Older pilots and basic med

[Kenny Phillips]

Maybe for the same reason my AME, who lives for aviation and pilots, stopped doing Basic Med exams. In his words, everyone coming to him for Basic Med had an issue with getting a 3rd Class.

Sure, there are some folks who do it just because they hate the FAA, but even around here, the advice to go on Basic Med is often given to people from whom obtaining a 3rd Class would be difficult or impossible. That could be for reasons that we consider arbitrary or capricious, but how's an insurance company going to distinguish between the pilot who just hates the FAA from the pilot who hunts down a DOT clinic where the doc doesn't know or care what conditions the FAA considers disqualifying?

We've even had discussions here about how conditions that disqualify you from a 3rd Class don't necessarily disqualify you from Basic Med. The insurance companies know that too. You're going to say it doesn't matter because those conditions don't make you any less safe to operate. But you (and the insurance company) don't know that for every such condition, nor do you know which condition(s) every Basic Med holder has.

Insurance is risk transfer in exchange for a premium. The insurer gets to set the terms on which it will accept the risk. The insured gets to decide if those terms are better than self insuring. Pilots who complain that a lack of insurance is keeping them on the ground are really saying they're unwilling or unable to meet the insurance company's terms AND are unwilling or unable to self insure on better terms.

Yeah, I worked as a developer for a large insurance company, and two of my friends did the same, with different companies. The insurance companies are ignorant of exactly nothing. They can consider several factors for a given individual and infer future behavior. They are pretty good at that; much in the way of resources goes that way.
Eliminating 3rd class would perhaps help more fly, but certainly wouldn't help get more insured at a reasonable rate. Probably the opposite.

 

[Anthem]

The difference isn't simply age. The difference is the discrimination against one of two equally valid measures of medical fitness and capacity to operate an aircraft within a certain category and class triggered by age of the pilot. At age 80, the opinion of your personal physician must be superseded by the opinion of a government agency if you are to obtain insurance, the opinion of which data to this point proves to be of no better predictive value.

Additionally, the government's opinion, though no more predictive, may require certain expensive and time consuming tests which place an increased burden on the the older pilot.

Insurance can only discriminate against you if there is in fact greater risk. It could be argued that a Basic Med pilot in fact presents no greater risk than a Cl3 after age 75 or 80 than before.

Look - you keep saying they are equal. They aren’t. There are significant amounts of people who cannot pass FAA Medicals 1,2,3 but can a basic med / but not vice versa. That makes them not equal

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Look - you keep saying they are equal. They aren’t. There are significant amounts of people who cannot pass FAA Medicals 1,2,3 but can a basic med / but not vice versa. That makes them not equal

If I have a basic med in my possession, I can legally fly an aircraft in the appropriate category and class. If I have a Class 3, I can legally fly the same airplane.
How are they not equal in allowing the same privileges?

 

[Chip Sylverne]

But they do. They have a much higher prevvalance of CAD than do certified (1st-2nd-3rd) class pliots. We knew that back in 2016 (Published at the ASMA meeting) and that's just ONE "peril". It is indeed a lower standard. And the capital markets (secondary insurors) are free to do what they think is fit. And the primary insurors ARE free to add up their costs to their loss ratios.....

Not conceding that it is, but has your perceived "lower standard" manifested itself in a statistically significant higher incident of incapacitation or accident? Not according to the FAA's report to Congess cited earlier. The sky didn't fall, much like it didn't when homebuilts and ultralights were first underwritten.

Yes, it's still early days. Sometimes good enough is good enough.

Look, General Aviation is but a pimple on the butt of the P&C insurance market. Returns from fixed rate investments have much more to do with how hard a market is, and how much risk reinsurers are willing to take on. When those returns go down, reinsurance premiums go up. GA losses are hardly a rounding error to London.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Yeah, I worked as a developer for a large insurance company, and two of my friends did the same, with different companies. The insurance companies are ignorant of exactly nothing. They can consider several factors for a given individual and infer future behavior. They are pretty good at that; much in the way of resources goes that way.
Eliminating 3rd class would perhaps help more fly, but certainly wouldn't help get more insured at a reasonable rate. Probably the opposite.

For life and health, in total agreement. And to a certain extent in auto.
For the bulk of Property and Casualty, especially in niche markets, not so much.

 

[Anthem]

If I have a basic med in my possession, I can legally fly an aircraft in the appropriate category and class. If I have a Class 3, I can legally fly the same airplane.
How are they not equal in allowing the same privileges?

Incorrect. You can’t fly above 18k, you can’t fly greater than 6 pax. For instance you can’t fly my 421 and I carry a class 3. So how is that “equal” ?

 

[Lindberg]

If I have a basic med in my possession, I can legally fly an aircraft in the appropriate category and class. If I have a Class 3, I can legally fly the same airplane.
How are they not equal in allowing the same privileges?

