PPL / Revoked Medical For OWI / Can I fly gliders/Part 103 in the meantime?

J

JoeSchmo

Guest
PPL here with revoked medical for 3rd OWI. Sober 2 years 2 months. I know all the hoops I need to jump through to get my medical back and get up in the air.

Out of curiosity would I be able to fly a Part 103 Ultralight or get my Glider Endorsement to fly gliders. I know each doesn't require a medical but wondering if there are restrictions for those who have a revoked medical for OWI.
 
Do you understand that "sobriety" in this case means COMPLETE ABSTINANCE? It means not even consuming things that may have been cooked in alcohol, etc?
Have you gone through any treatment? Do you have a history of (probably ineffective) AA attendance? You need a consult with a HIMS AME. This is going to be a tough slog with a substantial alcohol abuse history.

Yes, you can fly part 103. It's up to you to assess your ability to fly gliders. Light sport and basic med are, of course, off limits to you at this point
 
JoeSchmo said:
PPL here with revoked medical for 3rd OWI. Sober 2 years 2 months. I know all the hoops I need to jump through to get my medical back and get up in the air.

Out of curiosity would I be able to fly a Part 103 Ultralight or get my Glider Endorsement to fly gliders. I know each doesn't require a medical but wondering if there are restrictions for those who have a revoked medical for OWI.
Click to expand...
You'll need a rating, not an endorsement, to fly gliders, but yes, you can.

Now stand by for the moralizing.
 
Lindberg said:
You'll need a rating, not an endorsement, to fly gliders, but yes, you can.

Now stand by for the moralizing.
Click to expand...
Well, an endorsement will let him solo gliders while pursuing that rating.
 
I have done treatment and attend AA. Haven't drank since memorial day 2021. I have talked to an hims ame and I'm going to be going the route to get my my medical back. Won't start that official process until next year and it sounds like at least another 2-3 years after that to be issued a medical if everything goes as planned. Was just curious of ways to get some air time in the meantime.
 
flyingron said:
Well, an endorsement will let him solo gliders while pursuing that rating.
Click to expand...
Or with an instructor before that.

And if we're going for details, before he can solo in the glider with an endorsement, he'll also need a BFR in an aircraft for which he's already rated.
 
Lindberg said:
Or with an instructor before that.

And if we're going for details, before he can solo in the glider with an endorsement, he'll also need a BFR in an aircraft for which he's already rated.
Click to expand...
Read your denial letter carefully. It contains language to the effect of "not able to be PIC"...of any aircraft.
It was sent to you certified. So you can do it but you are sure doing it counter to 61.53 as the agnecy has told you, certified, that you aren't able to make that judgement.

Get on a testing program, log AA attendance and build to getting your certificate back....
 
bbchien said:
Read your denial letter carefully. It contains language to the effect of "not able to be PIC"...of any aircraft.
It was sent to you certified. So you can do it but you are sure doing it counter to 61.53 as the agnecy has told you, certified, that you aren't able to make that judgement.

Get on a testing program, log AA attendance and build to getting your certificate back....
Click to expand...
I didn't get a denial letter.
 
What FAR prevents you from soloing a glider after a revoked medical? I'm not aware of one.
 
Salty said:
What FAR prevents you from soloing a glider after a revoked medical? I'm not aware of one.
Click to expand...


Well FWIW, the logic goes like this:

CFR 61.53(b) "Operations that do not require a medical certificate. For operations provided for in § 61.23(b) of this part, a person shall not act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person knows or has reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner."​

Now, if the airman has received a certified letter from OKC telling him he's not qualifed to be PIC of "any aircraft," then the airman "knows or has reason to know" of a medical condition that makes him unable to operate an aircraft in a safe manner. The FAA told him so, therefore he knows he can't legally fly.
 
Half Fast said:
Well FWIW, the logic goes like this:

CFR 61.53(b) "Operations that do not require a medical certificate. For operations provided for in § 61.23(b) of this part, a person shall not act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person knows or has reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner."​

Now, if the airman has received a certified letter from OKC telling him he's not qualifed to be PIC of "any aircraft," then the airman "knows or has reason to know" of a medical condition that makes him unable to operate an aircraft in a safe manner. The FAA told him so, therefore he knows he can't legally fly.
Click to expand...
Until he consults his doctor and they assess his condition and determine that he is safe.

Virtually nobody has gotten an SI before flying gliders after having their medical revoked.
 
Salty said:
Until he consults his doctor and they assess his condition and determine that he is safe.
Click to expand...


Right. With two conflicting opinions, it would make sense to me that the airman would give more credibility to his own doctor who actually knew him and examined him.

Of course, if there were ever an incident, the FAA would value its own opinion above anyone else on the planet, no matter how much better informed the other was.
 
Half Fast said:
Right. With two conflicting opinions, it would make sense to me that the airman would give more credibility to his own doctor who actually knew him and examined him.

Of course, if there were ever an incident, the FAA would value its own opinion above anyone else on the planet, no matter how much better informed the other was.
Click to expand...
That, and it's the more recent opinion as well. He may very well have been unsafe at the time the letter was written. And if so, it likely wasn't news to him.
 
Half Fast said:
Well FWIW, the logic goes like this:

CFR 61.53(b) "Operations that do not require a medical certificate. For operations provided for in § 61.23(b) of this part, a person shall not act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person knows or has reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner."​

Now, if the airman has received a certified letter from OKC telling him he's not qualifed to be PIC of "any aircraft," then the airman "knows or has reason to know" of a medical condition that makes him unable to operate an aircraft in a safe manner. The FAA told him so, therefore he knows he can't legally fly.
Click to expand...
The OP no longer has the "medical condition" for which his medical was revoked (according to him). And he's under no obligation to get the FAA's confirmation that he no longer has said condition. So even under this logic, 61.53(b) would not apply.

In other cases, a medical could be revoked for reasons that have nothing directly to do with the airman's ability to operate an aircraft in a safe manner.
 
interesting. Did they change the wording on the SI letter to " the effect of "not able to be PIC"...of any aircraft."

Mine said "You are ineligible for medical certification under Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFRs) revised part 67; specifically under paragraph(s) or section(s) 113(b), 213(b), 313(b)."

Seems like a big difference.
 
Lindberg said:
The OP no longer has the "medical condition" for which his medical was revoked (according to him). And he's under no obligation to get the FAA's confirmation that he no longer has said condition. So even under this logic, 61.53(b) would not apply.

In other cases, a medical could be revoked for reasons that have nothing directly to do with the airman's ability to operate an aircraft in a safe manner.
Click to expand...


I agree, I was just answering the question about a CFR reference. All sorts of ways it could be okay for the pilot to fly, in spite of a revocation.
 
Back
Top