Why do pilots need a medical

On 17 Nov 2005 06:28:26 -0800, "Paul kgyy"
wrote:

I think the theory is that disabilities rarely occur without warning.
If you get chest pain while driving a bus, you can pull over to the
side of the road. If it happens in airplane, it may be a while before
you can find a safe place to park.


Yes, I'm sure that this is the reasoning used by Joe Bureaucrat for
keeping the reg. Of course, that bus driver might hit about 30
pedestrians when he pulls over to the side of the road while the pilot
may take out a backyard hot tub somewhere when he goes down.

take out a backyard hot tub somewhere when he goes down.

The one incident I am aware of a pilot having a heart attack while
flying. The Pilot on a Cross country flight landed and called the FBO
to call 911 for him. He had a 2nd Class Medical.

Brian

by "Andrew Sarangan" Nov 16, 2005 at 07:27 PM


The recent questions about medical certificate, paper trail, sport
pilot etc.. etc..got me thinking. What is the reasoning behind
requiring a medical for pilots? Why is a minor medical condition
disqualifying for flying a Cessna 172, when the same person can drive a
20,000 lb truck on public roads? Are there statistic to show that
medically unfit pilots are a greater danger to society compared to
other activities?

Completely inaccurate and untrue. In fact, medical testing requirements
are tougher for a CDL than for a PPL. Surely some pilots out there also
have CDLs. A link to reality:

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regul...on/medical.htm

"Skylune" wrote:
And another thing: CDL holders are subject to
random drug and alcohol tests. States may impose
tougher standards than the federally required minimums,
and many companies impose even tighter restrictions.

PPLs get off comparitively easily. Drug testing should be
mandatory for PPLs, and random drug testing s/b part of
FAA ramp checks.

Oh, my... Private pilots (the majority) are not commercial pilots.
And NTSB statistics do not support a safety hazard to the general
public when medical problems cause an accident. Once in a blue
moon, a generally solo accident occurs, like heart failure.
Happens in cars to people, and occasionally they hit pedestrians or
head-on another vehicle.

If you hate recreational aviation so much, wouldn't it be more fun
to find a sympathetic newsgroup? Preach to the choir.

Fred F.

TaxSrv wrote:


Oh, my... Private pilots (the majority) are not commercial pilots.
And NTSB statistics do not support a safety hazard to the general
public when medical problems cause an accident. Once in a blue
moon, a generally solo accident occurs, like heart failure.
Happens in cars to people, and occasionally they hit pedestrians or
head-on another vehicle.

If you hate recreational aviation so much, wouldn't it be more fun
to find a sympathetic newsgroup? Preach to the choir.

I don't know about other states, but I can tell you in my state,
random drug tests never occur. As a matter of fact, it's unlikely
that anything happens to a CDL driver who lacks a medical card.
Twice while sitting around in traffic court (In Virginia to add
insult to injury, if you are involved in an accident and the cops
cite the other driver, you have to go to court as a subpeonaed
witness) I saw (two different judges) judges routinely dismiss
the "lack of medical card" citations.

Something to Consider,
CDL drivers have companies they work for paying for those random drug
test. As an aircraft mech the companies I worked for also paid for the
random drug testing. If every truck driver or aircraft mech had to pay for
this out of his/her own pocket, there would not be many truck drivers or
aircraft mechanics.
I guess companies would pay for commercial pilots to take random drug
test, but since we are talking about private pilots, who exactly would cover
the cost? Would the FAA simply say you and you go to this lab and take a
drug test right now? What if you didn't have the funds to cover the test at
that time? Say you did take it. What happens if you fail a drug test you had
to pay for..would a court say wait a minute we can't make a person pay for
their own entrapment. It would be very interesting to see how it played out
in court.
That being said I don't see why the people working on the planes have to
take a drug test if those that fly it don't. But I really don't see a way to
"make" a private pilot pay for a drug test randomly. When a company pays for
it and uses it as part of their tax write off, and it's a condition of you
working there, it's controversial. Could you legally make someone pay for a
drug test ? Gets "out there somewhere" when you consider the pilot may not
be at his home airport with transportation to a lab facility, may not have
the money to cover the expense of the test and let's not forget the taxi or
rental car to the lab.
Ahhh a tangled web we weave........

