What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Third class medical /Oshkosh

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pat Stewart

Well Known Member
I've been watching all week for a discussion to start on what was said this week at Oshkosh. Anyone have an update.
 
Thing seem to be happening in congress though. The Pilots Bill of Rights 2 (PBOR2) is in committee, and was in need of cosponsors. I called the 2 Iowa senators on Tuesday, and on Wednesday they signed on. Whatever difference my 10 minutes of time caused, it was worth it!

It now has more than half of the senate as co-sponsors. Thats a good sign.
 
The FAA is a control agency, only they know what is good for the minions. God forbid they use common sense and relinquish control.

Here's my vent.....They won't even follow their own guidelines/rules, if they don't want to. :mad:

Hypertension can be authorized by your AME providing he fills out the appropriate criteria checklist and you meet the limits. I had a BP issue, but treated and meet all the critical items. AME said "all good to go, let me print this out and sign it for you"...except it won't print. Call to FAA....we need to review, expect a response in another 4-6week after we receive the snail mail letter from the AME(which they just got electronically).

what kind of @#%^&**@# BS is this! I haven't flown now since 4/29.
Whew I feel better now...not
 
Thing seem to be happening in congress though. The Pilots Bill of Rights 2 (PBOR2) is in committee, and was in need of cosponsors. I called the 2 Iowa senators on Tuesday, and on Wednesday they signed on. Whatever difference my 10 minutes of time caused, it was worth it!

It now has more than half of the senate as co-sponsors. Thats a good sign.

Yes... and a good mix of (R) and (D).

The identical House bill has over 50 co-sponsors - a call there might be better served if yours isn't on the list.

House list - https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1086/cosponsors

Senate list - https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/571/cosponsors
 
Administrator says he wants to do it right and make a rule change that will not have to be redone. Translation, they want to keep current rule.
 
... Ahmmmm... Hey Gil, you did a lighting plan for me of my current shop space that is totally PERFECT about 8yrs ago. Amazing that there is not a shadow in any corner (bring your sunglasses). We've been talking about how perfect your guidance was for the last 8yrs. So, in the coming months we have to recreate such perfection. Are your tools still current (T8 / T5?)? Sorry for the interruption :).
 
... Ahmmmm... Hey Gil, you did a lighting plan for me of my current shop space that is totally PERFECT about 8yrs ago. Amazing that there is not a shadow in any corner (bring your sunglasses). We've been talking about how perfect your guidance was for the last 8yrs. So, in the coming months we have to recreate such perfection. Are your tools still current (T8 / T5?)? Sorry for the interruption :).

Send an email...
 
I was the one who got Todd Rokita (author of the GA Protection Act) to come to Oshkosh last year and he invited me to Washington back in January. I haven't followed up with him since then but might give it another try. In January it was a "timing" issue. I know he hasn't lost interest. Will post it if I find out anything. Not sure anyone can or will give a straight answer...

Bob
 
There are now 52 co-sponsors of Senate Bill 571 - Pilots Bill of Rights 2. It took me about an hour to look up and send messages to all of the non co-sponsors requesting them to do so. A surprising number of R senators are not yet co-sponsors. If they get 60 it's a done deal. I think it was worth my time.

"Please co-sponsor Senate Bill 571 - the Pilots Bill of Rights 2. This is an important issue because the FAA, after several years of delay, simply will not act on this common sense measure supported by all pilots and our aviation organizations. It has 52 co-sponsors already and is bipartisan."

Many co-sponsors have been added in just the last few days!
Here's the list of co-sponsors. Look at the states with just (1) and contact the other one. It's awkward because of the form-based email system but worth the time.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/571/cosponsors
 
Oh bummer

Unfortunately in addition to adding PBR2 as an amendment to the trans bill, I've also read that the turtle is going to tack an obamacare repeal amendment on the same bill. This will of course guarantee a veto. Which they all know in advance. So I guess we get conned on that end to. After listening to Huerta basically say nothing and blow us off I have to conclude this whole system is off the rails.
 