Whether they actually allow the same privileges aside (they don't), that's not the relevant question. The remember question is whether they represent the same level of medical scrutiny. By definition, they don't.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Incorrect. You can’t fly above 18k, you can’t fly greater than 6 pax. For instance you can’t fly my 421 and I carry a class 3. So how is that “equal” ?

Did I or did I not say appropriate category and class?

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

It's over 99%. The FAA brags about that from time to time.

Of course, a typical pilot can pass a dozen times before they fail - that help the statics. And then there are those who know better than to even try and take the exam.

99% pass does not correlate to 99% of the people who might want a medical can get a medical.

 

[Anthem]

Did I or did I not say appropriate category and class?

What is “appropriate” ? You are claiming equal but now disclaiming all else ? Are you only saying airplane single engine land ? If so - then how about a pc12. Airplane single engine land. Same category and class or are you going to disclaim and sub at beyond that ?

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Whether they actually allow the same privileges aside (they don't), that's not the relevant question. The remember question is whether they represent the same level of medical scrutiny. By definition, they don't.

For the pilot of the 4 place single flying below Class A airspace, what privileges are denied the Basic Med pilot that are available to the pilot with the Class 3?

That is absolutely the relevant question because either path to the privilege provides a sufficient level of scrutiny as prescribed by the regulating agency.

Whether or not they represent the same level of scrutiny is I believe an open question. I had a class 3 for decades, and the exam has always been cursory compared to my yearly exam by my PCP. Any diagnosis my PCP may make upon her exam is what triggers the possible need for an SI, if it's a condition flagged by CAMI. My PCP has a greater interest in my health than does the bureaucrat in OKC, who would simply react to my reporting her diagnosis. She is going to look harder.

The scrutiny argument is a red herring.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

What is “appropriate” ? You are claiming equal but now disclaiming all else ? Are you only saying airplane single engine land ? If so - then how about a pc12. Airplane single engine land. Same category and class or are you going to disclaim and sub at beyond that ?

Appropriate as to category and class defined by the limitations of Basic Med. A Basic Med pilot can do anything a Class 3 can do within those confines.

 

[Anthem]

For the pilot of the 4 place single flying below Class A airspace, what privileges are denied the Basic Med pilot that are available to the pilot with the Class 3?

and what category and class is that ? I don’t see any definition of that category and class. You mention an FAA category / class and then correct others on category / class - but now you are creating your own sub whatever underneath of that ?

And you mention equal - how is that equal when they are definitely not ?

Appropriate as to category and class defined by the limitations of Basic Med.

This is funny. And what category and class are we talking about here ? So the limitations are there because they are equal ? I don’t understand your equal logic….

If they are equal - then let’s put it this way - how many people would take basic med every year over class 3 if they could freely and easily get it ? How many would take class 3 (or 2 or 1) over basic med is they could get it ? Are they really truly equal ?

 

[Tokirbymd]

Does anyone recall what percentage of deferrals and SI applications turn out to conclude in issuance of a medical certificate? Seems to me it was pretty high. For people in that group, the bottom line tipping the scales in favor of BasicMed is likely the extra expense, and the likelihood of being grounded for a year or so while waiting for the FAA to get around to making a decision.

Its this potential year plus long delay and $1000s in extra expense that cause people to avoid C3. If the FAA SI process were streamlined lets say to 6 weeks, how many would be that concerned about it given the large % that are issued vs denied. The reason people favor BM and hate the FAA is because like everything else in aviation, as soon as FAA bureaucracy gets involved, it takes too dang long and costs too dang much.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

and what category and class is that ? I don’t see any definition of that category and class. You mention an FAA category / class and then correct others on category / class - but now you are creating your own sub whatever underneath of that ?

And you mention equal - how is that equal when they are definitely not ?


This is funny. And what category and class are we talking about here ? So the limitations are there because they are equal ? I don’t understand your equal logic….

If they are equal - then let’s put it this way - how many people would take basic med every year over class 3 if they could freely and easily get it ? How many would take class 3 (or 2 or 1) over basic med is they could get it ? Are they really truly equal ?

I can easily get a Class3. I opted for Basic Med for the following reasons:

1.To support the program on behalf of those who are medically fit to fly, but are subject to the whims and caprice of the FAA, as well as the unconcionably long delays. I want the program to succeed, and it suits my purposes and mission.

2. It's good for 4 years, rather than 2.

3. I now don't have to think twice about putting my ticket at risk, or paying out of pocket for unneccessary yearly testing for an SI after seeking treatment of what may in fact be a benign ailment or injury.

4. I love my Comanche, and have no desire to move to a twin, turbine or other such, and have no desire to fly for pay. I can file and fly IFR, and Basic Med puts no obstacles in the path of how I use my aircraft, or changes how I used my aircraft while holding a Class 3.

