UND Crash…reversal of Germanwings

ProjectInfinity1 said:
No, we can say if someone is cured or not.
However does that mean someone with a chronic condition is thus incapable of performing airman’s duties? Mental illness is a huge spectrum, I don’t think any of us are advocating for someone with BPD, or Non verbal autism to fly.

Let’s try to look at it a different way, are we concerned more about suicide by pilot, a murder suicide with someone wishing to do others harm? Or is it somewhere between those extremes while also including general airmanship with the likes of ADHD, OCD ect

Has there really been a sharp uptick in accidents with regards to LSA? Yes if the standards are reduced, someone will eventually go through and cause harm to themselves or others.

But there has to be a certain amount of tolerance for those outliers. In your view, let’s say for ****s and giggles, that a reduction in standards after 5 years leads to a 2% increase in the current accident rate for pilot error. Would that in your mind warrant returning to the current system, or would it be a success in allowing 98% of those who otherwise were denied to fly, and had no incidents in such a hypothetical 5 year period.
Click to expand...

Yeah, some of these rules are just so goofy. Like how is ADHD disqualifying?

In order to fly an airplane, you have to go through a bunch of tests (written, training, practical) just for private, recreational flying. If someone's ability to concentrate means they can get through all that, then why can't they fly a plane again?

  • If the excuse is, "because once they're flying jumbo jets on instruments, they'll get confused" then you'd have to address the IR, commercial, ATP, airline hiring, type training/testing, observation by their other crew members, etc. It seems like someone can either hack it or not. If they can't, they can't, but don't block them because they have a hard to listening to a teacher drone for 7 hours in class.

I'm talking about "consistent" challenges like ADHD, not things that come and go like schizophrenia/etc in the above.
 
ProjectInfinity1 said:
Is it truly constructive to say to a depressed person that you would have to jump through hoops of fire if you received professional help on potentially one of your last enjoyable hobbies?

In what world can someone who is on two low dose SSRI’s or someone with a single suicide attempt from 5 years ago have to run the gauntlet for a class 3 medical SI, (and even then face a significant chance of denial).

Yet someone random guy who’s hearing voices and got released from a voluntary psychiatric admission the same afternoon, could come into my or any other gun shop in the majority of states and buy a AK with a 75 round drum and only the discretion of the store owner could legally stop him.

I fear that in the pursuit of safety, aviation regulators have detached themselves from reality.

I mean how many peoples nephews, nieces, sons and daughters have a diagnosable condition today? Anxiety, depression, ADHD, ect.

According to the NIH 29.4%! Of people between the ages of 18-25 has a diagnosable mental illness.
View attachment 101216
8.4% of people between the ages of 18 to 25 have a severe diagnosable mental illness.

View attachment 101217
Mind you this data was taken in 2019.
I can only imagine how much higher that number is after 2020.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/mental-illness

(I did not include this data so I didn’t run on too much, but it’s here for further reading should someone be interested.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/mental-health-disorder-statistics )


I will agree with you that the buck does stop with the PIC.
Click to expand...
Your firearm purchase analogy is inaccurate. The purchaser would have to lie in that situation as well.
 
MIFlyer said:
Yeah, some of these rules are just so goofy. Like how is ADHD disqualifying?

In order to fly an airplane, you have to go through a bunch of tests (written, training, practical) just for private, recreational flying. If someone's ability to concentrate means they can get through all that, then why can't they fly a plane again?

  • If the excuse is, "because once they're flying jumbo jets on instruments, they'll get confused" then you'd have to address the IR, commercial, ATP, airline hiring, type training/testing, observation by their other crew members, etc. It seems like someone can either hack it or not. If they can't, they can't, but don't block them because they have a hard to listening to a teacher drone for 7 hours in class.

I'm talking about "consistent" challenges like ADHD, not things that come and go like schizophrenia/etc in the above.
Click to expand...
Because they might be able to accomplish the above only with the help of psychoactive medications, which have side effects, and they might decide not to take on any given day.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Your firearm purchase analogy is inaccurate. The purchaser would have to lie in that situation as well.
Click to expand...

