[N62XS]

What the alphabets should be doing is paying their [ed. word here removed by dr (rules)] lobbyist and [ed. word here removed by dr (rules)] to convince the Democrooks and Republiconvicts to allow us honest pilots to use a state driver's license to serve as a Class III medical.

Why will this not happen anytime soon? Money, power and control!

It would result in the following:

1. Loss of government jobs in Oklahoma City and Washington, DC(Smaller government is a regular campaign lie, isn't it?)

2. Loss of income for AME doctors(Making flying less expensive for the little guy?)

3. Reduction in FAA/Government control in our hobby and our lives(Boyer said in the article Doug posted that "only 0.25 percent of all general aviation accidents were caused by medical incapacitation, and only nine accidents in nine years were caused by the incapacitation of a pilot flying with a fraudulent medical certificate." That is an average of one a year during the past decade, proving that Class III self certification is not a threat to public safety!

Frankly, if you falsify your medical, it will void your insurance coverage in the case of a damage claim and you would either be stupid to buy the insurance or stupid to get a Class III medical certificate, or both! Waste of money on both fronts. I would speculate that a pilot without a license and medical would face less legal action than a pilot with a license trying to "forget" a case of kidney stones or hypertension or viagra. If the alphabets are unwilling to fight for this type of common sense benefit for pilots, maybe they will fight to for more money for AME doctors by allowing them wide ranging latitude to BE A DOCTOR and perform all but the most serious evaluations/approvals in the field.

AOPA should partner with us on this issue, NOT WITH CONGRESS! I am sure Phil Boyer is a good person, but so was EVE before she met satan! Phil, if you lay down with dirty dogs you WILL GET FLEAS(Sorry RD, but he does not have fleas)! REMEMBER who pays the money for your salary. IT IS NOT CONGRESS OR THE FAA!

For the record, if it ever affects me, I will fly my Ercoupe 415C/D under LSA and fly the RV-10 and RV-8 with my pilot wife or pilot son as PIC. More than one way to stay legal even in the face of alphabets apathetic activity or goverment business as usual.

FWIW. Good night.

 

[grover]

same story. . .

similar to NRA and their position on "working with" ATF. when you mix clean water with dirty water, what do you get? dirty water. it will come to a point when pilots will simply elect to disregard medicals and maybe even licenses and take their chances with getting caught. just a matter of when that threshold will be reached, it seems.

 

[aelkins]

I agree... sorta...

Although I'm not quite as politically passionate as you, I do fully agree that a Class III medical license should be replaced with a valid drivers license. (mirrored by the LSA stipulations)
My thought process is as follows.. Past history of accidents caused by medical defieciencies are virtually unheard of. Also, there are certainly several cases of getting waivers of borderline deficiencies. But, the strongest point is that the public safety is effectively the same whether the pilot is PP or LSA rated. (as far as accident related to medical deficiency)

The bottom line really appears to be revenue.
(moreso for FAA jobs/control than AMEs, as the AMEs will still have the Class I & II business... And honestly, my AME doesn't make that much $$$ on my bi-annual.)
Just my opinion..
I'd welcome the opinion of a AME on the Class III medical debate.
They may shed some additional light that we may be missing...
Good day...

 

[fstringham7a]

RE: 3rd class notion

Robby and all you other clear thinking souls.

Good friend just received is 3rd class medical. About two months after being considered a very healthy 45 year old he said to his wife, why don't don't we take the RV4 up for a fun ride today. Fate intervened. He was called to work.Lucky or not for his wife after he got to work and was showing a model home to prospective client he died of a massive heart attack.

What did I learn from this; 3rd class medicals will not stop all potential medical problems associated to flying our planes. ( I know the gov FAA would say the low rate of accidents caused by medical probems is low because of the wonderfully well conceived medical monitoring program................ya right). Bad stuff happens sometimes in very tenuious situations.