5. I get a complete physical every year, including labs, covered by my health plan. Going for a class 3 would be an additional appointment and out of pocket expense, for a lesser quality examination.

6. I have had to go to three different AME's for the past three Class 3 exams. They seem to be retiring at a faster pace, and I would prefer not to have to start at ground d zero every two years.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

BTW, when I refer to category and class, I am referring to the way insurance companies rate. Broadly speaking, categories are conventional, fixed, retract, turbine, and class is number of seats and horsepower. Of course there are also subcategories, like high-performance conventional (Pitts, Christen Eagles etc, but it's just a matter of nomenclature. Sorry to have confused you.

Basic Med qualifying aircraft would mostly fall into categories A-C <250 HP

 

[Half Fast]

ther they actually allow the same privileges aside (they don't), that's not the relevant question. The remember question is whether they represent the same level of medical scrutiny. By definition, they don't.

The more meaningful question is whether both provide acceptable levels of safety. Does the difference in medical scrutiny result in any meaningful difference in accidents?

 

[Lindberg]

Whether or not they represent the same level of scrutiny is I believe an open question.

And that's the end of the debate.

When Basic Med carries the same imprimatur as a Class 3, you can argue that everyone should have to treat them the same.

 

[Anthem]

And that's the end of the debate.

When Basic Med carries the same imprimatur as a Class 3, you can argue that everyone should have to treat them the same.

Yep. And don’t forget BM isn’t accepted in Canada or anywhere else outside of Mexico and the Bahamas.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

And that's the end of the debate.

When Basic Med carries the same imprimatur as a Class 3, you can argue that everyone should have to treat them the same.

Reductio ad absurdum

 

[unsafervguy]

It makes a lot of sense that a 5 minute visit with a doctor would be so much better at predicting how well a geezer can handle an airplane than an hour or so with a flight instructor.

No, but the 5 minutes with a vision machine can be very telling……

 

[Daleandee]

And that's the end of the debate.

Not so fast there pardner ... after all, this is POA

 

[hindsight2020]

3 pages? Concur, this West Coast forest sized dumpster fire is just getting the kindling going

 

[Pinecone]

My only wish? That BasicMed could be used for Commercial operations not involving carrying passengers for hire. But grateful for my current options regardless.

That and removing the altitude restriction (or at least raising it to FL250 or 290), combined with the new limits on GW and seats would be PHENOMINAL.

I don't understand why, if I owned a warbird, I need a 2nd class to go to an airshow and accept free fuel. With a BM or 3rd, I can go, fly in the show, but just cannot accept fuel. Stupid.

 

[Ralph Parmenter Bennett]

It may have already been written within, but consider joining 'The United Flying Octogenarians'. If you can legally serve as PIC on or after your 80th Birthday, then you qualify for membership in our special organization for your duration. A major emphasis of the UFO is pilot insurance reform and health care awareness for us guys. We are presently about 2000 members in four countries but the FAA lists about 10,000 pilots over 80 years of age. Keep flying and don't hang up your headphones.

 

[FatherPilot]

It may have already been written within, but consider joining 'The United Flying Octogenarians'. If you can legally serve as PIC on or after your 80th Birthday, then you qualify for membership in our special organization for your duration. A major emphasis of the UFO is pilot insurance reform and health care awareness for us guys. We are presently about 2000 members in four countries but the FAA lists about 10,000 pilots over 80 years of age. Keep flying and don't hang up your headphones.

If in 30ish years I am still around I would be honored to make it into this club!

 

[Pinecone]

Eliminating 3rd class would perhaps help more fly, but certainly wouldn't help get more insured at a reasonable rate. Probably the opposite.

The idea is not to eliminate the 3rd Class, but make Basic Med BE the new 3rd Class.

In many cases, it is the person's PCP which has a greater depth of knowledge of the health of the person that any AME seeing the person once every several years for 30 minutes.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

It may have already been written within, but consider joining 'The United Flying Octogenarians'. If you can legally serve as PIC on or after your 80th Birthday, then you qualify for membership in our special organization for your duration. A major emphasis of the UFO is pilot insurance reform and health care awareness for us guys. We are presently about 2000 members in four countries but the FAA lists about 10,000 pilots over 80 years of age. Keep flying and don't hang up your headphones.

Do you take 65 year olds as junior members? if you have an action plan in this regard, I'd gladly support it.

 

[Half Fast]

Do you take 65 year olds as junior members?

65? You may be interested in the new organization I’m starting. United Flying SEXagenarians.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

65? You may be interested in the new organization I’m starting. United Flying SEXagenarians.

I've been with my wife almost 42 years. She must be doing something right.
But send me a pamphlet, just in case.

 

[frfly172]

The octogenarian club has an auxiliary club for pilots 75-80