Partial complex seizure disorder without intractable epilepsy

  • Thread starter Thread starter RichardE
  • Start date Start date
R

RichardE

Guest
Is this an automatic disqualifier for Sport Pilot self-certification? 750mg Keppra x 2/day maintenance dose. No seizures for 5 years. If I can’t self-certify, is there any hope for a waiver?
 
Exactly true. There is no such thing as a waiver for LSAs. Show me the document.....betcha can't.
However there is separate issue of wisdom, & 61.53 whcih does apply to all pilots....but there is no such thing as a Light Sport Waiver.

The limited seizure focus is always at risk for generalizing. And even if it doesn't, it can interfere with operations on short final....and speed of cognition, etc.
 
bbchien said:
Exactly true. There is no such thing as a waiver for LSAs. Show me the document.....betcha can't.
However there is separate issue of wisdom, & 61.53 whcih does apply to all pilots....but there is no such thing as a Light Sport Waiver.

The limited seizure focus is always at risk for generalizing. And even if it doesn't, it can interfere with operations on short final....and speed of cognition, etc.
Click to expand...
If a sport pilot chooses to use a driver's license instead of an FAA medical certificate, they must not have a medical condition that makes them unsafe to fly. I’m looking for an objective determination of whether I’m automatically considered unsafe to fly. Since my diagnosis is “without intractable epilepsy” which is treatable and has been successfully treated, my question is whether my condition still makes me, by definition, unsafe to fly or if five years seizure-free I’m legal. If the legal interpretation is that I’m disqualified, my option is to seek a waiver for a Class 3 since, as you state, there are no waivers for Sport pilot self-certification. I can’t self-certify if my condition falls under the list of disqualifying conditions or medications. If I am “without…epilepsy” do I fall outside of the epilepsy disqualifier? I’m looking for a professional interpretation of my situation.
 
For Sport Pilot, nobody makes that determination other than you and your physician. There is no process whereby you query the FAA to get an official legal decision about your situation.

RichardE said:
I can’t self-certify if my condition falls under the list of disqualifying conditions or medications.
Click to expand...

That's not true. It might not be the correct decision to fly, and the wisdom of doing so might be questionable, but the decision is up to you and it is not constrained by a list that provides guidance for issuance of an FAA medical. The list might inform your decision, and it might provide some guidance for your physician in his recommendations to you, but it is not a hard and fast barrier.

There are many pilots flying under SP rules who have conditions that would require a special issuance of a medical, but under SP they do not need an FAA medical.

Does your doctor have any concerns about you driving a car?
 
RichardE said:
If a sport pilot chooses to use a driver's license instead of an FAA medical certificate, they must not have a medical condition that makes them unsafe to fly. I’m looking for an objective determination of whether I’m automatically considered unsafe to fly. Since my diagnosis is “without intractable epilepsy” which is treatable and has been successfully treated, my question is whether my condition still makes me, by definition, unsafe to fly or if five years seizure-free I’m legal. If the legal interpretation is that I’m disqualified, my option is to seek a waiver for a Class 3 since, as you state, there are no waivers for Sport pilot self-certification. I can’t self-certify if my condition falls under the list of disqualifying conditions or medications. If I am “without…epilepsy” do I fall outside of the epilepsy disqualifier? I’m looking for a professional interpretation of my situation.
Click to expand...
You need to understand the difference between having a condition that makes you unfit to fly and having a condition that makes you unable to meet the standards for medical certification. Likewise, with medications, the FAA has a "do not issue a medical" list and a "do not fly" list. Some will say that the do not fly list is irrelevant to SP, but I disagree. In any event, it only applies while you're under the influence of one of those medications.
 
Last edited:
Lindberg said:
You need to understand the difference between having a condition that makes you unfit to fly and having a condition that makes you unable to meet the standards for medical certification.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:

@RichardE , one of the more confusing items about the whole FAA aeromed mess is that those two things above are not the same. The FAA issues many, many medicals as "special issuance" for conditions that don't meet their standards. The FAA does not prescribe treatment, they merely assess the condition, so those people flying with SIs would be exactly as safe were they flying as SPs without some FAA bureaucrat sprinkling holy 100LL over their medical application parchment.
 