My solution is: 3rd class medical traded in for divers lic. To satisfy myself of my ability as well as the physical/mental accuity to continue to fly with advancing age not to mention the knowledge that others are like wise fit I would suggest annual flight reviews mandated by the insurance folks and not the gov.

Finally I know a few of my flying friends are flying naked. They are never going to get a medical. I believe that no matter the system there will always be the rebel that will give the man the single digit salute!!!!!

I have really grown to dislike/distrust/ the gov and their menuions (FAA)

Lets begin the fight for what is right. Yes that includes getting our own brothers of the alphbet soup (EAA, AOPA) to go to bat for us!!!!!!!!!!

Frank @ SGU RV7A

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

There are some people who shouldn't be flying. Or --at the very least -- if they're collecting Social Security *disability* payments for a disqualifying condition, maybe they should be given a choice -- give up the money, or give up the flying. Eveyrone hates the "man." But they still cash the checks.

Fraud is fraud, and that's what Oberstar -- and there's no better friend to aviation in Congress than Jim Oberstar -- was focusing on when he released the report a few weeks ago.

I pay a lot of money in taxes and I'm happy to have some of the services the government provides (especially the airports in Rep. Oberstar's district (g)).

I see no reason why we should look the other way when someone is ripping off our money just because he has a pilot's certificate in his wallet.

Substitute "poor person" in the I.G. report for "pilot," and I bet we have a whole different discussion.

 

[fstringham7a]

RE:Agree

There are some people who shouldn't be flying. Or --at the very least -- if they're collecting Social Security *disability* payments for a disqualifying condition, maybe they should be given a choice -- give up the money, or give up the flying.

Fraud is fraud.

Bob I totally agree but there are a few that are going to go against any policy that is an attempt to protect them from themselfs. The scary things is they are in the air as we speak putting others in jeaporady. In other words there will always be those few that put the group in danger. No rule is going to stop them!!!! This fact does not change my notion of my reality that the gov...FAA...spends far to much time, money, and effort stopping many flyable healthy, prudent, law abiding individuals from enjoying this wonderful thing we call aviation. So I go back to my thought which is trade the 3rd class for Drivers Lic and insurance mandated annual flight reviews.

Frank @ SGU RV7A "NDY"

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

Perhaps no rule is going to stop them, but one of Boyer's ideas is to have better data sharing across agencies. So if I guy is collecting disability benefits,that cross check is going to reveal that he's flying.

So one of two things is happening there (1) He's lying to get the disability benefits or (2) he's lying to keep flying.

If he kills himself while flying, then when he goes down in flames his insurance company doesn't pay and he opens his estate up to significant damage.

If he's lying to get the government benefits, then he risks going to jail or saddling his estate with a huge lien.

Either way, a guy with judgment THAT bad, isn't exactly proving to me he's capable of exhibiting the good judgment required to fly.

What I *would* like to see the FAA do is rewrite an archaic "disqualifying condition" structure. For example, the ban on anyone with bipolar disorder from flying harkens back to an age (and we're not talking long ago ) when anything classified as a "mental illness" was all grouped in one category. We know more know, and people understand that there are all flavors of bipolar disorder as there is with anything else labeled a "mental illness."

But there it is in black and white as a disqualifying condition: no "ifs" "ands" or "buts."

The net effect of this is pilots don't seek help when they have problems for fear that it will be diagnosed a disqualifying condition.

I have no problem with rules designed to keep hazards out of the sky. I have Meniere's Disease (vertigo). I grounded myself and told the FAA and now it's up to me to prove I'm capable of flying again. While I can have a driver's license and I could -- under some of the proposed scenarios -- fly with a driver's license, I've not met an advocate of this system yet who has said it's a good idea for me to fly with them in closed formation.

Yes, as I indicated, there are probably capable flyers caught up in the system. And, yes, the system should be made easier for those people to fly. The devil in the details, though, is it shouldn't be made easier for those who would commit fraud to obtain government benefits to fly, not should it be easier for people who shouldn't be flying, to fly.

I like your idea of annual insurance reviews. But I'm a renter, I don't deal with insurance companies.

I'm a VERY honest guy. I'm a very law-abiding guy. But I do admit it's tempting to lie on my FAA medical application every other year. I don't, but it's tempting. So I know lots of folks with less scrupples than me do it. And I guess that's up to them.

But the ones that get government checks for their "illnesses"? Perp walk.

 

[vmirv8bldr]

Law of unintended consequences

At face value, I like the idea of Driver's License and insurance mandated annual flight reviews, but I can't help but think of the unintended consequences.

For example, insurance mandated flight reviews would likely lead to.....physical examinations, ever increasing in frequency as our age increases. Why don't they do it now? Because the FAA handles that for them which also lowers premiums slightly, since they don't have to manage that part of the risk portfolio. I'm fine with the 3rd class physical every three years. Just like driving a car, senility prevents dangerous drivers from taking themselves off the road. They're not just a danger to themselves, but also to the family of six they crush when hitting the gas instead of the brake. (happens all too frequently.)

As for the Driver's Licenses, they're issued by the state. Each state is free to determine the examination frequency and issuance requirements, provided they meet federal minumums. Your PPL is issued by the federal government, hence the conflict. Nationalize the driver's license? No thanks. States handle that better than I believe the fed can.

But they're good enough for LSA right? Right. LSA's are also restricted in performance and gross weight to make them primarily leisure recreational vehicles and NOT transportation vehicles.

Based on those potential outcomes, I say keep it as is.

Punish the fraudsters. Fly safely.

 

[cytoxin]

i agree, but the thought wont be quiet

you all mention how few accidents have occured...correct? hmmm then maybe it has worked, very well, infact almost perfectly. im sure many folks that have no buisiness flying would be flying. just like those that will fly LSA.
the risk maybe small but i think if this issue is pushed and to many comparrisons are made to driving a 7500lb suv on I 40 at 80 mph will eventually do more harm than good. what we will actually end up with is a medical for a drivers license. c'mon you know how these politicians heads work. it will be "hmmm, thanks Mr. peon, glad you pointed that out, now medicals for all the auto drivers as well." just like the comercial truck industry. IMHO people always underestimate their conditions. if you cant pass a third class medical, really, you dont need to fly.it is the threshold between bout to die and dead.
oh by the way i go for my medical tommorow i was really sick a while back and could very easily fail. i ride a bike 30 miles @20 mph 3 times a week. have normal BP and no meds for over 2 years.no limitations at all.but the history sounds concerning. when i go to any flyin i see people so out of shape it makes me wonder how they could get a medical.
if i lie its 250,000$ and up to 5 years. i wont lie at those costs but would just fly expired if i had to. and no, after building for 4 + years i dont have to fly.

in my state the license renews every ten years and when i was almost cripled, wearing a knee brace, ankle brace and cane i got the ten year ticket.

 

[keen9a]

Anyone wanna fill in the rest of us on what AOPA is supporting that we should be so angry about. Sure I'd like a driver's license medical, but I'm not a big fan of fraud either. So someone got a link to AOPA's position that we're talking about? Nothing wrong with venting a bit, but if you want to get people on your side of the issue I'm gonna need to know what the issue really is.

 

[Yukon]

Minimum Standards

Robby, a private pilot on a third class medical can load up a Cessna 206 with 6 people and depart into a 200 foot overcast. Tell me why he shouldn't have his blood pressure and glucose checked every two years? The third class medical has all but the lowest standards possible for flight. What's the problem?

 

[vmirv8bldr]

Anyone wanna fill in the rest of us on what AOPA is supporting that we should be so angry about. Sure I'd like a driver's license medical, but I'm not a big fan of fraud either. So someone got a link to AOPA's position that we're talking about? Nothing wrong with venting a bit, but if you want to get people on your side of the issue I'm gonna need to know what the issue really is.

http://www.aopa.org

Top of the page...

