[paulddraper]

> this is completely wrong

It's a little bit wrong.

A drivers license-only sport license requires that you not have failed an aviation medical exam. [1] ADHD will cause you to fail a medical exam, and thereby prevent you from a sport license. But, yes, if you play your cards carefully (i.e. stay away from the doctor!), you can fly LSA/gliders.

> 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.

FWIW, these aren't really differences between what you can fly with sport vs private pilot license.

* high-speed (200 horsepower) requires a separate high-performance endorsement, beyond private

* high altitude (18,000 MSL) requires a separate instrument rating, beyond private

* IFR requires a separate instrument rating, beyond private

* sport license and private license both permit carrying a passenger

There's remarkably little difference between, say, a Flight Design CTLSi and a Cessna 150, even though the FAA classifies the former as a LSA but not the latter.

In fact, the CTLSi is significantly faster :shrug:

[1] https://www.flyingmag.com/what-if-i-fail/

[ai_monkey]

I think the difference here is that you can get those ratings with a PPL with no extra medical requirements. IIRC some countries actually require you to get a higher class medical if you want to get an IFR endorsement for your PPL. I think what we're seeing with BasicMed is a step in the right direction to further relax the medical rules for the vast majority of PPL operations (i.e. not flying a cirrus jet at FL300, or a caravan with 10 friends). My main point though was that it is absolutely not the case that FAA bans you from flying if you have a condition they don't like or take meds they don't like. If you don't need a medical certificate (glider with or without a DL, LSA with a DL and no denial on the most recent medical application, among others) and can in good faith attest that your specific medical circumstances (the impact of which you are presumably deeply familiar with) are not a hazard, then you are allowed to hold a license and exercise its privileges. Disclaimer: This interpretation is based on reliable sources but I'm not a lawyer. Don't take my word for it, read the FARs and relevant legal publications or ask a lawyer if you think any of this applies to you.