Ted Cruz proposes new medical regs on balloon pilots

I was shocked commercial balloon pilots didn't need a medical...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
I was shocked commercial balloon pilots didn't need a medical...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Me too!
But these days there are so many things I find shocking.
And this is one of the most pressing issues facing the nation, I'm sure we would all agree.
(Oops. That might get me a ban hammer)

 
in response to the balloon crash in Texas last year:


Hearing : Investigative Hearing, Lockhart, TX Balloon Accident
NTSB Boardroom
12/9/2016 9:00 AM
Page Content


On July 30, 2016 at 7:42 am central daylight time, a Kubicek BB85Z hot air balloon, operated by Heart of Texas Balloons, registration N2469L, impacted electrical transmission lines and crashed into a pasture near Lockhart, Tx. The pilot and 15 passengers were fatally injured by impact and fire. The balloon was destroyed. Witness and weather observation information indicated low clouds and fog in the general area. The flight was a commercial sightseeing tour flight, operated under the provisions of 14 CFR part 91.

The investigative hearing is being held to discuss the circumstances of the accident flight and safety issues regarding commercial balloon tour operations. Areas that will be discussed include operations of large passenger carrying balloons, balloon pilot training and decision-making, weather factors relevant to accident, FAA regulation and oversight of commercial balloons, tour operator best practices, and medical factors and certification requirements relevant to the accident.

Parties to the hearing include the Federal Aviation Administration, the Balloon Federation of America, and Kubicek Balloons.
 
You guys are crazy.

Not sure where to go from here. One pilot, no medical, paying pax...

Do you know how to land a balloon?
This is a COMMERCIAL operation.

What am I missing??
 
Congressional response to public demands about how did this happen.
 
I think there's been a couple balloon accidents caused by excessive stupidity in Texas.
 
Kritchlow said:
You guys are crazy.

Not sure where to go from here. One pilot, no medical, paying pax...

Do you know how to land a balloon?
This is a COMMERCIAL operation.

What am I missing??
Click to expand...

So you think an accident nvolving a balloon loaded with 16 people was likely caused by the pilot not having a medical.
 
biplanebob said:
in response to the balloon crash in Texas last year:


Hearing : Investigative Hearing, Lockhart, TX Balloon Accident
NTSB Boardroom
12/9/2016 9:00 AM
Page Content


On July 30, 2016 at 7:42 am central daylight time, a Kubicek BB85Z hot air balloon, operated by Heart of Texas Balloons, registration N2469L, impacted electrical transmission lines and crashed into a pasture near Lockhart, Tx. The pilot and 15 passengers were fatally injured by impact and fire. The balloon was destroyed. Witness and weather observation information indicated low clouds and fog in the general area. The flight was a commercial sightseeing tour flight, operated under the provisions of 14 CFR part 91.

The investigative hearing is being held to discuss the circumstances of the accident flight and safety issues regarding commercial balloon tour operations. Areas that will be discussed include operations of large passenger carrying balloons, balloon pilot training and decision-making, weather factors relevant to accident, FAA regulation and oversight of commercial balloons, tour operator best practices, and medical factors and certification requirements relevant to the accident.

Parties to the hearing include the Federal Aviation Administration, the Balloon Federation of America, and Kubicek Balloons.
Click to expand...

So, you are posting an announcement for an upcoming meeting that has already occurred. Odd. Wouldn't posting any findings from the meeting, be the more productive thing to do?
 
Clip4 said:
So you think an accident nvolving a balloon loaded with 16 people was likely caused by the pilot not having a medical.
Click to expand...

Apparently so. And what about the DOT drug testing for commercial ops?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Apparently so. And what about the DOT drug testing for commercial ops?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
That's the part that blew my mind when this accident happened. The complete lack of FAA oversight for commercial operators of balloons compared to what we have to deal with to give sightseeing rides in airplanes.

The drug testing requirement alone is the biggest hassle for a sightseeing LOA.
 
It's one thing to argue for personal freedom operating part 91, but any sort of commercial operation - the public has an expectation that pilots and aircraft are pretty well regulated. I bet most wouldn't guess that somehow balloons were completely exempted and it's a free for all...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Clip4 said:
So you think an accident nvolving a balloon loaded with 16 people was likely caused by the pilot not having a medical.
Click to expand...
Not sure about any specific one, but an undisclosed medical condition sure could lead to an accident at some point.
 
Can someone just link to the thread where this horse was beaten to death and beyond when the event actually occurred?
 
Clip4 said:
So you think an accident nvolving a balloon loaded with 16 people was likely caused by the pilot not having a medical.
Click to expand...
The pilot had a history of four DUIs. No chance he'd be able to hold a medical with that sort of history. Problem is, without a medical, the FAA can't even pull a NDR check (I.e. violations on your drivers license).

Based on his dui history and cocktail of drugs he was on, this dude had a history of poor decision making.
 
Reading the article in the OP, I am struck how closely the FAA follows the wishes of the balloon lobby.

I think we should ask The Balloon Federation of America to broaden its mission to include us. They are so much more effective than AOPA.

"The Balloon Federation of America and officials with the Federal Aviation Administration have argued that medical exams and drug tests for balloon pilots are costly and unnecessary, given the low number of balloon flights compared to other types of aircraft."
 
NoHeat said:
Reading the article in the OP, I am struck how closely the FAA follows the wishes of the balloon lobby.

I think we should ask The Balloon Federation of America to broaden its mission to include us. They are so much more effective than AOPA.

"The Balloon Federation of America and officials with the Federal Aviation Administration have argued that medical exams and drug tests for balloon pilots are costly and unnecessary, given the low number of balloon flights compared to other types of aircraft."
Click to expand...

For the most part, balloons fly under the radar (both literally and figuratively). Recently there have been some higher profile accidents that will inevitably force the FAA to step up enforcement. Thing is, there are very few ASIs qualified in Balloons, so enforcement will always be a challenge.
 
I'm just shocked any kind of *commercial* operation was so unregulated. Surprised they could get insurance on those things for-hire without medicals, etc. Or did they?
 
I take a back seat to nobody in terms right wing wackery, but Ted's right about this Balloon thing. I was gobsmacked when it came out that a person with a host of substance and judgement 'issues' could sell tickets to a huge a balloon with essentially no oversight.

Certainly if the FAA diverted some of the logbook police to looking after commercial balloons we wouldn't need any new hires.
 
Brad Z said:
For the most part, balloons fly under the radar (both literally and figuratively). Recently there have been some higher profile accidents that will inevitably force the FAA to step up enforcement. Thing is, there are very few ASIs qualified in Balloons, so enforcement will always be a challenge.
Click to expand...

Why would an Inspector need to be balloon qualified to do an enforcement on a balloon operator?
 
I'm surprised so many here are clamoring for reg that even the FAA thinks are unnecessary.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Why would an Inspector need to be balloon qualified to do an enforcement on a balloon operator?
Click to expand...

An ASI need not be balloon qualified to either perform surveillance of or pursue enforcement action on a balloon operator.

The FAA performs surveillance and oversight based upon risk analysis and balloon operations have always been considered relatively low risk and for the most part that was and remains absolutely accurate for a variety of reasons. That does not mean however that some changes are not warranted. Recent events illustrate that change is needed and there are some people who are demanding it.

As to requiring a medical for commercial balloon operations, that requirement is long overdue in my opinion. Though I think allowing private pilots to continue to operate without one is fine. I would also advocate for the addition of an operating certificate for operations over a certain number of passengers. And for those operators, drug testing as well.

Change only make sense. Hopefully it will be in the form of reasonable and prudent regulations.
 
Guys, if Ted Cruz managed to get the law passed to require FAA medical exams for balloon pilots, do you think this will be a gateway to have FAA medical exams for pilot operations not requiring an FAA medical such as sport pilots, glider pilots and maybe even FAR Part 103 ultralight pilots? I hope not. Let's not go down that path.
 
One would hope the proposed bill is limited to commercial pilots. But nobody has posted a copy of the bill. So there's no way to know.
 
The problem here is that one would think that ANY commercial operation should be subject to the same rules as any other commercial operation. If you asked people if they thought that people operating a commercial balloon flight had medical and drug testing oversight - I'd bet 99 out of a 100 would say yes to that-

and you don't need a detailed bill to accomplish this:

Section 1. Title. Commercial Air Operations Responsibility Bill

Section 2. Scope: Anyone acting as pilot in command of any aircraft, rotorcraft, balloon, glider or other pilot certificate requiring a commercial certification, shall possess at least a Second Class medical certificate in accordance with . . . .

Section 3. Effective Date: January 1, 2018.

Thats the whole law. . . .
 
This would be so simple if our .gov wasn't run by complete bafoons. Private operations = no medical. Commercial operations = medical. So simple a child could do it.
 
I could be wrong, but I don't think you need a medical for commercial ops in a glider either.

I'll go against the grain here. I see no reason for either.
 
DFH65 said:
This would be so simple if our .gov wasn't run by complete bafoons. Private operations = no medical. Commercial operations = medical. So simple a child could do it.
Click to expand...
Simply, why? What would the impacts, positive and negative, be of requiring a medical for commercial balloon ops? Don't we need to know the answer to that question before advocating for any law?
 
"the pilot who flew the balloon that crashed into power lines near Lockhart, had suffered from unreported medical conditions and was on oxycodone, Valium, Prozac and other prescription drugs on the day of the tragedy."

Commercial ops should not be done under these circumstances.
 
Not a fan of regulation but seems like a guy taking money for rides shouldn't be flying with that stuff in his system. Is there a better way?
 
DFH65 said:
Not a fan of regulation but seems like a guy taking money for rides shouldn't be flying with that stuff in his system. Is there a better way?
Click to expand...

Regulation has become a dirty word. But a big percentage of regulation is necessary, common sense or ensures a level playing field for market participants. Sure some gets silly, but too often we seem to want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Ever see a pro sport without referees?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Clip4 said:
So much for old Ted being a anti regulation conservative.
Click to expand...
AAEAAQAAAAAAAAItAAAAJDViN2FmNDZhLWNmYmEtNDYyYS1hODBlLWI2OGQzYWU2YTAyNQ.png
 
Datadriver said:
"the pilot who flew the balloon that crashed into power lines near Lockhart, had suffered from unreported medical conditions and was on oxycodone, Valium, Prozac and other prescription drugs on the day of the tragedy."

Commercial ops should not be done under these circumstances.
Click to expand...
@Lindbergh THIS is why . . .
 
Seventy fatal balloon crashes in fifty years. Some fraction of those were commercial ops. And maybe some smaller fraction were related to the pilots health. And some fraction of those, might maybe have been prevented by the proposed regulation of it was followed 100%.

That's not worth the cost of the government ink to print the regulation, let alone the costs of enforcing it. There's a good reason the FAA opposed amending the regs.


http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ho...ooning-fatalities-are-rare-stats-show-n102116
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top