A new AME in town, who attended the required 1 week physician's AME course in OK this past Spring told me when he returned that the Secretary of Transportation had addressed the group of physicians and among other things said that 3rd class medical reform would never get approval from the Department of Transportation because the Department believes that quote: ?over 90% of GA accidents are in large part due to pilot use of drugs and alcohol.? Too bad as a fellow pilot on our field reminded several of us that NTSB reports simply do not bear this out. And it is certainly unfortunate that the Secretary chose to feed these newly minted AME's such misinformation.

Based on this, and assuming it is accurate, I think we will not see 3rd class medical reform until Congress forces it on the FAA.
 
?over 90% of GA accidents are in large part due to pilot use of drugs and alcohol.?
If true, that would take first prize in the "blatant lies from minor bureaucrats" contest. What a ridiculous statement. And even if it were true -- how exactly would a third class medical change that? I guess listening to these guys is like going to see a sci-fi movie... you just have to suspend disbelief.
Based on this, and assuming it is accurate, I think we will not see 3rd class medical reform until Congress forces it on the FAA.
They (the FAA) have made that perfectly clear over the past several years. While making numerous promises to "look into it", they have actually done absolutely nothing. It's a loss of power that no bureaucracy would tolerate without being forced into it.

Sorry, I guess I'm a little owly this morning. Back to my coffee.
 
When was the last time we had a real aviator to head the FAA? Huerta's background is useless. Might as well put a Fathead behind his desk. Like that show "Undercover Boss", there isn't a CEO in the bunch that can perform their company's lowliest job. Useless.
 
Unfortunately not true.

Apparently 52,000 pilots don't agree with the PBOR2 as ALPA put this letter out back in June. As is typical with these kinds of statements it presents a concern to get the reader excited ("allow medically unfit pilots unfettered access to the national airspace at altitudes up to 18,000 feet, which
also includes commercial airline traffic carrying passengers and cargo") with no data to support how this situation would not be any different from today with all of the "daily self certified" pilots currently occupying that same airspace.

I guess back to my coffee as well.........
 
That really ticks me off....seriously, airline pilots are opposed to eliminating the third class medical?

There's a difference between ALPA and pilots in the trenches.

Always has been so. For years ALPA opposed changing the age 60 rule while most members, at least those I knew favored it.

Membership, what's that? The internal political power base rules.
 
Apparently 52,000 pilots don't agree with the PBOR2 as ALPA put this letter out back in June. As is typical with these kinds of statements it presents a concern to get the reader excited ("allow medically unfit pilots unfettered access to the national airspace at altitudes up to 18,000 feet, which
also includes commercial airline traffic carrying passengers and cargo") with no data to support how this situation would not be any different from today with all of the "daily self certified" pilots currently occupying that same airspace.

I guess back to my coffee as well.........

The problem is the claim. To say that all 52,000 airline pilots in that organization agree with the position stated is obviously false, just as the AME organization claiming that all AME's agree with it's position is false. The key is to get the legislators' attention and make it clear that the ALPA letter is a lie. There are a lot of airline pilots on this forum; what say you? If you disagree with your association, how about a petition actually signed by ALPA members who disagree with their association's position?
 
Same as AMA

My primary care physician (not an AME but holds a Private Pilot Certificate) informed me that the American Medical Association represents only 17% of medical doctors. The AMA opposes the 3rd Class Medical Exemption.
 
There's a difference between ALPA and pilots in the trenches.

Always has been so. For years ALPA opposed changing the age 60 rule while most members, at least those I knew favored it.

Membership, what's that? The internal political power base rules.

Yeah, its true. I'm retired, but I would have voted to eliminate the 3rd class in a heartbeat. Then there's ALPA "leadership". Its true, they were against raising the retirement age to 65. Ticked me off too.
 
My Uncle

I've known a few airline pilots including my uncle. Only a few, I admit - and they were remarkable in that they had the four following opinions:

* they characterized our general av aircraft as 'puddle jumpers'.
* they had no respect for us or our sport.
* they hated their flying jobs - characterizing themselves as 'flying bus drivers'.
* they didn't want to learn about general aviation.

My uncle had no respect for any aircraft that had less that four engine kerosene burners. Hopefully that doesn't represent ALPA members now - maybe the ALPA membership will speak up.

