How to continue to fly?

Tom-D

Tom-D

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
34,740
Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
subject pilot is 75 years young, suffered a very mild strok 3 years ago, sold the Bonanza, but has no medical after the stroke, ( he never attempted to renew) doesn't like the light sport aircraft or ultra lights.

I told him to act like he is taking lessons from a CFI. He will rent anyway, and we both know a CFI with a 172.

got a better suggestion?

he just wants to go putt around.
 
So, medical was never denied, correct?

He could wait around and hope they change the recreational pilot medical requirements to match the LSA which would allow him to fly a 172 with a drivers license as his medical. Not sure when/if that will become a reality.

Without that, and also depending on the circumstances of the stroke, I think your suggestion of flying with a CFI is probably the best answer.
 
dmccormack said:
"doesn't like" the light sports because...?
Click to expand...
Because they're a go-cart with wings. A bunch of people trying to build airplanes that fit within the regulations that were never intended to support such aircraft in the first place.

Seems like a lot of quality, durability, and safety is sacrificed on a lot of the LSA aircraft for no reason other than so they can qualify as a LSA.

I'm totally not impressed with the SkyCatcher. Give me a 152 over one of those anyday.
 
jesse said:
Because they're a go-cart with wings. A bunch of people trying to build airplanes that fit within the regulations that were never intended to support such aircraft in the first place.

Seems like a lot of quality, durability, and safety is sacrificed on a lot of the LSA aircraft for no reason other than so they can qualify as a LSA.

I'm totally not impressed with the SkyCatcher. Give me a 152 over one of those anyday.
Click to expand...

This is a lot to break down.

Safety:Quite a few well equipped LSA's have shoulder harnesses, parachutes, GPS's, etc. etc. They sure feel a heck of a lot safer than the Cessna 150 I started in.

Go-carts: Their also wider and have more legroom than a 152. I guess we can scratch that off the list.

My suggestion is that you take a look at something other than the Skycatcher. There are better LSA products being produced.
 
jesse said:
Because they're a go-cart with wings. A bunch of people trying to build airplanes that fit within the regulations that were never intended to support such aircraft in the first place.

Seems like a lot of quality, durability, and safety is sacrificed on a lot of the LSA aircraft for no reason other than so they can qualify as a LSA.
Click to expand...
You mean like the Piper Cub?

But back to the original topic,

I don't see why he can't fly with a buddy - why does it have to be a CFI?
 
txnightster said:
This is a lot to break down.

Safety:Quite a few well equipped LSA's have shoulder harnesses, parachutes, GPS's, etc. etc. They sure feel a heck of a lot safer than the Cessna 150 I started in.

Go-carts: Their also wider and have more legroom than a 152. I guess we can scratch that off the list.

My suggestion is that you take a look at something other than the Skycatcher. There are better LSA products being produced.
Click to expand...
I've looked at nearly every LSA at Airventure. I'm not impressed. Lots of compromises in quality to keep the weight down. Fit and finish is pretty ridiculous on most of them.

Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
You mean like the Piper Cub?

But back to the original topic,

I don't see why he can't fly with a buddy - why does it have to be a CFI?
Click to expand...
The Piper Cub wasn't a huge sacrifice - its an airplane that was well designed to fit its mission. Most of these LSA's aren't trying to be a Piper Cub. They're trying to be a lot more and they're making sacrifices to do so.
 
Go for rides with friends or rent with a friend or CFi seems like his best options to me
 
jesse said:
I've looked at nearly every LSA at Airventure. I'm not impressed. Lots of compromises in quality to keep the weight down. Fit and finish is pretty ridiculous on most of them.
Click to expand...

Did you take a look at the RV-12? LSA and has all of the nice new features of any 2 seater in its price range. The design is as solid as any of Vans' stuff, and 'fit and finish' is just a product of the owner :)

Additionally, the Flight-Design aircraft are exceptional birds and come equally equipped as any of the Cessna 152s.
 
jesse said:
Seems like a lot of quality, durability, and safety is sacrificed on a lot of the LSA aircraft for no reason other than so they can qualify as a LSA.
Click to expand...
You are ignorant. Fly a real LSA like GX. Best built aircraft I've flown. Miles ahead of any Mooney, not to mention those Cessna garbage scows that the socially disadvantaged get to fly.

Edit:
jesse said:
I've looked at nearly every LSA at Airventure. I'm not impressed. Lots of compromises in quality to keep the weight down. Fit and finish is pretty ridiculous on most of them.
Click to expand...
I'm going to have to replace "ignorant" with a "difference of opinion", but nonetheless.
 
Last edited:
A friend of mine has a sport cruiser made in Czech. And it's great.

However, for the man with the history of having a stroke... Flying with another pilot seems like the best choice no matter the plane
 
jesse said:
Because they're a go-cart with wings. A bunch of people trying to build airplanes that fit within the regulations that were never intended to support such aircraft in the first place.

Seems like a lot of quality, durability, and safety is sacrificed on a lot of the LSA aircraft for no reason other than so they can qualify as a LSA.

I'm totally not impressed with the SkyCatcher. Give me a 152 over one of those anyday.
Click to expand...

C162 has its problems.

My Chief, most Cubs, and Champs qualify as LSA.

I just flew a Evektor SportStar and it's superior to any 150, 152, PA-28-140/160 I've been in.
 
