National Aeronca Association Bulletin Board

Hard to adjust the 77 price for just inflation as the regulations, tort coverage etc. changed. In 1985 when the last 152s were sold, the base price was already $43,500. I paid $73,500 for a new 1985 172 in 1985 and I think today they are about $240.00 tricked out.

" Hard to adjust the 77 price for just inflation as the regulations, tort coverage etc. changed."

That's exactly my point.

I totally agreewith you. The only problem is eliminate all the added costs and a used plane is still much less expensive then new and the fuel is the hugh operating cost. Don't know what mechanics get in your area, but here it can go from $50.00 an hour at a small out of the way grass strip to $150.00 per shop hour at one of the more modern facilities. The guy I use charges $75.00 per hour, so maintenance is up from the old days too.

I'm quite sure there are those who are flying something other than LSA without a currecnt medical. Personally I wouldn't do it .....insurance and liability wise....but I still say my 140 Cherokee was a heck of a lot easier to fly than my Champ or L16 especially on a windy day. You hardly needed feet in that thing and stalls were a 'yawn'. No reason why aircraft like Cherokees and 150/170 Cessnas shouldn't be classified as light sport (with the noted restrictions, of course) but then I feel like I'm beating a dead horse. Regarding the 3rd class medical I think it gets down to the point where some of us in the 60's and 70's, etc. have seen a friend or colleage get their medical denied for some often insignificant reason (usually a medication change) and have to go through the 'Oklahoma merry go round' so we get a bit gun shy even when we're in good health. As I said before it's not the cost of the $200 exam...it's the unknown gremlin that may be hiding somewhere in the details and I consider myself to be in excellent health for age 73.

Mike

I'm not even opposed to doing a flight physical. I just think that the FAA should lighten up a bit on some of the disqualifying factors for the Class III. We don't really need to be Supermen to fly a single engine airplane.

Right on, Larry. With some stipulations, if you can qualify to drive a car and get annual physicals and only fly part 91, why not allow your personal physician to sign off in lieu of a class 3 physical.

Dennis

Great points, which I totally agree with.

I think the physical for CDL (commercial driver's license) would work fine for 3rd class. The requirements are much less stringent and I believe waivers and exemptions are much easier to get.
In all honesty if you can't pass the CDL maybe you really shouldn't be flying. The system is in place and running for millions of CDL's. No added expense and would reduce FAA expenditures and help speed up the SI process for 2nd and 1st class medicals.
A big bonus would be if the DOT wants to change the standards in a negative way millions of commercial drivers would be screaming right along with us.
If it works for an 80,000 lbs semi why can't it work for us?

Let's review
1. Less cost to pilots
2. Savings on government spending
3. Faster SI for those who really need them
4. More active pilots
5. Jobs created
6. More tax revenue
7. Safety maintained

Rod,
Other than the fact I'd like to see the requirement for a third class medical dropped completely or rather down to a driver's license I can't agree more. Up until this year I held both a CDL with all heavy truck endorsements and a school bus license. I didn't renew my bus license this year as I retired from the school district; however, I still kept my CDL mostly because it's a long process to get it renewed once it's been dropped. It would seem that if one was qualified (medically) to operate a 70-80,000 rig down the road or haul a load of screaming middle schoolers he or she should be (medically and mentally) qualified to fly a less than complex plane in VFR conditions. Plus in both cases you have to take a random drug and alcohol test or at least I always did.

To me the third class medical is simply a case of government over regulation and there were times I was taking three physicals a year: regular yearly with my physician, school bus drivers and third class medical. I guess there could be a bright side as only one did the 'digital exam!

Mike Berg

This change would actually allow current New LSA manufacturers to easily up horsepower and specifications, which might spur some sales of new, but very expensive LSAs.

I think that another issue that isn’t mentioned much but is probably thought about a lot is the number of pilots who put off seeing a Doctor about some condition for fear of how it may affect their ability to stay certified, thereby causing more of a health risk. I happen to know of one individual who did that until he couldn’t hold off any longer and it did cost him his right to fly. Fortunately the LSA rule came along and I; oops, I mean he was able to fly again. The irony of it all, is without medication I’m legal to fly, I’m just not totally sane all the time. With my little happy pill I function just like the normal folks. My wife calls it my ‘anti-asshole medication’. Probably should double up on it some days.

Back to my original point; if fear of the FAA causes someone to risk their own health care then the system has a serious problem. These regs are so Draconian, they should have been relegated to the annuals of history years ago.

Right on, Larry. The government has a nak for discovering unintended consequences.

Dennis

If you read the regs though you will note that you are required to ground yourself if you have any condition that would knowlingly cause you to not be issued a 3rd Class Medical. There is an approved list of medications on the FAA and AOPA sites etc. If you are taking an unapproved drug, drivers license or not, you need to ground yourself.

The new rule would require you to self-certify via a 16 question on line questionaire, which would provide you with more than just the drivers license and a more defined medical level.

One of the big issues, is that I know at least 4 people that have failed their medicals, appealed, provided the required tests that the FAA asked for, in many cases, very costly tests and where then issued the medical, but then need to do that ever year over and over again. In more than one case, it was a 5 month process, that has to be redone. One person flys 777 Part 121 and has had a heart attack, but gets a waiver for a first class. I went through cancer treatment with another Part 121 driver, that also got a waiver.

Years ago I failed a medical after being critically burned in a fire. I went through the testing and fgot a medical. For the next 3 years (that was the requirement on the form in those days) I had to go through the same thing until I could fill out that in the last three years my medical condition had not changed. From there on, I never had to do it again. The scare tissue in my lung is still there and still shows up on my chest xrays, but for some reason is never questioned.

Like many things, we do need a revamping of parts of the system.

Bob,

Is this 16 question form (on-line or off) already defined ? I don't personally care but thought the proposal was to require only an "on-line educational element" in order to enable pilots to more adequately self-certify their physical condition to fly. If, on the other hand, someone either proposing this rule or preparing to put it into action has decided to include a pseudo- test in some written form, I would like to know what has been decided and who did it.

Dale

Bob, In 61.53 of the FAR’s it states that you may not act as PIC while holding a medical certificate if you are taking medication that would make you unable to meet the requirements for the med cert. However par. (B) it states that for operations that do not require a med cert. the reg states that you may not operate the aircraft only if you know of a condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner. There is a difference between the two. Moving up to 61.303 under Subpart J – Sport Pilots, par (b) states that when using a driver’s license to meet the requirements, you must comply with the restrictions and limitations of the DL. sub par. (4)(must) “Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate a slight-sport aircraft in a safe manner.”

I can see where there can be some ambiguity here but if you take it apart carefully, the med requirements that are imposed for those flying with a medical certificate, do not apply directly to those flying without one. Basically, you decide if you are fit to fly or not. Many a day, for a variety of reasons, I decide that it would be in my best interest to be on ground wishing I was flying than to be in the air wishing I was on the ground.