What planes can you fly without a pilot’s license?

https://pilotinstitute.com/flying-without-a-license/

by b8 • 3 years ago

168 228 3 years ago

pilotinstitute.com

andrewfromx• 3 years ago

this is amazing, I had no idea you could just skip the license if u use a tiny plane.

d4mi3n• 3 years ago

You can also get a pilot's license at 14 years old in many parts of the US.

That said, do so with caution. Flying is still dangerous and accidents will often be fatal, license or no. Note the provisions about "no passengers allowed".

One reason these planes don't require licenses is that the risk of collateral damage is low enough to be comparable to a car. You can hurt yourself quite badly while not endangering others.

So have fun, but definitely read up on the risks before you play around with aviation on a lark.

bombcar• 3 years ago

The nice thing about being the pilot is that something like 90% of small plane fatalities are the pilot's fault.

Compare to about 50% being the motorcyclists' fault.

So if you're careful and level-headed, small planes are a safe delight.

But if you ever feel pressured to fly into weather, then you will die.

wanderingmoose• 3 years ago

I'm not sure about power licenses, but for gliders (sailplanes, not hang-gliders), you could solo at 14 via a student license that required instructor supervision. You could get a full license at 16.

Growing up my family was into gliding (sailplanes) and I counted down the days until I was 14 so I could solo. Looking back, especially w/ a 14 yr old kid of my own...I think my parents were crazy for letting me fly, but I'm really glad they did. I have a medical condition and so couldn't reasonably fly power planes. This was before the power "sport-license" that is a good compromise between access for hobbyists and a regular license.

The comment about risks if very true. These types of activities can have real risks. It is sobering seeing a friend have a fatal accident. (With gliding it is almost always trying to make it back to an airport, getting too low and having a stall/spin close to the ground).

If anyone is near southwest ohio in the us....I'd highly suggest checking out Caesars Creek Soaring Club: https://www.facebook.com/CaesarCreekSoaringClub/

sokoloff4• 3 years ago

You can also get a pilot's license at 14 years old in many parts of the US.

FAA is federal in scope, so the rules are the same across the US.

You can get a student pilot certificate (allowing you to solo an aircraft) at 16 for airplanes/helicopters and 14 for gliders and balloons. 17 is the minimum age for a private pilot certificate and I believe 16 is the minimum age for a glider/balloon pilot.

gemanor2• 3 years ago

Having a picture of a Piper Super Cab in the header and gliders with tractor engines in the content, sounds like clickbait. I'm a big fan of ultralights and paragliding, but they have more in common with gliders than with aircraft. Also, maybe UPO, but simulators teach more about airplanes than those tools.

wood_spirit• 3 years ago

Ultralights are fun and practical and their enduring popularity speaks against your assertion. They are also popular even in countries that require a pilots license for them.

gemanor2• 3 years ago

I like ultralights myself and paragliding for fun. I'm speaking at the point of having a picture of a piper super cub (required license) in the header and write 'this is the airplanes you can fly with no license'.

brucethemoose2• 3 years ago

This page is SEO-ey, with the "how to" question titles and padding and such. I would have instinctively skipped it coming from Google.

...Which is really sad, because it actually reads like a earnest author just trying to make their informative page visible.

crooked-v2• 3 years ago

Well, there's definitely some SEO involved, because the site sells ground school courses for various piloting and drone flying subjects, as well as some free ones on specific hardware (like https://pilotinstitute.com/course/cessna-172-deep-dive/ about the Cessna 172). The courses are pretty good from what I've looked at with their drone stuff, though.

nullfield2• 3 years ago

The site is one of the places authorized by the FAA to do required TRUST certificates for non-Part 107 drone flights, and Greg here is a well-regarded instructor-so quite legit and all.

You can also get the non-flying part of a private pilot’s license through them.

