New Sport Pilot Rules

[Therookguy]

Hey all. I'm coming up on a CFI checkride and I want to make sure my understanding of the new Sport Pilot rules / MOSAIC is correct. It's a mess of 700 pages and is rather confusing.

Here's my current understanding:

Let's say we have a Sport Pilot Certificate (or Higher, Private, Commercial, ATP) with airplane category SEL or SES privileges:

- Medical: Driver's license, unless I had a revoked or denied medical at sometime. If I get endorsed to fly at night then I need at least Class 3, Basic Med, or DoD 2992.

- Can fly 4 place aircraft, one passenger only, must have less than 59 KCAS clean stall speed / Vs, up to 10,000 MSL or 2,000 AGL whatever is higher, Day VFR, night VFR with endorsement and medical, must be single engine.

- Endorsements: complex, retractable, and high-performance.

Questions I have:

1. High-Performance: I don't see High-Performance mentioned as an option for Sport Pilot's on most of the quick understanding guides for MOSAIC. For example. AOPA .
I get my assumption about High-Performance from Page 306 of the Mosaic Final Rule Issuance:

"NAFI and some individual commenters recommended FAA create a table to clarify what a pilot must accomplish to obtain an endorsement to fly airplanes with controllable pitch propellers and retractable landing gear and requested clarification as to whether high-performance and complex endorsements are available and applicable to a sport pilot. Pilots must obtain training and
an instructor endorsement under § 61.31 to operate complex or high-performance airplanes, which is equally applicable to sport pilots. FAA finds the revisions previously discussed more clearly communicate training and endorsement requirements for adjustable pitch propellers and retractable landing gear and align with the current training and endorsement framework in part 61, rendering a table unnecessary at this time."

Can Sport Pilots have a High Performance endorsement and fly >200 hp engines?

2. Category and Class of rating: Rotorcraft don't have a stall speed, correct? So in July 2026 when they create 14 CFR Part 22 and change the certification requirements for LSA, sport pilots will be able to fly whatever aircraft that they are endorsed for so long as it stays within the rules above? So if someone certifies a Rotorcraft Helicopter under Part 22, I can take a practical exam for Sport Pilot: Rotorcraft - Helicopter. But in 14 CFR 61.313 there doesn't appear to be a practical exam for Sport Pilot Rotorcraft Helicopter that exists, only gyroplanes. Also the PTS only mentions Airplane Category, Gryoplane Category, and Glider Category. (I guess gryoplanes are a category now???) Then I read 14 CFR 61.317 and 61.321 and get really confused. So I can get my sport pilot by taking a practical in a 172, examiner gives me an endorsement and does the IACRA for my Sport Pilot cert, which doesn't have a specific category or class. Now someone creates a helicopter or EVTOL that is certified under Part 22. According to 61.321 I just have to find an instructor who can give me an endorsement that says I can fly said helicopter (after passing a performance review per the PTS), and this endorsement applies to category and class, so any new Part 22 helicopter that comes out I can just hop in and solo?? I'm really confused here.

Here are some scenarios I thought up to make sure I understand what is going on with Sport Pilot:

Scenario A:
Pilot A: Own's a 235 HP Cessna 182, Flight Instructor Single Engine Land. Pilot B: 0 Hours flight time. Driver's license only, never applied for a medical. Pilot A instructs Pilot B in the 182 for 14 hours of dual. Pilot A and B then rent a Cessna 172 and Pilot A instructs Pilot B for 1 hour dual. Pilot A gives Pilot B Solo, Cross-country, and airspace (if required) endorsements. Pilot B does 5 hours solo in the 172 to include the Solo XC. Pilot B never having or applied for a medical whatsoever, just has a driver's license, passes the required written exam, meets language and age requirements, and passes the practical in the 172. Pilot A then trains Pilot B in the 182 further and writes Pilot B complex and high-performance endorsements. Pilot B can now operate the Cessna 182 as PIC during the day.

Pilot B later reads 14 CFR 61.23(C)(2) and wonders if their Bi-Polar diagnosis violates 14 CFR 61.23(c)(2)(iv), Pilot B continues to act as PIC of the 182 despite this. Is Pilot B illegally operating the 182 as PIC?

Scenario B:
Pilot A: Owns a Cessna 172, Flight Instructor SEL. Pilot B: 0 Hours flight time. Driver's license only, never applied for a medical. Pilot A instructs Pilot B for 20 hours of dual in the 172. Pilot B then receives 3 hours of instruction in a glider, and meets the requirements in 14 CFR 61.313(c). Pilot B then passes the practical test for a Sport Pilot cert in a glider. Pilot B then takes a proficiency check from Pilot C (CFI SEL) who works with Pilot A at a part 61 flight school. Pilot C then endorses Pilot B for Airplane SEL Sport Pilot. Pilot B is now a sport pilot authorized to fly Gliders and Airplane SEL. Did I get the flow right?

