If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
"Tony Verhulst" wrote in message
. .. Regrettably all a current medical certificate is useful for is knowing that the recipient WAS fit to fly at the time that they took the medical. Half an hour later, who knows. It's actually a little better than that. Since you must report all medications you are taking, the medical examiner can assess if one, or a combination of several medications, might impair your coordination and/or judgment which could affect your ability to act as PIC (or to drive a car for that matter). On the other hand, the AOPA is fond of (correctly) reporting that there is no statistical correlation between a pilot having a medical certificate and accidents due to medical causes. Tony V. LS6-b "6N" My dad passed his 3rd class medical in the morning. Went out to the airport to test fly an airplane he was thinking of buying. Then passed out in mens room at the FBO from some complication from his (up to then) undetected prostate cancer (It was never clear to me excatly why he passed out...) -- Geoff The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
On May 3, 5:21 pm, Frank Whiteley wrote:
http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621 Frank, Before you run off and start demonizing a pilot LEGALLY excercising his rights, you should research the subject. The fact is that possessing a current Airmen's medical is not guarantee WHATSOEVER that the pilot is fit to fly on any given day. I just received a medical denial letter from the FAA because I was taking Trazodone for insomnia. Insominia is not by itself a disabling medical condition, but Trazodone is on their prohibited list because it is an old anti-depresent drug. ALL anti-depresents are prohibited. PERIOD. It does not matter what the condition is for which you are taking the prescribed medicine: medical denied, DO NOT FLY! Well, I am flying my glider while the paper work is being sorted out (I have a different, much more expensive, drug prescribed for the same IDENTICAL condition). By your reasoning, I AM UNFIT TO FLY. PERIOD, END OF STORY! because I don't have a CURRENT MEDICAL! Never mind that glider pilots DO NOT NEED A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE to LEGALLY fly!! My doctor DOES have a disabling disease; it is DIABETES. But he is LEGALLY able to fly his motorgliders WITHOUT an aviation medical. I am very confident in his ability to fly his motorgliders, to the extent that I have allowed my wife, my kids and my mother to fly with him. By your standards he should be GROUNDED!!! Once, while getting a 3rd class medical, the doctor remarked about my good health. By comparison, he pointed out another patient of his, to whom he had granted the 3rd class medical with the warning that he might not get it the next time, that had DIED within one year! That guy was LEGALLY fit to fly, but died shortly after getting the medical. What you apparently don't realize is the system is more about the FAA covering their respective asses than it is about protecting the public. The system TOTALLY depends upon self reporting of medical conditions; if you report you come under INTENSE SCRUTINY. Thus, the incentive is: DO NOT REPORT! The Inspector General did a study matching Social Security disability payments with certified pilots. They found nearly 10% held CURRENT MEDICAL CERTIFICATES while simultaneously receiving DISABILITY PAYMENTS! Only 40 of these cases were prosecuted because of limited resources (http:// flightphysical.com/FAA/FAA-Report-Falsification/index.htm). Another pilot I know once reported that he had an EKG performed that was negative. The FAA required him to take an ANNUAL EKG for no damn good reason, just to cover their asses! Tom |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
On May 5, 8:40 pm, wrote:
On May 3, 5:21 pm, Frank Whiteley wrote: http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621 Frank, Before you run off and start demonizing a pilot LEGALLY excercising his rights, you should research the subject. The fact is that possessing a current Airmen's medical is not guarantee WHATSOEVER that the pilot is fit to fly on any given day. I just received a medical denial letter from the FAA because I was taking Trazodone for insomnia. Insominia is not by itself a disabling medical condition, but Trazodone is on their prohibited list because it is an old anti-depresent drug. ALL anti-depresents are prohibited. PERIOD. It does not matter what the condition is for which you are taking the prescribed medicine: medical denied, DO NOT FLY! Well, I am flying my glider while the paper work is being sorted out (I have a different, much more expensive, drug prescribed for the same IDENTICAL condition). By your reasoning, I AM UNFIT TO FLY. PERIOD, END OF STORY! because I don't have a CURRENT MEDICAL! Never mind that glider pilots DO NOT NEED A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE to LEGALLY fly!! My doctor DOES have a disabling disease; it is DIABETES. But he is LEGALLY able to fly his motorgliders WITHOUT an aviation medical. I am very confident in his ability to fly his motorgliders, to the extent that I have allowed my wife, my kids and my mother to fly with him. By your standards he should be GROUNDED!!! Once, while getting a 3rd class medical, the doctor remarked about my good health. By comparison, he pointed out another patient of his, to whom he had granted the 3rd class medical with the warning that he might not get it the next time, that