I don’t think so; the 4473 asks

“f. Have you ever been adjudicated as a mental defective OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?”

It also includes this is the directions for that question:

Question 21.f. Adjudicated as a Mental Defective: A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) is a danger to himself or to others; or (2) lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs. This term shall include: (1) a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and (2) those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility.

Committed to a Mental Institution: A formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term includes com- mitment for mental defectiveness or mental illness. It also includes commitments for other reasons, such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or a voluntary admission to a mental institution.

EXCEPTION: Under the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution in a State proceeding is not prohibited by the adjudication commitment if
the person has been granted relief by the adjudicating/committing State pursuantto a qualifying mental health relief from disabilities program. Also, a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution by a department or agency of Federal Government is not prohibited by the adjudication or commitment if either: (a) the person’s adjudication or commitment was set aside or expunged by the adjudicating/committing agency; (b) the person has been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring by the agency; (c) the person was found by the agency to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that served as the basis of the initial adjudication/com- mitment; (d) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code; or (e) the person was granted relief from the adjudicating/committing agency pursu- ant to a qualified mental health relief from disabilities program. This exception to an adjudication or commitment by a Federal department or agency does not apply to any person who was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Persons who fall within one of the above exceptions should answer “no” to question 21.f.
Question 21.h. Qualifying Restraining Orders: Under 18 U.S.
 
pilot445 said:
The same logic could be applied to SSRIs, yet one is approved and the other isn’t.
Click to expand...
Which one is approved, as a general rule? Or did you mean approved in a certain subset of situations with a bunch of expensive hoops to jump through? MIFlyer's post that I responded to was suggesting functional testing only. SSRIs are certainly not "approved" in that manner.
 
Lindberg said:
So IMHO, you did the right thing and so did the FAA. You admit you were not fit to fly, as you grounded yourself. What do you think should happen next after you're diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder: Moderate? Should the FAA then take your word for it when you say you're fit to fly again? And how would it distinguish between pilots who were actually fit to fly again and pilots who were still interested in flying into the side of a mountain then?

You did the right thing by reporting, people who don't report are doing the wrong thing. Likewise for seeking treatment. I am wondering what everyone's ideal "FAA handles mental health properly world looks like." Remove the questions from Medxpress so no one has to report? Then we wind up with treated/untreated diagnosed/undiagnosed all flying around together. Require reporting but don't take away medicals of the mentally ill? Allow pilots to report in/out and self-certify their mental health? All of these options will allow more people in the air at the expense of safety.
Click to expand...

Given what I know now, I regret seeking professional help. Biggest mistake I ever made. It has destroyed any hopes of flying in the future. I am very stable now, don’t have any psychiatric issues. I wasted years and money spent on certificates and ratings that are now essentially paperweights. I advise every pilot I know to avoid seeking professional help. Instead to seek help from clergy which is unreportable. The FAA is concerned about one thing only, and that is a paper trail. They don’t actually care about the underlying condition.

I think they should have a program similar to HIMS for alcohol. Regular group meetings for a 2-3 year period to establish mental stability. After that regular monitoring by AME/Psychiatrist. I don’t think forcing someone to spend $10k on Psychiatric evals is a good thing. Especially when we know most of those end up denied. A psychiatric evaluation only captures a persons mind at a specific point in time. It can’t predict someone’s future state of mind entirely.
 
