MOSAIC Status

P

Pilot99B

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 2, 2022
Messages
11
Display Name
Display name:
Pilot99B
Does anyone have a ETA for when the final rule for Mosaic with the Sport Pilot medical changes is likely to go live? I am itching to be able to more easily get into the air again.
 
I think they're timing it to release along with Top Gun 3.
 
I had a medical that is now expired. I likely can't qualify for another one without spending $$$ and risking possible denial, and basic med isn't an option. Sport Pilot is my route, but very difficult to find anything to rent in that category. MOSAIC will likely make it so it is easy to find an aircraft like a Cessna 172 that will likely qualfiy under the rule.
 
Pilot99B said:
MOSAIC will likely make it so it is easy to find an aircraft like a Cessna 172 that will likely qualfiy under the rule.
Click to expand...

Maybe.

The next issue will probably be what rental owners and insurers think about folks flying 172s without Basic Med or a Class 3. I wonder whether any aviation insurers filed comments.
 
Half Fast said:
The next issue will probably be what rental owners and insurers think about folks flying 172s without Basic Med or a Class 3. I wonder whether any aviation insurers filed comments.
Click to expand...
I looked at the rate of medical incapacitation a few years back. This is all accidents, not just homebuilts. Blue are the accidents involving pilots operating with a Class 3 medical or higher (this is pre-Basic Med), yellow is those with pilots operating under Sport Pilot (including those with Private or higher certificates). The accidents include any that involved incapacitation, not just those where incapacitation was a Probable Cause. It also includes only those cases involving medical conditions, not drug- or alcohol-related.
1706112761564.png

At most two accidents per year that involved those operating under Sport Pilot. Medical incapacitation is a rare event...note that we typically see ~1500 accidents per year.

More details in my article: https://www.kitplanes.com/homebuilt-accidents-the-pilots-condition/

Certainly, some rental owners and insurors may claim they need more compensation because of supposed risks, but I don't see it backed up by the data.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
I looked at the rate of medical incapacitation a few years back. This is all accidents, not just homebuilts. Blue are the accidents involving pilots operating with a Class 3 medical or higher (this is pre-Basic Med), yellow is those with pilots operating under Sport Pilot (including those with Private or higher certificates). The accidents include any that involved incapacitation, not just those where incapacitation was a Probable Cause. It also includes only those cases involving medical conditions, not drug- or alcohol-related.
View attachment 124663
At most two accidents per year that involved those operating under Sport Pilot. Medical incapacitation is a rare event...note that we typically see ~1500 accidents per year.

More details in my article: https://www.kitplanes.com/homebuilt-accidents-the-pilots-condition/

Certainly, some rental owners and insurors may claim they need more compensation because of supposed risks, but I don't see it backed up by the data.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
This is great data that I hadn't seen but wouldn't we need to see more of a ratio to draw any conclusions given that there are less sport pilots than class 3+? Aka do sport pilots, out of the total number of sport pilots, experience more incapacitation relative to their group than class 3+? I know that data might not be available but just food for thought
 
OregonDucks609 said:
This is great data that I hadn't seen but wouldn't we need to see more of a ratio to draw any conclusions given that there are less sport pilots than class 3+? Aka do sport pilots, out of the total number of sport pilots, experience more incapacitation relative to their group than class 3+? I know that data might not be available but just food for thought
Click to expand...
There are a lot of people who hold Private, Commercial, and ATP certificates but are flying with SP privileges and no medical, but there’s no way to know what those numbers are. I personally know at least half a dozen, and I don’t get out much.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
And, it's not. The FAA elected to not track how many Private or "better" pilots are flying under the Sport Pilot rules - they only track the number of medicals per certificate type.
Click to expand...
Really no way for them to tell. I let my Class 3 expire in 2005 and have had no contact with the FAA since.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Really no way for them to tell. I let my Class 3 expire in 2005 and have had no contact with the FAA since.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
They could have chosen alternate methods of determining who is "active" such as sending in a form when you did a flight review - that would cover those of us who are flying without medicals, including glider pilots.
 
Doesn’t the training you have to do every other year for basic med go to the Faa? I was thinking they got notified of you completing that.
 
I have a feeling the GAMA comments that just came out are going to tank this whole issue. It's great fodder for those politicians that want to pile on the FAA right about now.
 
Salty said:
Doesn’t the training you have to do every other year for basic med go to the Faa? I was thinking they got notified of you completing that.
Click to expand...
BasicMed pilots are counted towards active pilots. Folks operating under sport pilot, gliders, or non commercial balloons are completely untrackable.
 
Last edited:
Salty said:
Doesn’t the training you have to do every other year for basic med go to the Faa? I was thinking they got notified of you completing that.
Click to expand...
If you choose to fill out an 8710 for a flight review, they’ll get that. But otherwise, no.
 
MauleSkinner said:
If you choose to fill out an 8710 for a flight review, they’ll get that. But otherwise, no.
Click to expand...
I think he's talking about the medical education course, for which the answer is yes (although a couple of people have mentioned their course completion at Mayo not showing up on FAA.gov).
 
