K l e i n wrote:
On Sep 1, 3:36 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Gezellig wrote:
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 13:30:50 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Ben Jeffrey wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Orval Fairbairn wrote:
I know quite a few pilots flying well into their 70s -- some in
high-performance planes.
Hell Orval, it took that long for some of us to get proficient :-)))
--
Dudley Henriques
I have a friend in our soaring club who flew Corsairs as a USMC pilot in WW2
and still flys regularly in our club - usually the first to launch and the
last to land. To top it off, most of the time he flys his Pitts to the club
from his home field.
Ben Jeffrey
Some of the "older" pilots are in phenomenally good health. I deal with
a lot of them on a daily basis. They're amazing!
And some aren't Dudley neither of which is the point. The point is that
Fed/FAA gets aggressive, age could come into question regardless. For
that matter, why not a local port like Vegas throwing up their own
rules?
The one's that aren't should fail the medical. THAT is the point. The
"system" is supposed to discover and weed out those not medically fit to
fly.
As long as you can pass the medical, you fly. It's THAT simple!
Nobody says the system is perfect. There will always be those pilots who
slip through a medical check and then have a heart attack while flying.
Personally, I would be an advocate of more frequent medical checks for
pilots of a specific age determined by accident stats and medical
histories.
Of course if they went that route, you'd have the ACLU on their ass
screaming about "rights".
There is only one additional safety gap in the present system; that
being the individual choice of a pilot to voluntarily stop flying after
having a medical issue during the period between medicals.
As I said, it "ain't " a perfect system by a long shot!

--
Dudley Henriques

Well, you know, they already do that. A 3rd class medical is good for
substantially longer period of time if you are younger than 40. Also,
if you report certain conditions, etc, they give you a "special
issuance" with a 1 year limit for all classes, including 3rd.

This is true, but not what I'm addressing exactly. I would have no
problem with medicals requiring a shorter active period based on a
proactive projection of accident stats vs health issues within a
specific age bracket graduated after say a beginning point of 40.
In other words, the older you get and/or when you enter into an age
bracket where stats put you at a higher risk factor, the period of your
medical shortens accordingly.

The rub in all this, even in my own projection, is that it assumes that
sooner or later a pilot will reach a "no further medicals allowed" point
where a mandatory retirement is indicated.
Considering present regulations, the engine to implement such a plan
would be extremely difficult to design and push through the required
legislation.


--
Dudley Henriques