Anonymous Pilot said:
Given what I know now, I regret seeking professional help. Biggest mistake I ever made. It has destroyed any hopes of flying in the future. I am very stable now, don’t have any psychiatric issues. I wasted years and money spent on certificates and ratings that are now essentially paperweights. I advise every pilot I know to avoid seeking professional help. Instead to seek help from clergy which is unreportable.
Click to expand...
All counseling is unreportable unless it results in a personal psychiatric diagnosis.
he FAA is concerned about one thing only, and that is a paper trail. They don’t actually care about the underlying condition.
Click to expand...
That's not accurate. If it was, then counseling would make one ineligible for a medical. It is not the counseling, it is the diagnosis. And once you're been diagnosed with a condition by a professional, why would the FAA take your word for it that you're better or make its own determination. I thought we wanted the FAA to not practice medicine.
I think they should have a program similar to HIMS for alcohol. Regular group meetings for a 2-3 year period to establish mental stability. After that regular monitoring by AME/Psychiatrist. I don’t think forcing someone to spend $10k on Psychiatric evals is a good thing. Especially when we know most of those end up denied. A psychiatric evaluation only captures a persons mind at a specific point in time. It can’t predict someone’s future state of mind entirely.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're getting at. The cost and times of HIMS for alcohol is also a frequent complaint here.

The fact of the matter is that the system is designed to weed out the most unfit pilots while not affecting too many fit pilots. The system isn't designed for any particular individual and as a result, some folks will get screwed over unfairly. But I don't see how your suggestion would increase the number of pilots seeking help or disclosing.
 
Lindberg said:
All counseling is unreportable unless it results in a personal psychiatric diagnosis.

That's not accurate. If it was, then counseling would make one ineligible for a medical. It is not the counseling, it is the diagnosis. And once you're been diagnosed with a condition by a professional, why would the FAA take your word for it that you're better or make its own determination. I thought we wanted the FAA to not practice medicine.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. The cost and times of HIMS for alcohol is also a frequent complaint here.

The fact of the matter is that the system is designed to weed out the most unfit pilots while not affecting too many fit pilots. The system isn't designed for any particular individual and as a result, some folks will get screwed over unfairly. But I don't see how your suggestion would increase the number of pilots seeking help or disclosing.
Click to expand...

The FAAS current system is punitive. Report even mild depression, and a pilot is grounded. Hold it in, and no one is the wiser. I should have held my depression to myself, and not sought help. I will take that regret to my grave.

Someone in another thread posted this link earlier: https://www.foxnews.com/health/1-in-8-airline-pilots-may-be-clinically-depressed.amp

If you are aware of a depressed pilot should one report them to the FAA? I am aware of many. Sure would increase safety to get all those depressed pilots out of the air?

Does it make any sense how a depressed, bipolar, or ADHD individual could fly under Sport pilot, but could not fly a Cessna 172?
 
schmookeeg said:
How is this different than having, say, some sort of cardio event that jeopardizes your health AND medical simultaneously? I've heard of a bunch of different SIs that have short intervals and expensive tests in perpetuity.

Flying career -> broken heart -> Health first, now you are on a recurring onerous SI regimen

Flying career -> broken brain -> Health first, now you are on a recurring onerous SI regimen
Click to expand...

The decision should be made by a certified and accomplished doctor who has hands on the airman, who is using the most modern and proven medicine, and has their license on the line as well.
 
Lindberg said:
Which one is approved, as a general rule? Or did you mean approved in a certain subset of situations with a bunch of expensive hoops to jump through? MIFlyer's post that I responded to was suggesting functional testing only. SSRIs are certainly not "approved" in that manner.
Click to expand...
BladeSlap said:
The decision should be made by a certified and accomplished doctor who has hands on the airman, who is using the most modern and proven medicine, and has their license on the line as well.
Click to expand...

A doctor seeing an individual personally knows that individuals mental capacity far better than a Bureaucrat Doctor in DC. Lubitz’s doctors knew he was unfit to fly. They were just prevented by German privacy law as from reporting him.
 
BladeSlap said:
The decision should be made by a certified and accomplished doctor who has hands on the airman, who is using the most modern and proven medicine, and has their license on the line as well.
Click to expand...

Decision on treatment? Absolutely.

Decision on whether or not this person can fly a plane? Dr. GP or Dr. Shrink has no idea about that.