CobaltFire5• 3 years ago

There are a few more complete aircraft than what that list has, if interested:

Badlands F1 thru F5 models are based on the old Kitfox Lite: https://www.badlandaircraft.com/

Merlin Lite is based on the Merlin LSA: https://www.aeromarine-lsa.com/merlin-lite/

Both of those are pretty interesting aircraft more in line with what most people might think of as a full aircraft.

dtgriscom• 3 years ago

Wow, that Badland Aircraft site is annoying! Too many cute animations and images running around.

b82• 3 years ago

The Mirocopter SCH-2A meets the FAA requirements so it doesn't require a pilots license. You can buy it for $35k on Ebay [0]. It's cheaper than most cars and gas wise (5 gallons for 50min for flight time) would make it about the same cost as commuting to work in a car.

0. https://www.ebay.com/itm/354879150317

rlpb2• 3 years ago

The article doesn't really cover it but being able to fly without a license probably isn't the same as flying near a controlled (ie. towered) airport. If want to commute and aren't in the middle of nowhere you might find that flying in your local airspace does require a radio license in practice at least.

Source: I am a licensed pilot but not familiar with flying in the US.

CobaltFire5• 3 years ago

You are correct. Knowing the airspace is required under Part 103, and operating an aircraft under those rules puts you under the legal requirements of Part 103.

If you want to know more the entire document is only a couple pages:

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...

b82• 3 years ago

Huh, TIL. I've seen paragliders fly without headsets though near me (30mins from my states capital). Earning a radio license and getting a comms setup seems trivial though.

AdrianB18• 3 years ago

You can bet that people that fly these planes without a license also don't spend the time and money to get a radio license; that automatically prevents from flying to or from a towered airport.

These ultra-light planes are practically big toys that you can fly over some empty field and relatively low altitudes. Powered parachutes also fall in this category.

Sardtok• 3 years ago

I don't think commuting by helicopter counts as recreational flying, though.

hackernewds• 3 years ago

not every one is versed in these esoteric rules, so practically still prepare to be nagged and arrested while flying these.

semicolon_storm• 3 years ago

Pretty insane you can fly these with no license or certificates when basically all drones require having your TRUST certificate or full on drone license to fly.

jopolous• 3 years ago

1. These can only be flown in most class E airspace and class G, so not anywhere close to most airports 2. They are much bigger and more visible than drones 3. The ultralight pilot is inside the aircraft which means “see and avoid” is much more reasonable

It’s hard to compare ultralights to drones IMO as a licensed pilot

withinboredom• 3 years ago

That’s because people with drones were assholes. Flying into people’s yards and demanding their property back, or suing because it broke. All kinds of stupid shit.

Thus it had to be regulated to stop the nonsense.

crooked-v2• 3 years ago

Barrier to entry. With a $1,000 drone you can be doing something stupid in an hour and not second-guess yourself right up until it crashes into somebody's head at full speed. On the other hand, for an ultralight you've shelled out $27,000 (current price for an Aerolite 103), plus costs for storage, transportation, arrangements for taking off at a small airfield, etc.

tzs2• 3 years ago

1. If an ultralight crashes into my house the pilot has a good chance of being seriously injured or killed.

If a drone crashes into my house the only harm to the pilot is financial.

That gives the ultralight pilots a much bigger incentive to not do stupid things with their aircraft.

2. Ultralights have to stay out of cities and towns and can't fly over large groups of people.

That puts some more on how much damage they can do to other people and other people's properties than drones have.

golwengaud2• 3 years ago

Setting the legalities aside, flying any of these without the training behind a pilot's license sounds like a great way to have some fun, right up until you have a really bad day. Maybe you can skip the license---I haven't looked at those regs myself---but you can't skip the skills.

(I'd also want to take a hard look at the design, parts, and maintenance before I flew something like this---but I don't really have the training or experience to do that. I know some people who I might trust to do it for me, but I think they all have A&P certificates. Again, maybe you can take shortcuts & skip the expensive, highly trained mechanic, but that shortcut may not take you where you want to go.)

CobaltFire5• 3 years ago

Part 103 compliant aircraft are meant to have limits low enough to be LESS immediately lethal, but they are still dangerous.

Maintenance is absolutely a possible issue, and due to their restrictions the engines are generally MORE needy than normal GA aircraft.

golwengaud2• 3 years ago

Maintenance is absolutely a possible issue, and due to their restrictions the engines are generally MORE needy than normal GA aircraft.

Interesting! How so?

