Uncertified PFD MFD in GA airplanes

[DaV8or]

I didn't know that!

 

But still - I think all this medicals are dumb.  And useless.

 

Besides driving my little car, I could easily have a heart attack, or otherwise fall asleep due to sleep apnea, or whatever, and run into that school bus and take us both out - and I claim that such accidents are easier to imagine hurting someone other than myself in a car than in a small airplane.  And in big airplanes you have multiple pilots.

 

And why is the government so worried about me flying an airplane without a medical but has no worried if I am manic depressive or schizophrenic if I want to buy a gun?  Not that I want medicals there - but a little consistency please.  Let's dump the medicals.  All of them.

 

I hear you, but there is the pesky fact that from time to time people do keel over that the controls of an airplane. More frequently than some may imagine. They also do and the wheel of a bus or truck too. When this happens, it often results in fatality. It is then the non flying, non bus driving general public that cries out- "How could they let this guy pilot that thing!!??" Remember that the FAA is only partly charged with the safety of airplanes and pilots, the other part of their mandate is to protect the general public on the ground. The general public out number us pilots a gazzilion to one, so they are much more responsive to their needs than ours.

 

I agree that the 3rd class medical achieves very little in terms of safety and it would really help GA for it to go away, but no medicals at all is never going to happen.

[DaV8or]

Just another example ... look at the high caliber of FAA Administrators of past decades ... compared to the current ineptness ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_C._Richards

Guys with YEARS of aviation experience and leadership ... VERSUS the current political appointees with political science degrees.

(Our current FAA Administrator has a Political Science degree and his experience? He planned buses to get people from SLC to the Olympics Complex in Utah. He is FAA Administrator now ... because his boss, the former Administrator had to resign after he got drunk and decided to go driving ... on the wrong side of the street ... His FAA Chief of Staff is a former CNN reporter who married an NBC political editor.)

 

Excellent points! The top position in the FAA has become a political dumping ground for party favors. I would love to see congress mandate requirements for these types of posts that would include relevant experience in that field. Like, oh I don't know, regular people have to have applying for regular jobs. The head of the FAA should most definitely have roots in some aspect of aviation. Sadly, that's not the type of government we have anymore.

[DonMuncy]

I hear you, but there is the pesky fact that from time to time people do keel over that the controls of an airplane. More frequently than some may imagine. They also do and the wheel of a bus or truck too. When this happens, it often results in fatality. It is then the non flying, non bus driving general public that cries out- "How could they let this guy pilot that thing!!??" Remember that the FAA is only partly charged with the safety of airplanes and pilots, the other part of their mandate is to protect the general public on the ground. The general public out number us pilots a gazzilion to one, so they are much more responsive to their needs than ours.

 

The question should not be whether pilots sometimes keel over, but how often that happens and how many of them would be prevented by medical examinations. No system will ever totally eliminate risk. The FAA's concern (like all governmental agencies) ought to be the "cost benefit" of the medical. If the medical exam rules would prevent a large number of injuries/fatalities, we should all be in favor of it. However, if it is a very rare occurrence and a substantial number of the events would not have been eliminated by medical exams, they are indeed a waste of time. I will leave it to others to determine these numbers and percentages.

Just my opinion.

[DonMuncy]

I must have done that wrong. The top paragraph is the quote, and the bottom one is my rant.

[Hank]

Good point! How many pilots who died in the cockpit had valid medicals in their pockets? I would guess >90%, but I have no data. Either way, the 1st/2nd/3rd Class Medical Program didn't prevent much, did it?

[scottfromiowa]

 

This thread went tumbleweed. Adiós.

and I stabbed you with a Trident...

[Marauder]

Good point! How many pilots who died in the cockpit had valid medicals in their pockets? I would guess >90%, but I have no data. Either way, the 1st/2nd/3rd Class Medical Program didn't prevent much, did it?

Then there are the guys who have the medical in their pocket and their bloodstream full of meds for everything from atrial fibrillation to penile dysfunction -- all not reported and only found when the autopsy was conducted -- and not all limited to aviation related accidents.

I have mentioned this before; my brother is a long haul trucker who has Type 2 diabetes. The process for him to get back on the road was a heck of lot easier than a pilot with the same condition. Who is the greater risk? The guy with Type 2 flying in a 2700 pound airplane or the trucker hauling 70,000 pounds down the highway?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ArtVandelay]

. Who is the greater risk? The guy with Type 2 flying in a 2700 pound airplane or the trucker hauling 70,000 pounds down the highway?

Wrong question, who is more likely to be on the nightly news, and hence get more attention from those to want to legislate a solution.

[Marauder]

Wrong question, who is more likely to be on the nightly news, and hence get more attention from those to want to legislate a solution.

Depends. The plane everytime and the truck when he (or she) runs into a school bus full of kids. Plane incidents are like motorcycle accidents. Every one of them get reported.

[aviatoreb]

Then there are the guys who have the medical in their pocket and their bloodstream full of meds for everything from atrial fibrillation to penile dysfunction -- all not reported and only found when the autopsy was conducted -- and not all limited to aviation related accidents.

I have mentioned this before; my brother is a long haul trucker who has Type 2 diabetes. The process for him to get back on the road was a heck of lot easier than a pilot with the same condition. Who is the greater risk? The guy with Type 2 flying in a 2700 pound airplane or the trucker hauling 70,000 pounds down the highway?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yeah - its the inconsistency which is silly here.  All power to your brother.

 

But let us not forget that it is very easy to do major damage to other people even with a 4 seater car.  And no medical is required.  I claim it is easier and more likely to do major damage to other innocent people on a highway with a car if you have a medical event while driving than if you are flying - where likely the only ones hurt might be the people you are with.

 

But who said it?  Its about perception rather than reality.  Yes, the airplane stuff makes the national news.

 

I still think it is silly to have any medical.  Since they are useless.  But I fully acknowledge that they are unlikely to ever go away for commercial operations.  I think they might eventually go away for ALL part 91 operations, and it is a shame that this current push is excluding IFR and above 14500 operations since that could backfire and encourage unsafe aeronautical decisions (VFR into IMC) and this would be the time to push the whole thing through.

[Piloto]

Yeah - its the inconsistency which is silly here.  All power to your brother.

 

But let us not forget that it is very easy to do major damage to other people even with a 4 seater car.  And no medical is required.  I claim it is easier and more likely to do major damage to other innocent people on a highway with a car if you have a medical event while driving than if you are flying - where likely the only ones hurt might be the people you are with.

 

But who said it?  Its about perception rather than reality.  Yes, the airplane stuff makes the national news.

 

I still think it is silly to have any medical.  Since they are useless.  But I fully acknowledge that they are unlikely to ever go away for commercial operations.  I think they might eventually go away for ALL part 91 operations, and it is a shame that this current push is excluding IFR and above 14500 operations since that could backfire and encourage unsafe aeronautical decisions (VFR into IMC) and this would be the time to push the whole thing through.

 

 

 

 

Why would you need to have a medical different criteria for IFR  vs VFR. After all in IMC you don't see much anyway and above 14,500 you are above the clouds.

 

José