had DIED within one year! That guy was LEGALLY fit to fly, but died shortly after getting the medical. What you apparently don't realize is the system is more about the FAA covering their respective asses than it is about protecting the public. The system TOTALLY depends upon self reporting of medical conditions; if you report you come under INTENSE SCRUTINY. Thus, the incentive is: DO NOT REPORT! The Inspector General did a study matching Social Security disability payments with certified pilots. They found nearly 10% held CURRENT MEDICAL CERTIFICATES while simultaneously receiving DISABILITY PAYMENTS! Only 40 of these cases were prosecuted because of limited resources (http:// flightphysical.com/FAA/FAA-Report-Falsification/index.htm). Another pilot I know once reported that he had an EKG performed that was negative. The FAA required him to take an ANNUAL EKG for no damn good reason, just to cover their asses! Tom Yo Tom, I wasn't demonizing anyone and if the pilot in the article wanted to come out and fly _his_ glider, fine by me, as I've stated before. However, I think he was flying a _club_ glider and clearly instructing and towing, at least one of those things he definitely should not have been doing. At some point, people need enough personal integrity to do the right thing, especially within a club framework, where responsibilities extend to the other members. (If you don't like it, don't fly in clubs). This chap didn't and that's quite simply stated in the article. I suspect if he had admitted the loss of his medical and loss of power flight privileges to the club, that body may well have banned him from flying club equipment and/or the national association may have prohibited him from instructing. I knew a youngish, at the time, BGA instructor that lost his instructor privileges due to a heart valve replacement. He was about 30 and hiked extensively as a second pastime, but a heart valve replacement may lead to a increase in the chance of clotting, hence the restriction. He was not banned from flying club or personal equipment solo. It's certainly a tough call if it has to be made. BTW, when the SSF does a safety audit of a soaring site, they do look to see if the operation is tracking pertinent information about their flying group, and suggests some internal audits to perform that are germane to this discussion. The FAA does all sorts of things. Heck, I know a man, at 79yo, that got his medical back from a US Senator following a quad by-pass. It took that sort of clout to stop the FSDO foot dragging and get the attention of the FAA Flight Surgeon. 79yo pilots don't like to waste time;^) He wanted to get back to test flying. Frank |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
"Bullwinkle" wrote in message ... On 5/5/07 11:33 PM, in article , "Frank Whiteley" wrote: On May 5, 8:40 pm, wrote: On May 3, 5:21 pm, Frank Whiteley wrote: http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621 Frank, Before you run off and start demonizing a pilot LEGALLY excercising his rights, you should research the subject. The fact is that possessing a current Airmen's medical is not guarantee WHATSOEVER that the pilot is fit to fly on any given day. I just received a medical denial letter from the FAA because I was taking Trazodone for insomnia. Insominia is not by itself a disabling medical condition, but Trazodone is on their prohibited list because it is an old anti-depresent drug. ALL anti-depresents are prohibited. PERIOD. It does not matter what the condition is for which you are taking the prescribed medicine: medical denied, DO NOT FLY! Well, I am flying my glider while the paper work is being sorted out (I have a different, much more expensive, drug prescribed for the same IDENTICAL condition). By your reasoning, I AM UNFIT TO FLY. PERIOD, END OF STORY! because I don't have a CURRENT MEDICAL! Never mind that glider pilots DO NOT NEED A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE to LEGALLY fly!! My doctor DOES have a disabling disease; it is DIABETES. But he is LEGALLY able to fly his motorgliders WITHOUT an aviation medical. I am very confident in his ability to fly his motorgliders, to the extent that I have allowed my wife, my kids and my mother to fly with him. By your standards he should be GROUNDED!!! Once, while getting a 3rd class medical, the doctor remarked about my good health. By comparison, he pointed out another patient of his, to whom he had granted the 3rd class medical with the warning that he might not get it the next time, that had DIED within one year! That guy was LEGALLY fit to fly, but died shortly after getting the medical. What you apparently don't realize is the system is more about the FAA covering their respective asses than it is about protecting the public. The system TOTALLY depends upon self reporting of medical conditions; if you report you come under INTENSE SCRUTINY. Thus, the incentive is: DO NOT REPORT! The Inspector General did a study matching Social Security disability payments with certified pilots. They found nearly 10% held CURRENT MEDICAL CERTIFICATES while simultaneously receiving DISABILITY PAYMENTS! Only 40 of these cases were prosecuted because of limited resources (http:// flightphysical.com/FAA/FAA-Report-Falsification/index.htm). Another pilot I know once reported that he had an EKG performed that was negative. The FAA required him to take an ANNUAL EKG for no damn good reason, just to cover their asses! Tom Yo Tom, I wasn't demonizing anyone and if the