revoked medical for FAA falsification

So, can this pilot fly in any capacity right now? No medical but other certs, still in place.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Flying safely for 8 years? If so, then maybe the system is being a little too harsh and needs some changes.
Click to expand...

Someone narced on him. Where they out to get him or did someone drop the dime because the flying performance was sub-standard? Things we don't know.
 
They can fly in the right seat, or the left seat, in the role of a passenger. That doesn't mean they can't touch the controls. But they can't act as either PIC or SIC in an airplane.
 
Everskyward said:
They can fly in the right seat, or the left seat, in the role of a passenger. That doesn't mean they can't touch the controls. But they can't act as either PIC or SIC in an airplane.
Click to expand...

Or any other required pilot crew member. The last drivel from the chief counsel is that safety pilots are not necessarily SIC.
 
Unregistered said:
So, can this pilot fly in any capacity right now? No medical but other certs, still in place.
Click to expand...
Not in any capacity that requires a medical certificate or requires that a medical or special issuance has never been denied or revoked.

It's all pretty much covered in FAR 61.23.

Hopefully the person in question is consulting with an attorney who knows this stuff. It may not help too much in the long-run but it might prevent making a bad situation even worse.
 
Last edited:
flyingron said:
Or any other required pilot crew member. The last drivel from the chief counsel is that safety pilots are not necessarily SIC.
Click to expand...
You talking about the drivel that although a safety pilot is a "required crewmember" and may therefore log SIC time under 61.51, she not "acting as SIC" under 61.55 and therefore doesn't have to have an instrument rating if the flight is under IFR?
 
That's the one. The change to require SIC safety pilots to have instrument ratings was (in my opinion) inadvertently added to the regs when they reordered some of the paragraphs in an unrelated change to 61.55. Neither the NPRM nor anybody's comments, nor the final rule took note of the fact that changed. I tried to petition to put it back, but the response (from the now retired bastard John Lynch) completely missed the mark (even Levy pulled his hair out on that one). There was some rather unpleasant emails back and forth between me and Lynch where he did his usual "assert that's the way things always were." I was about to try again after Lynch's retirement, but Levy popped up with a counsel ruling that said "just because you're safety pilot doesn't mean you have to be PIC or SIC." Okie dokie, kind of makes some other parts of the regulation spurious, but if that's the way they want to do it, I'll take that rather than beating my head on the regulatory process. (I did manage to get the definition of night fixed).

So yes, in the current regulatory climate, you can be safety pilot and neither PIC or SIC, but you STILL need a medical.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top