Part 103 compliant aircraft are meant to have limits low enough to be LESS immediately lethal, but they are still dangerous.

What do you have in mind?

Quite a lot of what worries me when I fly involves misjudging the combination of weather with the aircraft's capabilities & my capabilities. Time under the care of a good instructor helps a whole lot with that judgement: you get to see a whole bunch of conditions that are beyond your capabilities & struggle with them, without endangering yourself or the aircraft. And (e.g.) winds variable 13-23, 3G12 on runway 09 is not so trivial, even if your aircraft has a 15kt crosswind limitation.

Or---I fly gliders, and I've had it drummed into my head that you never ever fly between trees when you're landing in some random field, because there may be a power line and power lines are a great way to kill yourself.

There are a thousand things like this, that are more about environment & pilot than aircraft.

(FWIW I've flown power in the past, but mostly fly gliders now; still newish. Maybe that skews my perceptions a bit; glider pilots are pretty willing to fly in windy or gusty conditions, in search of ridge or wave lift, so it's not so uncommon that I'm standing there asking myself "sure, the much more experienced pilots are fine to fly in this, but am I fine?" This is really hard! I'm really grateful to my instructors for giving me knowledge & experience with which to make that decision, and for giving me good training to fall back on if I misjudge!)

_ea1k• 3 years ago

+1 - They are simpler and slower, but not really safe without adequate training. Best to get quite a bit of it, though it wouldn't need to be as extensive as a private pilot course.

jillesvangurp• 3 years ago

Flying the plane is the easy part. What makes getting a pilots license hard and expensive is all the complex rules and regulations you have to know about and the complex engine operation that you have to be proficient in to fly safely. And what makes keeping a license expensive is the requirement to stay current, which means flying a certain amount of hours. Which is not cheap.

In my opinion, general aviation is due for a little disruption. Basically current cost, rules, training and practices are appropriate for planes that are half a century old, have a combustion engine, and require a lot of micro managing to fly safely, and regular and expensive inspections to keep airworthy.

The electrical drones and more or less autonomous planes currently being designed by dozens of companies are very different in nature. Cheaper to manufacture (less moving parts). Cheaper to operate (less maintenance, electricity is cheap). Fly by wire; you just point them in the right direction and they go there. They are orders of magnitude easier to deal with for pilots. Less buttons, dials, switches, etc. Some of these things can operate without a pilot even.

There are going to be a lot of experimental planes with electrical engines and a small enough battery that you might even operate them without a license. It will take a while for these to get very cheap as the high end batteries with > 500 wh/kg still are a combination of very hard to get and expensive. But they are getting to market. At least two companies have announced they are shipping such batteries this year. One of them is CATL. Better batteries might follow in a few years. But 500wh/kg is good enough to improve ranges quite a bit of currently already flying planes. And it also enables smaller form factors. Electrically propelled para gliders already exist, for example.

It will take a while but the rules are likely going to have to be adjusted for these new types of planes. And since they are much cheaper to operate, there will also be a lot of pressure for the current ATC system to be modernized to keep up with the growing number of planes.

AdrianB18• 3 years ago

They are the only thing an old pilot can continue to fly after they can no longer pass a strict medical check. For this purpose, they are perfect. For random people trying to fly without training they are a natural selection tool.

tzs2• 3 years ago

That covers what you can fly. There are also restrictions on when and where you can fly. These are daytime VFR [1] conditions only, only in uncontrolled airspace, cannot fly over cites or towns or large groups of people, cannot create hazards to other people or property, must yield right of way to other aircraft, and must comply with all FAA NOTAMs [2].

[1] Visual Flight Rules. VFR conditions are conditions where you can operate and navigate primarily relying on what you can see outside the aircraft. As opposed to IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) where you can rely entirely on your instruments and do not need to see anything outside.

[2] originally Notice to Airmen (now Notice to Air Missions if one wants to take into account female pilots). Notices that the FAA publishes about potential hazards or events that might affect flights. For example if some airspace is temporarily closed because of military activity, there would be a NOTAM to let civilian pilots know that they have to avoid that airspace.

imoverclocked2• 3 years ago

It’s also worth noting that “congested areas” are very loosely defined. Eg: It could be interpreted as a group of people sitting on bleachers.

