A Modest Proposal

[kscessnadriver]

Not to pick a fight, but can you point out any significant differences in the crash rates between sport pilots and private pilots directly attributable to the lack of medical certification? I had a lot of the same concerns when the proposal for sport pilot was put forth but those have largely never been supported by the actual events that have transpired.

I cannot. But I do know that people who are flying on a drivers license could easily have all kinds of mental conditions that might make them do things a person with a medical would not do. Because those mental conditions would never be certifiable medically. Long and short of it, I don't think that being able to fly without a medical is something that we should allow, as it doesn't comply with ICAO standards and AFAIK, there are no other countries that allow it as well.

Would I be ok with flying on no medical after someone had obtained a 3rd class medical and let it expire, perhaps. But to go up without ever having stepped in an AME office, I cannot support.

[steveinindy]

Judging them how? Are all CP and ATP fatalities the result of bad judgement?

No, not at all. It was meant to just be that certification or medical certification really isn't going to have much effect if the person in control is possessing of questionable judgment. Does that clarify where I was going with that example Marty?

[steveinindy]

But I do know that people who are flying on a drivers license could easily have all kinds of mental conditions that might make them do things a person with a medical would not do.

Assuming that:
1. the person even reports it to the AME. It's like a lot of pilots freely admit that their AME has never even done a physical exam on them. Mine's an OB/GYN. I don't think he'd pick up on subtle cardiac symptoms unless they walked up and bit him squarely on his butt.
2 That your assessment of their fitness is accurate (meaning that it's not a purposeful or unintentional confirmation bias at work). There are a lot of misplaced stigmas about mental illness that aren't grounded in fact and that's why people are allowed to drive. I will admit that a lot of folks don't deserve to be driving, but at the same time most of those have nothing to do with their medical fitness.

Because those mental conditions would never be certifiable medically.

There are a lot of mental conditions that have no appreciable effect that are grounding conditions because of archaic thought processes about them that stem from the 1940s and 1950s. Hell, there are non-sedating antihistamines which the FAA won't allow pilots to take because "of the risk of sedation and decrease in performance or judgment".

Long and short of it, I don't think that being able to fly without a medical is something that we should allow,

I agree to a certain extent with you, but I believe the current system is irreparably broken and antiquated. At most, a "Yup, you're good to go" from your primary care doc should be all that is required to achieve a comparable level of safety to what we currently have without needlessly grounding people or subjecting folks to unnecessary, expensive and sometimes potentially risky testing to get a "special issuance".

as it doesn't comply with ICAO standards and AFAIK, there are no other countries that allow it as well.

Because the ICAO standards are completely grounded in medical science and are spot on correct, right?

Would I be ok with flying on no medical after someone had obtained a 3rd class medical and let it expire, perhaps. But to go up without ever having stepped in an AME office, I cannot support.

You're entitled to that opinion, but as a scientist, I tend to go with what the evidence says and I'm likewise entitled to disagree with you. Either way, no hard feelings I hope.

[Eric Page]

I do know that people who are flying on a drivers license could easily have all kinds of mental conditions that might make them do things a person with a medical would not do. Because those mental conditions would never be certifiable medically.

I've been flying for about 24 years. I've held a 1st Class medical certificate for the last nine years and I held both 2nd and 3rd Class certificates before that. In all that time I've never undergone an exam that included a mental health evaluation, and I've never had an MRI or CT of my head. What assurance do I or my passengers have that I'm not suffering from an undiagnosed psychological disorder, or a physical, electrical or chemical defect in my brain? Answer: none. Same as every other pilot with a medical or driver with a license.

Medical incapacitation is an exceedingly rare thing, even for drivers (and there are a lot more drivers than pilots). How often do you hear of someone becoming incapacitated while driving and having an accident? I'm sure I've seen a news story about it, but I can't remember the last time.

I can think of three big things that will go a long way to improving aviation safety:

1. Provide the best initial training possible for new pilots.
2. Encourage a culture of safety and regulatory compliance among existing pilots.
3. Develop inherently safe and survivable aircraft with reliable and fault-tolerant systems.

Easing regulatory burdens by reducing the need for pilots to buy expensive, and largely meaningless, 3rd Class medical certificates will help to encourage entry and participation in aviation. It won't, in my view, have any negative effect on safety.

[Dana]

I cannot. But I do know that people who are flying on a drivers license could easily have all kinds of mental conditions that might make them do things a person with a medical would not do. Because those mental conditions would never be certifiable medically. Long and short of it, I don't think that being able to fly without a medical is something that we should allow, as it doesn't comply with ICAO standards and AFAIK, there are no other countries that allow it as well.

But as somebody else pointed out, an FAA medical doesn't check for mental conditions or stupidity. The drivers license basically means you have to wear corrective lenses to fly if you have to wear them to drive, as any reasonable pilot would anyway.

I put it to you that not requiring medical exams for drivers is no more reasonable than not requiring them for pilots... when a driver becomes incapacitated it's far more likely somebody else will be hurt than if a pilot becomes incapacitated.

Unless you're flying outside the US (which probably 99% of US pilots never do), who cares if we comply with ICAO standards?

[rosiejerryrosie]

And this mentality is the entire reason I'm against having no medical for a private pilot. Simply there will be too many idiots flying in the air. More air in their head than good decision making ability. People who think they know everything and can't be told anything. People who have zero regard for the established rules, that are more often than not, written in blood.

As far as I'm concerned, the original poster should have any and all pilot certificates revoked for simply suggesting this outrageous idea.

Just interested, Cessna, How does a medical check for common sense and insure good decision making ability?

[MEdwards]

As part of our research, we just completed an analysis of something like 530 GA fatalities (we have data for 1400 or so but were looking at something really specific and there was only sufficient information about that in 530 cases). That included all of the medically incapacitated pilot induced crashes in that series. All three of them....aged 44 (ultralight crash), 56 and 68.

What research are you referring to, and who is "we"? In the past, I recall that the FAA has turned down proposals to relax medical certification requirements by saying basically, "There is no evidence it won't reduce safety." I hope somebody is providing that evidence this time around, and I hope it's not just AOPA and EAA, but other independent researchers also who will have different data, or use it differently, and hammer home the point.

[Joe Delene]

Put me down for the free beer at OSH & the discussion can go forward.

[RickFE]

Found at Pharisee, short story in "A Gift of Wings" by Richard Bach.

[martymayes]

What research are you referring to, and who is "we"? In the past, I recall that the FAA has turned down proposals to relax medical certification requirements by saying basically, "There is no evidence it won't reduce safety." I hope somebody is providing that evidence this time around, and I hope it's not just AOPA and EAA, but other independent researchers also who will have different data, or use it differently, and hammer home the point.

Data, schmata. In the past when relaxing medical requirements was proposed, the federal air surgeon slammed the gavel down and said no way. Didn't matter if you had a mountain if data. If a federal air surgeon is open to change, strike while you can baby, might not get another chance for a long time.