5000 Pilots suspected of hiding health issues

I don't know anything about the particulars about this stuff. But I am certain of 2 things. 1) Any program designed to help a group of people who needs help is going to be abused, and people will complain loudly about that. 2) Most of the time, changes made to reduce cheating will affect the honest people more than the cheaters.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be fixed, only that it should be done carefully.
 
Velocity173 said:
We had a guy who used to work at my base in EMS who had 100 %. Always thought it ironic that he’s getting $3K tax free a month, got a handicap license plate, parked in a handicapped parking spot, 50 ft from the helicopter he flys for work! He’s currently trying to get back on with our company and I’m trying everything in my power to prevent that…probably to no avail.
Click to expand...
Velocity173 said:
Jeez, sounds like a pilot I had in my company. I was the SP so I had the unfortunate responsibility of ensuring the 14 guys assigned to me were trained and maintained currency. Had a guy who’d been flying almost as long as me. At the time I had around 3,500 hrs and he had 500 hrs. Spent his time failing checkrides and getting grounded for the last 10 years. I tried to get his ACIP stopped and got chewed out by a female flight surgeon who said it wasn’t my business. Found out right after I retired he had an MEB and boarded out. Also found out the dude was grounded but yet played organized rugby in his spare time. That’s another thing. A lot of times there’s no accountability when it comes to special duty / ACIP. People slip through the cracks.
Click to expand...

This is the exact kind of petty warrant behavior that made me hate being a commander. So you have this guy that is struggling to be a productive member of the ATP, but instead of trying to, idk, be an *I*P and *I*instruct, you decided to just drive him into the ground and try to go after his ACIP (it's not your money bro)? Did you work with the command team on moving this person into a role where they can better contribute to the Army or did you just create another s***bag PI for someone to deal with?

In many ways veterans have made massive strides in having their sacrifices and mental and physical hardships recognized and duly compensated. For years this forum has maligned how the FAA incentivizes hiding of derogatory health information. So it is surprising that when the news breaks about those who sacrificed immense amounts of their life for our way of life going through this process, we use it as an opportunity to vilify people who seek to be compensated for their service rather than criticize the insane in efficiencies of a federal bureaucracy that has created this perverse incentive structure in the first place.
 
redbaron said:
This is the exact kind of petty warrant behavior that made me hate being a commander. So you have this guy that is struggling to be a productive member of the ATP, but instead of trying to, idk, be an *I*P and *I*instruct, you decided to just drive him into the ground and try to go after his ACIP (it's not your money bro)? Did you work with the command team on moving this person into a role where they can better contribute to the Army or did you just create another s***bag PI for someone to deal with?

In many ways veterans have made massive strides in having their sacrifices and mental and physical hardships recognized and duly compensated. For years this forum has maligned how the FAA incentivizes hiding of derogatory health information. So it is surprising that when the news breaks about those who sacrificed immense amounts of their life for our way of life going through this process, we use it as an opportunity to vilify people who seek to be compensated for their service rather than criticize the insane in efficiencies of a federal bureaucracy that has created this perverse incentive structure in the first place.
Click to expand...
The guy wasn’t struggling to be anything. I hardly ever saw him because he was shamming his way through his time until he got med boarded. I never once got an honest answer on when he was going to get his up slip. RL progression with one IP and overwhelmed with new pilots means, you either **** or get off the pot. There’s no time to hold someone’s hand who doesn’t want to be there in the first place. The Army should’ve cut ties with him long ago.

“Duly compensated.” Give me a break. Someone with arthritis, erectile dysfunction, athletes foot, tinnitus or psoriasis shouldn’t be getting compensated for jack. Definitely not as much as a guy who’s legs are blown off from an IED. Compensation should be given for physical injuries directly attributed to service, nothing more. My grandfather got a whopping 20 % for being shot through the wrist and shot through the leg on Tarawa. My tax dollars today are paying for guys with 60-80 % disability and not thing related to war or even service for that matter. They got free training, good money and a check each month for life during retirement. They should be glad to have that.
 
redbaron said:
So it is surprising that when the news breaks about those who sacrificed immense amounts of their life for our way of life going through this process, we use it as an opportunity to vilify people who seek to be compensated for their service rather than criticize the insane in efficiencies of a federal bureaucracy that has created this perverse incentive structure in the first place.
Click to expand...
I think you’re missing the point of this entirely. Nobody - certainly not I (a 24-year veteran physician who did a bunch of retirement physicals during my time) is vilifying anyone for being compensated for their service, even if, IMHO, things like compensation for a hysterectomy seems a bit odd.

