Medical Requirement Update

[dick b]

What is the latest information on status of request to the FAA for deleting the requirement for a third class medical? Is any kind of timeline expected or proposed?

Dick B

[Hal Bryan]

Here's the most recent update, published last month:

http://eaa.org/news/2013/2013-01-10_FAA-still-reviewing-medical-certification-exemption-request.asp

[kscessnadriver]

Why does EAA and AOPA keep posting this as if it's going to happen. Aeromedical has said it is opposed to it, and as such, probably will not happen. Why the false advertising?

[WLIU]

Has FAA Aeromedical officially opposed the current proposal/petition? Is there a pointer or reference to a memo or input?

Thanks,

Wes
N78PS

[kscessnadriver]

Has FAA Aeromedical officially opposed the current proposal/petition? Is there a pointer or reference to a memo or input?

Thanks,

Wes
N78PS

Doc Bruce over on the AOPA forums, who is a very prominent AME who does lots of great work for SI's, has basically said that aeromedical has zero intention of letting the requirement for a medical go away.

I feel like that's great news. There is no reason to go against ICAO and potentially end up with a bunch of pilot certificates that aren't internationally recognized.

[martymayes]

Has FAA Aeromedical officially opposed the current proposal/petition?

The official answer to that is NO.


However, reputable word on the street is that at the end of the review it will be stamped "FAA REJECTS PROPOSAL"

[WLIU]

Interesting comment on ICAO. I do not see the issue as the requirement would simply be that to fly in another country on a US pilot certificate it must be accompanied by a US FAA Medical Certificate. I don't think that AME's will go out of business so pilots who need to can get medical certificates.

As for the FAA medical branch resisting, I suspect that like most things involving the FAA, AOPA and EAA will simply refile with yet another batch of data. Its what the members want and when dealing with the government, you can not be successful if you take NO for an answer. Its a game of last man standing....

Thanks for the info.

Wes
N78PS

[martymayes]

Word from the physician side is a relaxed standards medical certificate is obtainable under the current political atmosphere but the alphabet groups won't have anything to do with it.

This would require a visit to any medical practioner for a CDL type physical. Austrailia currently has such a program here
(http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2012/120627australia-offers-new-medical-option-for-private-flying.html)
So yes, continue to resubmit the petition, 10 yrs or so it may pass or go for something now that is obtainable and keep pluggin away for the grand prize. Wonder what the member consensus would be?

[Tom Charpentier]

First off, we have never represented this issue "as if it's going to happen." Are we optimistic? Sure, but we recognize there's a long way to go before we pop the champagne. We continue to keep a sharp eye on this and apply pressure where appropriate.

Second, the aeromedical establishment may or may not support this proposal, but they don't get to make the decision. Any ruling on this issue would come from the Administrator. We believe that the Administrator and his staff will follow the reasonable logic that given the track record of Sport Pilot, applying a similar medical standard (with the added requirement of a self-certification course) to the simple, familiar GA aircraft most pilots fly would not be a detriment to flight safety.

This exemption would have no bearing on ICAO acceptance of US licenses. It would simply remove the requirement to possess a medical while flying in certain aircraft under certain conditions in the US with a Private Pilot rating. If at any point you want to fly outside the US, your PPL is still perfectly valid as long as you pick up a medical.

[dewi8095]

The official answer to that is NO.


However, reputable word on the street is that at the end of the review it will be stamped "FAA REJECTS PROPOSAL"


If the FAA is going to reject the proposal outright, why should it delay? I think that the pending governmental budget crisis is influencing the final decision to some extent. Unloading the cost for processing a sizable portion of medical certificates would save the agency a bundle.

Don

[steveinindy]

Unloading the cost for processing a sizable portion of medical certificates would save the agency a bundle.

You know....that's a darn good way to frame it. Or at least point out "The money you're wasting on keeping people with marginal risk factors or illusionary risk factors from flying is money you could be spending on NEXGEN!" *POOF* CAMI's budget goes down and we get them off our collective butts.

