FAA Issued New Medical Requirements for Small Aircraft Pilots but Lacks Procedures and Data

And you just thought you had freedom.... :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Comments
1) this is how bureaucracy grows and burdens on the public increase.
2) how did the congress critters vote on the original basic med proposal and what lobby groups contribute to their campaigns? This sure sounds like something done to stop or slow down use of this medical provision (in part because it gives the government less control).
 
However, the lack of procedures to identify pilots who should not be flying under BasicMed and prevent them from operating aircraft raises questions about the impact of the new rule
Click to expand...

I’m curious how the authorities are going to prevent pilots without a drivers license from flying just because the authority checks to see if they have a license. This makes no sense.
 
"Moreover, FAA cannot make a meaningful comparison between the BasicMed rate of accidents and fatalities to those occurring among pilots holding a medical certificate because the Agency does not collect data on BasicMed pilots’ flight hours."
"NTSB also identified these missing data in a September 2014 safety study on pilot impairment. The study found that it was not possible to compare the safety of medically certificated pilots with those flying under the sport pilot and light sport aircraft rule [...] because there is limited information about the number and flight activity of pilots without medical certificates"

One has to wonder if the system of (again) not collecting data was put into place to protect the existing third class medical requirement.
 
I don't see this report as a bad thing. This was the opportunity to poke holes into BasicMed and all the bureaucrats could come up with is no procedures to check medical licenses, drivers licenses and flight hours. All three of which are easily rectified. Sad that it takes the FAA a year to address this. There was also the weak excuse of being unable to report on the safety of BasicMed (likely because there have been no accidents due to pilot incapacitation) because of lack of data and time.
 
Recommendations

To effectively implement and assess the safety impact of BasicMed, we recommend that the Federal Aviation Administrator:

1. Conduct a risk assessment of the issues related to valid driver’s licenses and use of State-licensed physicians noted in this report, and implement processes to mitigate any identified risks. Include the results of this risk-assessment in the required report on the safety impact of BasicMed to Congress.
2. Develop and implement a process to collect pilot flight hours or an alternative process that allows a meaningful assessment of the safety impact of pilots operating under BasicMed compared with pilots operating with a medical certificate.

These are the two recommendations that the FAA plans to implement. Neither seems particularly draconian to me - just verify the doctor you use is “state-licensed” and maybe fill out an online form giving hours flown.

The underlying problem is that folks who are cheating the system somehow - who I assume are rare - will just continue to cheat or ultimately just fly unlicensed. Not sure how either of these recommendations will help there, though the flight hour thing could help with data analysis on the safety of BasicMed certification.
 
My memory might be faulty, but I do recall typing in my divers license number and doctors ID number to a website. If they’re not validating the data is good, it shouldn’t be a stretch to do so.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
"Moreover, FAA cannot make a meaningful comparison between the BasicMed rate of accidents and fatalities to those occurring among pilots holding a medical certificate because the Agency does not collect data on BasicMed pilots’ flight hours."
"NTSB also identified these missing data in a September 2014 safety study on pilot impairment. The study found that it was not possible to compare the safety of medically certificated pilots with those flying under the sport pilot and light sport aircraft rule [...] because there is limited information about the number and flight activity of pilots without medical certificates"

One has to wonder if the system of (again) not collecting data was put into place to protect the existing third class medical requirement.
Click to expand...

It’s a conspiracy!

tenor.gif
 
shouldn't be hard to analysis... just look at excess accidents in place since BM... unless, of course the small number of medical incidents would make any estimation invalid.
 
We don't know the number of hours pilots with each type of medical is flying, but the total number of medical-incapacitation cases is extremely low. This plot shows the number of accidents (of ALL aircraft) in the US each year that involved pilot incapacitation.
incapacitation.JPG

A typical year sees ~1800 accidents, so well fewer than 1% of all accidents involve medical incapacitation. In over 75% of the cases, the pilot was the ONLY occupant of the airplane.

From 1998 through 2017, there were only 31 cases of medical incapacitation with passengers onboard. Only half those cases resulted in more than one fatality (which is typically the pilot).

Ron Wanttaja
 
We're talking .015 suspected non-compliance. My Dad used to call this "picking fly **** out of pepper. " But, I guess, generally speaking, that's the OIG's job description.
 