 

[grimr2]

Knee jerk reaction....

45 out of 40,000?

That sounds like the number of dishonest folks you would expect to find. One could assume that if the State of CA. was "successful in it's prosecution" that all 45 of the pilots were actually continuing to fly while on disability. But, you know what assuming does......

I would like to know the actual details of the case. Were all 45 current, were they actively engaged in flying, when did they go on disability vs. when they received their pilot's license.....etc.

 

[aelkins]

LSA vs PP

But they're good enough for LSA right? Right. LSA's are also restricted in performance and gross weight to make them primarily leisure recreational vehicles and NOT transportation vehicles.

Based on those potential outcomes, I say keep it as is.

It's a safe bet that any innocent bystander at the scene of the accident really doesn't care whether or not the pilot was LSA or PP. (performance and gross weight is not a factor at the crash site). Nor was whether the pilot visited an AME, or DMV examiner.
In either case, it's the PIC responsibility to ground himself if he sees fit. Maybe I'm twisted but, I really see no end-result difference between LSA and PP when it comes to medical requirements.
As for insurance mandating medical/flight reviews, that's totally within their discretion. The are selling a service and have the right to require such. However, the pilot also has the right to shop around in the event an insurance provider requires unreasonable terms. (Unfortunately, the FAA is a monopoly leaving us with 2 choices.. 'comply.. or... just fly'..
The debate continues..

 

[Low n Slow]

Robby, a private pilot on a third class medical can load up a Cessna 206 with 6 people and depart into a 200 foot overcast. Tell me why he shouldn't have his blood pressure and glucose checked every two years? The third class medical has all but the lowest standards possible for flight. What's the problem?

...IMHO people always underestimate their conditions. if you cant pass a third class medical, really, you dont need to fly.it is the threshold between bout to die and dead...

If pilots were actually falling out of the sky often enough to indicate any sort of problem with flying without a 3rd class medical, it would have showed up decades ago in the soaring community. It hasn?t and it won?t.

I never liked Boyer and this only confirms my impression. I miss the leadership under John Baker as I don?t think he would have ever come up with this cr_p.

 

[justinmg]

3. Reduction in FAA/Government control in our hobby and our lives(Boyer said in the article Doug posted that "only 0.25 percent of all general aviation accidents were caused by medical incapacitation, and only nine accidents in nine years were caused by the incapacitation of a pilot flying with a fraudulent medical certificate." That is an average of one a year during the past decade, proving that Class III self certification is not a threat to public safety!

FWIW. Good night.

Clearly Hard Knox Feels strongly about this, but quoting "statistics" is unhelpful, and often misleading.
As a pilot and a doctor, I feel able to give a sensible opinion.

To me 0.25% sounds like a LOT to me. I dont know what the FAA definition of accident is here. The majority of accidents in the UK are minor and result in no significant injury (cessna / pipers porpoising and collapsing the nosegear etc). When medical "incapacitation" occurs, unless there is a pilot in the RHS, then death of all onboard is likely. If 1 in every 400 accidents (0.25%) were to result in death of all on board I would think this is a big worry. Is this 0.25% of fatal accidents (much better). Like I say statistics can be misleading.

I treat all sorts of patients. Trust me: a straight forward driving licence will not cut it. It takes no account of fitness for altitude. No one says you need to be superfit, but basic fitness is essential.

Adjusting the law affecting 99% of law abiding people, because 1% may be fraudulent is stupid, as the fraudsters will not take note of the new rules. The law can not modify the behaviour of criminals.

In the UK we have a compromise medical. If the GP can sign you off for fitness equivalent to drive a heavy goods vehicle, then you can get a basic recreational licence. We have had the system for 3 years and so far all seems well.

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

As for the Driver's Licenses, they're issued by the state. Each state is free to determine the examination frequency and issuance requirements, provided they meet federal minumums. Your PPL is issued by the federal government, hence the conflict. Nationalize the driver's license? No thanks. States handle that better than I believe the fed can.

