it as I please, and use it IFR, etc. Even do the annual condition myself, if I take the LSRI course. . .

Am I missing a gotcha?

 

[FastEddieB]

Fast Eddie, thanks for the link. . .So it's feasible to buy a S-LSA, convert it to E-LSA, so as to maintain it myself, equip it as I please, and use it IFR, etc. Even do the annual condition myself, if I take the LSRI course. . .

Am I missing a gotcha?

Nope. Other than it can't be used for flight instruction or for rental. And for all practical purposes it can never go back. And passengers need to be advised of the Experimental status which may put some people off - though I've not yet met anyone discouraged by that.

Oh, and the value of the plane may take bit of a hit, but that's debatable.

The other restrictions are really non-restrictions if you read them carefully.

I'd be happy to email you a copy of my new Operating Limitations if you like - just message me with an email address.

Finally, some manufacturers of LSA's allow you to take delivery as either an S-LSA or an E-LSA. I think a substantial number of Carbon Cub buyers elect for E-LSA from the get go.

 

[Kiddo's Driver]

Any if you want to keep your S-LSA an S-LSA you can go the three week LSRM-A class that Blue Ridge Community College offers every summer. At the end of it you are the regulatory equivalent of an A&P/IA for S-LSA and E-LSA aircraft only.

 

[Palmpilot]

Nope. Other than it can't be used for flight instruction or for rental. And for all practical purposes it can never go back. And passengers need to be advised of the Experimental status which may put some people off - though I've not yet met anyone discouraged by that.

Oh, and the value of the plane may take bit of a hit, but that's debatable.

The other restrictions are really non-restrictions if you read them carefully.

I'd be happy to email you a copy of my new Operating Limitations if you like - just message me with an email address.

Finally, some manufacturers of LSA's allow you to take delivery as either an S-LSA or an E-LSA. I think a substantial number of Carbon Cub buyers elect for E-LSA from the get go.

What about the part about using it IFR? (I assume that would be for a pilot who was exercising private pilot privileges.)

 

[Palmpilot]

Your class 3 medical will still count just like it always did. I can't believe anyone would prefer it but I guess WC Fields was right about some things.

If my medical situation becomes less ambiguous in the future, I might go for a class 3 again, as I would like to fly to Canada someday, and Alaska, which would involve flying through Canada.

I's also possible that CAP might continue to require a medical certificate to fly their planes, and since I'm a member, that would be another reason.

 

[Sundancer]

Nope. Other than it can't be used for flight instruction or for rental. And for all practical purposes it can never go back. And passengers need to be advised of the Experimental status which may put some people off - though I've not yet met anyone discouraged by that.

Oh, and the value of the plane may take bit of a hit, but that's debatable.

The other restrictions are really non-restrictions if you read them carefully.

I'd be happy to email you a copy of my new Operating Limitations if you like - just message me with an email address.

Finally, some manufacturers of LSA's allow you to take delivery as either an S-LSA or an E-LSA. I think a substantial number of Carbon Cub buyers elect for E-LSA from the get go.

Adding lower costs avionics, like Dynon boxes, as do the experimental guys, appeals to me - getting approx 172 performance, and free reign to modify as I please. . .I'm good with never going back to S-LSA, and some redeuced resale value, in exchange for doing my own maintenance and mods.

Will need to do some research on the S-LSA fleet!

 

[FastEddieB]

One tiny example...

My Sky Arrow was delivered without an OAT gauge.

I installed a Scott early on, but it was hard to read in the only location that didn't require drilling the canopy.

Being Experimental, I found a digital thermometer with a remote probe on Amazon, for under $20, IIRC. Stuck it on with SuperLok mounting tape, routed the remote probe to where the battery vent used to exit the nose* and "Viola!":

Like I said, just a whole lot more solutions to simple problems once an owner is free to experiment!


*Battery vent tube no longer needed with the new Lithium Iron battery, itself "experimental".

 

[Jeffythequick]

I've thought about going experimental, but my company's life insurance for accidents specifically calls out that they won't pay in a death in an experimental aircraft. Other aircraft, yes, but while piloting an experimental, no. I'll have to see how much they pay in the other cases, and put it on a risk basis.

 

[Shopshirt]

So my question is if the following are the SI conditions...is OSA no longer an SI?

• Cardiovascular: myocardial infarction (heart attack); coronary heart disease that has required treatment; cardiac valve replacement; and heart replacement.
• Neurological: epilepsy; a transient loss of control of nervous system functions without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause; and disturbances of consciousness without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause.
• Mental Health: personality disorder that is severe enough to have repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts; psychosis defined as a case in which an individual has manifested or may reasonably be expected to manifest delusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psychosis; bipolar disorder; and substance dependence within the previous two years as defined in FAR 67.307(4).

 

[azure]

So my question is if the following are the SI conditions...is OSA no longer an SI?

• Cardiovascular: myocardial infarction (heart attack); coronary heart disease that has required treatment; cardiac valve replacement; and heart replacement.
• Neurological: epilepsy; a transient loss of control of nervous system functions without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause; and disturbances of consciousness without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause.
• Mental Health: personality disorder that is severe enough to have repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts; psychosis defined as a case in which an individual has manifested or may reasonably be expected to manifest delusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psychosis; bipolar disorder; and substance dependence within the previous two years as defined in FAR 67.307(4).

Correct. As written in the bill, OSA no longer qualifies as one of the listed conditions needing an SI. Whether that will still be the case when the FAA issues its final regulations is anyone's guess right now.

 

[DFH65]

Spoke to my doctor this morning. Asked him his thoughts on the whole signing the letter thing. He said if it is just signing a form no big deal he does that all the time. If the FAA requires him to take some course or some such nonsense then he said no. He said most doctors will sign it but there will certainly be others who think the sky is falling there always are.

 

[Palmpilot]

So my question is if the following are the SI conditions...is OSA no longer an SI?

• Cardiovascular: myocardial infarction (heart attack); coronary heart disease that has required treatment; cardiac valve replacement; and heart replacement.
• Neurological: epilepsy; a transient loss of control of nervous system functions without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause; and disturbances of consciousness without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause.
• Mental Health: personality disorder that is severe enough to have repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts; psychosis defined as a case in which an individual has manifested or may reasonably be expected to manifest delusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psychosis; bipolar disorder; and substance dependence within the previous two years as defined in FAR 67.307(4).

I don't think the new law has any effect on what conditions require an SI if you're applying for a medical certificate. It only affects what you need if you want to go the no-medical-certificate route.