Thankfully that doesn't represent the membership here on the VAF.
 
I've known a few airline pilots including my uncle. Only a few, I admit - and they were remarkable in that they had the four following opinions:

* they characterized our general av aircraft as 'puddle jumpers'.
* they had no respect for us or our sport.
* they hated their flying jobs - characterizing themselves as 'flying bus drivers'.
* they didn't want to learn about general aviation.

My uncle had no respect for any aircraft that had less that four engine kerosene burners. Hopefully that doesn't represent ALPA members now - maybe the ALPA membership will speak up.

Thankfully that doesn't represent the membership here on the VAF.

Your uncle was typical of guys who fell into aviation by accident. They generally were unenthusiastic, hated the job, and could not wait to retire - and no fun to fly with.

And then there were guys who said I can't believe they are paying me to do this.

Many, like myself would show up at OSH, there was an airline tent where guys would sign in and try to connect with other like minded aviators.

I remember one trip with a long lay over in St. Louis, we rented a car a made a shopping trip to Wicks. Carried a lot of important stuff around for the next three days until the trip was over....those were good days. I carried my LEZ build manual for good reading in a motel.

Not all airline pilots are or were like your uncle. Some of us had a lot of fun. :)
 
Last edited:
52,000 minus 1

That really ticks me off....seriously, airline pilots are opposed to eliminating the third class medical?

Not true, Dan. I can only speak for myself, but I have no problems with the proposed changes to the 3rd class medical certification. I don't know why ALPA took the position it did on this issue, particularly now, and if an inquiry were made, I would be surprised to receive a completely honest and truthful answer from them. David is right, there is a wide gulf between ALPA national and the rank and file and at my carrier, that distance is increasing.

J Baker
RV8 Finishing
(Delta MD88 driver)
 
Say again-

+1 David.
As a FLAP and a retired airline pilot; I love to fly and think the 3rd class should be fixed.
The FAA punted on Age 65 and is punting on this too.
Bureaucrat Rule #1: "Make no decisions and you'll never be wrong"
 
I have a lot of disagreements with ALPA national, but I am in agreement with this one. I do not support elimination of the third class medical. total redo on it, yes, bring it up to modern medical standards, yes, but not throw it out.
I have no intention of arguing it here, I know I am outnumbered but I have seen the people that are still allowed to drive in florida ( i also support tougher standards to drive) and do not want people flying without at least proving they are not blind. the problem being that medical standards to the DMV very from state to state, and are not enforced in a lot of states.

If ALPA feels that it is not in their best interest then they should oppose it. I hate to break it to some, but GA is a safety threat to them, I hate to count the number of RA's I have had with VFR GA traffic in the clouds.

bob burns
N82RB RV-4
 
Well, current and former airline pilots...it's crunch time. Are you going to call your legislator and call BS on the ALPA letter, or shrug and say "not my problem"?
 
If ALPA feels that it is not in their best interest then they should oppose it. I hate to break it to some, but GA is a safety threat to them, I hate to count the number of RA's I have had with VFR GA traffic in the clouds.

Bob, I respect your right to express your opinion. GA is a safety threat eh? It's good to know where we really stand with the ALPA professionals.

You want an opinion? I think the third class medical requirement kills a lot more pilots than midairs ever could. A high percentage of GA pilots (and more than a few Part 121 pilots) hesitate to obtain the regular medical checks and procedures that would save lives.
 
I hate to break it to some, but GA is a safety threat to them, I hate to count the number of RA's I have had with VFR GA traffic in the clouds.

bob burns
N82RB RV-4

And a third class medical every 2 years is going to do what to help prevent this?
 
Bob, I respect your right to express your opinion. GA is a safety threat eh? It's good to know where we really stand with the ALPA professionals.

You want an opinion? I think the third class medical requirement kills a lot more pilots than midairs ever could. A high percentage of GA pilots (and more than a few Part 121 pilots) hesitate to obtain the regular medical checks and procedures that would save lives.

