On making it difficult for everyone else

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"

"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.

"Frank Whiteley" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621


There is really no correlation between medical status and certification as
far as I can see. It is well documented that very few accidents have been
attributed to a pre-existing medical condition.

You never know your moment when flying. One day I was duty instructor at
Husbands Bosworth and I was sitting in the back seat of our Ka2, cable
connected, all out given, when the wing tip holder suddenly collapsed and
dropped the wing. I released the cable at once, and fortunately the tug
pilot was a bit slow to open up and there was no damage done. The wing tip
man (who was NEXT to fly with me) had had a heart attack and in spite of our
best efforts we could not revive him and he died at the scene. Very sad. I
count myself very lucky that this event occurred when it did, and not twenty
minutes later when we would have been airborne.

There was no way that this episode could have been predicted or prevented as
in those days only instructors had to hold a medical certificate which was
annually renewed. My own doctor just used to look at me and sign, as it was
the only time I ever visited his surgery. As it happens I am going to do a
bit of gliding this summer, and as I am now 74 not un-naturally the club
concerned has asked for a medical certificate in case I get to fly solo. My
doctor on this occasion did in fact do a fairly detailed check of my vital
functions but as he was basically doing only the same tests as those
required for renewal of a driving licence after an illness I don't really
feel that it tells us very much about my medical state.

Alistair Wright

On May 4, 11:01 am, "Alistair Wright"
wrote:
"Frank Whiteley" wrote in message

oups.com...

http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621

There is really no correlation between medical status and certification as
far as I can see. It is well documented that very few accidents have been
attributed to a pre-existing medical condition.

Depends on the arena looked at I guess. In commercial aviation the
situation is similar to that of the millenium bug: after the date
rolled over and nothing failed, lots of people spouted that there
never was a problem and those billions of dollars should never have
been spent on the issue. Of course, it was purely *because* that money
had been spent that there were no issues.

So it is with commercial aviation medicals. The fact that few - not
none, but few - accidents are due to medical conditions points to the
fact that the commercial medical certification process works.
Cardiology is in fact very good at detecting pre-existing but
superficially asymptomatic conditions. However the tests are
expensive.

An ASN database query gives:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/....php?Event=FCI

Note that the last incident - the 2004 USAF crash - seems to have
parallels with the Kilkenny crash.


Dan


Dan

On May 4, 12:12 pm, Dan G wrote:
An ASN database query gives:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/....php?Event=FCI


Should say that list is for "flight crew incapacitation", which
includes a range of occurences. However a notable absence from that
list is the 1972 Trident crash near Staines, just outside of London.
The captain had an acute heart condition during a cockpit emergency
that no doubt compounded the problem.


Dan

On 5/4/07 5:23 AM, in article
, "Dan G"
wrote:

On May 4, 12:12 pm, Dan G wrote:
An ASN database query gives:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/....php?Event=FCI


Should say that list is for "flight crew incapacitation", which
includes a range of occurences. However a notable absence from that
list is the 1972 Trident crash near Staines, just outside of London.
The captain had an acute heart condition during a cockpit emergency
that no doubt compounded the problem.


Dan

Medical examinations are really useless in determining who is safe to fly.
Very few pilots are grounded due to objective medical findings. Listening to
the heart and lungs, looking in eyes and ears, reviewing EKG's and lab
results: those items have a very low yield in detecting medical problems.

The only portion of the exam with significant relevance to determining
health or lack thereof is the history: what the individual says they are
experiencing. This requires honest reporting, and we all know that there is
a tremendous incentive to report that all is well, and to ignore those pesky
heart palpitations, or the migraines that come on with visual disturbances,
or those chest pains that get worse with exercise, etc.

That's how folks continue flying with disqualifying medical conditions: they
lie about them on their medicals.

JMHO,
Bullwinkle

On May 4, 1:54 pm, Bullwinkle wrote:
Medical examinations are really useless in determining who is safe to fly.
Very few pilots are grounded due to objective medical findings. Listening to
the heart and lungs, looking in eyes and ears, reviewing EKG's and lab
results: those items have a very low yield in detecting medical problems.

