ALPA opposes third-class medical reform
08-07-2015, 08:18 AM
#121
Eats shoots and leaves...
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Didactic Synthetic Aviation Experience Provider
Posts: 849
Since everyone seems to be so concerned about pilot health, here is the proposal I'll be submitting to my senators and congressmen, as well as the FAA:
Require all pilots to be screened by an AME chosen at random (by the FAA) within their geographic region. This would be much more effective than the current system, where some pilots deliberately "shop' for lenient AME's. This would certainly improve safety, as it would result in pilots being screened objectively, rather than allowing airmen with suspected medical issues to continue to slip through the cracks.
Anybody want to jump on board with this?
Really, why not? I thought you really cared about ensuring that pilots were absolutely medically fit? Or are you just hypocrites?
Require all pilots to be screened by an AME chosen at random (by the FAA) within their geographic region. This would be much more effective than the current system, where some pilots deliberately "shop' for lenient AME's. This would certainly improve safety, as it would result in pilots being screened objectively, rather than allowing airmen with suspected medical issues to continue to slip through the cracks.
Anybody want to jump on board with this?
Really, why not? I thought you really cared about ensuring that pilots were absolutely medically fit? Or are you just hypocrites?
08-07-2015, 09:48 AM
#122
New Hire
Joined APC: May 2014
Position: CAL/UAL Retired FO
Posts: 4
This whole "sharing the airways" argument is specious. When was the last time a mid-air (or even near miss) occurred because some pilot had a medical issue?
LSA and sailplane pilots have flown without medicals for years and the statistics don't support the argument that a 3rd class medical (or any medical for that matter) adds a darned thing to safety. I can recall that during my career there were at least four instances of airline pilots who had valid First Class Medicals dropping dead in the cockpit.
CAL retired.
LSA and sailplane pilots have flown without medicals for years and the statistics don't support the argument that a 3rd class medical (or any medical for that matter) adds a darned thing to safety. I can recall that during my career there were at least four instances of airline pilots who had valid First Class Medicals dropping dead in the cockpit.
CAL retired.
Last edited by Airnostalgia; 08-07-2015 at 09:49 AM. Reason: correction
08-07-2015, 10:26 AM
#123
New Hire
Joined APC: May 2014
Position: CAL/UAL Retired FO
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by bcrosier
Since everyone seems to be so concerned about pilot health, here is the proposal I'll be submitting to my senators and congressmen, as well as the FAA:
Require all pilots to be screened by an AME chosen at random (by the FAA) within their geographic region. This would be much more effective than the current system, where some pilots deliberately "shop' for lenient AME's. This would certainly improve safety, as it would result in pilots being screened objectively, rather than allowing airmen with suspected medical issues to continue to slip through the cracks.
Anybody want to jump on board with this?
Really, why not? I thought you really cared about ensuring that pilots were absolutely medically fit? Or are you just hypocrites?
Require all pilots to be screened by an AME chosen at random (by the FAA) within their geographic region. This would be much more effective than the current system, where some pilots deliberately "shop' for lenient AME's. This would certainly improve safety, as it would result in pilots being screened objectively, rather than allowing airmen with suspected medical issues to continue to slip through the cracks.
Anybody want to jump on board with this?
Really, why not? I thought you really cared about ensuring that pilots were absolutely medically fit? Or are you just hypocrites?
CAL Retired.
08-07-2015, 10:38 AM
#124
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 49
Originally Posted by Airnostalgia
This whole "sharing the airways" argument is specious. When was the last time a mid-air (or even near miss) occurred because some pilot had a medical issue.
08-07-2015, 11:12 AM
#125
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by cardiomd
I think a little more than 10 years ago if I recall correctly. It is impossible to get evidence because we'd be on uncharted territory - the LSA license explicitly forbids pilots that have been declined a Class 3 medical from flying, however if Class 3 is abolished then anybody that can drive can now legally fly. LSA have a maximal stall speed of 45 kts and are generally very simple craft.
There are no rules for reexamination for drivers license in many states (but many do have a quick vision test at DL renewal).
Driving is NOT the same as flying, and there are some people in absolutely horrible health, vision, deaf, alzheimers, tremors, previous stroke, etc., that can drive that should never pilot an aircraft (20/100 vision is probably enough to safely drive.) I'd never want a pilot with that vision.
I'm sure in a fantasy land "self-certification" of medical fitness would be fine, but simply put I predict an increase in crashes if this rule passes. Most would be single pilot, but some would not. Many would take their families with them. I fly a lot of people and nobody has ever asked me about my health - they assume that because I have a valid certificate, that I am safe.
I can't imagine anybody supporting this unless they fall into the class that would explicitly benefit (worried about failing the medical). A much better approach would be to REASONABLY expand the special issuance criteria, and to perhaps have functional testing instead of arbitrary exclusion criteria. Although I find it odd that ALPA jumped into the fray, I fully understand their position.
There are no rules for reexamination for drivers license in many states (but many do have a quick vision test at DL renewal).