“You must not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make it unsafe for you to operate a light-sport aircraft.” So I have never been denied a Class 3 or had it revoked. My driving privileges are unrestricted. No reason for the seizures have been determined but one possibility is hypoxia due to severe complex sleep apnea which is successfully managed with a CPAP for five years. Can I argue that I would not be unsafe operating a Light Sport aircraft?
And a second question, as a 40 year PPL can I operate in B/C airspace without any additional endorsements?
Thanks to all for the input.
 
RichardE said:
Can I argue that I would not be unsafe operating a Light Sport aircraft?
Click to expand...

To whom do you think you need to make an argument? It’s up to you to self-certify. Are you in the habit of arguing with yourself?

RichardE said:
And a second question, as a 40 year PPL can I operate in B/C airspace without any additional endorsements?
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
“To whom do you think you need to make an argument? It’s up to you to self-certify. Are you in the habit of arguing with yourself?” Oh, I don’t know. An NTSB investigator? I don’t know if the govt can get access to my medical records, but in the unlikely event I had a breakthrough seizure that led to an incident I’m sure the subject would come up, at which point the You should have known better charge would be leveled.
 
RichardE said:
“To whom do you think you need to make an argument? It’s up to you to self-certify. Are you in the habit of arguing with yourself?” Oh, I don’t know. An NTSB investigator? I don’t know if the govt can get access to my medical records, but in the unlikely event I had a breakthrough seizure that led to an incident I’m sure the subject would come up, at which point the You should have known better charge would be leveled.
Click to expand...
Well, are you legitimately concerned that you'll have a breakthrough seizure leading to an incident?
 
RichardE said:
“To whom do you think you need to make an argument? It’s up to you to self-certify. Are you in the habit of arguing with yourself?” Oh, I don’t know. An NTSB investigator? I don’t know if the govt can get access to my medical records, but in the unlikely event I had a breakthrough seizure that led to an incident I’m sure the subject would come up, at which point the You should have known better charge would be leveled.
Click to expand...

That’s going to come up whether you have a medical or not. The whole self-certification aspect isn’t just for sport pilot…every aviator has to self certify fitness for flight prior to every flight.

The medical process also won’t tell you what needs to be done to remain in remission. You should be having conversations with your PCM about the status of your health, likelihood of recurrence, l treatment options available to you, and whether or not you should be driving or flying, because the same risks apply when operating a motor vehicle as operating an aviation appliance.
 
TCABM said:
The medical process also won’t tell you what needs to be done to remain in remission. You should be having conversations with your PCM about the status of your health, likelihood of recurrence, l treatment options available to you, and whether or not you should be driving or flying, because the same risks apply when operating a motor vehicle as operating an aviation appliance.
Click to expand...

Also a board certified neurologist!
 
RichardE said:
Oh, I don’t know. An NTSB investigator? I don’t know if the govt can get access to my medical records, but in the unlikely event I had a breakthrough seizure that led to an incident I’m sure the subject would come up, at which point the You should have known better charge would be leveled.
Click to expand...

This requires a situation in which (a) you had a seizure while flying which caused a crash which (b) was severe enough to warrant an NTSB investigation while (c) was not so severe as to be fatal. The combined probability of (a) and (b) and (c) would seem to be low, but even if they all occurred, "should have known better" is pretty tough to prove.

Besides, as @TCABM points out, that will be a question regardless of whether you're flying under a driver's license or a class 3, as either way you still have to self-certify.

If you think that the probability of (a)(b)(c) is not sufficiently low, then you've answered your question about whether you can self-certify that you're safe to fly, haven't you?
 
Half Fast said:
This requires a situation in which (a) you had a seizure while flying which caused a crash which (b) was severe enough to warrant an NTSB investigation while (c) was not so severe as to be fatal. The combined probability of (a) and (b) and (c) would seem to be low, but even if they all occurred, "should have known better" is pretty tough to prove.

Besides, as @TCABM points out, that will be a question regardless of whether you're flying under a driver's license or a class 3, as either way you still have to self-certify.

If you think that the probability of (a)(b)(c) is not sufficiently low, then you've answered your question about whether you can self-certify that you're safe to fly, haven't you?
Click to expand...
I'm not following your logic. Where does your (c) fit in to the IMSAFE model? Are you saying that it's more acceptable to fly with medical conditions likely to only lead to a fatal crash? Hopefully I misunderstood.
 
