Too Old?

On Sep 1, 7:52*pm, Ricky wrote:
On Aug 31, 9:53*pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:

Perhaps its my 2 year old son?

?????? Adopted?

Ricky

Nope. I guess 40 years of crop dusting didn't affect me adversly
either! gg

"Gezellig" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:35:04 GMT, wrote:

Below is a perfect example of the aggressive behavior against GA pilots.
To think an age cutoff is unreasonable is to ignore the obvious.

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1201-full.html#198691

Did you actually read the article?
The pilot involved sued the government for damages.

The ruling was he wasn't due any damages since he could not show any
loss.

What has this to do with anything?

"The FAA and Social Security Administration shared medical records and
personal information on the pilot in 2005 as part of "Operation Safe
Pilot." That FAA investigation examined the records of some 45,000
pilots in Northern California" which is a strict violation of "the
federal Privacy Act which protects individuals from such information
sharing". Did you read my post?

"This is a perfect example of the aggressive behavior against GA pilots.
To think an age cutoff is unreasonable is to ignore the obvious."

It must be noted that Social Security covers more people then us "aged." In
the FAA / Social Security cross reference, it was the Social Security
Administration that initially was attempting to identify fraud relating to
disability claims. The check with the FAA showed many who claimed to be
disable with Social Security were in fact claiming to be able bodied with
the FAA.

When the fraud was noted a reverse check was made by the FAA. The results
are far above expectations.

As noted, it was proven in court that this cross check was in violation HIPA
legislation that protects the privacy of an individuals medical records.
Again the purpose was to identify fraud, not to remove pilots based on age.
In almost all cases a person failing the cross check had either lied on to
the Social Security Administration or lied to the FAA.

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder

writes:

And if you were to actually look at the numbers, such as collected by
NHTSA, you would find that people with the above conditions have high
accident rates while driving, so your arguement is nonsense not based
on fact.

So do people who drink alcohol, but the FAA allows people who drink alcohol to
become pilots. The same can be said of smokers.

In rec.aviation.owning Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

And if you were to actually look at the numbers, such as collected by
NHTSA, you would find that people with the above conditions have high
accident rates while driving, so your arguement is nonsense not based
on fact.

So do people who drink alcohol, but the FAA allows people who drink alcohol to
become pilots. The same can be said of smokers.

Bzzzzt, wrong answer, you lose.

This is just a lame attempt to prove yourself correct in spite of evidence
to the contrary.

Both driving and flying under the influence of alcohol are illegal.

There is no correlation between smoking and accident rates for either
driving or flying.

Neither smoking nor drinking have anything to do with the medical
requirements for flying.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"Gezellig" wrote in message
...

Too old? If so, at what age do you place the cutoff?

120

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Peter Dohm" wrote in news:FRZuk.20231$XB4.18085
@bignews9.bellsouth.net:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Well, sittin around in crew rooms or hotels, ya know, ya need a hobby.



Bertie

Something tells me that's an understatement!


We get to spend an enormous amount of time just sitting around. The usual
past-time is bitching about management, of course.


Bertie

Yours is not unusual, I think most nursing home are about the same.

"Maxine" @###@.^net wrote in news

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Peter Dohm" wrote in
news:FRZuk.20231$XB4.18085 @bignews9.bellsouth.net:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Well, sittin around in crew rooms or hotels, ya know, ya need a
hobby.



Bertie

Something tells me that's an understatement!


We get to spend an enormous amount of time just sitting around. The
usual past-time is bitching about management, of course.


Bertie

Yours is not unusual, I think most nursing home are about the same.


Yeh, good one lamer boi.


Bertie

"Ricky" wrote in message
...
Is Hoover still alive? Flying? Did the FAA ever give him his medical
back after whatever reason they took it years ago?
I had the honor of seeing his Commander routine several times as a kid/
teen. Awesome stuff. Watching vids of it these days almost brings
tears to my eyes.

Yes. Not sure, but he is retired from air shows. Yes - he got a medical in
Austrailia and continued with air shows for a while (just not in the US).
The FAA finally conceeded to restoring his medical after a round through
the courts.

"If they can do it to Bob Hoover, they can do it to anyone."

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:25:37 GMT, Mike Isaksen wrote:

"Gezellig" wrote in message ...
That FAA investigation examined the records of some
45,000 pilots in Northern California" which is a strict
violation of "the Federal Privacy Act" which protects
individuals from such information sharing.

I'm not sure that applies. The FAA physical is something you contract (pay)
for, but the Doctor works for the FAA and the results of the physical are
due the FAA (ie. I'm not sure you can negotiate with the doctor on what
portion of his finding will be forwarded).

So if the information is part of the gov't record, can it therefore not be
referenced to prevent fraud against the same gov't?

I view this differently if I have a relationship with a doctor who I
contract for my own needs. I view that information as private.

I have not reached the age where I have to think about the implication of
medicare/medicaid.

Good point, I wonder if HIPAA applies?

On Mon, 1 Sep 2008 21:29:23 -0600, Wayne Paul wrote:

When the fraud was noted a reverse check was made by the FAA. The results
are far above expectations.

As noted, it was proven in court that this cross check was in violation HIPA
legislation that protects the privacy of an individuals medical records.
Again the purpose was to identify fraud, not to remove pilots based on age.

Understand Wayne, all I am saying is that we have a general public
downturn in their opinion of GA. GA is an easy target, we have idiots
like the Vegas airport director looking for ways to undercut GA. Of the
ways, age cut-off dates appear to be one of the strong possibilities.
Who is going to cry foul if they shut down 80+ yos? How many 80+yo
pilots are there? 75yo? How much voice will they have against anti-GA
zealots?