Driving is NOT the same as flying, and there are some people in absolutely horrible health, vision, deaf, alzheimers, tremors, previous stroke, etc., that can drive that should never pilot an aircraft (20/100 vision is probably enough to safely drive.) I'd never want a pilot with that vision.
I'm sure in a fantasy land "self-certification" of medical fitness would be fine, but simply put I predict an increase in crashes if this rule passes. Most would be single pilot, but some would not. Many would take their families with them. I fly a lot of people and nobody has ever asked me about my health - they assume that because I have a valid certificate, that I am safe.
I can't imagine anybody supporting this unless they fall into the class that would explicitly benefit (worried about failing the medical). A much better approach would be to REASONABLY expand the special issuance criteria, and to perhaps have functional testing instead of arbitrary exclusion criteria. Although I find it odd that ALPA jumped into the fray, I fully understand their position.
So there is no evidence for either position, thanks.
Is there any evidence of more accidents for LSA pilots attributed to their medical condition?
Also, the requirement for a flight review and IPC would still apply. A certified instructor would still have to sign off on the pilot on a regular basis. As opposed to your driver's license.
08-07-2015, 11:14 AM
#126
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by bcrosier
Since everyone seems to be so concerned about pilot health, here is the proposal I'll be submitting to my senators and congressmen, as well as the FAA:
Require all pilots to be screened by an AME chosen at random (by the FAA) within their geographic region. This would be much more effective than the current system, where some pilots deliberately "shop' for lenient AME's. This would certainly improve safety, as it would result in pilots being screened objectively, rather than allowing airmen with suspected medical issues to continue to slip through the cracks.
Anybody want to jump on board with this?
Really, why not? I thought you really cared about ensuring that pilots were absolutely medically fit? Or are you just hypocrites?
Require all pilots to be screened by an AME chosen at random (by the FAA) within their geographic region. This would be much more effective than the current system, where some pilots deliberately "shop' for lenient AME's. This would certainly improve safety, as it would result in pilots being screened objectively, rather than allowing airmen with suspected medical issues to continue to slip through the cracks.
Anybody want to jump on board with this?
Really, why not? I thought you really cared about ensuring that pilots were absolutely medically fit? Or are you just hypocrites?
I would be ok with that. But I'm also of the opinion that we should have real and more strict medical exams and do away with a semi arbitrary age limit.
08-07-2015, 11:16 AM
#127
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,516
A person who (for example) is diagnosed as a diabetic is no longer eligible to exercise the privileges of their FAA medical.
However
If they let their medical lapse, they've then never "failed" or been denied a FAA medical and are completely legal to fly LSAs.
A friend that had cancer was able to fly via this "loophole".
This hasn't been an issue in the last decade or so, has it?
However
If they let their medical lapse, they've then never "failed" or been denied a FAA medical and are completely legal to fly LSAs.
A friend that had cancer was able to fly via this "loophole".
This hasn't been an issue in the last decade or so, has it?
08-07-2015, 02:14 PM
#128
Eats shoots and leaves...
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Didactic Synthetic Aviation Experience Provider
Posts: 849
Originally Posted by Airnostalgia
LSA pilots can self-certify. Glider pilots have never been required to have medicals, either. What would be your selection criteria? All pilots, some pilots, what? What do you hope to accomplish besides another layer of regulation? The statistics do not support the arguments against the regulation. I suspect that the majority of those on this forum who are opposed have never flown a GA airplane in their lives.
CAL Retired.
CAL Retired.
It's a rhetorical argument - I agree the last thing we need is more bureaucracy; and I'm certainly not going to write anyone advocating such a system.
08-07-2015, 03:45 PM
#129
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Right Seat 737, Front seat T-6
Posts: 536
Originally Posted by cardiomd
I'm sure in a fantasy land "self-certification" of medical fitness would be fine, but simply put I predict an increase in crashes if this rule passes. Most would be single pilot, but some would not. Many would take their families with them. I fly a lot of people and nobody has ever asked me about my health - they assume that because I have a valid certificate, that I am safe.
I can't imagine anybody supporting this unless they fall into the class that would explicitly benefit (worried about failing the medical). A much better approach would be to REASONABLY expand the special issuance criteria, and to perhaps have functional testing instead of arbitrary exclusion criteria. Although I find it odd that ALPA jumped into the fray, I fully understand their position.
I can't imagine anybody supporting this unless they fall into the class that would explicitly benefit (worried about failing the medical). A much better approach would be to REASONABLY expand the special issuance criteria, and to perhaps have functional testing instead of arbitrary exclusion criteria. Although I find it odd that ALPA jumped into the fray, I fully understand their position.
And, despite requiring Class 1 examinations for airline captains every 6 months (for those over 40), how many times have airline captains dropped dead in-flight? Now, there's a stat you could probably track. Is the solution to make Class 1 examinations even more often?
How about requiring a full medical prior to every flight? That would increase safety, wouldn't it? Or, would it just be more bureaucracy?
The whole idea of deleting the Class 3 requirement is not to make flying cheaper, but to remove some barriers to flying, allowing more pilots to enjoy flying ... who may someday become airline pilots -- something I think ALPA would want!
... except they say there is no pilot shortage??
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
