Too Old?

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.

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

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:44:51 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

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.

This makes sense especially if the quality of the medical is increased
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.

Disagree. If you can pass a sophisticated and comprehensive medical,
there should be no approach points. Pass = fly regardless of age.

Considering present regulations, the engine to implement such a plan
would be extremely difficult to design and push through the required
legislation.

Can't argue with this, don't have the expertise.

Gezellig wrote:
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 20:44:51 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

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.

This makes sense especially if the quality of the medical is increased
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.

Disagree. If you can pass a sophisticated and comprehensive medical,
there should be no approach points. Pass = fly regardless of age.

Make sure we're on the same page with the above. I might not have stated
this as accurately as I should have,
What I'm saying doesn't conflict with the Pass= fly regardless of age.
It simply RECOGNIZES that at a certain point while following the "plan",
a pilot WILL reach a specific point in time where the medical can no
longer be passed. In other words, Fail= no longer fly.
What I'm saying is simply that even my "plan" so to speak, ends up with
basically what we have now :-)) You fly until you can't pass the
physical then no more. The same issue remains. The "rub" is that no
matter what is done, the end of the road seems unchanged. There can very
well be a point where the pilot passes the physical at some ripe old
age, then has that heart attack in the air during the periods between
physicals.
This is the basis for what I have envisioned as a "plan" to shorten the
period between physicals as a pilot ages.

Considering present regulations, the engine to implement such a plan
would be extremely difficult to design and push through the required
legislation.

Can't argue with this, don't have the expertise.

You're doing well :-))


--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Make sure we're on the same page with the above. I might not have
stated this as accurately as I should have,
What I'm saying doesn't conflict with the Pass= fly regardless of
age. It simply RECOGNIZES that at a certain point while following
the "plan", a pilot WILL reach a specific point in time where the
medical can no longer be passed. In other words, Fail= no longer
fly. What I'm saying is simply that even my "plan" so to speak,
ends up with basically what we have now :-)) You fly until you
can't pass the physical then no more. The same issue remains. The
"rub" is that no matter what is done, the end of the road seems
unchanged. There can very well be a point where the pilot passes
the physical at some ripe old age, then has that heart attack in
the air during the periods between physicals.
This is the basis for what I have envisioned as a "plan" to
shorten the period between physicals as a pilot ages.

My situation is one of cost. I can easily pass the FAA Medical (even
at my age) but have decided not to try after passing my last one.

I have a Special Issuance wherein the FAA required documentation from
each of my two physicians. My Medical Group charges nearly $100 per
"official" letter and then there's the AME fee. I felt that a little
under $300 each year was a tad much at this time so it may well be
that it's time to hang up the spurs or do other flying alternatives.

--

"John Godwin" wrote in message
...


My situation is one of cost. I can easily pass the FAA Medical (even
at my age) but have decided not to try after passing my last one.

I have a Special Issuance wherein the FAA required documentation from
each of my two physicians. My Medical Group charges nearly $100 per
"official" letter and then there's the AME fee. I felt that a little
under $300 each year was a tad much at this time so it may well be
that it's time to hang up the spurs or do other flying alternatives.

--

That a shame John, sorry to hear it.

How old are you, and why the special?

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in
:

How old are you, and why the special?

Pushing 70 and well-controlled Type II Diabetes (A1C=6.0 and
decreasing) and Chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

--

John Godwin wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Make sure we're on the same page with the above. I might not have
stated this as accurately as I should have,
What I'm saying doesn't conflict with the Pass= fly regardless of
age. It simply RECOGNIZES that at a certain point while following
the "plan", a pilot WILL reach a specific point in time where the
medical can no longer be passed. In other words, Fail= no longer
fly. What I'm saying is simply that even my "plan" so to speak,
ends up with basically what we have now :-)) You fly until you
can't pass the physical then no more. The same issue remains. The
"rub" is that no matter what is done, the end of the road seems
unchanged. There can very well be a point where the pilot passes
the physical at some ripe old age, then has that heart attack in
the air during the periods between physicals.
This is the basis for what I have envisioned as a "plan" to
shorten the period between physicals as a pilot ages.

