Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
ALPA opposes third-class medical reform >

ALPA opposes third-class medical reform

Search
Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

ALPA opposes third-class medical reform

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-23-2015, 07:12 PM
  #181  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cardiomd's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Seat: Vegan friendly faux leather
Posts: 974
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat View Post
Remember, Doc, these guys know more about medicine than doctors, more about politics than politicians, more about the Union than Union officials, more about stocks than stock market guys....in fact, more about anything than anyone.

They're airline gods, remember.
Thanks. Indeed, a few are truly some of the most ill-informed, ridiculous posts I've ever seen. I guess it is what happens when every dolt has a microphone. As evidenced by counts the posters are a slim minority, and (hopefully) a few others learn from writings or well-thought out posts.

Originally Posted by Jughead135 View Post
A line straight out of the Department of Redundancy Department....!!

I talk like that sometimes I write in that way. Sorry about that!
cardiomd is offline  
Old 11-23-2015, 07:21 PM
  #182  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cardiomd's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Seat: Vegan friendly faux leather
Posts: 974
Default

Originally Posted by owendelong View Post
From my read of it, I'd guess the average sport pilot could add the endorsement (if they didn't have it before taking their check ride) with about 2-3 hours of ground and 1-2 hours of air time.
The majority of LSA people I know personally can not get a standard medical. They are allowed to fly small light aircraft for fun, which is the spirit of the LSA. They don't fly the "missions" of a PPL/CPL.


Originally Posted by owendelong View Post
Most private pilots don't operate "in the system" most of the time, so at least in the bay area, the meaningful differences between LSA/sport pilot and C-172/private pilot boil down to weight and maximum number of passengers. The speeds and interaction with controlled airspace are mostly the same.
I disagree. A modern single such as the SR22 and a LSA are completely different aircraft and demand a great deal difference in pilot sophistication, manual skill and dexterity to safely operate. The safety record between the two would also support this.


Originally Posted by owendelong View Post
Most people who are unfit to fly know it. Lots of "disqualifying conditions" shouldn't be disqualifying so long as they are managed. On one hand, the argument can be made that there is the special issuance process for that. However, as someone who's been through the SI process, I have to tell you that it's a bit on the silly side.
I disagree with your first sentence, but would listen to any supporting data you may have. Believe me, I'm at the other end of getting pilots SI. I'm a specialist and have helped a lot of people get back in the pilot seat, and would appreciate a somewhat more streamlined operation. I do think that there are some areas that could be managed a bit better instead of the "hard and fast" rules, and meaningful reform instead of the "abandon the medical" is reasonable.

I'm quite familiar with the SI process. Again you can imagine I get a few referrals; the AME's listen to specialists when needed.

Originally Posted by owendelong View Post
In short, I believe the proposed rule will significantly reduce costs to many pilots while not impacting safety in a meaningful way.
I think the proposed rule is a start of a good compromise as I said above, and much better than the "no medical examination needed forever" proposed rule, which would have significantly impacted safety.
cardiomd is offline  
Old 11-24-2015, 10:24 AM
  #183  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Baron50's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Cub Cap
Posts: 175
Default

Originally Posted by cardiomd View Post
I think the proposed rule is a start of a good compromise as I said above, and much better than the "no medical examination needed forever" proposed rule, which would have significantly impacted safety.
Except for one resident self hating contrarian here, you are losing the debate Doc. These changes make sense because even the most obtuse politician recognizes a very onerous expensive rule, which is only targeted at less than 1%, is not good public policy. The other 99% are inconvenienced and paying for the unfounded fears of the ignorant.

Most people who fly see a Doctor on a regular basis, some for free with Medicare. Those with a problem, who are not responsible and do not stop flying, are the type that rules do not matter anyways.

I suppose your rationalization, that the amendments are more than pandering, is some sort of justification that you were simply wrong. The reality is, hundreds of thousands private pilots will not need to write a check every two years to tell an AME they feel fine.

Airline pilots spend their entire career using good judgement, being responsible and following the rules, that does not change when they retire. It is truly offensive that someone in another profession would impugn our integrity. You have the wrong audience.

We can hope the AME's will be re-tasked to provide better health care to the general public, that will be an ancillary benefit of this legislation.
Baron50 is offline  
Old 11-24-2015, 10:39 AM
  #184  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2014
Posts: 1,681
Default

I would like so see some details about AME political contributions. In this day and age, there is absolutely no sense in having to get medical certification.

The most similar job I can think of would be a cruise liner. Thousands of people get on those cruise liners (which are crewed by at least a couple of crew members on the bridge at all times.) No cruise liner that I am aware of has ever sunk or grounded because all crew members simultaneously stroked out.

As far as I know, there is no medical certification for any of them.

Honestly, pilot medicals are archaic as all hell. There is simply no safety justification for people operating a two-pilot pressurized airplane. No medical argument can be made for why they are necessary. This ain't the battle of Britain or NASA. We drive a temperature-controlled office around in the air all day. Big whoop!

The only justification is by the Drs.... And anyone ever notice there is no daily limit on how many medicals an AME can issue per day-unlike an examiner issuing pilot certificates? I would bet some can crank well over 5k per day.

Becoming an AME is a sweet gig for a Dr. Issue 20 or 30 per day-at 200 bucks a pop! And never have to fool with insurance! Plus, run a few stress tests and such to keep the FAA happy-heck yeah! Pretty sweet gig. Sure beats a lot of jobs!

Total cash cow. Total waste of time and money by all involved.

As a non-doc, I defy anyone to give me any valid reason for a pilot medical certification in 2015.
jcountry is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
marc1968
Pilot Health
11
05-10-2018 07:35 AM
TheManager
Major
9584
07-28-2015 12:15 PM
Nextlife
Military
2
08-30-2014 07:29 PM
bgmann
Regional
31
11-19-2011 07:33 PM
flyharm
Mergers and Acquisitions
0
02-18-2008 06:49 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices