|
There seems to be some support for routine medical examinations for glider pilots rather than the current system of self-declaration for solo pilots and medical exams for charter pilots in Appendices 1 and 2 of the GFA Opregs.
For what it’s worth, here are my thoughts:
Under the current system, if people suffer from epilepsy, fits, severe head injury, recurrent fainting, giddiness, blackouts, abnormally high blood pressure, previous heart disease, a deficiency in vision or take insulin for the control of diabetes, they require a medical examination before flying solo. So, in effect, people are proposing to make people who don’t suffer from any of these conditions take a routine medical examination before flying solo. Can this be justified on safety grounds?
To counter the argument that some people have failed airline (Class 1) medicals and then turned to gliding, I would say it depends on what grounds they failed the Class 1 medical. I hope everybody agrees that a gliding medical should be less stringent than a Class 1 medical, so I can see a case for an ex-airline pilot failing a medical and self-declaring to fly solo in a glider as long as he doesn’t suffer from one of the conditions listed above. If he has any of these conditions, he can’t fly solo without a medical exam from a GP or DAME. If he has one of these conditions and falsely self-declares, I would argue that making everybody take a routine medical just to catch those dishonest people is unreasonably burdening the honest pilots.
Somebody else just made the point that having an incapacitating medical event could be just as fatal while driving a car as flying a glider. Anecdotally you hear of fatal car accidents caused by drivers suffering heart attacks etc but I don’t see the public or regulators clamouring to impose routine medical examinations for all drivers. Why? Because it isn’t justified on a risk assessment/cost-benefit analysis that applies just as well to gliding.
What would be the cost of imposing a routine GP medical exam on all glider pilots? Assume 50% of the 2,600 GFA members already have a Students Pilot License or greater and can use their existing medical. 1,300 x $80 doctor’s fee (This is a guess since I haven’t visited a doctor for many years) = $104,000 every two years (assuming the pilots are over 40).
What is the potential benefit? Apart from the possible pilot incapacitation example that Macca quoted, how many gliders do we lose each year to pilot incapacitation? If we lose less than one glider every few years, I would say that routine medicals aren’t warranted on a risk vs reward basis alone. Furthermore, not all medical examinations would pick up every “ticking time-bomb”. Even some airline pilots with current Class 1 medicals die suddenly, fortunately they do it outside the cockpit or they have a co-pilot to recover the aircraft. I realise that I’m being a bit callous and simplistic in my analysis by ignoring the cost of the pilots themselves but I’m assuming that they would have probably had the same fatal accident driving their car or sitting in their armchair.
You could argue that there would be an additional cost if the pilot dies at the controls while conducting an AEF or TIF with a non-pilot passenger who subsequently crashes the glider and gets injured. Many years ago, a glider pilot had to have a medical exam to get a passenger rating but I don’t know when this changed. I would be prepared to concede this point only.
Most people on this list favour less gliding regulation and less expense so it seems anomalous that people are proposing to increase regulation and cost for (IMHO) questionable reward.
Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to all.
Regards,
Patrick Barfield
(Somebody arguing vociferously against medicals but with nothing to hide since I have a Class 2 medical)
|
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
