If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: Because the requirements for a medical are rather rigid while the requirements for a sport pilot is the rather flexible "safe to fly". I've just explained why they are one and the same. No, you did not, you just babbled on with some nonsense that totally missed what happens in the real world. Once again you see everything as black and white and can't decern shades of grey nor do you seem to be able to understand the concepts of two sets of standards. Like a lawyer, in other words. No, like a "barracks lawyer", i.e. one able to read the letter of the law but with no clue as to the spirit or intent. You would fail your medical with a blood pressure reading of 156, which is 1 mm over the limit for the medical, but there is no one (except maybe you) who would make the claim that a person is safe to fly with a blood pressure of 155 but not with a blood pressure of 156. Then why isn't the limit 157? The point just keeps on going right over the top of your head, doesn't it? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
a wrote:
On Dec 19, 10:00Â*am, Mxsmanic wrote: writes: Because the requirements for a medical are rather rigid while the requirements for a sport pilot is the rather flexible "safe to fly". I've just explained why they are one and the same. Once again you see everything as black and white and can't decern shades of grey nor do you seem to be able to understand the concepts of two sets of standards. Like a lawyer, in other words. You would fail your medical with a blood pressure reading of 156, which is 1 mm over the limit for the medical, but there is no one (except maybe you) who would make the claim that a person is safe to fly with a blood pressure of 155 but not with a blood pressure of 156. Then why isn't the limit 157? There is little doubt that the risk of a 'cardiovascular accident' (stroking or MI) increases with increasing blood pressure. Of minor interest is in a location I am familiar with when people are subjected to a max effort treadmill test and their blood pressure as well as EKG is being monitored, the test will stop when (ready for this?) the BP exceeds 260 over I forgot what. The moral of the story may be steady state hypertension does long term damage to organs, but the chance of something sudden happening is probably fairly remote, even for hypertensives. The FAA thinks in terms of cut-offs, but we all know the risk increase is gradual, not abrupt. I am not sure but wonder if the BP limit is something for which one can get a waiver, just as I had gotten one for vision to get a Class 2 medical instead of the Class 3 I would have otherwise gotten. It's a pleasure to see an occasional posting that is actually related to aviation! One can get a waiver for just about any condition with enough time and money for doctors and lab work, none of which will be covered by insurance. The rational alternative is to spend the money on a LSA. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
VOR-DME wrote:
You are both partially right, but in my view, as an observer to the dynamic of this argument, Jim P is "more" right. It is true, if it were to come to the FAA?s attention that a sport pilot obtained that certificate because he was aware of a clearly disqualifying medical condition they would likely take action. However this is not what was suggested to the original poster. It was suggested that if the older candidate had any condition that "might preclude him from passing a third-class medical", he should go straight to light sport. There is a big difference, and Jim is right to point out that MX?s reaction is dogmatic and misses the nuance. Jim is also correct in pointing out that the flexibility in the medical rule is clearly an indication of application of a different standard, based on a different category of risk, and MX?s narrow and rigid responses appear to ignore this important difference. That's because MX sees everything in black and white. The terms "nuance", "spirit", and "intent" have no meaning to him. BTY, if a person flying under the light sport rules has a "clearly disqualifying medical condition" and starts or continues to fly, then they are in violation of the rules for light sport. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
On Dec 20, 6:46*am, wrote:
BTY, if a person flying under the light sport rules has a "clearly disqualifying medical condition" and starts or continues to fly, then they are in violation of the rules for light sport. And the betting is that the 'unfit to fly' drove to the doctors :-( |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 11:41:16 -0800 (PST), george
wrote: On Dec 20, 6:46*am, wrote: BTY, if a person flying under the light sport rules has a "clearly disqualifying medical condition" and starts or continues to fly, then they are in violation of the rules for light sport. And the betting is that the 'unfit to fly' drove to the doctors :-( It is my understanding that the only requirement to fly Light Sport be that you can qualify for a drivers license. If there is any other rules pertaining to ones medical condition I don't know what it is, however I'm real old and certainly don't keep up with everything, I do fly though. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 12:33:59 -0800, Ed wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 11:41:16 -0800 (PST), george wrote: On Dec 20, 6:46*am, wrote: BTY, if a person flying under the light sport rules has a "clearly disqualifying medical condition" and starts or continues to fly, then they are in violation of the rules for light sport. And the betting is that the 'unfit to fly' drove to the doctors :-( It is my understanding that the only requirement to fly Light Sport be that you can qualify for a drivers license. If there is any other rules pertaining to ones medical condition I don't know what it is, however I'm real old and certainly don't keep up with everything, I do fly though. No DL, then you have to have a 3rd class med cert. If your DL is limited (must have glasses) so is your SPL. -- A fireside chat not with Ari! http://tr.im/holj Motto: Live To Spooge It! |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
