His opinion of himself is he's still a safe pilot. Yet, he wanted to get checked out to rent before his medical expired... implying he didn't think he was likely to pass a new medical. If that's the case, one should self-ground. If you're not doing that when you believe you're not medically capable, there's something wrong in your ADM.
.........
While I despise government regulation on the whole and am tired of so many useless or worthless laws written, there's a large sector of society who allow it or worse, require it. They refuse to act responsibly so someone else must require them by statute to take such actions. We haven't seen the end of this, either.
On point 1, I don't know the gentlemen, but I don't think I'd look at wanting to do a rental checkout before going for a medical renewal as an indication that something's wrong with his medical (or that he wouldn't pass). It MAY be that he has an SI pending that will clear easily, but take time. It MAY be that he wants to get some time in before going to his medical. It MAY be that he's going to a new doc and doesn't know what to expect. Or he may simply have not gotten an appointment in time (or gotten an appointment after the last day of the month). From your standpoint (and from a legal standpoint), he still has a valid medical.
I did much the same: my BFR was due in the same month as my medical. I knocked off the BFR a week before the medical. We ended up doing an IPC the following month due to scheduling issues, but that's done, too. No ill intent at all - just how the schedule has all worked out.
As for gov't regulation, I agree: there are some folks that just outright won't accept personal responsibility. It's not just limited to aviation. The answer has been more and more and more regulation and control by the government, to the point that freedom is lost. Government regulation should not substitute for personal responsibility.
I think Mari has it right. It was also a way to stop the growing ultralight movement from getting out of control with the use of uncertified aircraft. I think there was a regulatory fear that the ultralight crowd was doing something that could reflect poorly on the FAA if accident started getting up to a noticeable amount and the suits did not want to appear as though they had been remiss in not regulating the ultra light pilots.
I think that's right to a large degree. But there are other elements at work, too.
The FAA is clearly concerned about LSA/ultralights being outside their control. And control is something that government agencies love to expand. From the commercial side, having LSA is all about getting insurance and relieveing some liability burden on manufacturers and lessors.
There are political factors, too.
Well, I think I have it right. Its a way to pacify us to accept flying planes that are less capable and therefore less likely to mix it up in Class B airspace. The FAA wants the airlines to be the exclusive user of ATC and Class B airspace. How many LSA's will be used IFR? Wake up and smell the coffee!
To some degree, but on the other hand, it supposedly matches regulation to the actual flying habits of pilots. No question that there is a lot of political pressure put on the FAA by the airlines and other vested interests to neuter GA.
Good points Mari, but the number of Cirri, Columbia and new Cessnas are dwarfed by the number of 30 - 40 year old aircraft from the 60's and 70's. I just realized my Tiger is 30 years old! WTF? Where did time go? I think we will see more pressure due to gas prices, maintenance cost of older airframes, user fees and ADIZ type regulation really cull our ranks. I know the airlines really hate the bizjet/fractionals and that's their major competition, but we are as you say collateral damage.
I am not against Sport Pilot, but I do think its less capable flying and GA will be consumed by it and thus we'll become purely recreational flyers in every sense of the word. I hope I'm wrong and pilots use it as a stepping stone, but I doubt it.
THe airlines have carefully crafted the user fee proposals to minimize the impact of avgas, and make it much more expensive on JetA. On the other hand, the environmental pressure will eventually push GA to Jet A. At that point, taxes become much higher on GA.
The regulatory pressure is tough, but the current administration has looked at "user fees" as a pot of gold. They don't view 'em as taxes. It's not just aviation, it's everything from roads (Mary Peters was interviewed on our local Fox affiliate as saying that eventually she thinks EVERY highway in the DC area should have tolls) to fire/police/ambulance. So, the "user fees" go up, but there's no corresponding tax decrease. (But, in the DC area plan, buses get a free ride...)
Frankly, I think if you surveyed most GA pilots, you'd find most of their use of aviation to be recreational. Some of us are the exception - we use it for travel. That presents a risk to airlines and other travel providers. There's a lot of money at stake.
I am not optimistic about the future of GA for a lot of reasons...