Half Fast said:
Maybe.

The next issue will probably be what rental owners and insurers think about folks flying 172s without Basic Med or a Class 3. I wonder whether any aviation insurers filed comments.
Click to expand...

Will be interesting. I guess there are a few protections for insurers with BasicMed. That said, I have yet to see a policy that has the word "BasicMed" in it.

I have been trying to figure out why my RV-12 policy is more expensive (for less coverage) than my C172 policy and based on your comment I thought maybe because the RV-12 is a LSA and may be piloted without a Medical Cert or BasicMed. My policy says:

"The pilot flying the aircraft must maintain a valid pilot certificate (including the appropriate
ratings) and valid medical certificate as required by the Federal Aviation Administration or
its approved equivalent."

So is a Driver's License an "approved equivalent" exercising Sport Pilot privileges?
 
idahoflier said:
...I have yet to see a policy that has the word "BasicMed" in it....
Click to expand...
My Assured Partners Aerospace policy has language that's broad enough to include it. (This is the insurance provider that AOPA is partnered with.)

2023 Poliicy Excerpt.png
 
Palmpilot said:
My Assured Partners Aerospace policy has language that's broad enough to include it. (This is the insurance provider that AOPA is partnered with.)

View attachment 124683
Click to expand...

I think you're probably covered as well with the above language, but it still doesn't say BasicMed. It looks like exercising Sport Pilot privileges flying a LSA is covered. Still - A bit different than an owner's policy...
 
idahoflier said:
I think you're probably covered as well with the above language, but it still doesn't say BasicMed. It looks like exercising Sport Pilot privileges flying a LSA is covered. Still - A bit different than an owner's policy...
Click to expand...
It's also broad enough to cover glider and non-commercial balloon operations.

I think I specifically asked them about BasicMed coverage before I first purchased the insurance, because at that time I did have the exact language of the policy.
 
idahoflier said:
I definitely like those terms/conditions better! Who is your underwriter?
Click to expand...
I'm not seeing any difference in wording between his screen-capture and mine. It looks like he is using the same underwriter, Assured Partners Aerospace.
 
Palmpilot said:
I'm not seeing any difference in wording between his screen-capture and mine. It looks like he is using the same underwriter, Assured Partners Aerospace.
Click to expand...

Me either, except I think his is an owner's policy and it looks like your policy is non-owned. Assured Partners is the broker, I use them too. My policy is underwritten by Old Republic...
 
idahoflier said:
Me either, except I think his is an owner's policy and it looks like your policy is non-owned. Assured Partners is the broker, I use them too. My policy is underwritten by Old Republic...
Click to expand...
I goofed on the terminology, but I assume that the wording of the policy is what's binding, and that appears to be the same for both owned and non-owned policies.
 
I have the same wording as Half Fast. AP is the broker, Starr is the underwriter. BasicMed is no problem (on my policies). There are still people who don't believe in BasicMed for some reason.
 
Pilot99B said:
I had a medical that is now expired. I likely can't qualify for another one without spending $$$ and risking possible denial, and basic med isn't an option. Sport Pilot is my route, but very difficult to find anything to rent in that category. MOSAIC will likely make it so it is easy to find an aircraft like a Cessna 172 that will likely qualfiy under the rule.
Click to expand...

Why not do Basic Med? If you held a valid medical after July 2006, you do it through any doctor.
 
jbarrass said:
I have the same wording as Half Fast. AP is the broker, Starr is the underwriter. BasicMed is no problem (on my policies). There are still people who don't believe in BasicMed for some reason.
Click to expand...
I am also fine with Basic Med from Starr through Falcon.
 
Pinecone said:
Why not do Basic Med? If you held a valid medical after July 2006, you do it through any doctor.
Click to expand...
That’s assuming he hasn’t had one of a few things that would require an SI. That can range from expensive to a crapshoot with a permanent lifetime “ aviation death penalty” if you get denied.
 
X3 Skier said:
What did they say?
Click to expand...
That letting any measure of "desirable" legacy spam can performance category (you know, the usual "BE35 and below" macro-class of piston airframes) into the LSA fold will be the death of thousands of children, and that it's pretty unsafe and the FAA should pause and never let that happen. Same reason the primary non-commercial category got snuffed in 2013/2015. I've said it for a decade now, it's always been the OEMs behind the scenes putting their thumb on the scale. They don't want anything to stir up support for the economic life extension of their legacy offerings on the market.

People need to get it through their skulls: OEMs want their legacy non-revenue 20th century piston offerings gone. They want them gone. GAMA, being their resident bootlicker/mouthpiece, is part of that controlled opposition campaign. Meanwhile the perennial ingénues on here keep clicking their heels waiting for MOSAIC Godot to bring them regulatory relief that was never forthcoming. It'd be comical if it weren't so sad to witness.
 
Back
Top