Amen! Amen! Ducking the medical radar is what enabled the progression of the disease that almost killed me!
 
dan you are right. but bringing the medical standards up to modern standards is what needs to be done. a lot of disqualifying conditions need to be eliminated and updated but just tossing it out is not the answer. there are to many people on the roads that should not be medically driving but they are. do you thing it will do GA any good when someone with 20/400 vision crashes into a house.

and as i stated GA is a safety threat. most RA's are from VFR GA aircraft being where they should not have been. I have had two near misses, both with GA aircraft. one while on the ILS13R at DFW a RV-6 went under me about 100 feet. yes he was in the class b without a clearance. the other was a 310 in the clouds VFR. he popped out of a clouds just as I got an RA on him.

bob burns

rv-4 N82RB
 
The third class medical accomplishes exactly zero.

There are many people that like bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake. It doesn't matter to them if it is accomplishing anything, or how much it costs, or what happens when it goes wrong and there is no recourse. They like it just to give themselves a comfortable feeling that someone else is in charge and they don't have to think for themselves. And, that other people can't be trusted with thinking for themselves either.

Usually, however, such people are not pilots.
 
Facts vs feelings

I bet a bunch of FAA folks curse the day that allowed airplanes to be flown without a medical. Pilots were supposed to be falling out ofthe sky right and left. Now that the data suggests otherwise, the arguement must now turn to an emotional and feelings based approach. I expect to hear more tear drop stories before this is over. Not being callous, but if the deciding authourties would just make data-based decisions rather than feel good decisions, our world would be a lot better place. My .02.
Cj
 
. . . and as i stated GA is a safety threat.

bob burns

rv-4 N82RB

Do we all understand now? Some professional pilots and their union believe GA is a safety threat. Some officials in the FAA think this as do their bosses at TSA and their bosses at Homeland Security. These groups will do everything they can to reduce the number of people flying around the country without the "proper" training and vetting.

Donald Trump will become emperor of the known universe before we see meaningful 3rd class medical reform.
 
The third class medical accomplishes exactly zero.

There are many people that like bureaucracy for bureaucracy's sake. It doesn't matter to them if it is accomplishing anything, or how much it costs, or what happens when it goes wrong and there is no recourse. They like it just to give themselves a comfortable feeling that someone else is in charge and they don't have to think for themselves. And, that other people can't be trusted with thinking for themselves either.

Usually, however, such people are not pilots.

More flying pilots and flying airplanes means more work for the FAA. They get paid regardless. Why would FAA employees want to work harder with more pilots flying?

Also, more flying pilots and little planes inevitably will mean more incidents. FAA gets pressure from the executive branch, Congress, the press with the occurrence of incidents. Less planes and pilots means fewer incidents. Why would the FAA bring more pressures upon themselves?

The FAA will never willingly allow the numbers of pilots and little airplanes to increase in "their" airspace system by letting go of the 3rd class medical. The only way it will be accomplished is though congressional action. Better call your congressmen!!
 
Last edited:
Bob I respect your right to your opinion and your desire to not debate the issue here. Twice, however, you recommend bringing the third class medical up to modern medical standards. Can you give us an example of something you feel is in need of modernization?

FWIW. I am a physician not an AME. I am in favor of elimination of the third class medical. Incapacitating events are terribly unpredictable.
 
Amen! Amen! Ducking the medical radar is what enabled the progression of the disease that almost killed me!
Ditto. If I hadn't been worried about the medical cert I'd have called the **** doctor and avoided an MI.
 
... there are to many people on the roads that should not be medically driving but they are. do you thing it will do GA any good when someone with 20/400 vision crashes into a house.

bob burns

rv-4 N82RB

Verification of ability is accomplished through a bfr, not a medical. The medical is useless, certainly for class 3, probably for class 2 and 1 as well.

Tim
 
Professional airline pilot, and I disagree with Bob Burns.

Changing 3rd class medical requirements does nothing to solve NMAC's or knuckleheads flying IMC without a clearance. Those are more appropriately enforcement issues pursued through means the FAA already has at its disposal.

Remember this accident:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/?berlingen_mid-air_collision

Happened in Class A airspace, at FL360...so what should we mandate when a controller runs two aircraft together? Make RVSM go away? Mandate 50 mile in-trail spacing? The point being, risk comes from multiple sources, picking one to blame doesn't get you off the hook on the others. IMO, isolating one threat over others as ALPA has done just screams out bad (or worse, lazy) analysis.