pilot in the article wanted to come out and fly _his_ glider, fine by me, as I've stated before. However, I think he was flying a _club_ glider and clearly instructing and towing, at least one of those things he definitely should not have been doing. At some point, people need enough personal integrity to do the right thing, especially within a club framework, where responsibilities extend to the other members. (If you don't like it, don't fly in clubs). This chap didn't and that's quite simply stated in the article. I suspect if he had admitted the loss of his medical and loss of power flight privileges to the club, that body may well have banned him from flying club equipment and/or the national association may have prohibited him from instructing. I knew a youngish, at the time, BGA instructor that lost his instructor privileges due to a heart valve replacement. He was about 30 and hiked extensively as a second pastime, but a heart valve replacement may lead to a increase in the chance of clotting, hence the restriction. He was not banned from flying club or personal equipment solo. It's certainly a tough call if it has to be made. BTW, when the SSF does a safety audit of a soaring site, they do look to see if the operation is tracking pertinent information about their flying group, and suggests some internal audits to perform that are germane to this discussion. The FAA does all sorts of things. Heck, I know a man, at 79yo, that got his medical back from a US Senator following a quad by-pass. It took that sort of clout to stop the FSDO foot dragging and get the attention of the FAA Flight Surgeon. 79yo pilots don't like to waste time;^) He wanted to get back to test flying. Frank All, I think everyone here needs a basic course in FAA medical standards policy. I can't provide one here, but recommend you do some research, instead of just shooting from the hip. Start with the FAA Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners (available on the FAA website) and pay close attention to the "protocols" for various diseases. When you are surprised that someone got their medical back after a CABG (coronary artery bypass graft), or that it required a US Senator to intervene, or that the FSDO has any role whatsoever in the medical certification process, then you are seriously confused about the how system works. Recommend you also take a look at www.aviationmedicine.com . And if you have questions, call those guys. There are many, many airline pilots with valid first class medicals flying (on special issuance) for things like CABG, heart valve replacement, atrial fibrillation, ongoing use of anticoagulant medication, history of cancers of most types, diabetes controlled on oral meds, history of recurrent kidney stones, history of depression, etc, etc. It's all in how you approach the FAA. Frank, the suggestion that clubs start making independent medical certification decisions is ridiculous. The club should operate within the law, and let the pilots make the decisions they are supposed to make under the FAR's (61.53). Regards, Bullwinkle I've listened to this arguement for all my life and now I'm old enough that it may soon apply to me. In that time I've seen two sharply divided groups. One loudly proclaims their 'right' to fly as PIC with innocent non-pilot passengers until they are dead or incapcitated. They will 'game' the system as long as they can get away with it. The other will say that their medical conditions preclude accepting PIC responsibilities and continue to fly but only with a safety pilot. The former group outnumbers the latter by a significant margin. When the day comes, I intend to be in the later group. It is correct to say that the current state of medical science, at least as it is practiced by AME's, can't accurately predict the physical performance of a pilot once he has left the doctor's office. It is also correct to say that the pilot is in the best position to judge his physical condition. The problem is that pilots are often, understandably, in denial about the extent of their medical conditions. Responsibility for one's actions and concern for the safety of others should trump mere pride but sadly, it doesn't happen often enough. At some point organizations will have to deal with a pilot in denial. It should be done with respect, care and courtesy since we all will have to face that day - but it should be done. Bill Daniels |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
"Bill Daniels" bildan@comcast-dot-net wrote in message ... I've listened to this arguement for all my life and now I'm old enough that it may soon apply to me. In that time I've seen two sharply divided groups. One loudly proclaims their 'right' to fly as PIC with innocent non-pilot passengers until they are dead or incapcitated. They will 'game' the system as long as they can get away with it. The other will say that their medical conditions preclude accepting PIC responsibilities and continue to fly but only with a safety pilot. The former group outnumbers the latter by a significant margin. When the day comes, I intend to be in the later group. It is correct to say that the current state of medical science, at least as it is practiced by AME's, can't accurately predict the physical performance of a pilot once he has left the doctor's office. It is also correct to say that the pilot is in the best position to judge his physical condition. The problem is that pilots are often, understandably, in denial about the extent of