Now, I know it would never happen like that but hey....a man can dream.

[Joe LaMantia]

If we step back and look at the "big picture", what we have is a typical conflict between two groups. The GA pilot population represented by AOPA and EAA are proposing a change that would benefit the group they represent, while a second group sees that change as a threat. Clearly the AME population will loose $ and the FAA's AeroMedical Div will loose power and maybe a bit of funding. Given the current state of federal debt and revenue, it would seem that at some point the cost savings coming from this proposal will have an impact on the outcome. Just like all the "issues" that come out of Washington, in the end, it's about who pays and who benefits. That's as close to politics as I'll get on this, but I think if we're patient we'll win in the end.

Joe
:cool:

[kscessnadriver]

As for the FAA medical branch resisting, I suspect that like most things involving the FAA, AOPA and EAA will simply refile with yet another batch of data. Its what the members want and when dealing with the government, you can not be successful if you take NO for an answer. Its a game of last man standing....


It's what SOME of the members want (emphasis on the bold). After having dealt with some of the LSA fliers that don't have medicals (who are typically older), I saw some who really had no business in an 120 knot LSA. Now you want them to be able to jump in a 200 knot Cirrus or 160 knot Bonanza? No thanks. I don't want to share the skies with these people that aren't mentally up to flying the aircraft.

Because the first incident of one of these pilots doing something to either a group of people on the ground or doing something interfering with an airliner, and GA goes away totally.

[David Pavlich]

It's what SOME of the members want (emphasis on the bold). After having dealt with some of the LSA fliers that don't have medicals (who are typically older), I saw some who really had no business in an 120 knot LSA. Now you want them to be able to jump in a 200 knot Cirrus or 160 knot Bonanza? No thanks. I don't want to share the skies with these people that aren't mentally up to flying the aircraft.

Because the first incident of one of these pilots doing something to either a group of people on the ground or doing something interfering with an airliner, and GA goes away totally.

I think you're painting with a very broad brush. I refer you to this thread:

http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?3279-AOPA-Webpage-fatal-accident-study

I have yet to take a lesson, however, I have done some research about GA accidents. I've reviewed a couple dozen and not one was an E-LSA or S-LSA pilot and none were caused by mechanical malfunction. Now, I'm not saying that LSA pilots are any better or worst, but to say that "Because the first incident of one of these pilots doing something to either a group of people on the ground or doing something interfering with an airliner, and GA goes away totally" is a bit much. With this statement, you infer that a Private Pilot certification guarantees that he or she won't do something stupid. I'm 61 years old, by the way, and I would think that it's a good possibility that some of the older pilots here would take exception to your assessment.

David

[martymayes]

If the FAA is going to reject the proposal outright, why should it delay? I think that the pending governmental budget crisis is influencing the final decision to some extent. Unloading the cost for processing a sizable portion of medical certificates would save the agency a bundle.


They are not interested in saving money in exchange for safety. The problem with the medical proposal is the proponents fail to prove their case. All the emotional testimony in the world isn't going to win the argument. Gotta get the facts and they have to be convincing. Good luck.

[Floatsflyer]

No thanks. I don't want to share the skies with these people that aren't mentally up to flying the aircraft.

Because the first incident of one of these pilots doing something to either a group of people on the ground or doing something interfering with an airliner, and GA goes away totally.

Agreed, for my own purposes and protection of vested interests and those of GA. Look, we are already one of the most publicly misunderstood and maligned groups of individuals on the planet. The uninformed/misinformed public and media(especially the media) already think we're just a bunch of yahoos flying around in little airplanes and that makes us dangerous. Just think about how upset you get and roll your eyes at the ignorant statements expressed when a GA accident is covered in the press.


:(That will be a walk in the park compared to the seisimic fallout when the public learns that the pilot in the reported accident had no medical and was not required to have one. The proverbial s**t will hit the fan with such force that the resulting spray will negatively impact GA like never before and put us back into the stone age!