The issue is intentionally hiding that compensation from the FAA. If they reveal their disability as required and the FAA assesses their situation and determines it’s safe to allow them to fly, then fine. But if they’re intentionally hiding a disability, impactful or not, that’s fraud and is the issue, at least for me.
 
Tantalum said:
I suppose not. But there's some 'appeal to authority' fallacy I think between the two. People know what they're getting with YouTube, see Dan Gryder, but they're epxecting a higher caliber with something like WaPo or NYT, for example. My big issue with any platform is the clickbait or sensationalist nature of it. "5000 pilots" sound a lot scarier than "less than 1%" .. it's intentionally misleading.
Click to expand...
It's not less than 1% of the pilots for whom data was gathered, as I explained in my other post. I also don't see anything misleading, intentionally or otherwise, about reporting the actual number of suspects.
 
This relates to the you have two doctors thing. One that keeps you healthy and one that keeps you flying, and they don’t know of each other.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I think you’re missing the point of this entirely. Nobody - certainly not I (a 24-year veteran physician who did a bunch of retirement physicals during my time) is vilifying anyone for being compensated for their service, even if, IMHO, things like compensation for a hysterectomy seems a bit odd.

The issue is intentionally hiding that compensation from the FAA. If they reveal their disability as required and the FAA assesses their situation and determines it’s safe to allow them to fly, then fine. But if they’re intentionally hiding a disability, impactful or not, that’s fraud and is the issue, at least for me.
Click to expand...
So...if you've checked them out with a thorough physical exam....wouldn't they be fine? Regardless of how they filled out the form?
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
So...if you've checked them out with a thorough physical exam....wouldn't they be fine? Regardless of how they filled out the form?
Click to expand...
A physical exam is just a snapshot of one single point in time. That's not all of what the FAA wants to see.
 
Palmpilot said:
If I understand the article correctly, the data was gathered in regard to pilots with VA records, not the entire pilot population of the U.S., so dividing the results by the latter population underestimates the extent of the problem.
Click to expand...
Well, you're probably right. When I posted that I didn't try to get past the paywall so I took the synopsis at face value. Any idea of the number of "pilots with VA records"?
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
So...if you've checked them out with a thorough physical exam....wouldn't they be fine? Regardless of how they filled out the form?
Click to expand...
To clarify, I was doing retirement physicals while an Air Force physician. The task of those was to document their physical condition at/near the time of retirement - not to specifically treat anything. That said, they were typically “my” patients in my panel and had been under my care for some period of time. Plus if I found anything on exam that was new I either set up an appropriate follow-up visit and/or started treatment, depending on the circumstances.
 
An article in Flying sheds a bit more light:

www.flyingmag.com

FAA Suspects Nearly 5,000 Pilots Concealing Medical Issues to Keep Flying - FLYING Magazine

About 60 pilots have been grounded as the FAA reviews their medical records, but the majority of those under scrutiny are still flying.
www.flyingmag.com www.flyingmag.com

Highlights (to me):
- It sounds like their focus is primarily on Part 121 and 135 pilots with the discrepancies. That makes connecting medical "concerns" to the public interest more realistic, IMHO
- For all the work over the past year, it sounds like they temporarily suspended about 60 pilots who "posed a clear danger to aviation safety". "In most closed cases, pilots have been ordered to correct their records and undergo new aeromedical examinations to restore their medical certificates."
- "...around 1,250 pilots under scrutiny no longer hold a valid medical certificate, which is not required for those operating light sport aircraft, light twins or singles under BasicMed, or for glider operations. However, the majority of pilots with open cases are being permitted to conduct business as usual."

I don't see any indication of any "punitive" action taken so far. It sounds like 60 pilots - 1 1/4% of the 4,800 - have been temporarily suspended. Seems to me the FAA is acting pretty responsibly in light of the circumstances, from what's being published.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
So...if you've checked them out with a thorough physical exam....wouldn't they be fine? Regardless of how they filled out the form?
Click to expand...
If someone is collecting my tax dollars for some disability attributable to their service, they sure as heck better not be doing a job and collecting pay as well.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
If someone is collecting my tax dollars for some disability attributable to their service, they sure as heck better not be doing a job and collecting pay as well.
Click to expand...
Wait…what?!?

Taken literally, are you saying they shouldn’t be doing ANY job and just exist on their disability pay? I hope not…

If they have a disability and can demonstrate it doesn’t interfere with safely doing some (other) job, that’s fine with me. Just let the safety of them doing the new job be assessable.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
If someone is collecting my tax dollars for some disability attributable to their service, they sure as heck better not be doing a job and collecting pay as well.
Click to expand...

The Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation act disagree with you and carry the weight of law.
 
Velocity173 said:
This will be a rant so stand by. I just finished a book “Should’ve Played the Flute.” It’s about an Army Aviator who went thru flight school in the late 60s and then to Vietnam.

