tell me about a career in aviation without a medical

[buttman]

I'm pursuing a career in aviation, but there are something in my life
that have sort of been a sort of slow train coming during in the past
10 years or so. I think it is finally time I take care of these things,
and as a result, I will most likley be put on medication that will void
my medical certificate.

Right now I am doing my CFI training which I should finish up before
Thanksgiving, and my commercial checkride is scheduled for a week from
today. I know that once I lose my medical I can't do any part 119 or 91
operations, but I heard you can do flight instruction, is that correct?
If I decide to be a flight instructor, I can do that as long as the
student has at least a private (to act as PIC), correct?

If word got out that I'm under medication, will that effect the amount
of students come to me?

If I felt that my condition was not safe to fly, I would definatly not
even try it, but you know how it is, other people always think they
know more about your body than you do...

[N93332]

"buttman" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm pursuing a career in aviation, but there are something in my life
> that have sort of been a sort of slow train coming during in the past
> 10 years or so. I think it is finally time I take care of these things,
> and as a result, I will most likley be put on medication that will void
> my medical certificate.
>
> Right now I am doing my CFI training which I should finish up before
> Thanksgiving, and my commercial checkride is scheduled for a week from
> today. I know that once I lose my medical I can't do any part 119 or 91
> operations, but I heard you can do flight instruction, is that correct?
> If I decide to be a flight instructor, I can do that as long as the
> student has at least a private (to act as PIC), correct?

See FAR 61.23. You can do flight instruction without a current medical if
the student is PIC. That would limit the training to post-private, sport
pilot, and >current< BFR's. But you wouldn't be able to do any other flying
without a medical except for sport pilot, glider or balloon. If you go for
the sport pilot rules, you can't fail your >last< medical.

As far as making a career out of it without a medical wouldn't be easy. It
depends on the demand in your area. Around here you'd go hungry!

[[email protected]]

buttman wrote:
>
> Right now I am doing my CFI training which I should finish up before
> Thanksgiving, and my commercial checkride is scheduled for a week from
> today. I know that once I lose my medical I can't do any part 119 or 91
> operations, but I heard you can do flight instruction, is that correct?

You need to learn about Light Sport Aircraft before you go any further
with this. It might be a way out for you.

If you haven't ever been denied a medical (i.e. you know you won't get
one but you haven't applied) then you can instruct for pay in Light
Sport Aircraft. A so-called Driver's License medical is all you need
unless your most recent application for an FAA cert was rejected. If
you have a valid medical now, but start taking a drug which is not
approved, just *don't* apply for a new medical. I know it's kinda
byzantine, but welcome to the FAA. Sportpilot.org can tell you more.

-cwk.

PS- Better bone up on those FARs... Instructing is Part 91, with or
without a medical. FWIW yes, you can instruct without a medical, but
only when students are legal as PIC, so no primary instruction, no IFR
in actual unless the student is licensed and current, etc. etc. An old
dog with a lot of experience might be able to make a market doing
specialty instruction, but a new CFI who can't do primary instruction
is like tits on a bull.

[Ron Natalie]

N93332 wrote:

> See FAR 61.23. You can do flight instruction without a current medical if
> the student is PIC. That would limit the training to post-private, sport
> pilot, and >current< BFR's.

Can't do anything that would require you to also be the safety pilot in
Simulated Instrument Flight. That's a real sticky point for a CFI
friend who lost his medical.

Pretty limitted what you can do as a pilot or even an ATC without a
medical. Mechanics school is an option.

[[email protected]]

Ron Natalie wrote:
> N93332 wrote:
>
> > See FAR 61.23. You can do flight instruction without a current medical if
> > the student is PIC. That would limit the training to post-private, sport
> > pilot, and >current< BFR's.
>
> Can't do anything that would require you to also be the safety pilot in
> Simulated Instrument Flight. That's a real sticky point for a CFI
> friend who lost his medical.

Then just wait for a cloudy day--that's perfectly legal if the pilot is
rated.

> Pretty limitted what you can do as a pilot or even an ATC without a
> medical. Mechanics school is an option.

Light-sport is a new option, depending on how/why the medical is lost.
Assuming he is able to just opt out and stick with the D/L medical,
then the question of fitness to fly is ethical rather than legal.

-cwk.

[Peter Duniho]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
...
>> See FAR 61.23. You can do flight instruction without a current medical if
>> the student is PIC. That would limit the training to post-private, sport
>> pilot, and >current< BFR's.
>
> Can't do anything that would require you to also be the safety pilot in
> Simulated Instrument Flight. That's a real sticky point for a CFI friend
> who lost his medical.

I'm not convinced that's true (the first sentence, not the second...I won't
comment on what's sticky for your friend and what's not :) ).

Specifically, all that 91.109 requires is that the pilot hold the relevant
category and class ratings. The pilot need not be current, and I see
nothing to suggest the pilot need to have a current medical.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Then just wait for a cloudy day--that's perfectly legal if the pilot is
> rated.

And current. But then why would they bother with a safety pilot at all?

See my reply to Ron though...I don't see why an instructor without a current
medical could not provide instrument training, even when the instructor
needs to be acting as the safety pilot as well. The usual caveats would
apply, of course -- the pilot receiving training would need to be able to
act as PIC -- but otherwise, I don't see the problem.

Pete

[Ron Natalie]

Peter Duniho wrote:

>
> I'm not convinced that's true (the first sentence, not the second...I won't
> comment on what's sticky for your friend and what's not :) ).
>
> Specifically, all that 91.109 requires is that the pilot hold the relevant
> category and class ratings. The pilot need not be current, and I see
> nothing to suggest the pilot need to have a current medical.

Try 61.23. A safety pilot is a required flight crew member. Believe
me, we discussed this with FAA headquarters on this.

[Ron Natalie]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
>>Then just wait for a cloudy day--that's perfectly legal if the pilot is
>>rated.
>
>
> And current. But then why would they bother with a safety pilot at all?

I think that was thte point. There's no "safety pilot" requirement in
actual.
>
> See my reply to Ron though...I don't see why an instructor without a current
> medical could not provide instrument training, even when the instructor
> needs to be acting as the safety pilot as well. The usual caveats would
> apply, of course -- the pilot receiving training would need to be able to
> act as PIC -- but otherwise, I don't see the problem.
>
The problem is 61.27 requires required crew members to have a medical
(even instructors).

[Peter Duniho]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
> The problem is 61.27 requires required crew members to have a medical
> (even instructors).

Okay, I'll buy that. :)

Too bad the FARs don't include cross-references, so when you're looking at
what you think is the right paragraph, you can tell that you're not.

Pete