[martymayes]

I have yet to take a lesson, however, I have done some research about GA accidents. I've reviewed a couple dozen and not one was an E-LSA or S-LSA pilot and none were caused by mechanical malfunction.

But there have been some LSA accidents where medical incapacitation was a factor. Perhaps the pilot should not have been flying, which is not helping with the medical exemption.

[David Pavlich]

I'm sure there have, Marty, just as there have been with a Private certificate. In an earlier thread, there was a post about PP that had NINE maladies that was still flying! How did that happen? I'm coming into this late in the game, but apparently some entity thought that the Sport Pilot certificate wouldn't be any more a problem than the Private certificate. I read an article in P&P that stated that the accident stats are no worse in the Sport group than the Private group. I suppose the author could be wrong, but if that's the case, I have a difficult time squaring the negative press of medical vs non-medical. Just so you know, when the time comes, I'll have to take the physical because I do want a Private certificate. But if the statisitics bare it out, then I don't understand the angst.

A case in point would be if the media reported the accidents you hear about in the news with the findings from NTSB saying that, as is the case of the video that I linked to, the Private Pilot made a decision to take a chance so that he could get his child back to college in one hour as opposed to a four hour car ride, there would be an outcry to stop allowing small planes rain down from the sky because these PP are incapable of making proper decisions. Stupid, I know, but such is the way of things. Thousands of flights are made without incident, yet the one that goes haywire is the one that gets the press. As I was told in another thread, you can't force someone to make a sound decision. You can teach him that going into marginal VFR carries a very high risk that it can quickly turn to IMC. However, that lesson seems to be lost on some Private Pilots.

I guess it comes down to my lack of experience and thinking that if a guy just gets his Sport certificate and makes the proper decision about how and when he flies, there is a very good chance that he'll live to be an old pilot regardless of time in the left seat.

David

[kscessnadriver]

The problem here is that Sport Pilot wasn't meant to create a bunch of new airplanes, it was meant to regulate a bunch of people who already couldn't follow regulations (in regards to Part 103 ultralights that weren't). That's where it was meant to be, regulate the guys who had little ultralights that did 60-80 knots, stayed low and local to their location. Not 120 knot airplanes that people turn into X/C machines.

[martymayes]

The problem here is that Sport Pilot wasn't meant to create a bunch of new airplanes, it was meant to regulate a bunch of people who already couldn't follow regulations (in regards to Part 103 ultralights that weren't). That's where it was meant to be, regulate the guys who had little ultralights that did 60-80 knots, stayed low and local to their location. Not 120 knot airplanes that people turn into X/C machines.

Nonsense. The purpose of LSA was not limited to regulating overweight ultralights. If that were true, rules could have easily been written to accomplish that without opening the door for new aircraft.

[Scott Wagner]

Now you want them to be able to jump in a 200 knot Cirrus or 160 knot Bonanza? No thanks. I don't want to share the skies with these people that aren't mentally up to flying the aircraft.



Unless they built some Cirri with 180hp up front, or some straight legged Bonanzas that I am unaware of, no one is suggesting they jump in one. And as long as there are pilots with more money than skill and brains, Cirri will continue to float to the ground under canopy because Dr. Whatshisname got in over his head. Bonanzas, Skyhawks and 152's, along with every other type, will crash and make the local news. Honestly, how many accidents a year are caused by medical incapacitation? Even with First Class Medicals, we see stories about an airline pilot dying in the cockpit from of a heart attack. The medical, as it applies to non-professional flying, is totally pointless. If people arent "mentally up to flying the aircraft", their instructor needs to let them know, and not sign off on their flight review.

[steveinindy]

Honestly, how many accidents a year are caused by medical incapacitation?

Conclusively and without any chance that it is not due to other reasons? Probably few enough to count on both hands. Then you get into the "well, the pilot might have been altered because of unreported use of prohibited medication" which is arguable because the FAA seems to view nearly every OTC medication as "potentially hazardous".