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"TaxSrv" wrote in message
. ..
"Skylune" wrote:
And another thing: CDL holders are subject to
random drug and alcohol tests. States may impose
tougher standards than the federally required minimums,
and many companies impose even tighter restrictions.

PPLs get off comparitively easily. Drug testing should be
mandatory for PPLs, and random drug testing s/b part of
FAA ramp checks.

Oh, my... Private pilots (the majority) are not commercial pilots.
And NTSB statistics do not support a safety hazard to the general
public when medical problems cause an accident. Once in a blue
moon, a generally solo accident occurs, like heart failure.
Happens in cars to people, and occasionally they hit pedestrians or
head-on another vehicle.

If you hate recreational aviation so much, wouldn't it be more fun
to find a sympathetic newsgroup? Preach to the choir.

Fred F.

You are comparing apples to oranges. The majority of Cessna 172 pilots
are not flying for hire. I do not have a problem with for-hire pilots
needing a medical.

You can drive a heavy truck with a regular drivers license. You don't
need a medical or a CDL.

Drug and alcohol tests for pilots are fine too. There is clear evidence
that shows that driving/flying under the influence is dangerous to the
public. However, there is no overwhelming evidence that a pilot with a
blood pressure 20 points higher than normal is so much of a hazard
that they should be barred from flying.

Brian wrote:
take out a backyard hot tub somewhere when he goes down.

The one incident I am aware of a pilot having a heart attack while
flying. The Pilot on a Cross country flight landed and called the FBO
to call 911 for him. He had a 2nd Class Medical.


We had a local chiropodist who had a heart attack while approaching the Rock
Hill, SC airport in an Aerostar after a trip to the coast. He ended up crashing
in an intersection and burning up. Unfortunately he took his passenger with
him.

Nobody on the ground was injured and I don't believe there was any appreciable
property damage, except his own.

You can read about the resulting lawsuit at:

http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories...1277.001.shtml

Use blahblah1 as the username and blahblahblah as the password unless you feel
the need to register.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...
TaxSrv wrote:


Oh, my... Private pilots (the majority) are not commercial pilots.
And NTSB statistics do not support a safety hazard to the general
public when medical problems cause an accident. Once in a blue
moon, a generally solo accident occurs, like heart failure.
Happens in cars to people, and occasionally they hit pedestrians or
head-on another vehicle.

If you hate recreational aviation so much, wouldn't it be more fun
to find a sympathetic newsgroup? Preach to the choir.

I don't know about other states, but I can tell you in my state,
random drug tests never occur. As a matter of fact, it's unlikely
that anything happens to a CDL driver who lacks a medical card.
Twice while sitting around in traffic court (In Virginia to add
insult to injury, if you are involved in an accident and the cops
cite the other driver, you have to go to court as a subpeonaed
witness) I saw (two different judges) judges routinely dismiss
the "lack of medical card" citations.

If the DOT gets a hold of them they will not be as forgiving to either them
or who they drive for.

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
ups.com...
The recent questions about medical certificate, paper trail, sport
pilot etc.. etc..got me thinking. What is the reasoning behind
requiring a medical for pilots? Why is a minor medical condition
disqualifying for flying a Cessna 172, when the same person can drive a
20,000 lb truck on public roads? Are there statistic to show that
medically unfit pilots are a greater danger to society compared to
other activities?


There are a lot of people at the FAA who's job it is to "review" and reject
medicals. And those people have supervisors. And those people have managers,
etc. etc. etc.

Does it make sense now?

--
Geoff
the sea hawk at wow way d0t com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
Spell checking is left as an excercise for the reader.