What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Third Class Medical

DMFenster

Well Known Member
Not sure how much this has been discussed, but I thought I'd post the following timeline (from DOT's website - looks like they are going to publish March 3rd 2015 with comments ending May 2015):

I put the link at the bottom:

20. Medical Self-Evaluation for Certain Noncommercial Operations in Lieu of Airman Medical Certification Black

Popular Title: Medical Self-Certification
RIN 2120-AK45
Stage: NPRM
Previous Stage:None
Abstract: This rulemaking would consider allowing certain operations to be conducted by individuals exercising private-pilot privileges without holding a current FAA airman medical certificate. The intended effect of this action is to provide relief from having to obtain a medical certificate for pilots engaged in low-risk flying, such as private pilots operating a small, general aviation aircraft.
Effects:
None

Prompting action: Secretarial/Head of Operating Administration Decision
Legal Deadline: None

Rulemaking Project Initiated: 02/04/2014
Docket Number:
Dates for NPRM:
Milestone Originally
Scheduled
Date New
Projected
Date Actual
Date
To OST 07/03/2014 08/14/2014 07/24/2014
To OMB 08/04/2014 11/30/2014
OMB Clearance 11/04/2014 02/27/2015
Publication Date 11/10/2014 03/05/2015
End of Comment Period 01/09/2015 05/05/2015

Explanation for any delay: N/A

Federal Register Citation for NPRM: None


http://www.dot.gov/regulations/report-on-significant-rulemakings
 
Thanks for the update. I just want to know what the proposal is (GW, HP, VNE, seats, pax, day/night, etc) so I know whether to keep squeezing or not, and what engine to shop for.

In the mean time I'll work to get our new incoming Congress-critter to support GAPPA.
 
Thanks for the update. I just want to know what the proposal is (GW, HP, VNE, seats, pax, day/night, etc) so I know whether to keep squeezing or not, and what engine to shop for.

No matter what it says for HP, seats, etc I will support it as it is a step in the right direction. I will also support any effort to include as many GA airplanes as possible.
 
Oh, me too -- any progress is better than none! I'm just hoping to see the specifics to help make some build decisions. :)
 
This can't happen soon enough.

And Huerta said at Oshkosh that it would be out on the streets by Christmas....now it looks like March. I don't see a particular rush here. It's too bad the Congressional action will probably have to be started all over again with the new session.
 
Anyone have a better link? The one posted leads to a list of NPRMs but the are not correctly linked.

Also, one of the others is about fees; it's not linked either.

Dave
 
Anyone have a better link? The one posted leads to a list of NPRMs but the are not correctly linked.
Also, one of the others is about fees; it's not linked either.
Dave

I believe the post said that the NPRM would not be published until March of next year. That gives them over 3 months to push the date back again.
 
The AOPA/EAA proposal is nothing more than Recreational Pilot privileges without needing a medical. It doesn't go far enough for quite a few PPL's so for many of us it will be a waste of effort. No night flying, no more than one passenger, 180hp limitation, no flying over the top, no IFR. I fly on a special issuance and would love to stop having to deal with the expensive and needless medical tests every year plus having to deal with Aeromedical in OK City. If this passes my yearly ordeal will need to continue. In the end I doubt that if this passes it will make much more than a small dent in the declining pilot population and nothing to help grow it. It is simply a convenience for day/VFR pilots and those that want to save $120 every two years.
 
Mike, I don't disagree with you one bit. Having said that... in my current situation, ANY flying is better than NO flying. If the FAA does decide to make these very small concessions I'll certainly take it. But I'm not going to stop pushing for something much more comprehensive, like GAPPA. My only real fear is that the FAA will make this token change to head off legislative action, which I am 99% sure is why they are doing it. That to me would be unacceptable. The APOA/EAA proposal would be a nice start, but it's just that -- a start. It's a fraction of what needs to be done.
 
Last edited:
Bill's link is to an article from back in April based on AOPA/EAA proposed exemptions.

The congressional proposal is actually for a rule change and is much more lenient, including 6,000 lb. gross weight, 6 seats, no hp limits, etc.

And obviously, regardless of what the final result is, some people won't be happy.
Give VFR, people will want IFR. Give part 91, people will want part 135. Give 10,000', people will want flight levels. And on it goes.

How about we do what we can to get what we can, then start working on the next level!
 
It will not be the AOPA proposal because that is an exemption request. The FAA announced at OSH over the summer that their proposal is a rule change instead. Either way, Mike is correct. The AOPA/EAA request is nothing more than the current LSA guidelines with a Cessna 172 / RV 7 thrown in. Alphabet Groups are simply trying to keep the aging pilot community and their aging planes in the air because that is their current membership base. (and the lucrative AirAdventure attendee)

There should be hope that the FAA proposal will be more far-sighted and actually focus on the future of general aviation. For example, maybe there should be less regulation simply because much of it has proven unnecessary, costly and often a huge hurdle to the free enterprise side of aviation. It is free enterprise innovation (can we say Van's?) that will attract future pilots, not free rides, certainly not health related exemptions. The FAA did say "by the end of the year" and it is now "expected" in March. That is not surprising. With a new congress on the immediate horizon, all govt agencies will sticking toes in the water this spring. And yes, March is no doubt a "check the temperature" date.

I may be a dreamer, but I'm hoping for something more substantial than the original request.
 
Bill's link is to an article from back in April based on AOPA/EAA proposed exemptions.

The congressional proposal is actually for a rule change and is much more lenient, including 6,000 lb. gross weight, 6 seats, no hp limits, etc.

And obviously, regardless of what the final result is, some people won't be happy.
Give VFR, people will want IFR. Give part 91, people will want part 135. Give 10,000', people will want flight levels. And on it goes.

How about we do what we can to get what we can, then start working on the next level!

^^^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 
What Mel said plus ....

Bill's link is to an article from back in April based on AOPA/EAA proposed exemptions.

The congressional proposal is actually for a rule change and is much more lenient, including 6,000 lb. gross weight, 6 seats, no hp limits, etc.

And obviously, regardless of what the final result is, some people won't be happy.
Give VFR, people will want IFR. Give part 91, people will want part 135. Give 10,000', people will want flight levels. And on it goes.

How about we do what we can to get what we can, then start working on the next level!

As usual, Mel's comments are on the mark as far as I am concerned.

Efforts like this take time. They are almost never what everyone wants or expects. And they take longer than most people want.

I see this as no different.

I believe that it will come later and have less than what many want. Like most things it is likely to be a series of trade-offs, But it will be progress. It will be a basis for looking forward.

James
 
I've got a fat checkbook and the time, and if the Feds get rid of the third class medical thing, I'm all over this...

This is why it's important to dump the 3rd class medical! GA is shrinking and so are the number of service providers to our market. Without a large customer base, the handful of us left won't be able to support the remaining aviation companies and trained experts. This is extremely important to all of aviation, not just experimentals. Even the airlines will suffer because there will be no pool to pull young pilots form once GA collapses.
 
Last edited:
I think the collapse of GA is already in the rear view mirror. Some of the type clubs now have national membership teetering on 100 total members for widely-flown types. Main reason for shrinkage is "dropped out of flying because I'm too old/lost my medical".
 
Back
Top