ALPA to GA: Screw you

FormerHangie said:
OK, this is about the third class medical going away, correct? ALPA saying that they oppose that is hardly saying "screw you" to GA.
Click to expand...

It is. Because the 3rd class medical is a joke and we all know it, it costs GA pilots lots of time/headache. LSA has been around for some time now, and enough hours have been flown by pilots without medicals to show that the 3rd class requirement does not have any effect on safety.
 
dell30rb said:
It is. Because the 3rd class medical is a joke and we all know it, it costs GA pilots lots of time/headache. LSA has been around for some time now, and enough hours have been flown by pilots without medicals to show that the 3rd class requirement does not have any effect on safety.
Click to expand...

My question is: If they didn't believe it's a safety concern, why would ALPA care? Do they have a financial interest in this? I don't think so but could be wrong.
I just don't see the motivation for ALPA to say this other than safety.
 
Kritchlow said:
My question is: If they didn't believe it's a safety concern, why would ALPA care? Do they have a financial interest in this? I don't think so but could be wrong.
I just don't see the motivation for ALPA to say this other than safety.
Click to expand...
This is what I am trying to understand. Why do they even care one way or another?

I can understand their position on the 1500 hr rule (there are many that wanted it in hopes of driving up pilot pay), but how does the elimination of the 3rd class medical impact the 121 world??? I don't believe that airline safety has been jeopardized by LSAs.
 
Bill Jennings said:
Less spamcans in the air means more revenue generating butts in the back.
Click to expand...
Okay, yes, now it makes perfect sense - it dove-tails with the 121 push for user fees. Less GA congesting the airspace.

And it is true - elimination of the 3rd class medical will result in more GA in the air. I just don't think GA should be penalized in order to improve airline profitability.
 
Kritchlow said:
So insignificant I don't believe it's measurable.
Click to expand...
If you are talking about increased revenue from pilots buying airline tickets, I don't think it is significant, but I do think you will end up with a lot more airplanes in the air.
 
I bet a vast majority of their members do not support this letter.

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk
 
Jim Logajan said:
The following was, in my opinion, almost the best argument they made:

"Based on a study of driving statistics by Hendricks, et al., 1999, approximately 6.4% of driving crashes resulted primarily from driver incapacitations. According to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), this type of bill would affect 39,120 pilots. If the same 6.4% incapacitation rate occurs for pilots under driving license medical standards, up to 2,503 new aircraft accidents would occur."

But then I looked at the linked study, where it defines its categories, and found this: "INCAPACITATION (e.g. fell asleep) - 6.4%"
 [EDIT: According to the study results, the 6.4% is the percentage of drivers contributing to causation, not 6.4% of crashes. In fact the original study says that 2% of driver contributed crashes were due to seizures and blackouts; 4.4% were due to falling asleep. Since driver contributed crashes accounted for 59.7%, the final tally for medical incapacitation as causal for accidents amongst drivers was .597*2 = 1.2%. And contrary to the bogus math used by the AsMA, you DO NOT multiply either 6.4% (or 1.2%) by the number of pilots to determine the increase in accidents. You multiply by the number of past accidents. In fact the number of accidents would increase only by 1.2% (or even 6.4% using their numbers.) An increase of about 15 new accidents a year, of which 3 would be fatal. NOT 2,503. That latter results from confused or deliberately deceptive math by the AsMA - their probability units are wrong.]
Click to expand...

It sounds good on the surface, but the reason it's crap is because it assumes (falsely) that the current third class medical is somehow stopping incapacitations.

All there points are easily disproven and pure fluff.
 
drizzt76 said:
I bet a vast majority of their members do not support this letter.

Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


If they don't oppose it, they support it.

Takes just a minute or two to send a email.
 
Kritchlow said:
My question is: If they didn't believe it's a safety concern, why would ALPA care? Do they have a financial interest in this? I don't think so but could be wrong.
I just don't see the motivation for ALPA to say this other than safety.
Click to expand...

The explanation I saw on another site had more to do with opposing it on the grounds of congress legislating medical law and the possible impacts down the road on congress legislating changes to the 1st class medical, which would effect ALPA members.

