AircraftOwner Online

People call or email me questions all the time but once in a while, just the question raises irritation levels.

    Recently, I received a question from a pilot about advancing age and the ability to fly. He had been chided by a “younger” pilot that he was too old to fly. Then last week, I fielded a complaint from an older pilot which stated that his insurance company was making him get a first class medical every year to keep his insurance.

    Age and flying is not a new subject. The FAA has looked at this many times debating the “age 60 rule” for airline pilots finally raising the age limit to 65 a year and half ago. During the “investigation,” the FAA commission a study by an Ivy League medical school for several million dollars to see what the effects of age had on the ability to fly. The only answer from the study was that as pilots get older, they generally get more medical problems. I could have told them that for a couple of beers at Oshkosh !

    Just last month, the AeroSpace Medical Association published an article that showed no difference in accident rates in commuter aircraft related to the age of the pilot. If nothing else, think about experience. Sullenberger landed in the Hudson at age 57 and Al Haynes was forced by the age 60 rule (at that time) to retire six months after he saved 184 people in a Sioux City corn field.

    Yes, pilots do have more medical problems as they get older. They also may not have the same quick reflexes they did as a newly minted private pilot. But they have something that those young pilots do not have—experience and maturity—qualities which are much more valuable in the cockpit.

    When it comes down to accident statistics, pilot error is far and away the most common cause of accidents and most of these tend to be “mental” errors. How much more needs to be said about judgment when the two most common causes of accidents are running out of gas and flying into IMC without qualifications?

    It is as hard to assess a pilot’s ability to make sound judgments as it is to assess their medical status. The main purpose of the medical certification exam is to “predict” the possibility of sudden incapacitation while flying. Physicians cannot do that well under any circumstances and especially with flight medicals. For instance, the medical form does not have any mention of smoking, family history, or cholesterol levels. The only issue for obesity is whether the abdomen is so big it gets in the way of the yoke. In fact, the word obesity is not even in the Guide for Aviation Medical Examiners.

    “A brief description of any comment-worthy personal characteristics as well as

height, weight… and other findings of consequence must be provided” is the only mention in the Guide of weight and there are no criteria or limitations beyond this mention. So what does the insurance company required first class medical standard do? Well, for the most part, it creates expense and hassles and does little else. The most significant safety factors for airlines pilots are the duplication of personnel in the cockpit, not the medical. The only different criteria in an otherwise non special issuance third and first class medical is vision criteria (20/20 required for 1st) and the annual resting EKG over 40.

    A resting EKG is not predictive of sudden incapacitation. I once had a conversation with Dr. Jon Jordan, the previous Federal Air Surgeon, who agreed that the resting EKG did nothing but stated “no one has the guts to stop it.” What is predictive of heart disease is a stress EKG (treadmill) or even better, a nuclear stress test. Since both these tests are expensive and time consuming, the chances of their being used for medical criteria are nil.

    So what is the bottom line? There are pilots out there who are 50 who should not be flying and there are those who are 75 who can grease a tail dragger on the runway effortlessly. Mature and experienced pilots generally choose to alter their flying as they see their ability wane such as discontinuing hard IFR or changing to lower performance aircraft. I wish younger pilots judged their capabilities as honestly.

    What may be more important evaluation criteria if used properly is the biannual review. How many instructors say to a pilot after a review, “Joe Pilot, you really need to work with an instructor to sharpen you skills or quit flying” regardless of their age. Not many. I just had an instructor tell me after what was supposed to be a ten minute check out that I needed a few more hours of touch and go’s in a conventional gear aircraft I was unfamiliar with before setting off on a 13 leg cross country stopping at unfamiliar airports. What made me do those extra couple of hours was not my self deceived mental age of 25 but the maturity of 30 plus years of flying.

~ BB ~