|
-
POSTING RULES

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

05-10-2013, 08:34 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: McKinney, Texas
Posts: 5
|
|
Exemption Strategy
I attended several forums on this issue at Oshkosh and my understanding is:
This proposed change was developed as an exemption to an existing rule. The rationale was that rule changes require much more effort and time than exemptions. As an exemption, it has to fit all the constraints associated with the FAA's definition of exemption. The constraints are not necessarily logical, and the EAA/AOPA strategy was to develop a fully compliant proposal.
A significant constraint is that an exemption can apply only to a specific set of pilots and aircraft. Specifying the aircraft was easy. But how to specify a set of pilots? The FAA would not accept "all pilots." A large specific set is card-carrying EAA and AOPA members. This definition would meet the FAA constraint.
The EAA and AOPA reps at Oshkosh stressed they were not trying to establish the exemption as a privilege for its members alone. This may not be entirely true, but it seems like a logical way to cast the net as wide as possible while meeting the requirement.
|

05-10-2013, 09:49 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas, TX (ADS)
Posts: 2,180
|
|
It would be a remarkably logical step for the FAA to approve it, but I'm not holding my breath.
TODR
__________________
Doug "The Other Doug Reeves" Reeves
CTSW N621CT - SOLD but not forgotten
Home Bases LBX, BZN
|

05-11-2013, 04:04 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,082
|
|
Seems the only time the FAA does anything positive affecting us lowly lead fuel burning minority is when congress forces them to do something. I wouldn't count on this getting approved at the FAA. There is no compelling reason why they would approve it. The cost savings in OK City would be minimal and it is not visible enough to the public. As to this being for AOPA and/or EAA members, well, that is what they are there for isn't it? To work for their members? Besides, most GA pilots are a member of one of them. It does not bother me a bit that my dues are funding their advocacy on the members behalf. But I'm sure those that are not members would benefit as well as they always do so if you do not belong to either and this passes, be sure to take care of me when we meet up at the bar. It is the least you could do since my membership dues covered your bi-annual savings at the AME.
__________________
Mike
JAMES AIRCRAFT.com
Flying - RV8 Hot Rod "Drone Killer"
Flying - RV8 "Look'n Good"
RV4 - FAST & FUN! Rebuilt, Flown, Sold
RV-7A Built, Flown, Sold
|

05-11-2013, 07:48 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: fort myers fl
Posts: 949
|
|
I hope it never does pass. Just come on down here to florida and drive for a few days and you will see why it may not be a good idea. Update the standards, yes, the rules have not kept up with medical science. There are those people that need someone to tell them its time to hang it up.
bob burns
Rv-4 N82RB
|

05-11-2013, 08:47 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mahomet, Illinois
Posts: 2,195
|
|
What a Super AME told our EAA Chapter ....
First, you may recall there are about 25 so-called Super-AMEs ... who have increased credibility/authority with the FAA. They have ability to get FAA approval on medical cases and issues that a "normal" AME cannot. In more recent years, they have worked very closely with the OKC authorities and have significant credibility thereto.
In March, one of the Super AMEs was the guest speaker at our monthly Chapter meeting, and told us that the AOPA initiative on the 3rd Class medical exemption was a huge mistake. It was undertaken largely because it would be viewed by AOPA members as the organization working for them, not because it was likely to happen or get FAA approval. IOW, it was a membership "thing", not a realistic initiative with expectations for regulation reform.
In the history of the FAA the largest single exemption to any of the three medical classes was seven ex-military pilots in a rare and one-time situation. As our speaker put it, "Why would anyone think the FAA would go from a historic seven one-time exemptions to 300,000 in one step? It made no sense." He advised the AOPA to NOT undertake the exemption process in that manner ... he advised them to work quietly with the FAA and the Super AMEs for a smaller group exemption first. Clearly, they did not listen to his advice. Based on the above, there is no realistic expectation the AOPA/EAA petition will go anywhere in the next few years. Regulatory reform for pilot medicals will come a lot slower and take years to accomplish.
__________________
Terry Ruprecht
RV-9A Tip-up; IO-320 D2A
S. James cowl/plenum
(Dues paid thru Nov '18)
|

05-11-2013, 12:01 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dallas, TX (ADS)
Posts: 2,180
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by n82rb
I hope it never does pass. Just come on down here to florida and drive for a few days and you will see why it may not be a good idea. Update the standards, yes, the rules have not kept up with medical science. There are those people that need someone to tell them its time to hang it up.
bob burns
Rv-4 N82RB
|
I think that's true with flying and driving, and plenty of those pilots manage to get medicals. Having a medical does not mean you are fit to fly medically speaking, it only means that you met the minimum standards imposed by the FAA and that specific AME. Likewise, not having a medical doesn't mean you are unfit to fly.
The most important part is the PIC's compliance with the requirement to not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make the PIC unable to operate a the aircraft in a safe manner.
TODR
__________________
Doug "The Other Doug Reeves" Reeves
CTSW N621CT - SOLD but not forgotten
Home Bases LBX, BZN
|

05-11-2013, 12:17 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 696
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupester
First, you may recall there are about 25 so-called Super-AMEs ... who have increased credibility/authority with the FAA. They have ability to get FAA approval on medical cases and issues that a "normal" AME cannot. In more recent years, they have worked very closely with the OKC authorities and have significant credibility thereto.
|
Is there a list of these Super-AMEs that a mere private pilot can access?
__________________
Don Alexander
Virginia
RV-9A 257SW Purchase Flying - O-320, Dynon D100
RV-9A 702DA (reserved) Finish Kit IOX-340
www.propjock.com
|

05-11-2013, 02:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western US
Posts: 98
|
|
Not surprising to me that an AME ("Super" or not) is against the proposal. I'm sure there's absolutely no bias on their part, LOL!
|

05-11-2013, 05:43 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Defiance, MO
Posts: 1,674
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryana
Not surprising to me that an AME ("Super" or not) is against the proposal. I'm sure there's absolutely no bias on their part, LOL!
|
Exactly. Just like asking an insurance agent if they favor the state law mandating everyone show proof of insurance to get license plates renewed.
Back to RVs. I am really surprised how divided his forum seems to be on the subject. Maybe due to that not all RVs are included in the exemption proposal.
__________________
Philip
RV-6A - 14+ years, 950+ hours
Based at 1H0 (Creve Coeur)
Paid dues yearly since 2007
|
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 07:23 AM.
|