Ed wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 11:41:16 -0800 (PST), george wrote: On Dec 20, 6:46Â*am, wrote: BTY, if a person flying under the light sport rules has a "clearly disqualifying medical condition" and starts or continues to fly, then they are in violation of the rules for light sport. And the betting is that the 'unfit to fly' drove to the doctors :-( It is my understanding that the only requirement to fly Light Sport be that you can qualify for a drivers license. If there is any other rules pertaining to ones medical condition I don't know what it is, however I'm real old and certainly don't keep up with everything, I do fly though. FAR 61.53 (b) "Operations that do not require a medical certificate. For operations provided for in 61.23(b) of this part, a person shall not act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person knows or has reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner." -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
On 12/19/2010 12:33 PM, Ed wrote:
On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 11:41:16 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Dec 20, 6:46 am, wrote: BTY, if a person flying under the light sport rules has a "clearly disqualifying medical condition" and starts or continues to fly, then they are in violation of the rules for light sport. And the betting is that the 'unfit to fly' drove to the doctors :-( It is my understanding that the only requirement to fly Light Sport be that you can qualify for a drivers license. Not quite... replace "can qualify for a driver's license" with "possess a valid driver's license". If you have a medical condition where your state does not allow you to drive, it's not valid for flight. If you get too many points and the state suspends your driver's license, it is no longer valid for flight. If there is any other rules pertaining to ones medical condition I don't know what it is, however I'm real old and certainly don't keep up with everything, I do fly though. ---------------- 61.23 Medical certificates: Requirement and duration. (2) A person using a current and valid U.S. driver’s license to meet the requirements of this paragraph must-- ..... (iv) Not know or have reason to know of any medical condition that would make that person unable to operate a light-sport aircraft in a safe manner. ---------------- As others have said, if you are *aware* of a condition that would prevent you from operating safely, you are expected to not "exercise the privileges of a Sport Pilot license." As far as I am aware, the FAA has not issued a list of disqualifying conditions, but they have reserved the right to issue such a list. The huge advantage, of course, is that this is self-certified. You are expected to ground yourself when necessary, but you can fly again when you are confident that the conditions is under control. You don't have to jump through a bunch of FAA hoops. Ron Wanttaja |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
a writes:
There is little doubt that the risk of a 'cardiovascular accident' (stroking or MI) increases with increasing blood pressure. So why would it increase more for a pilot who requires a medical than for a pilot who does not? That's the issue for a light sport license. If you can't pass the medical, then you're not fit to fly--that's what the medical is designed to determine--and so you don't qualify for the light sport license. The fact that some applicants engage in doublethink to avoid facing this obvious reality doesn't mean that they are right in doing so. The fact that the FAA chooses not to pursue this in many cases doesn't mean that it cannot or won't do so in the future or at its discretion. Of minor interest is in a location I am familiar with when people are subjected to a max effort treadmill test and their blood pressure as well as EKG is being monitored, the test will stop when (ready for this?) the BP exceeds 260 over I forgot what. The moral of the story may be steady state hypertension does long term damage to organs, but the chance of something sudden happening is probably fairly remote, even for hypertensives. Yes. A systolic pressure of 230 increases the chance of having a heart attack in the next decade by only a few percent. But it is true that consistently high BP does a lot of wear and tear, especially on things like the kidneys and eyes. These won't cause sudden incapacitation, so they aren't relevant to aviation, but they do affect general health, and may eventually affect fitness to fly. The FAA thinks in terms of cut-offs, but we all know the risk increase is gradual, not abrupt. I am not sure but wonder if the BP limit is something for which one can get a waiver, just as I had gotten one for vision to get a Class 2 medical instead of the Class 3 I would have otherwise gotten. I've never heard of a waiver for BP, but it's an interesting question. Perhaps if you could prove that it was white-coat syndrome or something, you could get a waiver. Sometimes, if your BP is very high at the doctor's office, you can try monitoring your BP several times a day at home over a period of weeks. The results may be surprisingly normal, although that might not necessarily satisfy the FAA (even though it should). |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Am I too old to fly?
Mxsmanic wrote:
a writes: There is little doubt that the risk of a 'cardiovascular accident' (stroking or MI) increases with increasing blood pressure. So why would it increase more for a pilot who requires a medical than for a pilot who does not? That's the issue for a light sport license. If you can't pass the medical, then you're not fit to fly--that's what the medical is designed to determine--and so you don't qualify for the light sport license. Wrong again. You just can't seem to get it into your head that light sport has one set of standards, basically a common sense definition, while the other certificates have a different set of standards primarily based on numerical limits. One set of standards has little to nothing to do with the other. By your black and white, one size fits all interpretation, anyone that can't pass the phyical for astronauts is "not fit to fly". The fact that some applicants engage in doublethink to avoid facing this obvious reality It is only obvious to someone that can't understand the concept of having two sets of standards for two set of circumstances. snip irrelevant babble I've never heard of a waiver for BP Because you haven't a clue what you are talking about. Sometimes, if your BP is very high at the doctor's office, you can try monitoring your BP several times a day at home over a period of weeks. The results may be surprisingly normal, although that might not necessarily satisfy the FAA (even though it should). A home BP test will satisfy the FAA for the medical requirements for sport pilot. If the home test is normal, the person has no reason to believe they are not fit to fly as defined by the rules which apply to sport pilot. Look up the term "white coat hypertension". -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|