[kscessnadriver]

Unless they built some Cirri with 180hp up front, or some straight legged Bonanzas that I am unaware of, no one is suggesting they jump in one.

Because I know how this game works. Just like the 1320 pound limit on LSA that everyone seems to want to increase. You get a foot in the door and then you keep pushing.

Quite simply, as someone who flies for my livelihood, I don't want anyone in the air without a medical, it wouldn't hurt my feels to see sport pilot go away.

[Bill Berson]

Quite simply, as someone who flies for my livelihood, I don't want anyone in the air without a medical, it wouldn't hurt my feels to see sport pilot go away.
Hmmm, I thought EAA and this forum was about, for and dedicated to sport aviation.
If all sport pilots went away, as you suggest, chances are good that many of the airports you use will go away.
Sport pilot is limited to 10,000 feet. Can't you get above 10,000 in controlled airspace anyway?

[WLIU]

I am always saddened when I see a participant in an activity make an elitist statement that boils down to "No one should be allowed to participate unless they are as talented and experienced as I!"

There is ALWAYS someone out there more talented and experienced ready willing and able to advocate that YOU don't measure up.

There are Baron drivers who would have the Cessna drivers get out of their way. King Air drivers who would have the tower have all of the Baron's hold while they are on the ILS. Gulfstream drivers who would have all of the airplanes burdened with mere propellers be diverted on their behalf. And there are lots of military generals who think that civilians are running amok and a lot more restricted airspace is in order.

STOP IT!

Benjamin Franklin of all people once said "if we do not hang together, we will all hang separately."

If you have not noticed, aviation is NOT thriving. And working to reduce the pilot population rather than getting out of your smug chair and putting in some time helping all of those great unwashed be smarter and safer pilots is just helping our activity die faster. It is up to you to make something positive happen. I can tell you that putting on a fake smile instead of screaming while you explain how a pilot that you just wished you had not just met did a dumb thing is hard work. But most pilots are not malicious, just uneducated and it is in all of our best interests to increase their knowledge level. And no we did not volunteer, Mother Nature drafted us. Comes with the territory. Get over it.

My $0.02.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78PS

[wacoc8]

I am always saddened when I see a participant in an activity make an elitist statement that boils down to "No one should be allowed to participate unless they are as talented and experienced as I!"

There is ALWAYS someone out there more talented and experienced ready willing and able to advocate that YOU don't measure up.

There are Baron drivers who would have the Cessna drivers get out of their way. King Air drivers who would have the tower have all of the Baron's hold while they are on the ILS. Gulfstream drivers who would have all of the airplanes burdened with mere propellers be diverted on their behalf. And there are lots of military generals who think that civilians are running amok and a lot more restricted airspace is in order.

STOP IT!

Benjamin Franklin of all people once said "if we do not hang together, we will all hang separately."

If you have not noticed, aviation is NOT thriving. And working to reduce the pilot population rather than getting out of your smug chair and putting in some time helping all of those great unwashed be smarter and safer pilots is just helping our activity die faster. It is up to you to make something positive happen. I can tell you that putting on a fake smile instead of screaming while you explain how a pilot that you just wished you had not just met did a dumb thing is hard work. But most pilots are not malicious, just uneducated and it is in all of our best interests to increase their knowledge level. And no we did not volunteer, Mother Nature drafted us. Comes with the territory. Get over it.

My $0.02.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78PS

As someone who has spent the last 27 years "flying for food", I cannot agree more with Wes. KCCessnaDriver's viewpoint is sad, very sad.

[rickatic]

As someone who has spent the last 27 years "flying for food", I cannot agree more with Wes. KCCessnaDriver's viewpoint is sad, very sad.

x 3...I have heard other elitist's say similar nonsense...my favorite was an old flight instructor buddy who said he would never support the 3rd class no medical because the medical card necessity made him "special"...

Regards

[David Pavlich]

I am always saddened when I see a participant in an activity make an elitist statement that boils down to "No one should be allowed to participate unless they are as talented and experienced as I!"