Quite honestly, I don't support dropping the medical requirement. So go ahead and ban me or shoot me.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Okay, yes, now it makes perfect sense - it dove-tails with the 121 push for user fees. Less GA congesting the airspace.

And it is true - elimination of the 3rd class medical will result in more GA in the air. I just don't think GA should be penalized in order to improve airline profitability.
Click to expand...

You think that the biggest issue to getting more GA in the air is the medical standards? Maybe take a look at the economy and cost of flying. Medicals aren't the thing keeping GA down. Wages in this country are.
 
I'm late to this discussion (the first I heard of it was reading Jack Pelton's response, which was taped over every urinal in the North 40 at Oshkosh. No, really!), but I am appalled and dismayed that ALPA would try to rip the rug out from under GA like this.

Damn. First my respect for ATC was reduced to near zero, and now this? WTF is wrong with people? Why in the world would a PILOT do anything to harm GA?
 
Fearless Tower said:
Okay, yes, now it makes perfect sense - it dove-tails with the 121 push for user fees. Less GA congesting the airspace.
Click to expand...

except it doesn't make sense.

Eliminating GA users while implementing user fees just means a smaller customer base to pay for the same infrastructure.

You would have to be on drugs to think that less GA users would reduce FAA costs.
 
Bob Noel said:
except it doesn't make sense.

Eliminating GA users while implementing user fees just means a smaller customer base to pay for the same infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense, actually.

But first, you have to understand that the real reason, I believe, behind the push for user fees is to reduce the number of GA in the system. Not really to pay for the system. Less GA contesting the system means room for more airline flights.

I don't agree with it at all, but I believe that is where they are coming from.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
You think that the biggest issue to getting more GA in the air is the medical standards? Maybe take a look at the economy and cost of flying. Medicals aren't the thing keeping GA down. Wages in this country are.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that at all. It is just one aspect.

I simply think that the number of GA aircraft that will use the ATC system under the 3rd class reform is not necessarily insignificant.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I didn't say that at all. It is just one aspect.

I simply think that the number of GA aircraft that will use the ATC system under the 3rd class reform is not necessarily insignificant.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's going to make a difference. I don't doubt there are already guys that fly without a medical, all this does it make them legal. I really don't think there are that many people who are going to pick up flying simply because they don't need a medical doctor to bless them now.

I could support eliminating the 3rd class medical for private operations, if the limitations were similar to that of sport pilot, with just larger airplanes (no more than 6 seats, no more than 10,000 ft AGL, no IFR), but I don't think that's going to happen.
 
Jim Logajan said:
"According to recent studies by Casas and Castro, pilots with FAA Third Class medical certificates have a lower accident rate than sport pilots who have no such certification."

Sport pilots also may attain their certificates with lower number of hours and fly a different class of aircraft than that available to private pilots.
Click to expand...
Yes, light sport aircraft, are, well, light. More susceptible to crosswinds, gusts, etc. - particularly when landing - which is where you see more accidents.

I can't find that study, so I don't know how they determined the accident rate because no one knows how many hours are flown by (per the FAA definition) "inactive" (no valid medical) pilots.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
I don't think it's going to make a difference. I don't doubt there are already guys that fly without a medical, all this does it make them legal. I really don't think there are that many people who are going to pick up flying simply because they don't need a medical doctor to bless them now.

I could support eliminating the 3rd class medical for private operations, if the limitations were similar to that of sport pilot, with just larger airplanes (no more than 6 seats, no more than 10,000 ft AGL, no IFR), but I don't think that's going to happen.
Click to expand...

If you are an active CFI/II, I'm surprised you'd think that. There's a fair amount of non-starts due to non-issue gratuitous medical diagnosis in youth that carry over. That shouldn't be.