I agree it's an impasse.

I still don't think this is an issue but for the onerous costs involved. AOPA probably has an angle here to sell "Medical Protection" alongside that Legal protection and wine club and negotiate some very specific group rates on very specific FAA testing that insurers don't find medically necessary.
 
schmookeeg said:
Decision on treatment? Absolutely.

Decision on whether or not this person can fly a plane? Dr. GP or Dr. Shrink has no idea about that.

I agree it's an impasse.

I still don't think this is an issue but for the onerous costs involved. AOPA probably has an angle here to sell "Medical Protection" alongside that Legal protection and wine club and negotiate some very specific group rates on very specific FAA testing that insurers don't find medically necessary.
Click to expand...

I’d like to see the stats as to how necessary some of these tests actually are. How many of these tests are just to satisfy curiosity vs actually improving safety? Does increased testing vs medically necessary actually result in increased safety? Given that many pilots fly successfully under Basic Med to avoid testing I’d disagree it’s necessary.
 
schmookeeg said:
Decision on treatment? Absolutely.

Decision on whether or not this person can fly a plane? Dr. GP or Dr. Shrink has no idea about that.

I agree it's an impasse.

I still don't think this is an issue but for the onerous costs involved. AOPA probably has an angle here to sell "Medical Protection" alongside that Legal protection and wine club and negotiate some very specific group rates on very specific FAA testing that insurers don't find medically necessary.
Click to expand...

Sure they do, flying a helicopter isn’t unique to the human machine, go back to the old CAA definition of normal health, or just make a list of “a day in the life” and let the much more qualified and with much more to risk licensed medical doctor make that call about their patient.
 
MIFlyer said:
Yeah, some of these rules are just so goofy. Like how is ADHD disqualifying?
Click to expand...

is this a serious question?

ADHD has a lot of symptoms which are inconsistent with flying. One is hyperfocus, looking at one thing to the exclusion of others. Others? Forgetfulness. Inability to follow a list of instructions. Losing track of time. Inattention. Impulsivity.

Can you really not understand why these are bad in the cockpit?
 
ADHD has been wildly over-diagnosed for the last 20 years. Any kid (especially boys) who struggles in school for any reason is pushed to get a diagnosis, prescription, and accomodations so they don't "fall behind." Many of these kids have nothing wrong other than minor delays in focus and self control that they will grow out of.

The military gets this, so while ADHD is disqualifying, waivers are easy to obtain as long as you don't need medication. They take the sensible view that training standards will screen out those who cannot actually learn and perform. If the FAA had any incentive to be reasonable, they could adopt a similar approach.
 
TCABM said:
I don’t think so; the 4473 asks

“f. Have you ever been adjudicated as a mental defective OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?”

It also includes this is the directions for that question:

Question 21.f. Adjudicated as a Mental Defective: A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) is a danger to himself or to others; or (2) lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs. This term shall include: (1) a finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and (2) those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility.

Committed to a Mental Institution: A formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term includes com- mitment for mental defectiveness or mental illness. It also includes commitments for other reasons, such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or a voluntary admission to a mental institution.

EXCEPTION: Under the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution in a State proceeding is not prohibited by the adjudication commitment if
the person has been granted relief by the adjudicating/committing State pursuantto a qualifying mental health relief from disabilities program. Also, a person who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution by a department or agency of Federal Government is not prohibited by the adjudication or commitment if either: (a) the person’s adjudication or commitment was set aside or expunged by the adjudicating/committing agency; (b) the person has been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring by the agency; (c) the person was found by the agency to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that served as the basis of the initial adjudication/com- mitment; (d) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code; or (e) the person was granted relief from the adjudicating/committing agency pursu- ant to a qualified mental health relief from disabilities program. This exception to an adjudication or commitment by a Federal department or agency does not apply to any person who was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Persons who fall within one of the above exceptions should answer “no” to question 21.f.
Question 21.h. Qualifying Restraining Orders: Under 18 U.S.
Click to expand...