There is ALWAYS someone out there more talented and experienced ready willing and able to advocate that YOU don't measure up.

There are Baron drivers who would have the Cessna drivers get out of their way. King Air drivers who would have the tower have all of the Baron's hold while they are on the ILS. Gulfstream drivers who would have all of the airplanes burdened with mere propellers be diverted on their behalf. And there are lots of military generals who think that civilians are running amok and a lot more restricted airspace is in order.

STOP IT!

Benjamin Franklin of all people once said "if we do not hang together, we will all hang separately."

If you have not noticed, aviation is NOT thriving. And working to reduce the pilot population rather than getting out of your smug chair and putting in some time helping all of those great unwashed be smarter and safer pilots is just helping our activity die faster. It is up to you to make something positive happen. I can tell you that putting on a fake smile instead of screaming while you explain how a pilot that you just wished you had not just met did a dumb thing is hard work. But most pilots are not malicious, just uneducated and it is in all of our best interests to increase their knowledge level. And no we did not volunteer, Mother Nature drafted us. Comes with the territory. Get over it.

My $0.02.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78PS

Well, that about says it all!! :thumbsup:


David

[JimRice85]

Very well stated, Wes. Unfortunately, I see KSCessnadriver doesn't mesh any better here than on other aviation boards. Too bad. :(

[kscessnadriver]

Hmmm, I thought EAA and this forum was about, for and dedicated to sport aviation.
If all sport pilots went away, as you suggest, chances are good that many of the airports you use will go away.
Sport pilot is limited to 10,000 feet. Can't you get above 10,000 in controlled airspace anyway?

I have zero problem with people flying for sport. I'm saying that I have a problem with a big chunk of people I've seen fly with no medical. Some of them, IMO, have no business behind the wheel of a car, let alone behind the controls of an aircraft. Because the first time one of these guys hits something and makes the news, the outcry from the public is going to push us further into irrelevancy. I'm a firm believer in self-regulation for self-preservation.

But hey, its my opinion only. Not likely to be popular here, but that's what I think.

[rosiejerryrosie]

KSCessnaDriver



I'm a firm believer in self-regulation for self-preservation.

From your posts it would appear to me that you are more opposed to 'self regulation' and more in favor of 'government regulation', since you appear to be opposed to the self certification of medical fitness by pilots of small aircraft.... just saying... Your concern about how the press will react when they find out a pilot did not possess a medical is probably the same reaction they have had for a long time when they find out the pilot was flying without 'filing a flight plan'.... horrorstruck, but having no effect at all on the way the world runs...
In reality - a medical exam is a poor predictor of any pilot's ability to keep from making smoking holes in the ground....

[WLIU]

You are welcome to your opinion. This forum and its host are inclusive, not exclusive. We all like that.

But you and we should all recognize as adults that some opinions make you part of the problem rather than part of the solution. The world will be better off if we all try to apply our smarts and creativity to be part of the solution.

Thanks,

Wes
N78PS

[kscessnadriver]

In reality - a medical exam is a poor predictor of any pilot's ability to keep from making smoking holes in the ground....

No, but it eliminates people who have serious mental problems, which are likely to be ones who do things to hurt GA with an airplane.

[kscessnadriver]

You are welcome to your opinion. This forum and its host are inclusive, not exclusive. We all like that.

But you and we should all recognize as adults that some opinions make you part of the problem rather than part of the solution. The world will be better off if we all try to apply our smarts and creativity to be part of the solution.

Thanks,

Wes
N78PS

So basically, you're saying, your entitled to your opinion, unless it doesn't fit what other people think, then in that case, piss off?

[dewi8095]

KSCessnaDriver



... Your concern about how the press will react when they find out a pilot did not possess a medical is probably the same reaction they have had for a long time when they find out the pilot was flying without 'filing a flight plan'.... horrorstruck, but having no effect at all on the way the world runs...
..

