Too Old?

In rec.aviation.owning Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in :

In rec.aviation.owning BobR wrote:
On Sep 4, 1:25?pm, wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning Mxsmanic wrote:

writes:

As for smoking, that is utter, pulled out of your ass, nonsense.

Not when the air is thin.

More ignorant nonsense; if it were true about half the population of
Peru would be incapacitated.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Your knowledge of this subject is so seriously limited that you
really need to drop out of the discussion before you make yourself
look really stupid. The people of Peru who live at high altitudes
have become acclimated to the altitude and are not as subject to
altitude sickness as those who live at lower altitudes. Smoking has
the direct effect of diminishing the ability of the lungs to absorb
oxygen which becomes especially critical at higher altitudes.
Smokers who are not acclimated to the altitude and who take off from
lower altitudes and asscend to altitude can easily become oxygen
starved resulting in numerous possible medical problems.

Point totally missed.

1) No one becomes "immediately incapacitated", whatever that means,
from smoking.



Depends on what you mean by that. Smoking will exacerbate any situation
where breathing sails close to the edge, like a sudden loss of
pressurisation or if the individual has been comprimised and breathing
becomes difficult. Like someone who has been badly inured and is
comatose. All other factors being equal, if the individual has been
pushed to the edge in a situation like this, a history of smoking will
push them over it.

And in what kind of situation is any of that likely to happen to a
private pilot?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote in news
In rec.aviation.owning Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
wrote in news:0046p5-c0p.ln1
@mail.specsol.com:

In rec.aviation.owning BobR wrote:
On Sep 4, 1:25?pm, wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning Mxsmanic wrote:

writes:

As for smoking, that is utter, pulled out of your ass,
nonsense.

Not when the air is thin.

More ignorant nonsense; if it were true about half the population
of
Peru would be incapacitated.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Your knowledge of this subject is so seriously limited that you
really need to drop out of the discussion before you make yourself
look really stupid. The people of Peru who live at high altitudes
have become acclimated to the altitude and are not as subject to
altitude sickness as those who live at lower altitudes. Smoking
has
the direct effect of diminishing the ability of the lungs to absorb
oxygen which becomes especially critical at higher altitudes.
Smokers who are not acclimated to the altitude and who take off
from
lower altitudes and asscend to altitude can easily become oxygen
starved resulting in numerous possible medical problems.

Point totally missed.

1) No one becomes "immediately incapacitated", whatever that means,
from smoking.



Depends on what you mean by that. Smoking will exacerbate any
situation
where breathing sails close to the edge, like a sudden loss of
pressurisation or if the individual has been comprimised and
breathing
becomes difficult. Like someone who has been badly inured and is
comatose. All other factors being equal, if the individual has been
pushed to the edge in a situation like this, a history of smoking
will
push them over it.

And in what kind of situation is any of that likely to happen to a
private pilot?


Well, there are a lot of private pilots operating airplanes at high
altitudes these days.
Leaving that aside, my intention as to highlight the damage done and how
that can comprimise someone operating at or near their limit. It's
something else stacked against you in a bad situation. .

What do peruvian mountain dwellers have to do with private pilots?

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Well, there are a lot of private pilots operating airplanes at high
altitudes these days.
Leaving that aside, my intention as to highlight the damage done and how
that can comprimise someone operating at or near their limit. It's
something else stacked against you in a bad situation. .

What do peruvian mountain dwellers have to do with private pilots?

Point missed completely.

You're a dumb ass, and you're trolling, and doing a **** poor job of both.

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


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Well, there are a lot of private pilots operating airplanes at high
altitudes these days.
Leaving that aside, my intention as to highlight the damage done and
how that can comprimise someone operating at or near their limit.
It's something else stacked against you in a bad situation. .

What do peruvian mountain dwellers have to do with private pilots?

Point missed completely.


Yes, I know. Read it again.


You're a dumb ass, and you're trolling, and doing a **** poor job of
both.


Nope. I was offering my POV based on knowledge and some personal
experience.


But I could troll you if you like.





Bertie

writes:

And in what kind of situation is any of that likely to happen to a
private pilot?

Occult cardiovascular disease, typically.

"Mxsmanic" wrote...
writes:

And in what kind of situation is any of that likely to happen to a
private pilot?

Occult cardiovascular disease, typically.

Heredity plays an equally important role in all of this - a person's
vulnerability to disease as a result of environmental factors (smoking,
drinking, breathing in asbestos fibers, etc.) is highly dependent on
genetics, as is your likelihood to suffer a stroke from smoking excessively,
or a heart attack from eating too much bacon, eggs, donuts, etc., or just
plain being overweight.

Where do you draw the line?

Tim writes:

Heredity plays an equally important role in all of this - a person's
vulnerability to disease as a result of environmental factors (smoking,
drinking, breathing in asbestos fibers, etc.) is highly dependent on
genetics, as is your likelihood to suffer a stroke from smoking excessively,
or a heart attack from eating too much bacon, eggs, donuts, etc., or just
plain being overweight.

True ... but the FAA doesn't look at that, either.

Where do you draw the line?

My point is that the FAA criteria are badly skewed. Airline pilots with
first-class medicals still drop dead from time to time, and people who are
denied medicals still live to be 95 years old without ever being suddenly
incapacitated by anything.

The FAA criteria seem to be inherited from military test-pilot programs or
astronaut medicals, but they are far too draconian. The FAA could increase
safety a lot more by testing pilot competence more extensively and forgetting
the over-the-top medical criteria. In fact, the best way to determine pilot
aptitude is by testing it directly, not by inferring it from other
information, and since pilots are tested individually, this is a completely
practical goal.

In rec.aviation.owning Mxsmanic wrote:
Tim writes:

Heredity plays an equally important role in all of this - a person's
vulnerability to disease as a result of environmental factors (smoking,
drinking, breathing in asbestos fibers, etc.) is highly dependent on
genetics, as is your likelihood to suffer a stroke from smoking excessively,
or a heart attack from eating too much bacon, eggs, donuts, etc., or just
plain being overweight.

True ... but the FAA doesn't look at that, either.

Of course not as it is all irrelevant just as is everything you've
been whinning about.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Tim writes:

Heredity plays an equally important role in all of this - a person's
vulnerability to disease as a result of environmental factors
(smoking, drinking, breathing in asbestos fibers, etc.) is highly
dependent on genetics, as is your likelihood to suffer a stroke from
smoking excessively, or a heart attack from eating too much bacon,
eggs, donuts, etc., or just plain being overweight.

True ... but the FAA doesn't look at that, either.

Where do you draw the line?

My point is that the FAA criteria are badly skewed. Airline pilots
with first-class medicals still drop dead from time to time, and
people who are denied medicals still live to be 95 years old without
ever being suddenly incapacitated by anything.

The FAA criteria seem to be inherited from military test-pilot
programs or astronaut medicals, but they are far too draconian. The
FAA could increase safety a lot more by testing pilot competence more
extensively and forgetting the over-the-top medical criteria. In
fact, the best way to determine pilot aptitude is by testing it
directly, not by inferring it from other information, and since pilots
are tested individually, this is a completely practical goal.


You have no idea what you're talking about.

you are an idiot.


Bertie

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
(in part)
Airline pilots with first-class medicals still drop dead from time to
time...

Actually, it is quite unusual for anyone to drop dead more than once.