CPLX• 3 years ago

It can and would

duxup• 3 years ago

only in uncontrolled airspace, cannot fly over cites or towns or large groups of people

Yeah I wouldn’t want some yahoo playing around with that in my neighborhood.

dghughes2• 3 years ago

The lack of mentioning daytime in the article had me worried.

Also there is no flying in an aerodrome and hopefully the person knows what an aerodrome is. Or near hospitals since many are restricted for helicopter air ambulances. Or anywhere near anything military.

I briefly took some flying lessons and there is an enormous amount to know both the flying part and the ground school part.

itsyaboi2• 3 years ago

Aerodrome? Is this a euro-specific rule?

CobaltFire5• 3 years ago

The relevant CFR, typically known as Part 103:

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F...

blt• 3 years ago

You don’t need a license to operate these aircraft because they’re easy enough to fly that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) doesn’t see the need to regulate them.

I don't think that's the reason. The reason is that they are unlikely to hurt anyone besides the pilot in a crash.

They can have an engine failure, stall-spin, or fly into a cloud just as readily as any other plane. Those are the biggest risks for GA, and they're no easier to handle in an ultralight.

quasarj• 3 years ago

Flying into a cloud is a big risk? They're everywhere!

psunavy034• 3 years ago

When you aren't instrument-qualified, get disoriented, and fly yourself into the ground, then yes, they are a big risk for the weekend warrior lawyers and doctors who never get an instrument rating.

itsyaboi2• 3 years ago

Not only is it a big risk, it's also illegal.

mschuster912• 3 years ago

Here in Germany, if you don't have an IFR (instrument flight rules) rating, you're not allowed to fly through clouds, because if you're not trained in using avionics or the plane doesn't have them in the first place, you are very very likely to kill yourself, your passengers and people on the ground. If you encounter unexpected clouds, you are supposed to GTFO... if you try to fly "under" the clouds, you may end up forced into the clouds anyway by natural elevation, minimum ground clearances or obstacles and hitting a mountain or whatever, and if you try to fly above the clouds you may end up being forced to a higher altitude than your plane can maintain, or you can't push down to a landing site and run out of fuel.

In fact, unexpected clouds are among the top killers in general aviation with a fatality (!) rate of 86% - if you lose visual, you got 180 seconds to live on average [1].

Stay the fuck away from clouds, fog and other visual obstacles with anything that moves, no matter if it's a drone, a plane, a ship or a road vehicle, unless you are trained and certified in instrumental operation. You will either hit something you didn't intend to yourself, or you will get hit by something that could have avoided you, had your vehicle had collision avoidance systems (in aircraft, TCAS, in watercraft ordinary radar plus AIS - neither of which are a requirement in small vehicles).

[1] https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2022/june/pilot...

lsh1233• 3 years ago

There are studies about non-instrument pilots entering clouds (instrument meteorological conditions or IMC in aviation lingo): - in 60 secs the plane control is lost (though still recoverable); - in 90 secs the plane is in an unrecoverable attitude; - in 180-270 secs the plane breaks up or hits the ground.

An example of someone who lived to tell the tale:

http://www.37000feet.com/report/879711/new-in-type-private-p...

grepfru_it7• 3 years ago

One of the biggest risks of flying into a cloud while vfr is that you do not know what is on the other side when you come out. Could very well experience a mid-air collision, even though the odds seem low it’s a lot more probable than you think

hadlock• 3 years ago

In plains states like Texas you end up with these super tall (500+ ft tall) 200'+ diameter convective clouds that have massive downdrafts and rain in the middle. Like a floating, wandering storm cell. On the outside they just look like tall white fluffy clouds on a sunny dry day. All sorts of atmospheric hazards.

pkilgore• 3 years ago

Flying into meaning literally inside. You can fly among them in VFR assuming you meet minimums for the airspace (3SM visibility, 1000 above, 500 below, 2000 to the side in most areas of the USA).

I have only been in actual instrument conditions once with an instructor who was certified to do so under and instrument flight plan. It's disorienting. It's turbulent. Its impossible to avoid other planes (IFR the tower keeps you separated).

Crosswinds and rain and landing are basically boring after a few tens of hours. But fuck clouds.

benjaminclark• 3 years ago

You are absolutely correct. The fact that this statement is made by a website holding itself out as an educational source is very disappointing.

Ultralight vehicles meeting these requirements (weight, single seater, etc.) are subject to NO airworthiness regulation by the FAA at all. So the FAA is making no statement on whether they are safe or easy to fly.

What these regulations mean is it is not a crime to fly something meeting these requirements (even if it was assembled by your crazy neighbor in their shed). That doesn't mean anyone would think it is a good idea, let alone the FAA.

nelgaard• 3 years ago

Yes, but they are easier to land if you do get an engine failure. With 5 gallons of fuel they are less likely to be surprised by bad weather.

zzless4• 3 years ago

Police in the US do not have to have a license to operate anything, including aircraft. In this case, insurance requirements take over though. They may have a legal right to fly but no insurance company would approve operation by anyone but a commercial pilot. I got a few hours in a local police Bell 206 because they needed a commercial pilot to fly while their official pilot only had a private license. Fun!

ryanwaggoner2• 3 years ago

I’d like to hear more about this, because I’m a pilot and I’ve never heard anywhere that the FAA waives their license requirements for local police? That doesn’t make any sense to me.

genjii931• 3 years ago

Police also aren't legally allowed to straight-up murder people, but...

zzless4• 3 years ago

As I mentioned above it is not that the FAA waves their requirements as much as the FAA does not have jurisdiction over such operations (under appropriate circumctances).

repiret• 3 years ago

I call baloney. Do you have a citation for that?

zzless4• 3 years ago

Here is a quote from AC No: 00-1.1A (Public Aircraft Operations): What Oversight of PAO Does the FAA Have? The FAA has limited oversight of PAO, though such operations must continue to comply with the regulations applicable to all aircraft operating in the NAS. The government entity conducting the PAO is responsible for oversight of the operation, including aircraft airworthiness and any operational requirements imposed by the government entity. The government agency contracting for the service assumes the responsibility for oversight of a PAO.

The military is another entity that operates aircraft outside of FAA jurisdiction. Even military airman certificates have to be `converted' to civilian ones i a military pilot wants to become a civilian pilot.

WirelessGigabit• 3 years ago

To be honest, I don't like pages like this.

The only reason this page is here is is to have more content for SEO purposes. The only 2 links on this page are links to other pages on the same website.

All it does is pollute search results.

jameshart• 3 years ago

Additionally:

- any plane you’re on board of, where all the licensed pilots on board have become incapacitated.

- your instructor’s plane during a flying lesson

Programmers should insist on more precision in their rule definitions.

tass• 3 years ago

Under part 91, any plane at all, so long as a licensed pilot is aboard as pilot in command.

dylan6045• 3 years ago

When I was in elementary school (waaaay back in the 80s) I lived way out in BFE where there was a lot of undeveloped land around the school. One weekend, one of the students discovered a crashed ultralight in the fields surrounding the school, and then told his parents about it. There was an company a few miles from the school off of the highway that sold/rented ultralights, so the parents called them about it. Apparently, someone walked away from the crash and just decided not to tell anyone about it. As a reward for reporting the location of the "lost" ultralight, the place offered free flights to the kid and parents. The parents said no thanks. It was always one of those stories that stood out as a kid growing up and I hadn't thought about that in a really long time.

pixelatedindex• 3 years ago

If I were a kid, I’d be livid to not get free flights. I always wanted to fly - I think the first time I ever got on a plane was in high school and I remember being glued to the window almost the whole time.

Incidentally, I just learned about ultralights not needing a license last week and there are some really affordable ones for like 16K: http://www.uflyit.com/aerolite103main.htm

There are more manufacturers here: https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aviation-interests/ultralights/getti...