I wonder if a very large portion of the non-flying public even realizes a medical certificate is required for private pilots? While the media refrain 'he/she didn't file a flight plan' is frequently seen in news reports of airplane accidents, I don't ever recall the mention of a lack, or presence of current medical certification.

Don

[WLIU]

"it eliminates people who have serious mental problems"

It absolutely does not. The AME's are not trained mental health professionals and no part of the 3rd class exam examines mental health.

And the act of congress in the Bob Hoover case effectively stomped on the FAA adding mental health to the AME's process.

The news media folks generally know nothing about recreational aviation. They grab official looking phrases like "Flight Plan" that are listed on accident report summaries and try to sound knowledgeable. As noted above, an uninformed talking head on the news will almost always sensationalize an aviation related report, for good or bad. If I take a reporter up and do one roll, I am a famous test pilot. If someone bends an airplane, no matter what the reason, it will either be described as gross incompetence or hugely heroic depending on if if anyone is injured. It sells advertizing. If you are going to limit your behavior based on what the dumbest person in the room thinks, plan for a very dull life.

Fly safe,

Wes
N78PS

[JimRice85]

At 24 years old, KSCessnadriver is just smarter than everyone else.

I'm sure still doesn't yet fully realize his parents are the complete idiots he once thought either. That's okay. They will get smarter as he ages.

[Hal Bryan]

Guys - debate the ideas, not your opinions about the people who present them. This thread has gone over the line - let's bring it back.

Some are in favor of the exemption, some opposed, some think it's feasible, some don't. THAT'S a good discussion to have.

[Bill Berson]

[QUOTE=kscessnadriver;27519
Quite simply, as someone who flies for my livelihood, I don't want anyone in the air without a medical, it wouldn't hurt my feels to see sport pilot go away.[/QUOTE]

Does that include glider and balloon pilots?

Ok, earlier I assumed your concern as a pro pilot was all these non-pro pilots in "your" airspace creating a perceived increased collision hazard to you.
Was that an incorrect assumption ?

[kscessnadriver]

Does that include glider and balloon pilots?

Ok, earlier I assumed your concern as a pro pilot was all these non-pro pilots in "your" airspace creating a perceived increased collision hazard to you.
Was that an incorrect assumption ?

My post was mainly aimed at powered pilots. I've got no issues with either gliders and balloons being unregulated when it comes to medical certification.

But it's very clear to me that this issue isn't one that people want to have a discussion from both sides on. They want their opinion to be the law of the land and organization, and to hell with the other guy.

[kscessnadriver]

"it eliminates people who have serious mental problems"

It absolutely does not. The AME's are not trained mental health professionals and no part of the 3rd class exam examines mental health.

Sure it does. How many people do you know flying with ADHD? Or Schizophrenia? Or clinical depression? Or, are you going to pretend that the 3rd class medical doesn't catch that.

[dewi8095]

Guys - debate the ideas, not your opinions about the people who present them. This thread has gone over the line - let's bring it back.

Some are in favor of the exemption, some opposed, some think it's feasible, some don't. THAT'S a good discussion to have.

The proposal intends to exempt medical certification for sport and recreational flying and private air travel (with specific limitations) and does not extend to medical certification of occupational flying or any flight under instrument flight rules.

Aside from flying, what other recreational or travel activities in the United States require physical examinations every two to five years? Maybe high school and college sports which require a seasonal physical exam, but I am at a loss to name others. To my knowledge, boating does not and it is probably a much larger-based activity than flying. I don't think snowmobiling does, bicycling, no, nor does any federal agency require that motorists take a physical exam to drive private vehicles as a non-occupational activity. My point is that federal medical certification for recreational and travel-related private flying appears to be an anomaly, and I doubt that our society will be subjected to unbearable risks if an exemption to the 3rd class medical is granted within the limits of the current proposal.

My sense is that the time to give the exemption a fair trial is at hand. Let's hope the FAA leadership agrees.

