Thread: 1% incapacitation rule

I have just had my dream of getting my pilot licence dashed cos of a condition I had as a kid meaning I dont meet the 1% incapacitation rule. How do they define 1% incapacitation?? I havent been incapacitated 1% of the time!! I have looked all over the web and cant find an explanation. The condtion itself isnt relevant to this discussion and besides has been under control through diet for years I just want to see if I can challenge the decision on grounds that they have done their maths wrong!! Has any one taken on the CAA and won??

Not so sure on the medical condition or what you are meaning by incapacitation, however the last question you might like to get an external doctors opinion who doesnt work for the CAA. Tell them exactly what you have been told, ask them lots of questions, basically get yourself a second opinion before you challenge the CAA.
Hotdog

I would book an appointment with another CAA ME and get a second opinion on the matter, based on the information you now know and any questions etc.

All the best.

You should find the required information in JAR-FCL3. Do as the others say. Gather information and seek a second opinion. If it has already been referred to the CAA at Gatwick then it becomes a little more tricky. I believe there is an appeal system but I should imagine they will back their own and if in any doubt will err on the side of safety even if it does seem unfair on the individual. Good luck

Chris

Just a thought, is it perhaps wise seeing another CAA examiner? Purely based on the prospect of them potentially writing up your visit or forwarding questions on to only further highlight your small problem?

I think a basic GP first and check out JAR FCL3 as old timer said THEN putting forward your case but only when you have sufficient details because as OldTimer says the CAA will no doubt back their own...
Hotdog

At worst case, a pilot with 1% per annum incapacitation risk, (where handover is not completed at the time
of his incapacitation) poses a threat to the aircraft of one in 106 flying hr/flts. If only 10% of that flight is
critical the odds lengthen by a factor of 10 (one in 107) and if only one per cent of handovers fail, the odds
lengthen again by a factor of approximately 100 (one in 109 flying hr/flts). This is the figure quoted in
paragraph 2 as an acceptable target rate for medical cause accidents and so the proposed 1% per annum
risk of professional aircrew incapacitation appears justified and should be accepted.
Private Pilots
There are no world wide figures for fatal accidents to private pilots. Those North American and European
statistics available would indicate a fatal accident rate one hundred times greater than that of large jet
passenger aircraft. It would therefore seem reasonable to set a target accident rate for private flying a
hundred times greater than that of public transport flights i.e. 1 per 107 x 100 or 1 per 105 flying hours.
If one again considers the pilot is part of the operating system and his health only a part of the risk to that
system, then the target for medical cause for accidents in private aviation should be less than 1 per 106
flying hours i.e. 10-6 to 10-7.
In general, private pilots do not fly with another qualified pilot and so acute incapacitation poses an
immediate threat to the safety of the flight, throughout its duration. The risk of fatality arising from
incapacitation in flight must therefore be that of the incapacitation (10-6 to 10-7).
We have previously said that 1% per annum equates to 1 per 106 flying hours, therefore it would seem
reasonable that a private pilot with a 1% per annum risk of incapacitation would meet the target rate for
medical cause accidents in private flying.
The concept of aeromedical risk assessment (continued)

Thanks fellas. I found it in jarfcl-3. just gotta figure out what the hell it means!! Good advice. think i will go see a private doc and get an opinion on wether it should be a problem to safety and then work out if i meet the 1% rule. it cant mean once in a hundred years?? it looks like it is related to how much flying you do but i think i need to have a cofee and look at it again!! Cheers

Originally Posted by Hotdog

Chris

Just a thought, is it perhaps wise seeing another CAA examiner? Purely based on the prospect of them potentially writing up your visit or forwarding questions on to only further highlight your small problem?

I think a basic GP first and check out JAR FCL3 as old timer said THEN putting forward your case but only when you have sufficient details because as OldTimer says the CAA will no doubt back their own...

Hotdog

Probably right, Hotdog !

I was just thinking from the angle of this chap approaching a new ME, knowing what he knows now, and then being able to ask any questions at this point.

But considering the official nature of a CAA ME, probably not a good move.