|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

01-17-2019, 12:04 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 6,797
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanH
I'm with Bob.
First, is there written opinion or direction from the FAA (not AOPA) on this specific subject?
Absent specific interpretation, FAR 91.109 seems to offer reasonable support for a Basic Med safety pilot. It says....
(c) No person may operate a civil aircraft in simulated instrument flight unless -
(1) The other control seat is occupied by a safety pilot who possesses at least:
(i) A private pilot certificate with category and class ratings appropriate to the aircraft being flown...
There's nothing about the type of medical certification required of the safety pilot. It actually says possesses a private pilot certificate, which one can do without medical certification. In the event the safety pilot feels it necessary to take control, from the moment he says "My airplane" he is exercising the privileges of a private pilot certificate, for which Basic Med is appropriate.
Hey, it's a reasonable argument.
|
Yes, I’ve seen an FAA memo (but don’t recall where) reminding pilots that the law congress passed only referred to PIC’s and so only these persons could use basic med. The issue is that somewhere else (forget the FAR number) the FARs say a medical is needed for ‘all required crew members’. The FAA has excluded all basic med holders from acting as a non-PIC required crew member. Being a safety pilot is the most obvious case, but not the only one.
Edit: I found it. FAR 61.3(c) requires ‘required crewmembers’ to hold an appropriate medical certificate. So safety pilots for pilots under the hood must hold a medical, and the faa has ruled that if the safety pilot is not the PIC, then he is not eligible to act under basic med.
Last edited by BobTurner : 01-17-2019 at 01:40 PM.
|

01-17-2019, 02:14 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 08A
Posts: 9,500
|
|
Darn. Now I can't plead ignorance.
__________________
Dan Horton
RV-8 SS
Barrett IO-390
|

01-17-2019, 02:57 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Richmond VA, USA
Posts: 456
|
|
You can still do it, sort of....
AOPA agrees with you, but they say the work-around is for the entire flight to be conducted under BasicMed with the safety pilot acting as PIC, because (now get this) the other pilot can log approaches and use them for currency even if s/he isn't the PIC (!).
https://pilot-protection-services.ao...-safety-pilots
Obviously sort of silly, but at least two people can still get the job done if one of them needs approaches and the other is BasicMed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTurner
I found it. FAR 61.3(c) requires ?required crewmembers? to hold an appropriate medical certificate. So safety pilots for pilots under the hood must hold a medical, and the faa has ruled that if the safety pilot is not the PIC, then he is not eligible to act under basic med.
|
__________________
N929JA, 2007 RV-9A
Based W96: New Kent International Aerodrome
(near Richmond, VA USA)
2020 Dues Paid
|

01-17-2019, 03:20 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 6,797
|
|
Yes, this is true. But don?t take lightly the legal burden of being PIC. If the pilot flying busts a reg and is caught, are you willing to take the fall? And if there is an accident or incident, if you tell the FAA you were PIC, the pilot?s insurance may deny coverage. Or, you do as I suggested: Do not accept being PIC in someone else?s airplane. Claim ignorance of such a stupid rule. And accept whatever punishment the faa may dish out. Better that than having insurance denied.
|

01-17-2019, 03:34 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 5,147
|
|
You guys realize you're discussing borderline insurance fraud on an open, public forum, right?
__________________
Greg Niehues - SEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2020 dues paid 
N16GN flying 700 hrs and counting; IO360, SDS, WWRV200, Dynon HDX, 430W
Built an off-plan RV9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.
|

02-13-2019, 11:30 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Vaca Moo Airport - TA37 in East TEXAS
Posts: 1,331
|
|
Very informative discussion.
__________________
RV-8 N52VM: OnSpeed Gen2 AOA-3D, Dynon D-180, Autopilot, Titan 0-360A1A, Hartzell C/S, INS-429 IFR & GPS496, WingX & Stratux for backup & ADS-B IN. Enjoying life while building an airpark with FREE campsite for pilots www.facebook.com/VacaMooAirport/
Exempt by 3 out of the 10 ways but I still donated.
|

02-13-2019, 02:19 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Posts: 411
|
|
I'm confused now
So what you're saying is that BasicMed isn't really a "medical" in the eyes of the FAA?
__________________
Mike F
RV-6A wings/fuselage
RV-3 empennage (extra thanks to Mr. Zilik)
RV-4 Plans only S/N 2938
Cessna 152
Elk Grove, CA
VAF #744 Exempt but paid anyway
|

02-13-2019, 02:29 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 5,298
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTurner
Yes, this is true. But don’t take lightly the legal burden of being PIC. If the pilot flying busts a reg and is caught, are you willing to take the fall? And if there is an accident or incident, if you tell the FAA you were PIC, the pilot’s insurance may deny coverage. Or, you do as I suggested: Do not accept being PIC in someone else’s airplane. Claim ignorance of such a stupid rule. And accept whatever punishment the faa may dish out. Better that than having insurance denied.
|
+1
If you have a problem, there is no way out. Claim the co-pilot is PIC and the FAA is happy. However, if that co-pilot doesn't meet the open pilot provisions on your policy, the insurance company won't pay out. Flip it around and you are PIC, the FAA is not happy, which also give the insurance company a reason not to pay (didn't follow the FARs, which is usually lurking in the policy's fine print somewhere).
__________________
N64LR - RV-6A / IO-320, Flying as of 8/2015
N11LR - RV-10, Flying as of 12/2019
|

02-13-2019, 02:33 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 5,298
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by arffguy
So what you're saying is that BasicMed isn't really a "medical" in the eyes of the FAA?
|
That is correct. However, the FARs now allow you to fly, as PIC, with basic med instead of a medical. It's possible this loophole/problem was overlooked by the FAA, but I think it's a "finger in the eye" of the regulators that pushed them to adopt basic med via a legislative bill. Unfortunately the regulators didn't think far enough into the issue to demand things like this, as well. Possibly the regulators assumed that Basic Med would be interchangeable with the Class III medical, but the FAA didn't implement it that way. Basic Med included everything in "letter" of the bill and not a thing that wasn't specifically outlined in the bill made it to the FAR's.
The FAA has been clear that Basic Med is used in leiu of a medical and one is not considered a replacement for the other.
Larry
__________________
N64LR - RV-6A / IO-320, Flying as of 8/2015
N11LR - RV-10, Flying as of 12/2019
Last edited by lr172 : 02-13-2019 at 02:42 PM.
|

02-13-2019, 04:12 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Posts: 411
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lr172
That is correct. However, the FARs now allow you to fly, as PIC, with basic med instead of a medical. It's possible this loophole/problem was overlooked by the FAA, but I think it's a "finger in the eye" of the regulators that pushed them to adopt basic med via a legislative bill. Unfortunately the regulators didn't think far enough into the issue to demand things like this, as well. Possibly the regulators assumed that Basic Med would be interchangeable with the Class III medical, but the FAA didn't implement it that way. Basic Med included everything in "letter" of the bill and not a thing that wasn't specifically outlined in the bill made it to the FAR's.
The FAA has been clear that Basic Med is used in leiu of a medical and one is not considered a replacement for the other.
Larry
|
Considering I have a lapsed Class 3 at this time, this topic gives me something to think about as I have a friend who wants me to act as his safety pilot. Thanks guys. And Thanks for the explanation Larry.
__________________
Mike F
RV-6A wings/fuselage
RV-3 empennage (extra thanks to Mr. Zilik)
RV-4 Plans only S/N 2938
Cessna 152
Elk Grove, CA
VAF #744 Exempt but paid anyway
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:13 AM.
|