What stood out in it was his comment about the washout rate back then. He stated his class had 120 flight students and only half of them got their wings. When I went through and still the situation today is, Army Aviation has about a 1 % washout rate. What that means, because we’re so short of pilots, is they push people through the system to meet a quota. The naysayers will say “well they met the requirements to be here, they should graduate.” Complete BS. Just because they passed the tests and boards to get there, doesn’t mean they should stay. Not everyone should be an aviator in the military and there should be a culling process to eliminate those who can’t hack it. Instead, we push people through that have no business being there. When I was an IP at Rucker, we used to say “Well, they’ll pair this guy with a strong PIC when he gets to his unit.” That was our way of trying to rationalize weak students we were sending through the system.

To me it’s scary. We have a military now that’s under the philosophy of “everyone gets a trophy.” In my experience, outside of a few units (spec ops) the vast majority of the Army is comprised of mediocre performers.
Click to expand...
 
Kenny Phillips said:
If someone is collecting my tax dollars for some disability attributable to their service, they sure as heck better not be doing a job and collecting pay as well.
Click to expand...
Many of these are folks with partial disabilities that will not affect their flying abilities. Like an ankle or wrist issue....maybe even a knee. It's not what it appears to be....but we will sensationalize it to make news. ;)
 
Llewtrah381 said:
Wait…what?!?

Taken literally, are you saying they shouldn’t be doing ANY job and just exist on their disability pay? I hope not…

If they have a disability and can demonstrate it doesn’t interfere with safely doing some (other) job, that’s fine with me. Just let the safety of them doing the new job be assessable.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying someone shouldn't be compensated for, say, losing a foot to an IED, or things lesser or worse. Pay them, once. Disability should be only for when you cannot do something for continuing income. Shouldn't those able to work, work? I've worked with deaf folks, paraplegics, people with CP, amputees, really stupid people, etc.
But certainly if you can fly an airplane, you should be collecting zero in continuing payments. And this is about that.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Many of these are folks with partial disabilities that will not affect their flying abilities. Like an ankle or wrist issue....maybe even a knee. It's not what it appears to be....but we will sensationalize it to make news. ;)
Click to expand...

So the guy is collecting $1500 per month for his disability, and has a job paying 15-25000 per month flying an airliner. Sounds reasonable.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
I'm not saying someone shouldn't be compensated for, say, losing a foot to an IED, or things lesser or worse. Pay them, once. Disability should be only for when you cannot do something for continuing income. Shouldn't those able to work, work? I've worked with deaf folks, paraplegics, people with CP, amputees, really stupid people, etc.
But certainly if you can fly an airplane, you should be collecting zero in continuing payments. And this is about that.
Click to expand...

Disability payments aren't about how much you can work, it's about how much of your physical health and enjoyment of life you gave up in service to this country. Imagine you lost your family jewels to a bullet. You would still be able to fly a plane just fine. Would you not want to be compensated for never being able to have your own offspring? Now imagine the quality of life reductions that arises from tinnitus, back/joint injuries, cancer, and other things that wouldn't immediately preclude someone from working but qualify as clear and direct harm to the individual as a result of military service.
 
Velocity173 said:
This will be a rant so stand by. I just finished a book “Should’ve Played the Flute.” It’s about an Army Aviator who went thru flight school in the late 60s and then to Vietnam.

What stood out in it was his comment about the washout rate back then. He stated his class had 120 flight students and only half of them got their wings. When I went through and still the situation today is, Army Aviation has about a 1 % washout rate. What that means, because we’re so short of pilots, is they push people through the system to meet a quota. The naysayers will say “well they met the requirements to be here, they should graduate.” Complete BS. Just because they passed the tests and boards to get there, doesn’t mean they should stay. Not everyone should be an aviator in the military and there should be a culling process to eliminate those who can’t hack it. Instead, we push people through that have no business being there. When I was an IP at Rucker, we used to say “Well, they’ll pair this guy with a strong PIC when he gets to his unit.” That was our way of trying to rationalize weak students we were sending through the system.

To me it’s scary. We have a military now that’s under the philosophy of “everyone gets a trophy.” In my experience, outside of a few units (spec ops) the vast majority of the Army is comprised of mediocre performers.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I was in the Americal Division at the exact same time as Elgin, but in a different helicopter company. Guess I’ll have to read his book before I comment further. Already have one suspicion that will need to be confirmed.
 
Last edited:
Mikey52 said:
So the guy is collecting $1500 per month for his disability, and has a job paying 15-25000 per month flying an airliner. Sounds reasonable.
Click to expand...
Yup....I have a family member that is a retired Marine with partial disabilities. He gets compensated for that and is a Police officer. So, he is still able to work....and is being compensated for his prior service injuries.