--break break--


The argument indeed is to reduce GA numbers. They always knew GA wasn't going to pay for the lion's share of the ATC infrastructure, user fees or no user fees. But the airlines are aware GA is very elastic when it comes to additional DOCs. Imposing the fee effectively kills the segment. 3rd class ensures the only people who can enter are the young but moneyless, while the monied aging pilots can be effectively swatted out. Airline management are a bunch of a-holes. They couldn't care less about American aviation. If printer toners were more profitable and they could justify the company's re-tooling, they'd park the entire thing and do printer toners, societal benefits be damned. This is why public utilities should be regulated, because crony capitalists just can't help themselves.
 
hindsight2020 said:
If you are an active CFI/II, I'm surprised you'd think that. There's a fair amount of non-starts due to non-issue gratuitous medical diagnosis in youth that carry over. That shouldn't be.

--break break--


The argument indeed is to reduce GA numbers. They always knew GA wasn't going to pay for the lion's share of the ATC infrastructure, user fees or no user fees. But the airlines are aware GA is very elastic when it comes to additional DOCs. Imposing the fee effectively kills the segment. 3rd class ensures the only people who can enter are the young but moneyless, while the monied aging pilots can be effectively swatted out. Airline management are a bunch of a-holes. They couldn't care less about American aviation. If printer toners were more profitable and they could justify the company's re-tooling, they'd park the entire thing and do printer toners, societal benefits be damned. This is why public utilities should be regulated, because crony capitalists just can't help themselves.
Click to expand...

I'm not active CFI/CFII, never have been, never will be. I fly 121. If you honestly think the opposition is due to the airlines wanting user fees, you're barking up the wrong tree.
 
Just a question, how many older pilots that can't pass a 3rd class medical do you believe will ever fly above 18,000'?
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
I'm not active CFI/CFII, never have been, never will be. I fly 121. If you honestly think the opposition is due to the airlines wanting user fees, you're barking up the wrong tree.
Click to expand...
No one is saying the opposition is due to wanting user fees. They just go hand in hand - consistent with an overall theme which is to reduce GA in the system. User fees and fighting against medical reform are just two tools to forward that goal.

Unless I missed a change, the current 3rd class medical proposal would allow DL medical pilots to file/fly IFR. The LSA market had a big boom after that initial reform. But those guys can't use the IFR system. I do think there will be an increase in IFR traffic if the bill passes as proposed. How much, I don't know, but I do believe it will increase as I know several pilots who would take advantage of it that aren't able to right now......at least until user fees do become reality and then it will drop noticeably.
 
The medical examiners are also lobbying against it (clearly though this directly impacts the amount of $ in their pocket so not a terrible surprise).

They site some stats saying there's evidence that those without valid medicals are more accident prone. Interpret their stats as you wish. They also pull the "planes will fall from the sky" scare mongering bit too.

http://www.asma.org/asma/media/AsMA...ical-Certification-Legislation-April-2015.pdf
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
You think that the biggest issue to getting more GA in the air is the medical standards? Maybe take a look at the economy and cost of flying. Medicals aren't the thing keeping GA down. Wages in this country are.
Click to expand...

A lot of people have thrown in the towel or not pursued flying at all because of the medical. I know several, personally.

Increased participation in GA is probably viewed as a negative thing for the ALPA. Eliminating the medical and eliminating the 1500 hr rule would both result in a higher supply of airline pilots, driving the wages down.
 
dell30rb said:
A lot of people have thrown in the towel or not pursued flying at all because of the medical. I know several, personally.

Increased participation in GA is probably viewed as a negative thing for the ALPA. Eliminating the medical and eliminating the 1500 hr rule would both result in a higher supply of airline pilots, driving the wages down.
Click to expand...

So then, why stop at a 3rd class medical? If operating an aircraft doesn't need a medical, why should any medical be required? Just make pilots get a DOT medical, thats it then, right?


My opposition is more about congress meddling in issues they have no business being involved in, and the future ramifications of said issues on other aviation related items.
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
Increased participation in GA is probably viewed as a negative thing for the ALPA. Eliminating the medical and eliminating the 1500 hr rule would both result in a higher supply of airline pilots, driving the wages down.
Click to expand...


Do you think this is their motivation? More pilots means less exclusivity, therefore lower wages? It really comes across as them being elitist, which is never a popular thing, especially when people think they get paid a lot of money to do nothing but press the "Take Off" and "Land" buttons. Yes, we know better, but based on this letter, I'm not correcting anyone.