My situation is one of cost. I can easily pass the FAA Medical (even
at my age) but have decided not to try after passing my last one.

I have a Special Issuance wherein the FAA required documentation from
each of my two physicians. My Medical Group charges nearly $100 per
"official" letter and then there's the AME fee. I felt that a little
under $300 each year was a tad much at this time so it may well be
that it's time to hang up the spurs or do other flying alternatives.

That's a CRIME. I'm VERY sorry this is happening to you. I never quite
know what to do or say when I see things like this happening to a pilot.
We're at the mercy of these damn doctors and they know it. You could
complain, but many times that simply ends up in an endless loop that
goes nowhere. Charging $100 to fill out a form is a gross over charge
and the only reason they can get away with it is because you HAVE to
have it.
This doctor could easily have been a lawyer!


--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques writes:

Charging $100 to fill out a form is a gross over charge
and the only reason they can get away with it is because you HAVE to
have it.

Then again, if the doctor fills out the form and signs it for a pilot, and the
pilot later dies in flight, the doctor gets sued, even if the cause of death
had nothing to do with the doctor's evaluation. So it works both ways.

Dudley:

The OP is not at the mercy of a physician in the group- he simply could go
elsewhere to get his FCIII exam performed. However, it sounds like he needs
a complete new physical, a review of the records, and a submission via
computer on a regular basis for the special issuance.

Unfortunately, this all takes a fair amount of time. Performing the required
tests, especially Class II, requires an EKG, hearing test, vision screening,
etc, and between the equipment and time required this adds up to a lot of
expense. Then, you, or a paid assistant, has to log onto the FAA computer
and submit all of this stuff.

A special issuance requires an extensive review of records, along with
dictation of a letter (that has to be done by a paid transcriptionist) and
then submission to the FAA.

Most docs actually barely break even or lose money doing this service for
pilots.

So, yes, it's expensive, but so are a lot of other aspects of flying. I
personally would rather have someone identify a potential problem and
address the issue, rather than keep on flying until something breaks, just
as if my mechanic found some potential problem that would ultimately save
money or my life down the line.



"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
news
John Godwin wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:
Make sure we're on the same page with the above. I might not have
stated this as accurately as I should have,
What I'm saying doesn't conflict with the Pass= fly regardless of
age. It simply RECOGNIZES that at a certain point while following
the "plan", a pilot WILL reach a specific point in time where the
medical can no longer be passed. In other words, Fail= no longer
fly. What I'm saying is simply that even my "plan" so to speak,
ends up with basically what we have now :-)) You fly until you
can't pass the physical then no more. The same issue remains. The
"rub" is that no matter what is done, the end of the road seems
unchanged. There can very well be a point where the pilot passes
the physical at some ripe old age, then has that heart attack in
the air during the periods between physicals.
This is the basis for what I have envisioned as a "plan" to
shorten the period between physicals as a pilot ages.

My situation is one of cost. I can easily pass the FAA Medical (even at
my age) but have decided not to try after passing my last one.

I have a Special Issuance wherein the FAA required documentation from
each of my two physicians. My Medical Group charges nearly $100 per
"official" letter and then there's the AME fee. I felt that a little
under $300 each year was a tad much at this time so it may well be that
it's time to hang up the spurs or do other flying alternatives.
That's a CRIME. I'm VERY sorry this is happening to you. I never quite
know what to do or say when I see things like this happening to a pilot.
We're at the mercy of these damn doctors and they know it. You could
complain, but many times that simply ends up in an endless loop that goes
nowhere. Charging $100 to fill out a form is a gross over charge and the
only reason they can get away with it is because you HAVE to have it.
This doctor could easily have been a lawyer!


--
Dudley Henriques