Lindberg said:
I'm not following your logic. Where does your (c) fit in to the IMSAFE model? Are you saying that it's more acceptable to fly with medical conditions likely to only lead to a fatal crash? Hopefully I misunderstood.
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying he'll only have to worry about an NTSB investigation if he's alive to be investigated, and the probability of the crash being fatal effects whether an investigation is worth worrying about.
 
Half Fast said:
No, I'm saying he'll only have to worry about an NTSB investigation if he's alive to be investigated, and the probability of the crash being fatal effects whether an investigation is worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
He'll only know about the NTSB investigation of he's alive to see it. But the investigation will be as damning, or worse, if he's dead. Not to mention the possible consequences to others, like his passengers.
 
deyoung said:
Given that, what leads you to be unconcerned?
Click to expand...
My internet searches led me to believe that self-certification was essentially stating that one felt medically qualified based on Class 3 standards. Additional digging seems to contradict that, but I’ve found no definitive FAA black and white standard as to whether there are hard disqualifiers from self-cert. Folks on this thread and elsewhere are of the opinion that sport pilots are the ultimate authority to determine their own medical fitness, but there are others saying no. Right now the point is moot because I need to justify to the wife why a Part 103 plane is inadequate and I need to spend double the money for a Spirit Aviation S1.
 
You need to do better searches. There is no "self certification" for the third class, or really anything else (glider pilots used to have to self certify, but that was regulatorily deleted decades ago). The rule is 61.315(b):
You have to have a drivers license and be in compliance with the license limitations (like if it says you need glasses you have to wear them),
You didn't apply for a medical and were denied or deferred, or had it revoked or withdrawn.
and here are the words you are looking for: Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a light-sport aircraft in a safe manner.

This is ONGOING every time you want to exercise the sport pilot privs, not something you ever certify to.
 
flyingron said:
You need to do better searches. There is no "self certification" for the third class, or really anything else (glider pilots used to have to self certify, but that was regulatorily deleted decades ago). The rule is 61.315(b):
You have to have a drivers license and be in compliance with the license limitations (like if it says you need glasses you have to wear them),
You didn't apply for a medical and were denied or deferred, or had it revoked or withdrawn.
and here are the words you are looking for: Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a light-sport aircraft in a safe manner.

This is ONGOING every time you want to exercise the sport pilot privs, not something you ever certify to.
Click to expand...
I never said nor meant to imply there was self-cert for a 3rd class. The issue is who defines a “medical condition that would make a person unable to operate…” I know that my condition is a disqualifier for 3rd class but I would argue that with no DL restrictions and no absence seizures for five years that I’m safe. I was hoping someone could definitively state that I have a valid (legal) argument.
 
Half Fast said:
YOU do. Why do you seem to be so uncomfortable with taking personal responsibility for the decision?
Click to expand...
I have an idea:
RichardE said:
No, but I doubt my neurologist would unequivocally rule it out.
Click to expand...
OP, I would suggest you have a conversation with your neurologist, and see what he thinks.
 
Lindberg's answer above is the best answer.

That said, my feeling is that you are hoping for support in a position that you suspect might not actually be tenable. I feel like you are playing the rule against the intent a bit; "Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a light-sport aircraft in a safe manner." Would. Not "could". Therefore, if you don't *think* it will happen (though it might) then you're good, because it's not always going to be an issue. Or even usually, though of course it only takes once.

I suggest that if the risk is there, that's enough to disqualify. You don't need a guarantee that it will be a problem on every flight.
 
Thanks for all the input. I feel pretty good arguing that 5+ years of successful treatment (meds) should be proof that I’m at no more risk of an in-flight medical event than any other 70 year old, and I’m in otherwise great health.
 
RichardE said:
Thanks for all the input. I feel pretty good arguing that 5+ years of successful treatment (meds) should be proof that I’m at no more risk of an in-flight medical event than any other 70 year old, and I’m in otherwise great health.
Click to expand...
I'd feel better arguing that my neurologist said it was low risk. But maybe there's a reason you don't want to ask him.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top