I am caught up in the maw of the FAA's CAMI on a sleep apnea issue, and they are a bureaucracy run amok. To the point that, with my current sleep study results, the CAMI dictates I still use a CPAP machine, while were I to be on Medicare (run by the same Federal Government) I wouldn't qualify for reimbursement for one, I'm below their threshold of the definition of sleep apnea.

How out of whack is that?

Anything that will pull the teeth on an out of control, ineffective agency like the CAMI is a GOOD thing and I support any effort in that direction, 100%.

Thank God ALPA does not represent me.

Rob Schroer
 
dan you are right. but bringing the medical standards up to modern standards is what needs to be done. a lot of disqualifying conditions need to be eliminated and updated but just tossing it out is not the answer. there are to many people on the roads that should not be medically driving but they are. do you thing it will do GA any good when someone with 20/400 vision crashes into a house.

and as i stated GA is a safety threat. most RA's are from VFR GA aircraft being where they should not have been. I have had two near misses, both with GA aircraft. one while on the ILS13R at DFW a RV-6 went under me about 100 feet. yes he was in the class b without a clearance. the other was a 310 in the clouds VFR. he popped out of a clouds just as I got an RA on him.

bob burns

rv-4 N82RB

And both of those guys had expired/revoked 3rd class medicals, right? No? Then why bring it up when we're discussing 3rd class medicals?

A couple of decades ago, when in-cockpit traffic alerts were brand new, I attended a Rutan forum at OSH. He had an airline pilot with him who told us that the majority of their near-misses happened due to ATC directing the two a/c at each other. Was that due to the 3rd class medical issue, too?

If the ALPA (or any other alphabet soup agency) can show data that proves *medical issues* of Private Pilots are causing problems for airliners, let's see it.
 
Maybe Bob Burns would like to pay the two grand out of pocket, drive the 400 miles, and spend the two days it takes me to to get my medical EVERY year. Bet he'd flap a different tune. Last thing I need is more modern standards. That means more tests, time, dollars, and chances to fail.
 
Cheap shot?

Sort of a cheap shot DanH.
There is plenty of finger pointing to go around. Not all ALPA pilots are anti-light airplane prima-donnas. We are confident professionals, some are jerks! But then I've put up with more than one private pilot clogging up the frequency with 'chit-chat' or screwing up the pattern costing my employer several thousand pounds of fuel going around. How about the inconsiderate aviators who blind you with their landing lights and strobes while holding short.
We do have higher standards; 1st Class physicals and flight checks every 6 months. Failing either can cost you your job. When was the last time you had an unannounced FAA check ride? We fly in ALL weather to CATIIIb mins. 99% of the time we are going, regardless. The questions are how much fuel and what is plan 'B'. . . and 'C'. You always have the option to sit it out.
Lets drop the idea that all airline pilots are jerks and only light airplane pilot are true aviators.
BTW, I have written my legislators and complained to ALPA.
 
Why do some of the airline pilots here think the airspace is any more theirs than ours? I fly in and out of BOI. I have had to do an extended downwind for an airline doing a straight in approach or wait at the threshold for them to land just as much as they do. It is MY airport just like it is theirs.

Every "incident" posted here about GA pilots making a mistake or tying up the radio has nothing to do with having a medical or not. How about the pilot with the class 1 who flew the airline into the mountain? Did it help?

If anyone has data showing having a medical keeps you from chatting on the radio or having a close call with an airliner, lets see it. If you don't have any data, then is the reason you are pushing for the medical to stay is to cut the number of GA pilots?
 
There is not, nor has there ever been, any shred of evidence to show that the third-class medical exam has a measurable effect on accident rates and safety in light airplanes. To the contrary, the medically-related accident rate for gliders and now LSAs shows no statistical difference to the rate for the rest of light GA. No spate of medically-caused accidents drove the adoption of the third-class medical, and no findings from those non-existent accidents drove the criteria for the exam--it was simply someone's rectally-extracted idea of what constituted "good health", imposed for no other reason than because the military and airlines had a medical exam so by God, private pilots will too.