their medical conditions. Responsibility for one's actions and concern for the safety of others should trump mere pride but sadly, it doesn't happen often enough. At some point organizations will have to deal with a pilot in denial. It should be done with respect, care and courtesy since we all will have to face that day - but it should be done. Bill Daniels Bill, A few years ago an elderly pilot, who's ability to fly far exceeds mine, determined it was time to give up the sport. He had just completed an outstanding flight from Sun Valley, Idaho. During the after flight debriefing (you know, beer and "there I was, scratching the Bolders") he stated he wanted his memories of flying to be the great flight he and just finished and put his Mini-Nimbus on the market. Though we miss him when we fly, we all adminre his wisdom and judgement. Wayne HP-14 "6F" http://www.soaridaho.com/ |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
On May 6, 6:45 am, Bullwinkle wrote:
On 5/5/07 11:33 PM, in article . com, "Frank Whiteley" wrote: On May 5, 8:40 pm, wrote: On May 3, 5:21 pm, Frank Whiteley wrote: http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621 Frank, Before you run off and start demonizing a pilot LEGALLY excercising his rights, you should research the subject. The fact is that possessing a current Airmen's medical is not guarantee WHATSOEVER that the pilot is fit to fly on any given day. I just received a medical denial letter from the FAA because I was taking Trazodone for insomnia. Insominia is not by itself a disabling medical condition, but Trazodone is on their prohibited list because it is an old anti-depresent drug. ALL anti-depresents are prohibited. PERIOD. It does not matter what the condition is for which you are taking the prescribed medicine: medical denied, DO NOT FLY! Well, I am flying my glider while the paper work is being sorted out (I have a different, much more expensive, drug prescribed for the same IDENTICAL condition). By your reasoning, I AM UNFIT TO FLY. PERIOD, END OF STORY! because I don't have a CURRENT MEDICAL! Never mind that glider pilots DO NOT NEED A MEDICAL CERTIFICATE to LEGALLY fly!! My doctor DOES have a disabling disease; it is DIABETES. But he is LEGALLY able to fly his motorgliders WITHOUT an aviation medical. I am very confident in his ability to fly his motorgliders, to the extent that I have allowed my wife, my kids and my mother to fly with him. By your standards he should be GROUNDED!!! Once, while getting a 3rd class medical, the doctor remarked about my good health. By comparison, he pointed out another patient of his, to whom he had granted the 3rd class medical with the warning that he might not get it the next time, that had DIED within one year! That guy was LEGALLY fit to fly, but died shortly after getting the medical. What you apparently don't realize is the system is more about the FAA covering their respective asses than it is about protecting the public. The system TOTALLY depends upon self reporting of medical conditions; if you report you come under INTENSE SCRUTINY. Thus, the incentive is: DO NOT REPORT! The Inspector General did a study matching Social Security disability payments with certified pilots. They found nearly 10% held CURRENT MEDICAL CERTIFICATES while simultaneously receiving DISABILITY PAYMENTS! Only 40 of these cases were prosecuted because of limited resources (http:// flightphysical.com/FAA/FAA-Report-Falsification/index.htm). Another pilot I know once reported that he had an EKG performed that was negative. The FAA required him to take an ANNUAL EKG for no damn good reason, just to cover their asses! Tom Yo Tom, I wasn't demonizing anyone and if the pilot in the article wanted to come out and fly _his_ glider, fine by me, as I've stated before. However, I think he was flying a _club_ glider and clearly instructing and towing, at least one of those things he definitely should not have been doing. At some point, people need enough personal integrity to do the right thing, especially within a club framework, where responsibilities extend to the other members. (If you don't like it, don't fly in clubs). This chap didn't and that's quite simply stated in the article. I suspect if he had admitted the loss of his medical and loss of power flight privileges to the club, that body may well have banned him from flying club equipment and/or the national association may have prohibited him from instructing. I knew a youngish, at the time, BGA instructor that lost his instructor privileges due to a heart valve replacement. He was about 30 and hiked extensively as a second pastime, but a heart valve replacement may lead to a increase in the chance of clotting, hence the restriction. He was not banned from flying club or personal equipment solo. It's certainly a tough call if it has to be made. BTW, when the SSF does a safety audit of a soaring site, they do look to see if the operation is tracking pertinent information about their flying group, and suggests some internal audits to perform that are germane to this discussion. The FAA does all sorts of things. Heck, I know a man, at 79yo, that got his medical back from a US Senator following a quad by-pass. It took that sort of clout to stop the FSDO foot dragging and get the attention of the FAA Flight Surgeon. 