Scenario C:
Pilot A: Sport Pilot with third class medical, own's a 172. Pilot B: A private pilot with Airplane SEL. Pilot A wishes to refresh training under foggles for simulated instrument. Due to insurance requirements Pilot A must be acting pilot in command. Pilot B acts as a safety pilot. Pilot A's wife would like to come along and sit in the back. Pilot A doesn't wear the foggles for taxiing, takeoff, and landing. Did Pilot A violate the one passenger only requirement?

Scenario D:
Same as Scenario C but Pilot B is now a CFII Airplane SEL. Pilot A still acts as PIC and wears the foggles. Was the one passenger rule violated?

Scenario E:
Same as Scenario D (I know this going to sound ridiculous, but stick with me). Except now we add Pilot C. Pilot C is private pilot airplane SEL and acts as safety pilot, sitting in the right seat. Pilot B is still instructing but sits in the back seat with the passenger. Did we violate the one passenger requirement?

Okay check my understanding to see if I would pass this rabbit hole on my checkride:

A: Yes. If an incident happened they would probably use 14 CFR 61.23(c)(2)(iv) to come after both Pilot A and Pilot B. Remove the bi-polar diagnosis and it would be legal. Is this a gray area here?

B: Check me here, I think I'm correct in that this is the proper flow.

C: Yes this is a violation, the second Pilot A removes his foggles Pilot B is no longer a safety pilot / required crew member and becomes a passenger, we then have 2 passengers on board.

D: No, see Kortokrax interpretation, the instructor does not count as a passenger, even if Pilot A removes the foggles.

E: Okay this is a 91.109(a), 91.109(c), and 61.195(g) question. I'm guessing if something happened that the FAA would say that 61.195(g)(2) implies that the instructor has access to the controls. But the idea was to see if a sport pilot can fly a completely filled 4 place aircraft legally.

I think I understand the fixed wing fairly well I just don't know what the FAA is doing with rotorcraft for MOSAIC.

 

[JScarry]

FYI,
This memorandum memorializes that the Kortokrax Legal Interpretation (Aug. 22, 2006) was rescinded as of July 23, 2023.

That’s why some of the wording in the FARs was changed as well to refer to persons not passengers.

I don’t see a direct link to the Legal Interpretation but go to this link and put in Kortokrax Rescinded
and you will find it.

 

[robin ardoin]

For sake of correctness: "- Medical: Driver's license, unless I had a revoked or denied medical at sometime. If I get endorsed to fly at night then I need at least Class 3, Basic Med, or DoD 2992."

You cannot have your most recent medical suspended/denied or had a SI withdrawn. IOW, if one had a medical certificate application denied, then had authorization for a Special Issuance, received that SI medical cert and complied with all of the requirements during the valid period, they could excersize Sport Pilot priveleges under a valid Driver's license. I post this just in case your DPE decides to get a little pedantic.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I'm coming up on a CFI checkride and I want to make sure my understanding of the new Sport Pilot rules / MOSAIC is correct. It's a mess of 700 pages and is rather confusing.

First question, are you bringing the Federal Register documentation for ALL of the regs, or just choosing to do so with this section?

I would recommend sticking with the regs unless/until someone claims they don’t mean what they say.

Rotorcraft don't have a stall speed, correct?

Are you taking a Rotorcraft instructor checkride?

Pilot A then trains Pilot B in the 182 further and writes Pilot B complex and high-performance endorsements.

Is this a retractable 182?

Flight Instructor SEL.

There is no Land or Sea rating on an instructor certificate (at least in airplanes).

Scenario B:

Assuming all of the training requirements were met for ASEL, and instructor A endorsed pilot B for the proficiency check. There is no need for A and C to work together at a flight school.

 

[flyingron]

For sake of correctness: "- Medical: Driver's license, unless I had a revoked or denied medical at sometime. If I get endorsed to fly at night then I need at least Class 3, Basic Med, or DoD 2992."

You cannot have your most recent medical suspended/denied or had a SI withdrawn. IOW, if one had a medical certificate application denied, then had authorization for a Special Issuance, received that SI medical cert and complied with all of the requirements during the valid period, they could excersize Sport Pilot priveleges under a valid Driver's license. I post this just in case your DPE decides to get a little pedantic.

For the sake of correctness, that's the rules for Basic Med.

For Sport Pilot, your most recent medical application must have been ISSUED and then not revoked/suspended/withdrawn.

The distinction is that if your most recent medical was deferred, you can fly under BasicMed, but not Sport Pilot.