If we really want to do something about safety, why doesn't the FAA take all the millions of dollars of taxpayer money and all the hundreds of thousands of man-hours spent on making sure light airplane pilots can turn their heads and cough, and use that instead to do something meaningful about stall/spin and other loss-of-control accidents--you know, one of the largest causes of accidents--beyond just wringing their hands and admonishing pilots to just "be better pilots"?
 
Fantastic discussion however I think it's time to re-focus on those that will finish the push with Congress. It alarmed me last week to learn that both EAA and AOPA were not at OSH with the largest open event talking about the third class medical. Most of us on this forum have been writing to our leaders and responding to EAA/AOPA with their requested contributions to carry on the fight. I am hearing that both were virtually quiet at the largest GA event in the world, my question is why. Time to light the fire under both organizations again. [ed. Agreed. But use THEIR discussion boards for that. www.vansairforce.net/rules.htm (#3). dr]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is not, nor has there ever been, any shred of evidence to show that the third-class medical exam has a measurable effect on accident rates and safety in light airplanes. To the contrary, the medically-related accident rate for gliders and now LSAs shows no statistical difference to the rate for the rest of light GA. No spate of medically-caused accidents drove the adoption of the third-class medical, and no findings from those non-existent accidents drove the criteria for the exam--it was simply someone's rectally-extracted idea of what constituted "good health", imposed for no other reason than because the military and airlines had a medical exam so by God, private pilots will too.

If we really want to do something about safety, why doesn't the FAA take all the millions of dollars of taxpayer money and all the hundreds of thousands of man-hours spent on making sure light airplane pilots can turn their heads and cough, and use that instead to do something meaningful about stall/spin and other loss-of-control accidents--you know, one of the largest causes of accidents--beyond just wringing their hands and admonishing pilots to just "be better pilots"?

Having been a USAF flight surgeon, I'm sure many of the medical requirements originated from experience in the "old days": the stresses of flight in high performance aircraft (i.e. pulling G's), high altitude without pressurization, extremes of temperature, noise, vibration etc. It made sense for military aviation (still does to a significant extent) and the early days of commercial aviation. But so much has changed in terms of both medical knowledge and the flight environment itself that the entire system (speaking mostly to commercial aviation) makes little sense. Even the more comprehensive First/Second class medicals do not capture/prevent all episodes of in-flight incapacitation (heart attack, stroke, first seizure, etc). That's why there are still two pilots up there. A substantial (majority?) portion of episodes of failed in-flight performance issues are due to factors that are not necessarily captured (unless the pilot is willing to admit the issues) during a medical evaluation - alcohol/substance abuse, depression, fatigue, etc. I wonder how many of these pilots would be better off in a less-punitive system of self-reporting, self-certification (as others have mentioned regarding usual medical issues).

Even when I was a relatively naive young USAF flight surgeon, it was frustrating to eliminate an outstanding pilot or flight school candidate due to some minor issue like slightly substandard vision (easily correctible) or some other trivial issue. (I think the military has eased off on the vision requirements) Aviators would avoid the flight surgeon with potentially significant aliments (cancer in one case I was involved in) because they saw the flight surgeon as a barrier to their career. Conversely, "conscripted" aviators who never wanted to fly in the first place would keep visiting until something was found.

I'm convinced that some standards exist as the most conservative possible option - if you're not sure, then "no fly". And once a rule/set of rules is in place it's almost impossible to change it based on actual evidence: as you point out the glider/LSA rules (mostly older pilots these days) and experience outside the US has not shown any risk attached to relaxing the third class requirements. If pilots knew their flying avocation/career would not be at risk based on self-reporting and taking care of their basic health, would we all be safer?
 
Last edited:
Sort of a cheap shot DanH.
There is plenty of finger pointing to go around. Not all ALPA pilots are anti-light airplane prima-donnas.

Jim, no cheap shot intended. I remain astounded to hear GA called a safety hazard by a pilot. As for the job difficulties, nobody knows better than fellow pilots...with and without stripes.

ALPA is losing a lot of friends over this one.

BTW, I have written my legislators and complained to ALPA.

Thank you. Hopefully the airline pilot community can get their organization under control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top