It’s also wild to me that some of these kits are build-it-yourself - they assemble the kit, test fly it, take it apart and ship it to you. I’m more than happy to build my own bike, but my own aircraft? That will make me triple check every step and still be super scared to fly it.

dylan6045• 3 years ago

If your kid discovered a crashed something and the people that operated the something didn't know it was missing gave your kid free time to fly/ride a thing just like it, would you let your kid go? But of course the kid was upset.

grepfru_it7• 3 years ago

I would gladly build my own cub and fly it. You could probably repair it mid flight haha!

bagels4• 3 years ago

Ultralights are one-seat by definition. I'm not sure most elementary school kids could handle actually flying one of those.

indus• 3 years ago

Beware: That Piper Super Cub in the cover image requires a license to fly. LOL.

grepfru_it7• 3 years ago

Unpopular opinion but technically correct answer: you can fly any plane without a pilots license.

In fact I just saw a Quora question with this exact question and the answer came from a 60 year old pilot that has been flying without a license for 30 years.

If you never fly out of a major airport where an FAA inspector can ramp check you, who will ever find out?

Please don’t do this.

userbinator2• 3 years ago

and the answer came from a 60 year old pilot that has been flying without a license for 30 years.

More precisely, someone who claims to be one online.

serf• 3 years ago

it's not an uncommon story, so I don't really doubt it.

lots of history with older crop-duster or other utility-craft pilots who sort of passively ignore the FAA.

grepfru_it7• 3 years ago

Think about people in the Midwest who flew with their parents and inherited a Cessna. They may have never gotten a pilots license but racked up thousands of hours. They take off and land on a grass strip or their own private paved runway. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license?

How about a kid who loved planes but parents did not or could not afford lessons. They found simulators and cut their teeth on 20 years of Microsoft flight simulator and x-plane. Then they fly with some friends who comment on their remarkable flying skills. This emboldened pilot continues to fly without a license without an incident. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license?

How about a drug runner in Columbia or Mexico who learned to fly on his or her own to make $10k per flight. Mastering extreme short field takeoffs/landings and abandoning the plane afterwards. Why (in their eyes) would they need a license?

Please do not do this.

digi59404• 3 years ago

FWIW, I’ve personally met someone who this exact scenario applied too. His father flew planes in WW2 then came back and flew crop dusters. As a kid his father would let him fly and taught him how. He never went and got his FAA License. He just flew small planes like Cessnas to/from private areas. No one ever bothered him or asked him for his license.

taneq2• 3 years ago

What do you want GP poster to do, check their license? :P

Dalewyn2• 3 years ago

In the same vein, the only reason you need a license is because you use publicly owned space.

For a mundane example, consider your driver's license. You only need it because you drive on public roads and highways; a driver's license is a license stating you are competent enough to not ruin the shared public roads and highways.

Likewise, a pilot's license is a license stating you are competent enough to not ruin the skies shared by all.

Commercial equivalents for those licenses also detail how you are competent enough to be entrusted with other peoples' lives or things, but I digress.

So if you take your car on a drive on your own, private land, you don't need a driver's license. Hell, you probably don't even need to register that car. Likewise, if you own a chunk of airspace and fly strictly within it, you don't need a license and you probably don't need to register the plane either.

Of course, nobody's going to be owning chunks of airspace like that so this is all theoretical.

Also IANAL, please don't do shit based off what some random hooligan spews on the intertubez.

8note2• 3 years ago

It's kinda silly though, compared to driving, there's very little public space that somebody else would be using

amluto• 3 years ago

Hell, you probably don't even need to register that car.

In California at least, you are required to file for “planned non-operation”, which is inexpensive but not free.

kotaKat• 3 years ago

So if you take your car on a drive on your own, private land, you don't need a driver's license

This is actually one of the reasons that Phantom Auto [phantom.auto] started with remote controlling cars - and while they still do, they pivoted a lot of their work towards industry driving forklifts and terminal tractors that live on private property and don't need regulation on remote operation.

paulddraper8• 3 years ago

I'm a private pilot.

This is basically correct. If your airport is small and you never get in trouble with ATC or have an emergency situation, you will probably not get caught.

However, if you do get caught, it is a criminal charge with (IIRC) up to $250,000 fine and 6 years prison time.

Or worse, you overestimate your ability and die/kill people.

I wouldn't take that risk.

If you want to fly a lot, get a license. If you want to fly a little, make friends with a pilot.

You can even get a student license with relatively few requirements, and fly solo (no passengers) during the day.