This is very common.....and an eye roller. IMHO.:rolleyes:
 
I never really understood the concept of partially disabled. I mean, isn’t everybody partially disabled at some level? I can’t run a four minute mile. So does partial disabled mean I can do everything I want but walk an extra 50 feet from the handicap spot.
 
Morgan3820 said:
I never really understood the concept of partially disabled. I mean, isn’t everybody partially disabled at some level? I can’t run a four minute mile. So does partial disabled mean I can do everything I want but walk an extra 50 feet from the handicap spot.
Click to expand...
Were you able to run a 4 minute mile before joining the service and receiving an injury while serving, thus removing your ability to do so afterwards?
 
Piperonca said:
Interesting. I was in the Americal Division at the exact same time as Elgin, but in a different helicopter company. Guess I’ll have to read his book before I comment further. Already have one suspicion that will need to be confirmed.
Click to expand...

Yeah he mentioned the 176 in the book. He started out in OH-6s and transferred to UH-1s at Chu Lai. Even if his 50 % washout rate is exaggerated at bit, I’ve read several pilot biographies from WWII, Korea and Vietnam. They washed out students like crazy back then. Now a days in the Army, we push them through. Popular saying from the IPs when I was at Rucker was “eliminations have been eliminated.”

One thing is for certain from all these Vietnam books I’ve read (Chickenhawk, DUSTOFF,etc) you guys were cowboys! Some of the stuff I’ve read you’d never be able to pull off today. In a way, that’s good but also, it’s sad.
 
Baked Potato said:
Were you able to run a 4 minute mile before joining the service and receiving an injury while serving, thus removing your ability to do so afterwards?
Click to expand...
Well no service requires one to be able to do a 4 mile run so it’s a moot point. But, if one can’t do the bare minimum for a PFT, then they should be kicked out. Instead they get PT waivers. Another rant for another day.

Now, the real question is, is the so called “injury” related to service? Pilots getting out today didn’t exactly storm the beaches of Normandy in Higgins Boats. We led a pretty cush lifestyle in the military. Even on deployment, climate controlled trailers and Steak and a Lobster on Fridays at the Dfac. The vast majority of medical issues vet pilots claim today, they would’ve had even if they spent 20 years flying as a civilian. How many civilians are in the same condition in their mid forties as they were at early twenties? That’s just simple aging. Has nothing to do with a job.
 
Velocity173 said:
Well no service requires one to be able to do a 4 mile run so it’s a moot point. But, if one can’t do the bare minimum for a PFT, then they should be kicked out. Instead they get PT waivers. Another rant for another day.

Now, the real question is, is the so called “injury” related to service? Pilots getting out today didn’t exactly storm the beaches of Normandy in Higgins Boats. We led a pretty cush lifestyle in the military. Even on deployment, climate controlled trailers and Steak and a Lobster on Fridays at the Dfac. The vast majority of medical issues vet pilots claim today, they would’ve had even if they spent 20 years flying as a civilian. How many civilians are in the same condition in their mid forties as they were at early twenties? That’s just simple aging. Has nothing to do with a job.
Click to expand...
I've never sat on a board that determines eligibility for disability payments, but logically I think they'd consider long term injury symptoms separately from normal wear-and-tear that occurs during typical aging. And disability insurance is available for private industry too, not just government service.
 
Most people don't truly understand the VA disability process and what it means from a medical or legal stance. The entire purpose for VA disability compensation (which is different than VA medical care) is to prevent veteran homelessness because of lost economic opportunity. This lost economic opportunity is based on current functional loss due to physical or mental health issues at the time of the claim. Per the actual law, not what occurs in practice, you must demonstrate a functional loss to qualify for VA disability compensation.

In the late 2000s the VA was under a lot of pressure, as reported in the article, to speed up the claims process. The result was that the claim process was effectively made much easier, faster and with much less scrutiny. The evaluation of the current functional loss seemed to be the one that slipped through the cracks a lot. And people have been getting disabilities for things that had previously existing, but resolved, and things that may be of a concern in the future.

Meanwhile, many pilots marked "yes" to disability benefits and the FAA never came back and asked for detail. And many pilots did hide it. But the FAA only looks at a pilot on paper. No pilot is individually evaluated at the Oklahoma City office. So when a pilot doesn't provide medical evidence that says they have recovered from the functional loss that resulted in their disability compensation, there is a problem. That is why I was quoted in the article as saying many of these are "paper" disabilities with no actual functional loss. But the FAA doesn't know that because all they see is the paper.
 
Wonder if John Wayne Jones collects disability? Doubtful.
 
Back
Top