Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Medical Requirement Debate

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

volunteer

Saturdays in the fall.
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Posts
74
Friendly debate at the local airport as to medical requirement for Part 91 Turbine PIC being paid a salary by the owner. Some say ATP required so 1st class. Others say commercial required so second class. Can anyone put this to bed?
 
Insurance aside, why would an ATP be required under part91? Said pilot only rerquired to have a 2nd class medical.
 
Medical Question?

First class medical is only if you are going to exercise ATP privledges. Part 91, Commecial and 2nd class is the most you will ever need.
 
landlover said:
Insurance aside, why would an ATP be required under part91? Said pilot only rerquired to have a 2nd class medical.
I've never heard of an insurance company requiring a 1st class medical. Not saying that they couldn't or wouldn't though. You used to need a 1st class medical if you wanted to add any type-ratings to your ATP certificate. That is no longer the case either.

'Sled
 
volunteer said:
Some say ATP required so 1st class. Others say commercial required so second class. Can anyone put this to bed?
This shouldn't even be a debate. you hand the book of FARs to the "ATP requried" crowd, and ask " where does it say that?"

When they are unable to come up with anything supporting thier position (and they won't), you declare the "comm/2nd class" advocates winner of the "debate"

Why would you argue about the regulations when it's much easier to read then and *know* what the answer is?
 
Last edited:
A Squared said:
Why would you argue about the regulations when it's much easier to read then and *know* what the answer is?
Yes, but it's so much more =fun= to debate from ignorance about what you =think= they say.
 
A Squared said:
This shouldn't even be a debate. you hand the book of FARs to the "ATP requried" crowd, and ask " where does it say that?"

When they are unable to come up with anything supporting thier position (and they won't), you declare the "comm/2nd class" advocates winner of the "debate"

Why would you argue about the regulations when it's much easier to read then and *know* what the answer is?

Maybe you've never encountered them, but there are those that will still debate when you hand them the regs (opened to the page even). The "interpretation" monster comes out then.
 
volunteer said:
Maybe you've never encountered them, but there are those that will still debate when you hand them the regs (opened to the page even). The "interpretation" monster comes out then.

I uncderstand that some regulations leave some room to be misunderstood, and that CHief counsel interpretations often add a level of complexity.
THis is not one of those situations.

I'll admit that my curiosity is piqued here. I assume that you are one ofthose who has read the regulations and knows that a commercial certificate and second class medical is all that is needed. Can you explain how exactly the othere's phrase thier argument?

WHen you hand them the book of regulations and say "show me where an ATP is required to pilot a turbine aircraft under part 91"' and they can't do that, what do they then say? how does the "debate" continue from that point?
 
A Squared said:
I uncderstand that some regulations leave some room to be misunderstood, and that CHief counsel interpretations often add a level of complexity.
THis is not one of those situations.

I'll admit that my curiosity is piqued here. I assume that you are one ofthose who has read the regulations and knows that a commercial certificate and second class medical is all that is needed. Can you explain how exactly the othere's phrase thier argument?

WHen you hand them the book of regulations and say "show me where an ATP is required to pilot a turbine aircraft under part 91"' and they can't do that, what do they then say? how does the "debate" continue from that point?

They say that an ATP is required to be PIC of ANY turbine powered A/C. Then, of course, the Private Pilot doctor with his L-39 is brought to the floor. Then the 1000 yard stare comes on their face. Then it is ANY PIC turbine pilot that is being paid to fly. Then comes the "show me" part of it. The response is "I know it is in there, I don't have time to find it." That is the Cliff Notes version.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top