If it weren't for my FAA medical exam when I was learning to fly (this would be around '97), I wouldn't have known just how bad my eyesight was. But I flunked the original test. Funny, I got a driver's license fine. But the fact of the matter is, I couldn't see very well. And since I couldn't see very well, I didn't know I couldn't see very well because, well, I couldn't see it.

 

[fliier]

I'm trying to figure out your logic

I don't get why folks are arguing that a valid Driver's license should substitute for a medical certificate. There's no medical component to getting a Driver's license, other than an easy reading of an eye chart.

What am I missing here?

John Allen

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

45 out of 40,000?

According to my calculation, the number is actually 3200. According to the report, 8% of the 40,000 pilots surveyed were getting Social Security disability benefits.

That's an astonishingly high number, and certainly much higher than the 45 mentioned here.

There are 625,000 pilots who hold medicals. If the number of those surveyed holds up, that would mean 50,000 people are getting Social Security disability benefits.

Figure a monthly disability check of $578, that's $28.9 million a month in fraud.

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

I don't get why folks are arguing that a valid Driver's license should substitute for a medical certificate. There's no medical component to getting a Driver's license, other than an easy reading of an eye chart.

What am I missing here?

John Allen

Personally, I'd like to see all drivers required to pass a driving test every two years, and prove that they're medically fit to drive.

 

[Mike S]

I don't get why folks are arguing that a valid Driver's license should substitute for a medical certificate. There's no medical component to getting a Driver's license, other than an easy reading of an eye chart.

What am I missing here?

John Allen

My opinion only, but in both cases you are operating a motorized piece of equipment that can kill you, your passengers, and innocent bystanders, as well as cause a lot of damage to inanimate objects.

Mike

 

[Tom Maxwell]

Sellout???

The original title of this post was "Sellout..." and the discussion has kind of shifted to the validity of an FAA medical certificate.

To go back to the original post, I would like to comment on whether or not AOPA's actions constitute a "sellout" or perhaps may be better characterized as "damage control." Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Clearly, well at least to me, what precipitated the present actions is the recognition that some portion of the pilot ranks either lied on their medical to cover up a disability or lied on the disability application for the sake of securing fraudulent benefits. Either one is not a good thing and is very difficult to defend.

It doesn't take too much thought to consider that a purely FAA solution to the issue may not be a good thing for GA in general. Therefore, what is a GA advocate suppose to do?

1) Sit back and wait to see what the FAA comes up with and then either fight it or hope it will be acceptable?

2) Acknowledge the problem and proactively work with the FAA to address the issue in the least restrictive manner?

I will admit that I have not read up on the recommendation and therefore am responding from a position of ignorance. But I tend to believe that a "we vs them," "all or nothing," "take it or leave it," "if you aren't 100% with us you are against us," mentality is seldom productive.

IMO, AOPA and Mr. Boyer do a fairly good job of representing GA. I am sure there are much more pleasant issues that the staff at AOPA would rather be addressing, but right now GA has it's proverbial tata in a wringer, and I for one am thankful we have a staff working to minimize the bruising.

So I think "Sellout" may be too strong of a word. I am confident the decision to offer an option was not the sole decision of Mr. Boyer so I think it unfair to single him out as a Benedict Arnold. I am also confident that a lot of smart individuals including lawyers and political experts were involved in the decision. I choose to give them the benefit of the doubt and surely trust them to look out for the little GA guy more so than the folks WE elected to Congress and the White House.

 

[Yukon]

How's that 7A coming along Tom?

 

[N62XS]

Symantics?

IMO, AOPA and Mr. Boyer do a fairly good job of representing GA. I am sure there are much more pleasant issues that the staff at AOPA would rather be addressing, but right now GA has it's proverbial tata in a wringer, and I for one am thankful we have a staff working to minimize the bruising.