]
wsuffa said:
And you just thought you had freedom.... :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Comments
1) this is how bureaucracy grows and burdens on the public increase.
2) how did the congress critters vote on the original basic med proposal and what lobby groups contribute to their campaigns? This sure sounds like something done to stop or slow down use of this medical provision (in part because it gives the government less control).
Click to expand...

Chip Sylverne said:
We're talking .015 suspected non-compliance. My Dad used to call this "picking fly **** out of pepper. " But, I guess, generally speaking, that's the OIG's job description.
Click to expand...

from the top of p 2 of the report:

Requested by the Chairmen of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and its Aviation Subcommittee
Click to expand...

who is Mr Bill “I introduce a bill to privatize ATC every session” Schuster I believe.
 
I thought the response from the FAA was a masterpiece. They thanked the auditors for their recommendations, said they'll get right on it. I think that's bureaucrat speak for we are going to totally ignore it.
 
Considering that there is no requirement to log hours AT ALL unless pilots want to use them for another certification or rating, it would be rather non-productive for the FAA to ask for them unless they create a new reg that requires all hours to be logged. And how would that ever be enforced?

And since medical incapacitation is such a small percentage of accidents, this would be an utter waste of time and money. Therefore I'm certain a USG bureaucracy will do it.
 
This is their concern? Just today I met a guy (wont say pilot) who shortly into the conversation said he didn't have a "license". Went on to explain he has been a perpetual student (over 400 hours) keeps getting solo sign off has "Sugar" so decided to go sport pilot. Went and bought an Aeronca Chief because, sport pilot, but his Chief has an O-235 so no way it qualifies.
 
Last edited:
I have to wonder if somehow the newly regulated adsb is going to play a new role in even more regulation....
 
Piper18O said:
I have to wonder if somehow the newly regulated adsb is going to play a new role in even more regulation....
Click to expand...

maybe... but I don't recall PIC being one of the fields in the ADS-B out message.

unless you want to think there will be a required modification to add PIC information...
 
Bob Noel said:
maybe... but I don't recall PIC being one of the fields in the ADS-B out message.

unless you want to think there will be a required modification to add PIC information...
Click to expand...

Thirty years ago, my first flight instructor was convinced that eventually all flights would be tracked, and you eventually wouldn't be able to fly without being identified and watched. He was always saying, "It's coming. One thing will lead to another." He was a WW2 veteran, he probably had read "1984" and we kind of passed it off as un-necessary paranoia. He died about 15 years ago. In a way I am so glad he never had to live in today's world with adsb. It would have eaten him alive. He is probably turning over in his grave today. He was a good man.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
So, according to the data, the primary cause of pilot incapacitation is a valid medical.
Click to expand...
And over 50% of the incapacitation cases involved pilots with Commercial or ATP tickets. Get rid of them, and the incapacitation rate drops precipitously. About 5% of the incapacitation accidents involved pilots with valid Class 1 medicals.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
And over 50% of the incapacitation cases involved pilots with Commercial or ATP tickets. Get rid of them, and the incapacitation rate drops precipitously. About 5% of the incapacitation accidents involved pilots with valid Class 1 medicals.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...


Those would be the pilots with the greatest motivation to mask medical problems, no?
 
wanttaja said:
And over 50% of the incapacitation cases involved pilots with Commercial or ATP tickets.
Click to expand...

Presumably they’re mainly flying two pilots in a cockpit, so that an incapacitation might be survived and recorded.

For single-pilot operations, unless an autopsy shows something, I’m not sure how often anyone would know that a loss of control was due to medical incapacitation.
 
Here's a conspiracy theory for you...

Think of how that "inadequate" data will look if existing SIs were made more onerous, or more cases where the the airman may be on the edge of eligible for an unrestricted medical but gets steered to SIs. How about the ever expanding list of conditions that require and SI. Those airmen would most likely opt into the BasicMed pool to avoid the very ridiculousness that BasicMed was designed to remedy. Now fast forward a few years when all that "inadequate data" has been collected. Statistically some of those guys are going to have medically unrelated accidents, but their SI medical condition will be a data point. Toss in a "good" statistician and you've got the right data pool for FAA Medical to say "Look at all these sick pilots wrecking planes and killing people! We told you so!" Nevermind the fact that they would have been flying under an SI anyway, and still probably had the accident.
 
