Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ed Cesnalis

PPL (and higher) subject to sport pilot limitations?

Recommended Posts

This is too big an issue to not have its own thread.  Its been pointed out that:  

Quote

 

61.23 allows you to exercise the privileges of a sport pilot certificate using a drivers' license, but it doesn't say you have to follow the limitations.

61.315 list those privileges, and also list limitations. It specifically says it applies to holders of a sport pilot certificate...

 

Can anyone here dispute this?

 

:)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

This is too big an issue to not have its own thread.  Its been pointed out that:  

Can anyone here dispute this?

 

:)

 

 

The FAA probably can.

But seriously,  you’d need to get a ruling from FAA to be legally safe doing this, especially since it’s completely counter to conventional wisdom that PPs are required to abide by SP limitations when exercising a driver’s license medical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FlyingMonkey said:

The FAA probably can.

But seriously,  you’d need to get a ruling from FAA to be legally safe doing this, especially since it’s completely counter to conventional wisdom that PPs are required to abide by SP limitations when exercising a driver’s license medical.

Nice try Andy, you fail, next?

 

Tom's point is well made. It is reasonable to ask if there is a basis in the rule or FARs that leads to the 'conventional wisdom' before concluding an FAA ruling is needed. A 'ruling' does not yet exist and there is the careful what you ask for aspect.

Without challenging the rule legally and without relying on conventional wisdom but relying the wording of the FARs can anyone here show that the higher certificate holder is subject to sport pilot limitations when exercising sport pilot privileges? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed:


61 is for pilot certification.
Part 91 is operations and as pointed out above, is the relevant part regarding exercising privelages. Also, read your airworthiness certificate limitations section.

Basic Med is a substitute to satisfy class 3 medical unless stated otherwise. If you are on basic med, you have a class 3 equivalent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Roger Lee said:

Even with a PPL once your medical expires you're flying sport pilot limitations.

Where does it says so in the regs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, JohnnyBlackCT said:

"(c) Operations requiring either a medical certificate or U.S. driver's license. (1) A person must hold and possess either a medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter or a U.S. driver's license when—

(i) Exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking sport pilot privileges in a light-sport aircraft other than a glider or balloon;

(ii) Exercising the privileges of a sport pilot certificate in a light-sport aircraft other than a glider or balloon;"

 

The implication is you are exercising the privileges and limitations of a sport pilot certificate although it does not specifically say that.  Most reasonable people would not think you can exercise the privileges but are not subject to the limitations.  As I posted in your other thread, that is the reason for Basic Med.  You are exercising privileges of a Sport Pilot certificate even though you may hold a Private, Commercial, or ATP.

 

Thanks for the bold emphasis, it says I gain the privileges and is silent on limitations.   

Nonetheless you use it to argue that the limitations are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Anticept said:

Ed:


61 is for pilot certification.
Part 91 is operations and as pointed out above, is the relevant part regarding exercising privelages. Also, read your airworthiness certificate limitations section.

Basic Med is a substitute to satisfy class 3 medical unless stated otherwise. If you are on basic med, you have a class 3 equivalent.

Did you mean this for me?  If so I didn't get the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JohnnyBlackCT said:

Call the FAA if you doubt it.  Or, give us your certificate number and we'll call for you.

That sounds like some kind of threat.  I should either take your word for it or have you turn me in?

What is wrong with identifying the language in the regs that limits the higher cert holder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing about pilot privelages. They are privelages, which means you can't do it unless they say you can. So if you excercise the privelages of a sport pilot, then you can do what they say a sport pilot can do and no more.


There are a couple exceptions though. For one, as a private pilot, you do not need to be endorsed to operate in class B airspace, nor do you need to be endorsed to operate an aircraft with a speed higher than 87 knots. A legal interpretation came out on that stating a private pilot has the training to satisfy those endorsements and may be used in lieu of them.

 

Consider an ATP pilot where his or her first class expired. They may exercise the privelages of a commercial pilot for hire if they satisfy second class requirements, and a private pilot or flight instructor on their third class. Even though they are ATP rated, they cannot exercise the privelages of an ATP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anticept said:

Here's the thing about pilot privelages. They are privelages, which means you can't do it unless they say you can. So if you excercise the privelages of a sport pilot, then you can do what they say a sport pilot can do


There are a couple exceptions though. For one, as a private pilot, you do not need to be endorsed to operate in class B airspace, nor do you need to be endorsed to operate an aircraft with a speed higher than 87 knots. A legal interpretation came out on that.

Corey,

What was the basis of the interpretation on speed and airspace limitations? No mention of the other sport pilot limitations and when and if they apply?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I was wrong in my quick look at the regulations. Ed, you will have to go back to the other liberal thoughts on altitude. 61.303 is where it says you have to follow the limitations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

61.303

 

If you hold

(2) Only a U.S. driver's license

And you hold 

(ii) At least a recreational pilot certificate with a category and class rating,

Then you may operate 

(A) Any light-sport aircraft in that category and class,

And

(1) You do not have to hold any of the endorsements required by this subpart, but you must comply with the limitations in § 61.315 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

Corey,

What was the basis of the interpretation on speed and airspace limitations? No mention of the other sport pilot limitations and when and if they apply?  