---

That said, I do sympathize with people wanting to opt out of the FAA's draconian rules. (E.g. If you have been professionally diagnosed with ADHD, the FAA bans you from any pilot's license ever, even a student license. :/ Lovely)

chrisweekly2• 3 years ago

"E.g. If you have been professionally diagnosed with ADHD, the FAA bans you from any pilot's license ever, even a student license. :/"

What?! That's incredible. If more people were trying to get their licenses I bet the ACLU would fix that nonsensical bigotry and embarrass the FAA in court.

godelski5• 3 years ago

E.g. If you have been professionally diagnosed with ADHD, the FAA bans you from any pilot's license ever, even a student license

Not quite true. They just need you to be evaluated where you've been off medication for at least 90 days. But if you're on Adderall, you're shit out of luck. Which is pretty dumb since the medication resolves issues.

Other dumb things that will/can prevent you from getting your license: AIDS, diabetes, obesity (BMI >35), anemia, depression, gender dysphoria (they more recently updated for trans, but hormones or surgery can make it difficult), color blindness (not that impactful these days, and there are many types of color blindnesses), and many more.

Side note: I was working on my pilot's license before I went to grad school. No problems, despite a history of depression too. In grad school I got diagnosed and Adderall really made a big difference (even helping with my depression). So gotta make the choice of being able to fly or being able to do productive work which I'm passionate about. Private pilots are a dying breed, and the FAA is only doing things to accelerate this.

https://pilot-protection-services.aopa.org/news/2015/septemb...

colanderman• 3 years ago

If you have been professionally diagnosed with ADHD, the FAA bans you from any pilot's license ever, even a student license.

I'm not sure this is literally true? https://adhdrollercoaster.org/adhd-news-and-research/faa-gui... and https://www.faa.gov/ame_guide/media/AI_ADHD_ADD.pdf seem to disagree, only that ADHD medication is a no-go.

I definitely know someone who is a licensed private pilot and instructor who was diagnosed with ADHD when young and has taken medication for it. (I don't know whether he had to stop medication and be reevaluated to be licensed, presumably he did per the above link.)

ai_monkey2• 3 years ago

When and where did you get your information? Because this is completely wrong. LSA's and gliders rely on self-certification for the very medical reasons you mentioned. In smaller aircraft where you don't carry passengers and don't fly in demanding circumstances (high speeds, altitudes, IFR, etc), the margin of safety for the general public is much wider. The FAA puts more trust in your own assessment of your medical condition's impact on your safety, since the main person affected by your ADM in such an aircraft is yourself. editing to add that this isn't speculation, I fly gliders.

gymbeaux• 3 years ago

There are also discovery flights where you can fly with a licensed instructor and get to actually fly the plane after takeoff and before landing.

sugarkjube2• 3 years ago

You can fly a plane without a licence just like you can drive a car without a licence. No problem at all. Until you're caught or in a crash.

You can't however, unlike a car, fly a plane without having been taught. If you try, you may be able to get in the air, but the difficult part is getting back on the ground alive.

Dalewyn2• 3 years ago

We can't drive a car without having been taught either.

Granted, the amount of training required to drive a car pales in comparison to flying an aircraft, but it's not like humans can just drive a car straight out of the womb.

mike50• 3 years ago

Clickbait. Real Answer Ultralight aircraft.

Justin_K• 3 years ago

After your solo signoff you can fly alone without a license. Many people do this and never go all the way, they'll l fly for years.

gusennan• 3 years ago

an instructor’s solo sign off is only valid for 90 days in the US, and there are a bunch of restrictions as to what a pilot is operating under the instructor’s sign off can do.

BWStearns3• 3 years ago

Please actually get lessons to fly unless you have a lot of room to crash and kill only yourself while learning (in which case you probably have enough money for lessons).

chrisweekly2• 3 years ago

Getting insurance is a related question I have (eg for a sport pilot license).

wkat42426• 3 years ago

Wow here in Europe you need a license for ultralights as well. Not quite as rigid in terms of requirements and the medical is easier too. But you still need one.

I've flown gliders also which meet these criteria too and they need it as well.