I'm not sure that's really a strong enough motivation to put their reputation out on such a weak limb. Their claim of pilots flying despite being medically unqualified really isn't any different than today AND there's no evidence that medical issues are really any more of an issue in GA than they are in the ALPA world.
 
Tom-D said:
Just a question, how many older pilots that can't pass a 3rd class medical do you believe will ever fly above 18,000'?
Click to expand...


None.

Unless it's Harrison Ford in a TBM or something like that ...
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
My opposition is more about congress meddling in issues they have no business being involved in, and the future ramifications of said issues on other aviation related items.
Click to expand...

Ummm...the FAA, and the Medical Division as a component thereof, exists as a creation of the Congress. They have every business meddling in it.
 
JeffDG said:
Ummm...the FAA, and the Medical Division as a component thereof, exists as a creation of the Congress. They have every business meddling in it.
Click to expand...

Congress has nothing better to do than try to decide what pilots should and shouldn't have to have a medical? You have to be *****ing me, how about do something for the other 99% country, like, balance a budget. They absolutely have no business legislating medical issues they have no real knowledge in, because first it starts with 3rd class medicals not being required, then it morphs into ridiculous asian style airline medicals.
 
bflynn said:
Do you think this is their motivation? More pilots means less exclusivity, therefore lower wages?
Click to expand...

No, that isn't it.

Less GA in the IFR system means room for more airline flights (obviously the demand for flights needs to be there, but that is the airline's problem, not the union's). More airline flights means more jobs for pilots.

Separately, the 1500 rule would result in fewer qualified pilots. More flights for fewer qualified pilots in theory should mean higher pay.

Whether or not it ends up working out that way, who knows. There are still some variables that are well beyond the control of the union. I believe that many airlines will simply cut flights before they significantly increase pay.
 
dell30rb said:
Increased participation in GA is probably viewed as a negative thing for the ALPA. Eliminating the medical and eliminating the 1500 hr rule would both result in a higher supply of airline pilots, driving the wages down.
Click to expand...
Eliminating the medical would not result in a higher supply of airline pilots because, even if people don't need a medical at first, they will by they time they fly commercially.
 
Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me either. I can't figure out what their opposition is based one.

Perhaps we should all become union members and elect new leadership? ;)
 
bflynn said:
Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me either. I can't figure out what their opposition is based one.
Click to expand...

What part of more room for increasing the number of flights per given day creates the potential for more jobs doesn't make sense?
 
bflynn said:
Yeah, it doesn't make sense to me either. I can't figure out what their opposition is based one.
Click to expand...

Maybe they sincerely believe their claims?

We all must use heuristically derived rules to help us make our decisions in life - and most of the thinking we apply really isn't as logical as we'd like to think. Sometimes the status quo is favored over the unknown if we don't see personal benefit in some proposed change, but we can imagine, however improbable, some negative consequence.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
So then, why stop at a 3rd class medical? If operating an aircraft doesn't need a medical, why should any medical be required? Just make pilots get a DOT medical, thats it then, right?





My opposition is more about congress meddling in issues they have no business being involved in, and the future ramifications of said issues on other aviation related items.
Click to expand...


When a FedGov agency refuses to loosen its regulatory grip on an issue that matters to a large segment of the pilot population, it is absolutely fair that Congress gets involved. Unelected bureaucrats often have too much control over the citizenry, and that is what is happening here.
 
Has anyone pointed out yet that the sheer existence of the FAA (and thus, medical requirements) is because Airline Pilots were too stupid to not keep hitting each other over the desert and killing bunches of people? Also - the last few heart attacks that occurred in flight were in Airline Cockpits, not GA....

Maybe the problem is that airline pilots need stricter medical requirements.
 
nddons said:
When a FedGov agency refuses to loosen its regulatory grip on an issue that matters to a large segment of the pilot population, it is absolutely fair that Congress gets involved. Unelected bureaucrats often have too much control over the citizenry, and that is what is happening here.
Click to expand...

So because the medical experts don't want to do something, to hell with the knowledge they have, ignore them? Truly the American way these days, you get the info you don't want, f'it, I'll do what I want.

It's no wonder GA is dying, it's mostly full of crotchety old white men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top