no medical consequenses

[896tr]

So I asked in another thread what would happen if you were caught flying without a current medical certificate. Apparently nobody has first hand knowledge of anyone that has been caught.
I haven't, and probably won't fly as pilot in command without one, for now.
Yes you might eventually get caught robbing banks but that is completely different because that is a FEDERAL OFFENCE with specific laws and procedures set up for states and federal courts to follow. Flying without a medical certificate or even without a pilots certificate is a misdemeanor offence.
And yes, when there is an incidence and the general public finds out that the pilot didn't have a current medical certificate there will be outrage and general discontent among the masses. And what if it happens in one of those dangerous homemade airplanes (they should all be banned, they're so unsafe and constantly falling out of the sky!) ? Did he even have a flight plan on file?
But having one or not having one could be debated until "Spacely Space Sprockets" files for bankruptcy protection.
I was just wondering how much trouble a person could expect getting caught without a medical certificate. I'm sure it would be worse if your last one said you had diabetes, sleep apnea, high blood pressure, copd, and chronic explosive diarrhea.

[Av8r3400]

I have no first hand knowledge of the consequences. What I do believe is that if you are flying under "private pilot" or higher level of flying and didn't have a medical certificate and had some sort of incident, you will be hard pressed to get your insurance to do anything but say "sorry Charlie" and walk away leaving you holding the bag.

[mr bill]

Talked to an insurance VP a month ago on this subject. His reply was they would pay, unless a medical condition somehow contributed to the accident.

[jiott]

If you were caught flying w/o a medical but had never failed one, have a valid drivers license, and you were flying light sport aircraft, day vfr, and following all the sport pilot rules, I believe you would be perfectly legal and there would be no consequences. Many people are actually doing this. They have voluntarily dropped down to a Sport Pilot ticket.

[SkyPirate]

Im flying as Sport Pilot, my last 3rd class was 2001, i didnt fail it,.. I really dont care to fly at night or in congested airspace, so it works for me

[Paul Z]

I knew a man the flew for year without a Medical and without a Physical. He had taken training up to getting his solo, and never finished his license. He flew a single place FlyBaby all over. In the years I know him he never got ramp checked. Watching him fly he had very proficient skills, but he never was signed off as a pilot.

I quit going for my physicals in 2008. In 2009 I purchased an SLSA Kitfox. I can fly into contested airspace, and can land at Towered Control Airports, I have the endorsements. I don't fly at night, my night vision isn't the best, and my depth perception isn't any better, ever since I turned 50 or so.

[ClickClickBoom]

Alaska probably has a few doing this.....not many FAA inspectors waiting on the gravel bar to "ramp check" potential candidates/victims.

[av8rps]

I know of a guy that flew a Cub around for 20+ yrs with no medical (he knew he wouldn't pass one, but yet drove a car and a motorcycle all over north America with a valid drivers license, so he figured he was safe to fly an airplane). And that was long before Light Sport was even heard of.

I actually used him as an example (anonymously) in discussions with the FAA when we were pushing for a new pilot license (modified Recreational Pilot which ultimately became Light Sport) that would allow us to fly without a medical. He never harmed anyone or himself, or had an accident during that time, and to keep himself from getting in trouble, he did what he could to avoid big airports and big cities.

And honestly, that wasn't a big issue to him as he had sold his 172 but kept his Cub. And being that it was a Cub, grass strips were his favorite place to go anyhow. He commented once to me that he never had more fun (since not having a medical) as he had learned all the small airstrips and airports in the state, and had gained a whole bunch of new friends.

Obviously I will never really know if me telling his story influenced the FAA or not to give the go-ahead on Light Sport. But I'd like to think it did.

And honestly, if it weren't for the violators like my friend, along with many in the Ultralight community not following the rules, I don't know if we would have ever got Light Sport? In some regards it might have taken a bunch of people like that to get the law changed? I'll never really know that I'm sure, as I doubt anyone will ever admit the law was changed because they had to make the violators legal. But at minimum I think that was part of the reason we today can enjoy flying Light Sport without a medical.

And in addition, now that there is a 10 yr history (from the Light Sport pilots) proving that medicals don't keep people from having accidents, I believe it is likely that Private Pilots may get to enjoy flying larger aircraft than LSA's without medicals. If that happens as I believe it will, that would be a VERY large, POSITIVE step for what is left of the aviation community.

I'm not a renegade myself. But sometimes I think that as a society we accept rules too easily. How many thousands upon thousands of pilots have left aviation because of minor medical concerns over the decades? Even worse, all those pilots we lost were probably lost for no valid reason...we learned from the Light Sport crowd over the last 10 yrs that there never was any proven correlation between being safe and having a medical, or not having one.

So it was gross over-regulation all along. That only further proves how sad it is that we still have to work to convince the FAA to let us fly (not-for-hire) aircraft without a medical. The proof a medical isn't needed has been there for DECADES.

And for those that disagree with that viewpoint, just think about this; Every aircraft accident in FAA's history that happened due to a pilot medical condition proves that having a valid medical means nothing, unless of course the pilot was flying without a medical.

Face it, you can be healthy one day, and unhealthy the next. My grandfather passed an extensive physical with flying colors on his 69th birthday, only to die that night in his sleep.

Here's a quote from a friend of mine that is a retired heart surgeon that I think says it all: "We are all ticking time bombs..."

[TahoeTim]

Since the introduction of LSA, there is absolutely NO excuse not to fly legally.

The kitfox is a great plane and with 20 hours of flight training, you can become a legal pilot. I have been patiently been waiting for the new third class medical ruling to pass so I can fly at night if I choose but until then I will follow the rules.

[Geowitz]

A comment was made and removed, but... The mere act of flying without a medical infringes on no one's rights, where as in most instances of "breaking the law" there would be an infringement against another person.

The allowing of a miniscule off chance that a pilot could harm someone because they didn't have a medical is no different than any other standard policy with regard to managing risks within our society.

The decision of medical fitness should be left to the PILOT IN COMMAND. We're held responsible for every other part of the flight and would face recourse if we made a bad decision. What's the difference here?

Is there recourse against a pilot who has a valid medical, but for some reason knew of an impairment not covered by an FAA medical that caused a crash? Here's where the regulations can cut both ways. Lets say my family is killed by an irresponsible pilot who had a "Valid" medical due to an impairment not discovered by the FAA process. Can I sue him or his estate?... Or is he insulated from all liability now because the FAA said he followed the law?