BTW, since I have been accused of being a Democrat who believes in the all knowing nanny state that will save us all....I would like to point out that I am, in fact, a redneck Republican who hunts, owns guns and hates the ACLU and other liberal organizations that tend to mess this country up.
Your comment that people should be regulated away from doing dangerous things sure doesn't sound like it came from someone with this background.
In regards to the arguments about "What about if you're a high hour pilot who loses his medical?": I have no problem with those pilots flying under a special category if the medical disqualification is something minor (not like cardiac problems, severe COPD, etc).
Again, I ask: If someone's safe to drive with a cardiac history, why aren't they safe to fly? Be specific, please; "we need to be as safe as possible" won't cut it. The same goes for diabetes, asthma, sleep apnea, depression, and lots of other conditions that the FAA makes getting even a third class medical difficult.
It's the out of the gate sport pilots that worry me. It's the lack of knowledge and experience that primarily concerns me.
In what way does the extra training of a private (remember, it's 20 hours or less) change this to the point you consider it acceptable? Why is a 40-hour private pilot fresh from his checkride safer than a 20-hour sport pilot fresh from his?
How about failing them from the start? The EMS training program I used to work as an instructor for regularly failed students who could not cut it despite them whining they had a "right" to be EMTs and/or paramedics. If you realize someone is a marginal student, then don't pass them or at very least hold them back for remedial training.
I spent 17 years in volunteer EMS, 10 of those as a paramedic, 8 of that as team lead, with a service that won two Texas volunteer EMS provider of the year awards while I was there.
ANY EMS training program turns out its share of turkeys. Further, no freshly minted paramedic is ever as competent as one who had been out on the street for a few years and had seen the real world. Is the fix for that to require four years of training for a paramedic? At some point, you have to kick them out of the nest and let them actually treat patients and manage scenes. The same goes for aviation: at some point, you have to let them go off and learn.
The problem is this would need to be organized or they would simply go down the road to the next CFI whose morals are, how to put it? Lacking?
This happens in EMS. Why do you think it wouldn't happen in aviation?
The problem is despite the CFI sign-off, he/she still has to pass a practical.
Exactly. The pilot has to demonstrate his competence to someone independent before he gets to go fly without oversight.
I still think instructors really need to be the gatekeepers more so than they are currently...as an instructor (and former instructor) in two medical fields, I see absolutely no problems with this approach....
That only goes so far in aviation, just as it only goes so far in medicine. We've all dealt with incompetent doctors, nurses, EMTs,... The percentage of those is no smaller than the percentage of them in aviation.
My experience with the Light Sport license is not the interest in it but the quality of the aircraft. Just getting parts for these LSA's ( for the most part are foreign made) is hurting us. They are also not made to take the landing abuse that say a Cessna can take.
Now you know why I bought a Zodiac.
Not only does it use standard aircraft parts throughout, not only is it built entirely in the USA, but when I did a BFR in one after 15 years away from flying, I beat the heck out of it and the instructor didn't raise an eyebrow. As long as you put it on the mains first, you won't break anything. The main gear is a single 30-pound piece of aluminum bar.
I have heard stories of one very popular LSA having trouble with the mains breaking off in a hard landing...but that one wasn't on my short list anyway.
We are also eagerly awaiting our order of the new Cessna 162. Please, no coments on the whole China thing.
Well, at least Cessna knows how to make spare parts available.
Flying is more difficult than driving. Not hugely, but yes, it is, and it is beyond some people to operate aircraft safely without some level of automation technology.
That it's more difficult is something nobody will argue with. That's why there are minimum training requirements and multiple signoffs needed before you can get a license.
LESS required trainning hours/events DOES NOT equate to LESS QUALITY of trainning or lower standards.
Exactly. Merely adding hours will not result in safer pilots - unless you add enough hours to get past the hump in accident stats at several hundred hours total time.
Having flown with/instructed numerous PPs, COMs and ATPs, I can tell you that I'll stack my SP students stick and rudder skills up against any PP, most COMs, and even a few ATPs any day. SLSAs are generally lighter, more sensitive to gusts, and have higher performance than your average C152/172 or PA140. Because of this, Light Sport Aircraft breed a better "Sitck and Rudder" pilot than the average spam can(especially if it's a tail dragger) IMO.
Indeed. I've flown with a few folks who've learned to fly in 172/Warrior-class airplanes, and the Zodiac is a handful for them until they get used to the light touch needed. Folks who've never flown before have less trouble with it.
Have you actually looked at the SP requirements and PTS. It requires significantly more trainning than is required to "Just fly around the pattern".
I don't have time now, but sometime in the next day I'll sit down with Part 61 and detail just what the differences are between SP-ASEL and PP-ASEL. They're not that great.
Once again I'll stack my SP students knowledge of the CFARs, their ADM, pilotage and basic airmanship up against any new PP.
This all comes down to the instructor. A CFI who takes shortcuts will turn out a crappy pilot, true, but that's just as true for a PP as it would be an SP.
Requiring more stringent medical requirements would also be a huge waste of time and effort. By your own statistics, medical problems are a factor in a VERY small percentage of incidents/accidents. And as far as I can tell, all of those to date have been with a pilot flying on or supposed to be flying on a current medical certificate.
Indeed. The current medical requirements are a relic of the 1930s. They do not reflect real-world experience.
Denying returning pilots or even new SPs a chance to meet the standards and fly IS elitist.
Yup. It's just a different kind of elitism, not about money or social status, but about meaningless ticket-punching.
Bet I could still handle 5 or 6 Gs. That oughta be enought to pull a lead on Henning. 
