Attended a forum on this by AOPA today at OSH.

You're all speculating, which is a waste of bits and bytes.

First, as is always the case, an act of Congress means nothing UNTIL the agency with responsibility promilgates REGULATIONS to implement that law. The FAA has 180 days from July 15 to publish said regs.

We all know the FAA always misses deadlines, right? Well, this law has a provision that says if the FAA hasn't promulgated regs to implement this by July 15, 2017, pilots will be permitted to make a good faith effort to comply with the provisions of the act, and may operate without a medical without risk of prosecution.

Dr. Fries discussed the issue of doctors signing these deals. His comment was that many doctors assume liability risk all the time. He offered the example of a bus driver of a scoop bus....CDL, which the doc signs. Like there's no risk there?

I asked my primary care doc if he'd sign this....he said sure. I asked my dermatologist if she'd sign it....yep.

I think it's going to be easier than it might be.

Speculate all you like. The regs will be along in due time. AOPA is already developing the required educational video that pilots will have to watch every other year.

MTV

I agree with Mike, it's fun although a waste of time to speculate.
It's all academic until the FAA comes out with the new reg.
They can either make it as easy and stress-free as possible, or as big a PITA as possible, or somewhere in between.
Which way do you think they'll be leaning?

The good news is that there isn't much wiggle room in the law....it's REALLY specific about provisions that MUST be implemented.

I'm a lot more optimistic about this after hearing this talk.

MTV

I've seen numerous articles about the new law, including recaps of it's provisions.
One recap said the doc must sign off a "fit to fly" statement, another said he must sign off just that he discussed medical issues with the pilot -- big difference. So evidently people are coming up with different interpretations. Like I said, we'll have to see just what the FAA comes up with.

Hotrod180 wrote:

.
One recap said the doc must sign off a "fit to fly" statement, another said he must sign off just that he discussed medical issues with the pilot -- big difference.

Big difference indeed. HUGE..if I may quote one of our Presidential candidates. Requiring a "fit to fly" signature I think would lead to a lot of variable outcomes from various different physicians. A signature acknowledging that he/she "discussed the issue" would be able to be more uniformly implemented.

I am guessing & hoping it will be the second " discussed the issue " interpretation.

.
Winston Churchill referring to Russia describes the country as follows.
It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Wrap that package once or twice more and you have the FAA.

Just read the bill passed to calm your fears. Not much wiggle room for the FAA to screw around.

TahoeTim wrote:Just read the bill passed to calm your fears. Not much wiggle room for the FAA to screw around.

Agreed, but that said, there is some serious talent in the FAA.

MTV

One thing to consider is that with the new medical US pilots are prohibited to fly into Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

One of the articles AOPA has put out about this issue says that the FAA is pushing to meet or beat their deadline for the new regulations. That would be good, it would demonstrate some enthusiasm to satisfy the will of the people, as opposed to the foot-dragging they've done ever since the AOPA/EAA medical reform proposal of several years ago that started this whole ball rolling.

Pusher wrote:One thing to consider is that with the new medical US pilots are prohibited to fly into Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you get this from?

M6RV6 wrote:

Pusher wrote:One thing to consider is that with the new medical US pilots are prohibited to fly into Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you get this from?

Latest COPA magazine, Transport Canada ruled against the new medical reform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pusher wrote:

M6RV6 wrote:

Pusher wrote:One thing to consider is that with the new medical US pilots are prohibited to fly into Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you get this from?

Latest COPA magazine, Transport Canada ruled against the new medical reform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could you cut n paste for me, I can't find it!!
Thanks

M6RV6 wrote:

Pusher wrote:

M6RV6 wrote:[quote="Pusher"]One thing to consider is that with the new medical US pilots are prohibited to fly into Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you get this from?

Latest COPA magazine, Transport Canada ruled against the new medical reform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could you cut n paste for me, I can't find it!!
Thanks[/quote]





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pusher wrote:

M6RV6 wrote:

Pusher wrote:[quote="M6RV6"][quote="Pusher"]One thing to consider is that with the new medical US pilots are prohibited to fly into Canada.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where did you get this from?

Latest COPA magazine, Transport Canada ruled against the new medical reform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could you cut n paste for me, I can't find it!!
Thanks[/quote]





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]
Yup. Just read it. 2 thumbs down...

Guess I will just have to overfly instead of stopping and spending any money!!
Do you think they will change there mind?
I would think this is a pretty big step in not allowing someone legal in the US to not fly in Canada?
Wonder what the ramifications will be?

M6RV6 wrote:Guess I will just have to overfly instead of stopping and spending any money!!
Do you think they will change there mind?
I would think this is a pretty big step in not allowing someone legal in the US to not fly in Canada?
Wonder what the ramifications will be?

I doubt they will change their minds anytime soon. I'm sure the ramifications will just be some fines.
To be fair, not everything legal in Canada is legal in the US either. Take owner maintained aircraft for one. A very nice rule here, but not allowed to fly into the US, which sucks, but we make due.

Ramifications are that you will have to get a third-class medical (at a minimum) to land in Canada. No idea whether that will also affect overflights.

M6RV6 wrote:Guess I will just have to overfly instead of stopping and spending any money!!
Do you think they will change there mind?
I would think this is a pretty big step in not allowing someone legal in the US to not fly in Canada?
Wonder what the ramifications will be?

I don't think you are able to fly through Canadian airspace or get a flight plan approved.
Similar thing in Canada is that you can be an airline captain past 65 years old as long as you can hold a Class 1 medical and your contract does not have a mandatory retirement age. However you can fly only in Canadian airspace but can not enter US airspace, as the US has different rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pusher wrote:

M6RV6 wrote:Guess I will just have to overfly instead of stopping and spending any money!!
Do you think they will change there mind?
I would think this is a pretty big step in not allowing someone legal in the US to not fly in Canada?
Wonder what the ramifications will be?

I don't think you are able to fly through Canadian airspace or get a flight plan approved.
Similar thing in Canada is that you can be an airline captain past 65 years old as long as you can hold a Class 1 medical and your contract does not have a mandatory retirement age. However you can fly only in Canadian airspace but can not enter US airspace, as the US has different rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wonder how this will work? How would anyone know what type medical I have?

M6RV6 wrote:

Pusher wrote:

M6RV6 wrote:Guess I will just have to overfly instead of stopping and spending any money!!
Do you think they will change there mind?
I would think this is a pretty big step in not allowing someone legal in the US to not fly in Canada?
Wonder what the ramifications will be?

I don't think you are able to fly through Canadian airspace or get a flight plan approved.
Similar thing in Canada is that you can be an airline captain past 65 years old as long as you can hold a Class 1 medical and your contract does not have a mandatory retirement age. However you can fly only in Canadian airspace but can not enter US airspace, as the US has different rules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wonder how this will work? How would anyone know what type medical I have?

Medical is attached to / part of your pilot license (number).