Don

[Bill Berson]

But it's very clear to me that this issue isn't one that people want to have a discussion from both sides on. They want their opinion to be the law of the land and organization, and to hell with the other guy.
You did not provide any logic to support your inflammatory opinion in the first post.

If you are worried about the public hearing harmful reports about pilots without medicals, my experience is they never heard of medicals.
My passengers usually only ask me if I am talking to a Control Tower at my rural field. I say no, the chatter they hear on the radio is private pilots self announcing.
They never ask about medical issues.

[martymayes]

Sure it does. How many people do you know flying with ADHD? Or Schizophrenia? Or clinical depression? Or, are you going to pretend that the 3rd class medical doesn't catch that.

I've applied for and received >50 medical certificates from 1st to 3rd class. I have NEVER been tested for ADHD, Schizophrenia or depression.

[kscessnadriver]

I've applied for and received >50 medical certificates from 1st to 3rd class. I have NEVER been tested for ADHD, Schizophrenia or depression.

But you did list if you were on prescription pills. Which all of those, when treated with medicines, would be disqualifying.

[David Pavlich]

Don...you just brought up a good point about boating. Anybody can walk into a Fountain Powerboat dealer and buy a 40' go fast boat that has twin 575hp Mercs and capable of 90mph on the water. No physical, no certification, no nothing! Pretty scary stuff, but it's out there!

David

[Hiperbiper]

Sure it does. How many people do you know flying with ADHD? Several...a local Platipuss jockey that can't remember his sqawk or freq till the third or forth repeat. Or Schizophrenia? As long as their're flying twins I'm cool... Or clinical depression? CD can be overcome by not looking at the fuel flow gauge during climb out... Or, are you going to pretend that the 3rd class medical doesn't catch that. I'm not pretending anything...a third class medical will catch a jumpy thumper and the inability of the patient to be able to fog a mirror with his breath.


JMPO and YMMV;

Chris

[steveinindy]

How many people do you know flying with ADHD? Or Schizophrenia? Or clinical depression? Or, are you going to pretend that the 3rd class medical doesn't catch that.


I do know of pilots who have those histories (well, ADHD and depression at least) and have skated through by various means (usually lying). The system isn't perfect but then again if it were perfect, it would be focused on things that actually have a demonstrable statistically significant effect and are not based off of fear, myth and supposition. The major problem what that is that they have their "phasers set to kill" with regards to the clinical depression and other easily treated and alleviated or often transient mental conditions. The schizos and- to a lesser extent- the severe ADHD cases (since I don't know many of us on here who wouldn't light up the DSM criteria for ADHD while at Oshkosh), yeah, I of course can see grounding them. But a guy who was transiently severely depressed years ago- say because of an abusive home life for the sake of having a transient option to argue- and doing fine on or off medication will likely not get his third class since the FAA considers him a flight risk. The attitudes towards mental health and related medications at CAMI are positively draconian with very little nuance for the actual conditions which can vary widely from one person to another. You want to stick a VFR only sticker on his medical because of some pie in the sky fear of spatial disorientation with a patient on newer generation antidepressants, go for it. But if you have a person who is stable and functioning just fine, there's no more risk with that than them giving a special issuance to someone who previously had a heart cath but came back with clean coronaries.

I often wonder how many professional pilots have untreated mental illnesses (or physical conditions) for fear of losing their livelihood. THAT would be what I would be concerned about.

Sorry...didn't mean to post that much. I was actually talking to one of the folks I know down at CAMI about this over on LinkedIn so a lot of this is kind of front and center in my mind.

[steveinindy]

They want their opinion to be the law of the land and organization, and to hell with the other guy.

Actually my stance is show me a reason (scientific preferably) why the law of the land should be the law of the land beyond "we've always done it this way" or "when I got my pilot's license".

I mean, with regards to that last option, when Jim and Marty got their pilots licenses, it was still socially acceptable to take a couple of swigs from a whiskey bottle before flying. But then again I think if I had to see and avoid pterodactyls, I would be drinking too. ;)

(Sorry guys, couldn't resist).