These are endorsements for the 87 knot limitation and the class B limitation that sport pilots have. The purpose of endorsements are to ensure pilots have received training in the areas the endorsements are for. I don't know if there were any others, it has been a while since I read it.

It's not a perfect system though, and as said, as a private pilot, it is already assumed you have this training from a legal perspective.

Keep in mind, the writers of the sport pilot changes were thinking of things from a long history of private pilot training, and now they were creating a certificate with half the required training time. So basically, they took the parts that are in private pilot experience requirements, such as night, and said that's 10 hours of training less needed. So on, so forth.

And, as stated, if you are exercising the privileges of a particular certificate, then that means you are NOT exercising your privileges of any other. Without a third class or equivalent, you cannot exercise any privileges granted by a private certificate. You are, for all intents and purposes except aforementioned endorsements, a holder of a sport pilot certificate when you exercise the privileges of a sport pilot. It would be a hard fight to look the FAA in the eye and tell them otherwise, but if you are determined to try, you will want to send a message to the chief council.

EDIT: I cannot seem to find that interpretation at this time. I would recommend, therefore, to be cautious about following what I have said about those endorsements for a sport pilot when you hold a private pilot or higher certificate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Anticept said:

Here's the thing about pilot privelages. They are privelages, which means you can't do it unless they say you can. So if you excercise the privelages of a sport pilot, then you can do what they say a sport pilot can do and no more.

Well, privileges are not limitations, they are kind of the opposite of each other.  There is a good point to be made that if privileges (such as flying on a DL medical) are specified and limitations (night flight, altitudes above 10k, etc) are not, that the limitations are not enforced.  This follows the legal principle that says that any action is allowed unless it is prohibited in statute.  For example, we know that walking down the sidewalk is legal, because there is no law prohibiting it.  For it to work any other way would mean that everything would be prohibited by default, and the law would have to list everything that is allowed, which would be impossible and oppressive.

HOWEVER, FAA regulations, like most other regulations, fall in the area of law that is not criminal law, but administrative law.  Generally the courts have allowed that the controlling Agency or authority (FAA in this case) has broad powers to manage and interpret the law, due to their status as subject matter experts.  This means it's exceedingly rare and difficult to get courts to overturn an agency's interpretation of a regulation under its  purview.

So again, you'd have to ask FAA to get the "legal" answer.  I'm guessing CharlieTango won't like their interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

Nice try Andy, you fail, next?

Well gosh, I fail by telling you the FAA will have the correct legal answer on this issue?  Okay, but I'm not sure I'm the one failing here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Anticept said:

Keep in mind, the writers of the sport pilot changes were thinking of things from a long history of private pilot training, and now they were creating a certificate with half the required training time. So basically, they took the parts that are in private pilot experience requirements, such as night, and said that's 10 hours of training less needed. So on, so forth.

Actually sport pilot requires 75% the training of a private pilot, 15 hours verses 20 hours. It requires only half of the solo time 5 hours verses 10, and half the total time 20 verses 40. Private pilot leave 10 hours on the table that can be used as needed, but not specifically required as training or solo.

Most old school instructors think the same way as you that it is less training, but in reality if both were done in the minimum time a sport pilot has more flight training time that can be used for basic pilot skills. When you back out the 3 hours of night, 3 hours of instrument training, and the additional cross country training from the 20 hours of mimimum flight training required it becomes quite evident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC the only PTS/ACS items PPs have in their syllabus that the SPs do not are night flight, radio navigation, and under the hood time.  I think SPs now have to have a little hood time too, but when I was trained it was not required.  All the shared items must be performed to the same standards as PPs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FlyingMonkey said:

  I'm guessing CharlieTango won't like their interpretation.

Why?

I only axed for the language and I poxted it on 2 threadx already.  (keyboard prob)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, FlyingMonkey said:

IIRC the only PTS/ACS items PPs have in their syllabus that the SPs do not are night flight, radio navigation, and under the hood time.  I think SPs now have to have a little hood time too, but when I was trained it was not required.  All the shared items must be performed to the same standards as PPs.

The hood time is a student requirement, not a sport pilot requirement. It only applies if you are training in a aircraft with a Vh of greater than 87 knots.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FlyingMonkey said:

Well gosh, I fail by telling you the FAA will have the correct legal answer on this issue?  Okay, but I'm not sure I'm the one failing here.

 

looking for the language in the reg.  -  Tom found it and I posted it twice now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Ed Cesnalis said:

looking for the language in the reg.  -  Tom found it and I posted it twice now

My point was that under administrative law, the agency interpretation can carry as much weight as the regs.  Even something not in the regs can be enforceable based on agency interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×