I think it makes sense though. You can still hurt people on the ground and more importantly, you could endanger other air traffic. Airspace in Europe is too dense for people not to know what they're doing. This is why every aircraft needs a mode S transponder now too at the very minimum.

1letterunixname• 3 years ago

You don't even need a plane. PPG is a parachute and a motor.

technick2• 3 years ago

I once had dreams of becoming a pilot but the FAA considers adderall a no fly drug, even though it makes me better at everything I do. Because I wasn't diagnosed with it by a shrink or psychologist, the FAA doc in Oklahoma told me I could stop taking it for six months and then get my medical but there wasn't any way I could do that.

Another guy I know who was in the same boat as me, went and got his pilots license in another country (I think Australia) and just flies here without any problems.

The FAA needs to let go a little bit, otherwise more and more are going to start violating laws because we are tired of the overreach.

Update: Forgot to mention a lot of people that are getting caught up with ADHD or Adderall can go get their sports pilot license but that restricts them to ultralight planes with a max of 2 seats and very low weight limits. The good thing about the sports pilot is it doesn't require a medical.

sealeck2• 3 years ago

I really wouldn't want someone with ADHD flying a plane – it's just not safe.

technick2• 3 years ago

There's different degrees of ADHD, like in my case I don't have hyperactivity though I have issues completing things I'm not into, however if it's something I am passionate about, I'm 110% in on it.

I have 19 hrs towards my private license, have flown 3 different lines of planes (Cirrus, Cessna, Piper), have a great understanding of aviation principles and aerospace science, and am confident I can operate in every class of airspace proficiently.

ulrischa• 3 years ago

Does someone know how the situation is in Germany

H8crilA• 3 years ago

I don't think you can fly anything without a license in Europe. Even small drones require a license now (that you can obtain online in 1-2 evenings).

Also, please just get whatever license is required. It's not difficult to do, and they will teach you what you absolutely have to know when flying. A fresh pilot with a private license knows just enough not to crash and not to be a problem to others, nothing more really. It's very similar to a driver's license, where you first get it and only later over the next year or so learn how to feel really comfortable on the road.

andersrs3• 3 years ago

My hot take is that hobby pilots are a bunch of selfish assholes creating a bunch of noise and emissions just do they can have fun. So selfish they only started thinking about removing lead from fuel very recently. One of the aircraft is even called a mosquito so the industry is so aware of the issue they're making a joke out of it. At least commercial aircraft have a purpose and try to be as quiet as possible. Fuck pilots.

entropy472• 3 years ago

creating a bunch of noise and emissions just so they can have fun

Wait until you hear about parents!

I haven't actually done the maths but I expect an ultralight is comparable to a car hobbyist in both noise and emissions. Agree that flying a jet liner for fun would be a dick move.

andersrs3• 3 years ago

Yeah I hate those kind of people as well when they are noisy. Is that supposed to be an argument?

gU9x3u8XmQNG• 3 years ago

Hmmm…

Australia is heavily regulated, which is good and bad.

Unfortunately, due to regulation and other costs; recreational flying - in my experience - is suffering greatly in Australia.

I watch a few US youtube channels, including the STOL groups, often in awe.

My recreational flying days are likely over, primarily due to cost. Cannot even find hangar space, in west Victoria, within my budget :(

Drones (also heavily regulated) and Flight Simulator are all that remain.

NoNameHaveI2• 3 years ago

Mosquito XEL looks pretty good to me. Would save me a lot of time on my commute.

mft_• 3 years ago

Anyone interested in the DIY route might find some value in Peter Sripol's Youtube channel.

This was his first DIY ultralight build: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAIipq7EZswtld3d8ttKQ...

nikau• 3 years ago

UA175 and AA11 are 2 that come to mind

LispSporks22• 3 years ago

Dunno if it counts as a plane, but you can fly a paramotor (basically a parachute attached to a 2-stroke motor and prop). Cheap to get into and fairly safe, although kinda limited.

I looked into it after being treated for depression made it practically impossible to get a private pilots license. The FAA would rather you fly untreated, undiagnosed.

Good job, FAA.

mycall• 3 years ago

the aircraft must weigh less than 254 pounds

8-bit?

What planes can you fly without a pilot’s license?

Related Stories