[Bill Berson]

The medical does nothing to weed out older impaired pilots. The physician does not test for old age impairments, as far as I know.
Every pilots airmanship ability is determined by his instructor and the check ride examiner.
And every two years thereafter by the instructor doing the flight review.

[martymayes]

But you did list if you were on prescription pills. Which all of those, when treated with medicines, would be disqualifying.


To have an illness, one must have a diagnosis.

My point was a third class, or second class, or first class medical exam does not test for mental illness. Absent a disclosed condition, if a Dr. suspects something he can defer issuance of the medical. Most Dr.'s are not really equipped to make that kind diagnosis during a routine physical exam (apparenty Dr.'s should consult with pilots on a chat board who can make that diagnosis - insert eye roll here). I doubt many medicals are deferred for this reason.

[rosiejerryrosie]

No, but it eliminates people who have serious mental problems, which are likely to be ones who do things to hurt GA with an airplane.

You are kidding, right? I never had a mental status exam as part of any medical I ever took.....

[rosiejerryrosie]

Sure it does. How many people do you know flying with ADHD? Or Schizophrenia? Or clinical depression? Or, are you going to pretend that the 3rd class medical doesn't catch that.

Are you really claiming that there are no people with serious mental illnesses flying BECAUSE they didn't pass their medical? You can't be serious! I would posit that there are very few folks with mental illnesses who have even TRIED to pass a flight physical (for their own reasons)

[Joe LaMantia]

Here's a few more thoughts on the subject. "Laws were meant to be broken" somebody said that and it's true to the extent that there is always some case of someone doing something that is illegal. Lawbreaking is fodder for the press, and small single-engine private planes have always been easy targets. The FAA "rules" are in place to "promote" safety and aviation, that is their "mission statement". The "safety" rules also provide cover for the politicians when things go south. It is fair to say that the 3rd class medical is overkill, since the number of aviation accidents caused by a "disqualifying" physical condition is very small. It is also clear that the logic behind that law is a bit faulty since it is not applied to other modes of transportation. We kill about 50K people a year on our roads most of those accidents are preventable but there is no public outcry unless a tractor-trailer is involved. Private pilots are required to have a bi-annual flight review as a way of promote basic proficiency, why isn't that a requirement for the renewal of a drivers license? It isn't even required to renew a commercial drivers license, even though there is a physical exam required. The only real consistency we have in regulating our transportation system is the laws that have been written in reaction to events that put pressure on the politicians who write them.

In my opinion, most pilots "self certify" regarding all their flights. I don't fly if the weather is marginal, I don't fly if the aircraft is sick, I don't fly when I'm not up to the task physically, or mentally. That goes for driving as well, I don't own a boat but if I did I follow the same self imposed rules. This is just common sense with or without rules, and yes there will always be someone who is lacking in that department, rules won't prevent stupid actions, they do set some guidelines for proper behavior. What is needed are rules that make sense and are enforceable, that is the hard part.

Joe:cool:

[Bill Berson]

A rule maker achieves perfection not when the maximum hurdles and rules are created but rather when the absolute minimum rules needed are created.


(adapted from:"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” Antoine de Saint-Exupery)

[Flyfalcons]

It seems efforts to change the 3rd class medical requirements would be more effective than trying to eliminate the medical altogether.

[prasmussen]

How's this: Since my insurance company knows way more about me and my medical, financial and spiritual status than they should, let's skip the FAA medical step and just turn the decision who gets to fly over to the insurance companies. Guarantee if someone were unfit or undercapitalized, they'd be walking.

[kscessnadriver]

How's this: Since my insurance company knows way more about me and my medical, financial and spiritual status than they should, let's skip the FAA medical step and just turn the decision who gets to fly over to the insurance companies. Guarantee if someone were unfit or undercapitalized, they'd be walking.

That's assuming people have insurance, unless you want to make it mandatory?