ECGs and cholesterol levels - both tested in medicals - are good
indicators of cardiac health. I expect pilots normally pass this part
of the medical because they keep themselves healthy in order to do so.

Cardiac disease is the second biggest killer in the 44-65 age group -
behind cancer - and the fact so few pilots collapse at the controls
suggests that these tests do work.

In this case the results of the tests meant the crash pilot knew that
sudden collapse was a stronger-than-normal possibility for him. The
problem is that he knowingly put other people at risk too by
continuing to tow and his club's procedures were not good enough to
find him out. (And while afaik it's never happened it's conceivable
that an out-of-control single seater could harm people on the ground.
Such an event would be quite bad for gliding I think.)

I think the point the accident report was making is that *everyone*
needs to be properly checked that they meet requirements, and
procedures should be put in place in Ireland to make sure that
happens. I don't think that's harmful to gliding.


Dan

Alistair Wright wrote:
"Frank Whiteley" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.kilkennyadvertiser.ie/index.php?aid=5621


There is really no correlation between medical status and certification as
far as I can see. It is well documented that very few accidents have been
attributed to a pre-existing medical condition.

snip

Presumably most people who lose their medical certificate stop flying.
Sort of the point of a medical, isn't it?


There was no way that this episode could have been predicted or prevented as
in those days only instructors had to hold a medical certificate which was
annually renewed. My own doctor just used to look at me and sign, as it was
the only time I ever visited his surgery. As it happens I am going to do a
bit of gliding this summer, and as I am now 74 not un-naturally the club
concerned has asked for a medical certificate in case I get to fly solo. My
doctor on this occasion did in fact do a fairly detailed check of my vital
functions but as he was basically doing only the same tests as those
required for renewal of a driving licence after an illness I don't really
feel that it tells us very much about my medical state.


This is interesting to me. The way I see it: If "The Rules" (law,
club, etc.) say you don't need a medical to fly a glider (as in the US),
some group coming along saying "Your too old. We need to see a medical
from you", should be told "Hook up to tow rope, then F--- Off!" ;-)


Shawn

"Shawn" wrote in message
. ..
This is interesting to me. The way I see it: If "The Rules" (law, club,
etc.) say you don't need a medical to fly a glider (as in the US), some
group coming along saying "You're too old. We need to see a medical from
you", should be told "Hook up to tow rope, then F--- Off!" ;-)


Well let me tell you that the UK BGA have introduced rules about old pilots
flying solo. When I get to 76, which will occur in about 18 months, I will
no longer be allowed to fly without a safety pilot. I officially retired
from instructing in 1978 and have not flown gliders since. However I do have
500 hrs P1 and 2100 sorties in my book. All of this cuts no ice with the
BGA, or indeed the club I am going to fly with this summer. I have to
produce a full medical certificate or I will not fly solo, assuming that I
can cope with these new fangled glass ships. So I have had the medical. The
fact that I am fitter than people twenty years my junior has nothing to do
with it either. However I do not mind any of this in the least, as it was
very re-assuring to be advised by my medical man that I was in better shape
than some 50 year olds on his books. I still maintain my view that all this
medical examining has little to do with the possibility of an accident or
incident taking place due to some problem hitherto undiscovered.

Alistair Wright
Old wooden pilot

There was another case where an airline captain who
had passed a full CAA Class 1 ATP medical only a few
days previously had a heart attack and died during
a commercial flight with many passengers on board.
The co-pilot completed the flight without further incident.

State regulation does not guarantee flight safety,
but just costs pilots lots of money!

Derek Copeland


At 11:24 04 May 2007, Dan G wrote:
On May 4, 12:12 pm, Dan G wrote:
An ASN database query gives:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/....php?Event=FCI


Should say that list is for 'flight crew incapacitation',
which
includes a range of occurences. However a notable absence
from that
list is the 1972 Trident crash near Staines, just outside
of London.
The captain had an acute heart condition during a cockpit
emergency
that no doubt compounded the problem.


Dan