So I think "Sellout" may be too strong of a word. I am confident the decision to offer an option was not the sole decision of Mr. Boyer so I think it unfair to single him out as a Benedict Arnold. I am also confident that a lot of smart individuals including lawyers and political experts were involved in the decision. I choose to give them the benefit of the doubt and surely trust them to look out for the little GA guy more so than the folks WE elected to Congress and the White House.

Tom:

While the premise of your post is correct that this as most threads gradually deviate from the original topic, my intent was to express my opinion and draw attention to what I perceive as another "compromise" by AOPA, on our behalf with the FAA. In the article, AOPA quotes statistics that do not jive and makes assumptions that a fire is present without fuel, oxygen or an ignition source. AOPA is big business, supports the big business in GA and is supported with major funding by big business GA. AOPA employs lawyers(different breed than attorneys) and lobbyists to negotiate, cajole and work the DC system in the same manner as drug companies and oil companies. These are the individuals you refer to as "lawyers and political experts". I refer to them as crooks or money changers. They are the merchants of the positions of large companies and special interest groups of which AOPA and EAA are just two of many that do not often understand, care or share the position of rank and file Americans. AOPA will eventually sell small weekend GA down the river and have the hobbyists bear an increasingly dispoportionate share of the bloated FAA budget, to the benefit of big business GA and airlines. Mr. Boyer should be attempting to reduce the size and budget of the FAA to the benefit of all. Included in this process would be a Class III DL medical, reducing the cost of hobbyist GA and eliminating the need for some FAA Aeromedical positions.

By rearing I was raised to accept few things at face value, a natural cynic or skeptic. By practice I am a Libertarian Christian that believes government is too large, that everyone is entitled to an opinion and as long as voiced without a hidden agenda should be heard. I do not profess to have the answers, but have tons of ideas. I find that every now and then one of my ideas has merit, but I usually throw most of them out to see if any float and, more importantly, stimulate dialog.

I will continue to pay my AOPA and EAA dues and vote Libertarian so I may continue to voice my opinion and even respectfully tell you that I think you are wrong to trust the "lawyers and political experts" to have your best interest in mind when changing money.

FWIW and apologies to Doug for the rules violation.

 

[sportpilot]

medical

My instrument flight instructor died at the controls of his Cessna 310 barely missing a house.
My boss man had a heart attack while piloting a night mail run in a beech 18. He landed safely
A local commercial pilot had a heart attack flyhing his Piper Navajo. He landed safely, but died shorty thereafter.

All 3 of these pilots had a VALID 1st class medical in their pocket. I dont know what a high risk pilot is, but these 3 men whom I personally knew were considered bullet proff by everyone. Go figure.

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

I'm missing why the AOPA being cooperative with the FAA is considered a sellout.

The whole image AOPA has been trying to craft is that pilots are law-abiding folks, interested in the greater good; not just selfish folks whose only interest is self interest.

Granted, that image is mostly a crock, but from a marketing standpoint, it's not a bad image to pretend we have.

Anyway, it worked in the aftermath of 9/11 when the goal was to keep agencies from closing (most)small airports because of 'security fears.' AOPA correctly crafted an image of pilots who were interested in helping the government provide security at airports.

I think that probably was a good idea and got us a lot of benefits that the "us vs. them" mentality probaly couldn't have.

The only way for aviation to gain a better foothold is to have a place a the table. Boyer has shown that when it's time to push, he can push. So I give him the leeway to decide when a battle is worth fighting.

Somehow, I'm on his side when it comes to saying protecting 8% of those among us who -- apparently -- are defrauding the U.S. taxpayer isn't a battle worth wasting resources on.

If pilots can't agree that we all have a responsibility to prevent fraud against the honest taxpayers, then maybe we don't deserve the voice we often demand.

As for me, I'll renew at AOPA despite my general dislike of Boyer because I can't stand crooks, even if they are pilots. If folks want to vent a spleen, vent about the crooks, because those are the people who are giving opponents of aviation the ammunition that Boyer has spent so much time (and money) opposing.