You really aren’t going to rely of facts to make your argument?
 
Ed Haywood said:
ADHD has been wildly over-diagnosed for the last 20 years. Any kid (especially boys) who struggles in school for any reason is pushed to get a diagnosis, prescription, and accomodations so they don't "fall behind." Many of these kids have nothing wrong other than minor delays in focus and self control that they will grow out of.

The military gets this, so while ADHD is disqualifying, waivers are easy to obtain as long as you don't need medication. They take the sensible view that training standards will screen out those who cannot actually learn and perform. If the FAA had any incentive to be reasonable, they could adopt a similar approach.
Click to expand...
Bingo ^. I will also note that not all ADHD diagnosis’s are equal. I failed high school science and Algebra II, and regularly stayed after school to get remedial help in those subjects. (Mainly it was such topics being akin to pulling teeth without Novocain for me). However I repeatedly got straight B+’s in English, and A’s in history.

I actually got made fun of by my peers for doing my turn at a weekly current event poster on the 70th anniversary of the end of the battle of Stalingrad . Everyone else was doing things like legalization of pot in Colorado, or the Super Bowl winners of that year lol.

I digress, my point being is ADHD is real, and certainly can cause trouble with attention, memory, ect.

However if such a person is involved with something they genuinely enjoy, then the effect is actually remarkably reversed and it’s almost like a form of hyper focus.

I think the main issue here is that there needs to be exceptions to every rule to allow discretion, rather than this current cookie cutter system.

Tldr, it should be less if the person has ADHD, but rather does their ADHD effect their piloting ability.
 
bflynn said:
is this a serious question?

ADHD has a lot of symptoms which are inconsistent with flying. One is hyperfocus, looking at one thing to the exclusion of others. Others? Forgetfulness. Inability to follow a list of instructions. Losing track of time. Inattention. Impulsivity.

Can you really not understand why these are bad in the cockpit?
Click to expand...


But those characteristics are equally inconsistent with a whole host of other activities which are not prohibited to those with an ADHD diagnosis: driving, operating farm equipment, handling firearms, caring for children, using machinery, et cetera ad infinitum. Such things are equally or even more dangerous.
 
Last edited:
Half Fast said:
But those characteristics are equally inconsistent with a whole host of other activities which are not prohibited to those with an ADHD diagnosis: driving, operating farm equipment, handling firearms, caring for children, using machinery, et cetera ad infinitude. Such things are equally or even more dangerous.
Click to expand...

and they are also outside the scope of the FAA's regulation.
 
bflynn said:
ADHD has a lot of symptoms which are inconsistent with flying. One is hyperfocus, looking at one thing to the exclusion of others. Others? Forgetfulness. Inability to follow a list of instructions. Losing track of time. Inattention. Impulsivity.
Click to expand...

I'd like you to really think about the list that you just post, and think of how internally inconsistent and contradictory that list is. I would guesstimate that may 10-20% of diagnosed ADHD conditions are "real", and probably most of those are still something that people grow out of, or are able to manage invisibly to outsiders, by the time they are adults.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
I'd like you to really think about the list that you just post, and think of how internally inconsistent and contradictory that list is. I would guesstimate that may 10-20% of diagnosed ADHD conditions are "real", and probably most of those are still something that people grow out of, or are able to manage invisibly to outsiders, by the time they are adults.
Click to expand...

I didn't post a list. I copied symptoms from another site. ADHD is an attention disorder and that can take many different forms. If you don't understand why the symptoms I posted ARE consistent, that's your problem and I'm not going to try to solve it for you.

Meanwhile, the FAA still isn't going to change to make you happy.
 
pilot445 said:
What I’d like to know….if every pilot was required to take Cogscreen, MMPI, and ADHD tests, what % would pass?
Click to expand...

Sometimes it better not to ask question you really don't want answered for yourself.
 