79yo pilots don't like to waste time;^) He wanted to get back to test flying. Frank All, I think everyone here needs a basic course in FAA medical standards policy. I can't provide one here, but recommend you do some research, instead of just shooting from the hip. Start with the FAA Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners (available on the FAA website) and pay close attention to the "protocols" for various diseases. When you are surprised that someone got their medical back after a CABG (coronary artery bypass graft), or that it required a US Senator to intervene, or that the FSDO has any role whatsoever in the medical certification process, then you are seriously confused about the how system works. Recommend you also take a look atwww.aviationmedicine.com. And if you have questions, call those guys. There are many, many airline pilots with valid first class medicals flying (on special issuance) for things like CABG, heart valve replacement, atrial fibrillation, ongoing use of anticoagulant medication, history of cancers of most types, diabetes controlled on oral meds, history of recurrent kidney stones, history of depression, etc, etc. It's all in how you approach the FAA. Frank, the suggestion that clubs start making independent medical certification decisions is ridiculous. The club should operate within the law, and let the pilots make the decisions they are supposed to make under the FAR's (61.53). Regards, Bullwinkle I didn't suggest that at all in any post. What I did say was that the SSF suggests some auditing systems of persons at the club levels. More specifically, last medical date/type, flight review annual part 61.69 requirements of tow pilots and last flight review date of members and instructors. The rest is a matter of personal prerogative except when there are extenuating circumstances. Cheers, Frank |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
This is an interesting discussion.
Frank said: I didn't suggest that at all in any post. From the earlier post: I suspect if he had admitted the loss of his medical and loss of power flight privileges to the club, that body may well have banned him from flying club equipment and/or the national association may have prohibited him from instructing. If that's not a club or national association (like the SSA or BGA?) making aeromedical decisions, I don't know what is. If you don't require a medical for your national certifying body (like the FAA), and your club bans someone from flying because of their medical condition, that club is making an aeromedical decision. I suppose it could be club policy to not allow pilots to fly if their FAA (or other national certifying body) medical application has been denied. But what about a person with the exact same medical condition(s), who has never applied for FAA aeromedical certification, and thus has not been denied? If that person shows up, and is willing to state they "have no known medical condition that would affect my ability to fly safely", would you be happy with that? This is the whole light sport pilot issue with medical certification and FAA denials. We in gliding can ignore that, since it doesn't apply to us. Clubs, at least in the litigious USA, would be well advised to avoid getting sucked into this kind of discussion. Bullwinkle |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
"Wayne Paul" wrote in message ... A few years ago an elderly pilot, whose ability to fly far exceeds mine, determined it was time to give up the sport. He had just completed an outstanding flight from Sun Valley, Idaho. During the after flight debriefing (you know, beer and "there I was, scratching the Bolders") he stated he wanted his memories of flying to be the great flight he and just finished and put his Mini-Nimbus on the market. Though we miss him when we fly, we all adminre his wisdom and judgement. Wayne HP-14 "6F" http://www.soaridaho.com/ My father-in -law (now deceased alas) was driving cars well into his eighties. He was a very keen driver - he had learned on a Model T when he was doing his BS at Carnegie Mellon in the 20s. We used to lunch together from time to time and yarn (both of us were engineers with loads of stories). Normally I drove us to the lunch spot, but on this particular day he said he would drive. We had our usual jolly lunch and as I paid the bill he passed his car keys across the table to me and said ' The car's yours now; I'm not driving any more'. A very sensible decision by a man for whom I had enormous respect. I would hope that all pilots would be able to face facts as he did. There is no shame in flying with a safety pilot. When my time comes (soon) I will accept this gracefully. Alistair Wright |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On making it difficult for everyone else
Alistair,
A pedantic correction - your father-in-law wasn't getting his BS in the 20s from Carnegie Mellon, he was getting it from Carnegie Institute of Technology. My class (1970) was the last to graduate from CIT, before they defiled a proud name solely because of naked greed. -John He was a very keen driver - he had learned on a Model T when he was doing his BS at Carnegie Mellon in the 20s. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Making your own canopy | c hinds | Home Built | 6 | November 22nd 04 09:10 AM |
How to deal with a difficult DE? | Mark | Piloting | 15 | August 19th 04 12:21 AM |
Difficult Strips | C J Campbell | Piloting | 6 | August 11th 04 08:04 PM |
Making a VFR C152 IFR | Paul Folbrecht | Instrument Flight Rules | 48 | April 7th 04 04:39 PM |
Strange and/or really difficult approaches | SeeAndAvoid | Instrument Flight Rules | 11 | February 24th 04 03:25 AM |