 

[jonbakerok]

If only that was all they did

Robby, a private pilot on a third class medical can load up a Cessna 206 with 6 people and depart into a 200 foot overcast. Tell me why he shouldn't have his blood pressure and glucose checked every two years? The third class medical has all but the lowest standards possible for flight. What's the problem?

How is that any different than loading 6 people into an SUV and launching into an ice storm with a heart condition?

If all they did was check your blood pressure and make you pee in a cup, there wouldn't be any fraud. The problem is that they demand your life history and can disqualify you on the basis of your meds or history even after actual measurements prove you are perfectly fit to fly.

When are people going to get it through their thick heads that government can't save them? Everything government does works in reverse. We in aviation ought to know that better than anybody. Medicals are a perfect example. How many pilots avoid going to the doctor for fear they'll discover something? There must be thousands of guys flying around with untreated heart problems or depression. Are they safer because they haven't gotten help?

Or take aircraft certification. If the auto industry was subject to the same regulations as aviation you'd be delivering your kids to school in an extremely well maintained '77 Chevy -- or if you were extremely rich, a 2007 Chevy that was an exact copy of a '77 Chevy, only with leather seats and a great radio. Would that make your kids safer?

 

[N395V]

Long Post

I am not an AME but I am a physician. I don't like the FAA nor Phil Boyer but...........................................................................................


There seems to be a perception that the purpose of the medicals is to detect people at risk for sudden death ie "heart attacks"

There is no test that can determine a date at which someone will have a heart attack and a routine physical, if normal, tells very little about a persons probability of a problem today tomorrow or 6 months from now.

The bulk of useful pertinent info derived from a flight physical is derived from what you write down, or do not write down, on the form and what the urine test reveals.

By far a bigger risk, in the air, is a grossly low blood sugar in someone taking meds for diabetes, a grossly low blood pressure in someone starting a new medicine, a pilot falling asleep because of untreated sleep apnea or a pilot on antidepressants, that are not working, deciding to end their misery by augering in somewhere. So it is not the physical exam that is so important but the truthfullness of what you tell the FAA during the process.

Why not self certify with a drivers liscense. Because most people with the problems listed above do not recognizethe potential dangers of their condition.

It ain't a perfect system, but in large part it works. Does it unfairly prevent some from flying who are most likely safe? You bet it does but life itself ain't fair.

As far as Boyer and AOPA and their role in this lets review a bit of history.

The DA (or whatever you call them) for the SanFrancisco region ran a computer cross reference between Social Security numbers and FAA medicals. Many, including myself, believe illegally. He found approx 30-40 individuals claiming disability for conditions that would have grounded them that they did not disclose during their filight physical.

Now who is the bad guy here. In my opinion #1 is the DA who used the SSAN for political gain and #2 The folks who falsified their physical.


Now note the AOPA is cooperating with Congress not the FAA on this. This is because this episode really ticked off some congressmen, not the FAA, and congress has decided something "will be done" so I say better as pilots to lead rather than follow or just get out of the way.

I do not like Boyer but in this case he is doing what is necessary to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. The sows ear being delivered by a group of pilots who broke the law.
In my opinion self certifying with a drivers license will ultimately result in a rash of airplanes falling out of the sky due to incapacitated pilots.

 

[the_other_dougreeves]

But they're good enough for LSA right? Right. LSA's are also restricted in performance and gross weight to make them primarily leisure recreational vehicles and NOT transportation vehicles.

Maybe I'm twisted but, I really see no end-result difference between LSA and PP when it comes to medical requirements.

There is a subtle but important difference. Both PP and LSA/SP must self certify that they are safe to fly for every flight. The difference is the standard, which is contained in FAR 61.23 (c)(2). To summarize:

* PP must self-certify that they do not have any condition that would disqualify them from getting a medical.
* SP/LSA must certify that they do not have any condition that would prevent them from safely acting as PIC.