NoHeat said:
wanttaja said:
And over 50% of the incapacitation cases involved pilots with Commercial or ATP tickets. Get rid of them, and the incapacitation rate drops precipitously.
Click to expand...
Presumably they’re mainly flying two pilots in a cockpit, so that an incapacitation might be survived and recorded.
Click to expand...
Actually, most of the aircraft involved do not require two pilots. Twenty-one cases (1998-2017) involved ATPs, but there no airliners and just two business jets (and one was a Citation being operated single-pilot). The rest were typical GA aircraft.

ERA09IA240 is pretty interesting. A chartered Beech B200, pilot with history of heart issues operating on a special issuance, pilot-rated passenger landed the aircraft.

NoHeat said:
For single-pilot operations, unless an autopsy shows something, I’m not sure how often anyone would know that a loss of control was due to medical incapacitation.
Click to expand...
Often the autopsy *does* show something. But it's not binary; 75% artery occlusion does not mean a happy landing while 76% means a crash. Some cases are otherwise inexplicable....

"While on a cross-country positioning flight, a flight of four aircraft was in cruise flight when the number four airplane entered a descending right hand turn and flew into the ground in an open field. The pilot received fatal injuries. Other pilots in the flight had been in communication with the accident pilot via radio within 2 minutes prior to the event. Investigation found no evidence of aircraft failures or malfunctions and a review of the pilot's medical history and autopsy findings provided no evidence of medical significance except for the presence of coronary artery disease." (DEN99FA109)

The NTSB ruled this one as "Pilot incapacitation for unknown reasons," and given the circumstances, I don't think the ruling was unreasonable. But it's true, there's no way to be completely sure.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Half Fast said:
Those would be the pilots with the greatest motivation to mask medical problems, no?
Click to expand...
But also, on average, the pilots who spend the most percentage of their lives in an airplane.

Given the variables,uncertainties, and the infrequent nature of "incapacitation" it would be hard to draw solid conclusions even if someone were collecting data.
 
wanttaja said:
The NTSB ruled this one as "Pilot incapacitation for unknown reasons," and given the circumstances, I don't think the ruling was unreasonable. But it's true, there's no way to be completely sure.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

Could he not have just fallen asleep? I did once on a ferry flight of a cropduster but was fortunate the change of sound as the plane picked up speed woke me up.
 
FastEddieB said:
Could he not have just fallen asleep? I did once on a ferry flight of a cropduster but was fortunate the change of sound as the plane picked up speed woke me up.
Click to expand...

Don’t know what altitude they were, but lack of O2 could have caused unconsciousness.

Carbon monoxide could also be possible, but I think that would have shown up in the blood.
 
FastEddieB said:
Could he not have just fallen asleep? I did once on a ferry flight of a cropduster but was fortunate the change of sound as the plane picked up speed woke me up.
Click to expand...
How long has it been since your last sleep study?:)
 
FastEddieB said:
Could he not have just fallen asleep?
Click to expand...
Certainly. Any number of things which may or may not have been detectable in an autopsy. Could have just fallen asleep, could have been altitude-related (last departure airport has 6,600 foot elevation), could have been a mini-stroke, could have been low blood sugar, could even have been suicide.

All but the last would fall under the "Pilot Incapacitation for unknown reasons" call the NTSB made. This happened prior to the NTSB putting all the data up on its web page, so we don't have access to the full medical report. The main NTSB report says, "The medical examiner listed the cause of death as 'massive blunt deceleration injuries.' In his summary, the medical examiner noted there was significant coronary artery disease." (DEN99FA109)

Asleep at the stick, blinded by a TIA, in the middle of a coronary, incapacitation of one form or the other still seems pretty likely.

One of the frustrations of doing this study was the lack of binary answers. "Significant coronary artery disease" raises a red flag, but it still doesn't mean that was the cause of the incapacitation. In several cases, the impairment isn't even listed as the primary cause. "Probable Cause: The pilot's failure to maintain airspeed resulting in a stall. A factor in the accident was the pilot's physical impairment due to dementia and his failure to report the medical condition to the aviation medical examiner." (ATL06LA058)

For my study, I included cases like the above where the incapacitation was not listed as Primary Cause.

Ron Wanttaja
 
I like how they never asked the question of whether or not a medical certification process is even needed. It’s just a built in assumption.

Suppose in a few years the data is in and we find actual compliance has been poor but there wasn’t a significant increase in accidents because of it.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top