I'd say that the system is broken far beyond the FAA/HIMS/SSRI systems. What about psychiatrists/psychologists who overdiagnose non issues? What about psychiatrists/psychologists on the other end of the spectrum who are too quick to dismiss genuine issues? What about the social stigmas of not wanting to appear "weak"? What about the decline of physical social interaction in favor of digital social interaction?

We say that if you have a problem or are just struggling with the pressures of life that we all face, you should talk to a religious leader (I'm a pastor, so I fully support this, but MANY people today wouldn't have the first clue who to go to because they are either not religious at all or are so detached from their faith that it might as well be a moot point.) Others say, "talk to a friend." We've denigrated social interaction to something that is nearly a last resort.

We have to place the blame squarely where it lies and that is on us as a society, not merely on the FAA. That's not to say the FAA's system is flawless or even to say that it doesn't need improvement. But we ALL need to step up and help with this. Don't have such superficial relationships. Spend quality time with your friends. Maybe that means slowing our lives down a bit so we can actually take time to care about those around us.
It's easy to point the finger at the FAA, but they are only a part of the problem and one could even say they are merely a side effect of the real problem.

Get out there and start caring about your friends with your actions.
 
pilot445 said:
What I’d like to know….if every pilot was required to take Cogscreen, MMPI, and ADHD tests, what % would pass?
Click to expand...

More to the point, is there any evidence of reduced accident rates from increased filtering of pilots for the conditions these tests are supposedly designed to detect? Or is this mostly FAA aeromedical branch that feels emboldened to come up with screening criteria that might have little provable effect on aviation safety.

What it comes down to, as mentioned above, is, in the absence of medication, doesn't the training and testing regime already in place screen out those that can't hack it? It seems to me the lower hanging fruit to improve safety would be eliminating those with an anti-authority attitude, but that is something that can be hidden from instructors and examiners.
 
bflynn said:
If you don't understand why the symptoms I posted ARE consistent, that's your problem and I'm not going to try to solve it for you.
Click to expand...

I know from personal experience working with kids who actually *do* have properly diagnosed ADHD, that the list of symptoms is inconsistent, and is a catch-all descriptive methodology. The symptoms are highly conditional on the environmental circumstances, which is where the problem lies with improper diagnosis and determining the severity of ADHD. "ADHD" is so gradational, that it blends into the "normal" (whatever that really is) range of behaviors. This is a wide-spread problem that the FAA refuses to acknowledge without thousands of dollars in testing.
 
So your beef is that the medical industry has a hard time properly diagnosing ADHD. I agree, I think it's way over diagnosed and kids are over medicated. A more engaging school environment would be a much better solution than drugs.

But the FAA still isn't going to change it's safety program because of uncertainty in the medical profession. If anything, they have to be stricter BECAUSE of the uncertainty.
 
bflynn said:
But the FAA still isn't going to change it's safety program because of uncertainty in the medical profession. If anything, they have to be stricter BECAUSE of the uncertainty.
Click to expand...

Or, they could just defer to medical professionals who actually see the patients to make these judgements, instead of prescriptively applying the same requirements to all applicants. Again, where is the proof that all of this actually benefits safety?
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Or, they could just defer to medical professionals who actually see the patients to make these judgements, instead of prescriptively applying the same requirements to all applicants. Again, where is the proof that all of this actually benefits safety?
Click to expand...

I’ll point out, Lubitz presented two different distinct versions of himself. The stable sane fit to fly Lubitz to Aeromedical doctors, and the real unstable unfit to fly Lubitz to his own personal doctors.

Which medical professional is more qualified?
 
pilot445 said:
I’ll point out, Lubitz presented two different distinct versions of himself. The stable sane fit to fly Lubitz to Aeromedical doctors, and the real unstable unfit to fly Lubitz to his own personal doctors.

Which medical professional is more qualified?
Click to expand...

Are you trying to give an example to prove my point? Because you just did. The aeromedical docs are usually just checking to see how you answered a question.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top