If he had a stroke, it's not certain that he's legal to fly as a Sport Pilot unless he's consulted his physician and they've determined that he suffers no lingering effects which would interfere with his ability to fly an LSA safely. Strength, motor coordination and/or vision may never return to to the point where he can do that. There's also the threat of recurrence to consider, and that can only be evaluated by his physician.

In any event, if he's not interested in LSA's, he doesn't need a CFI to fly with him -- any pilot qualified to act as PIC can ride shotgun with him. Of course, that other pilot is going to have to be capable of telling when it's necessary to step in, and how to do that safely, which many non-CFI's can't do, so that's a question the individual non-CFI pilot would have to ask him/herself before letting your friend fly the plane whle s/he acts as PIC.
 
Ron Levy said:
If he had a stroke, it's not certain that he's legal to fly as a Sport Pilot unless he's consulted his physician and they've determined that he suffers no lingering effects which would interfere with his ability to fly an LSA safely. Strength, motor coordination and/or vision may never return to to the point where he can do that. There's also the threat of recurrence to consider, and that can only be evaluated by his physician.

In any event, if he's not interested in LSA's, he doesn't need a CFI to fly with him -- any pilot qualified to act as PIC can ride shotgun with him. Of course, that other pilot is going to have to be capable of telling when it's necessary to step in, and how to do that safely, which many non-CFI's can't do, so that's a question the individual non-CFI pilot would have to ask him/herself before letting your friend fly the plane whle s/he acts as PIC.
Click to expand...

The CFI with the 172 for rent is the logical choice. (to me)
 
Tom-D said:
The CFI with the 172 for rent is the logical choice. (to me)
Click to expand...
That's certainly the better choice than a non-CFI pilot, all else being equal. And he doesn't have to "act like he is taking lessons;" he should just tell the instructor the full story and explain what he wants to do. At least from this instructor's perspective, I'd rather have that than have him pretend to want lessons he doesn't need -- that will just create mismatched expectations, and that's not good.
 
Ron Levy said:
That's certainly the better choice than a non-CFI pilot, all else being equal. And he doesn't have to "act like he is taking lessons;" he should just tell the instructor the full story and explain what he wants to do. At least from this instructor's perspective, I'd rather have that than have him pretend to want lessons he doesn't need -- that will just create mismatched expectations, and that's not good.
Click to expand...

The CFI with the 172 knows the whole story.
 
Why doesn't he just rent a CFI along with the Skyhawk when he wants to fly? Compared to the other costs in aviation, CFIs are quite inexpensive. That is likely what I'd do. Besides, flying all by yourself is boring.
 
Ron Levy said:
Then why did you tell your friend to "act like he is taking lessons"?
Click to expand...

probably a bad choice of words (here). I told him it would be just like taking lessons (same situation)
 
steingar said:
Why doesn't he just rent a CFI along with the Skyhawk when he wants to fly? Compared to the other costs in aviation, CFIs are quite inexpensive. That is likely what I'd do. Besides, flying all by yourself is boring.
Click to expand...

I just goth off the phone with him. I think he's good with it.
 
Tom-D said:
probably a bad choice of words (here). I told him it would be just like taking lessons (same situation)
Click to expand...
In terms of the legalities, yes, it would. However, they'll probably operate in a much different way that a trainee and instructor normally would.
 
Ron Levy said:
In terms of the legalities, yes, it would. However, they'll probably operate in a much different way that a trainee and instructor normally would.
Click to expand...

Yep, two old geezers chasing hamburgers, one with, one with out. who knows/cares who's flying as long as one does.
 
jesse said:
Because they're a go-cart with wings. A bunch of people trying to build airplanes that fit within the regulations that were never intended to support such aircraft in the first place.

Seems like a lot of quality, durability, and safety is sacrificed on a lot of the LSA aircraft for no reason other than so they can qualify as a LSA.

I'm totally not impressed with the SkyCatcher. Give me a 152 over one of those anyday.
Click to expand...

I'm also very much not impressed with the SkyCatcher. Really stripped down, with lots of inconveniences. I know it isn't an LSA, but I far prefer the C150/2.
 
spiderweb said:
I'm also very much not impressed with the SkyCatcher. Really stripped down, with lots of inconveniences. I know it isn't an LSA, but I far prefer the C150/2.
Click to expand...

The 150 doesn't qualify for LSA, but the Taylor craft BC-12-D does. and it's a great aircraft if you can get into it.
 
Most of those engines on the light sports sound like mosquitoes....not a fan. I like an engine that sounds a little bigger than a weed whacker. Not to say they aren't good planes, I just don't like the way most of them sound.
 
Is it just me, or does it seem kind of humorous that Tom posted a question that he apparently already had the answer to and the thread has degraded into a debate about the quality of LSAs.......
 
Fearless Tower said:
Is it just me, or does it seem kind of humorous that Tom posted a question that he apparently already had the answer to and the thread has degraded into a debate about the quality of LSAs.......
Click to expand...
This is nothing... you ought to check out the grocery shopping thread. Talk about deteriorating!
 
Fearless Tower said:
Is it just me, or does it seem kind of humorous that Tom posted a question that he apparently already had the answer to and the thread has degraded into a debate about the quality of LSAs.......
Click to expand...

I was hoping some one had a better idea.

But... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top