 

[robin ardoin]

For the sake of correctness, that's the rules for Basic Med.

For Sport Pilot, your most recent medical application must have been ISSUED and then not revoked/suspended/withdrawn.

The distinction is that if your most recent medical was deferred, you can fly under BasicMed, but not Sport Pilot.

We're saying the same thing. If your most recent medical was deferred, but, you were able to obtain a medical certificate via special issuance (and, of course complied with the obligations until expiry), you will be meet the requirements of Sport Pilot in regards to the medical. If one had their most recent medical application deferred, and did not pursue/receive a medical under an SI (or other means), then you could not qualify for SP or BM.

The OP postulated that if one ever had a medical revoked or denied, then the Driver's License option, in lieu of medical cert., was out. I was pointing out that that is not correct as long as the last medical application resulted, ultimately, in a medical even though deferred and denied. My medical was deferred, then denied, then granted under SI. I let my medical cert lapse. I qualify to fly SP based on holding a valid DL.

 

[flyingron]

H9

We're saying the same thing.

No, we are not. Both you and the person you were responding to are wrong.
Read the last line of my post again. You described the basic med rules. The sport pilot rules are different. As soon as you file an medical application, the DL-based sport pilot rules are BARRED to you until you get an issuance. Basic med lets you fly with a deferral (until you get denied).

 

[robin ardoin]

H9

No, we are not. Both you and the person you were responding to are wrong.
Read the last line of my post again. You described the basic med rules. The sport pilot rules are different. As soon as you file an medical application, the DL-based sport pilot rules are BARRED to you until you get an issuance. Basic med lets you fly with a deferral (until you get denied).

That is exactly what I am inferring. We must agree that we are disagreeing upon what we agree.
Seriously though, I get what you are saying; In regards to SP, if you start a medical application and it is deferred, you have to ultimately obtain approval (SI or just submit requested supporting data allowing issue) or you are dead in the water. My point to the OP is that a revoked or denied medical in the past doesn’t rule out using your DL in lieu of a FAA medical certificate if a pilot eventually did obtain a certificate after the revocation or denial.

 

[flyingron]

That is exactly what I am inferring. We must agree that we are disagreeing upon what we agree.
Seriously though, I get what you are saying; In regards to SP, if you start a medical application and it is deferred, you have to ultimately obtain approval (SI or just submit requested supporting data allowing issue) or you are dead in the water.

You are dead in the water from the moment you are deferred. All the supporting data in the world does you no good. You need to be subsequently approved.

 

[midlifeflyer]

You are dead in the water from the moment you are deferred. All the supporting data in the world does you no good. You need to be subsequently approved.

I may well have missed it, but have not seen anything from the FAA saying that you are dead in the water from the moment you are deferred. I've seen that claim in various places but I have not seen any of those back it up with an FAA reference.

Here are the words of the regulation:

A person using a U.S. driver's license to meet the requirements of paragraph (c) while exercising sport pilot privileges must--​

(i) Comply with each restriction and limitation imposed by that person's U.S. driver's license and any judicial or administrative order applying to the operation of a motor vehicle;​

(ii) Have been found eligible for the issuance of at least a third-class airman medical certificate at the time of his or her most recent application (if the person has applied for a medical certificate);​

(iii) Not have had his or her most recently issued medical certificate (if the person has held a medical certificate) suspended or revoked or most recent Authorization for a Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate withdrawn; and​

(iv) Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate an aircraft meeting the performance limits and design requirements of Sec. 61.316 in a safe manner.​

I have heard people claim that a deferral means you have not have been "found eligible...at the time of his or her most recent application." I disagree for three reasons:

1. Application is a process, not a one-time event. It is still in process until either approved or denied.​

2. That claim means that if, say an AME tells you they need a note from your physician within 24 hours about something so they can approve it, sorry, too bad. You are done with sport pilot.​

3. That claim also means that, after deferral, if the FAA approves the issuance, also sorry, too bad. It wasn't approved "at the time." "Subsequent approval" is, by definition, "not "at the time." From that literal reading, you'd have to reapply from scratch or, if there was an SI, wait for renewal.​

​

That doesn't mean flying under sport pilot rules while the application is pending is not without compliance risk. (iv), knowing or having reason to know that one is unable to operate in a safe manner, is a pretty big catch-all. But there is a difference between a caution and a prohibition.

 

[robin ardoin]

You are dead in the water from the moment you are deferred. All the supporting data in the world does you no good. You need to be subsequently approved.

Yes, exactly. If you proceed to obtain the medical through an SI or approved after satisfying the additional information often requested at deferral, then you will be good to go through a DL if you choose to let the medical lapse. This is what I have been saying...and so have you.

 

[bbchien]

700 pages on Mosaic reduced to three.