These are different tests.

 

[Low n Slow]

...In my opinion self certifying with a drivers license will ultimately result in a rash of airplanes falling out of the sky due to incapacitated pilots.

Considering that well over 21,000 active glider pilots (including motorglider drivers) have managed to survive without a 3rd class medical, I?m curious why you and others are predicting ?a rash of airplanes falling out of the sky?. Based on what, a gut feeling? There?s a track record that goes back decades that indicates it?s a non-issue.

Or do you really believe that glider pilots are that much younger, or healthier, or do they ground themselves when they should, because they?re so much more trustworthy compared to airplane pilots?

Tom
RV-4
"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles."
Ronald Reagan

 

[Hwood]

If you really want to get fired up, it out to be over the aviation trust fund legislation, know to us as user fees. In tis bill an FAA board consisting of gov't officials and airline reprsentatives will have the say on who, when and how much user can be levied. Heck with the medical,it won't matter when we can't afford to fly.

 

[N395V]

Or do you really believe that glider pilots are that much younger, or healthier, or do they ground themselves when they should, because they?re so much more trustworthy compared to airplane pilots?

Nope I believe the total hours per year spent airborne by glider pilots (all 21,000) is insignificant compared to the hours spent in the air by airplane/helicopter pilots.

Based on what, a gut feeling?

Nope, based on the number of people who come through a small town ER after being incapacitated with health conditions while driving a motor vehicle and based on the number of people I personally know who would continue flying with adverse medical conditions were it not for the annual medical process and the requirement they sign their name on a document.

 

[Low n Slow]

Nope I believe the total hours per year spent airborne by glider pilots (all 21,000) is insignificant compared to the hours spent in the air by airplane/helicopter pilots.

Point well taken and I agree, glider pilots fly only a fraction of the hours flown by airplane pilots. Yet according to the General Aviation Manufacturers Association data for 2004 (the most current I could find), glider pilots flew a total of approx 119 thousand hours (compared to 15,363 single engine piston aircraft). This amount of annual time flown over the course of many decades would surely be enough to discern a trend that might confirm your fears. You can bet that if the statistics supported your contention, the opponents of GA (and there are many) would have latched on to it and spread the word a long time ago.

2004 General Aviation and Air Taxi Total Hours Flown (in Thousand) by Actual Use By Aircraft Type. Includes Air Taxi Aircraft. Excludes Commuter Aircraft.

Glider: 119
http://www.gama.aero/dloads/2005GAMAStatisticalDatabook.pdf

Nope, based on the number of people who come through a small town ER after being incapacitated with health conditions while driving a motor vehicle and based on the number of people I personally know who would continue flying with adverse medical conditions were it not for the annual medical process and the requirement they sign their name on a document.

I could provide plenty of stories that would indicate the opposite, but what?s the point? Anecdotal evidence is what Reagan probably used to support his theory about polluting trees.

I will just say that in my opinion, the demographics of airplane pilots are much more aligned with glider pilots, than either are with the general public, especially ones visiting a small town ER.

Tom
RV-4
?I want to die like my grandfather did, peacefully in his sleep, not screaming in terror like his passengers??

 

[RVbySDI]

If you really want to get fired up, it out to be over the aviation trust fund legislation, know to us as user fees. In tis bill an FAA board consisting of gov't officials and airline reprsentatives will have the say on who, when and how much user can be levied. Heck with the medical,it won't matter when we can't afford to fly.

Huh!?

 

[tomcostanza]

Personally, I'd like to see all drivers required to pass a driving test every two years, and prove that they're medically fit to drive.

Abso-freakin-lutely!!

I don't know what it's like in the rest of the country, but in the mid-Atlantic region, cars are bouncing off each other regularly. With drivers though, I believe it's a basic lack of respect (for laws, other drivers, anyone living in the area, etc.). Pilots seem to be a much better breed on every count. This site is just one example.

Clear skies,