Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 15:42:11 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-6604495@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.214.177; envelope-from=pjdmiller@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Sleep apnea
References: <list-6604057@logan.com>
From: Paul Miller <pjdmiller@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <list-6604057@logan.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)

I am not a doctor or sleep expert.  However, I believe sleep problems can al=
so be manifested through stress, debt problems, marital factors, job loss, d=
eath in family, time zone changes, long work hours, partying, worrying about=
 tomorrow's flight and weather, and other significant challenges in life.   I=
t is not unreasonable that BMI testing should be expanded to include a quest=
ionnaire and background checks for all these items and possible loss of priv=
ileges for those who may be subject to the potential resulting fatigue if an=
y of the above are present or forecasted.  Hopefully no pilots in the airlin=
es, military, freight dog category are subject to those issues and would be a=
ffected.

The definition of "not unreasonable" is really slick avoidance of the test o=
f "is reasonable" or "necessary".  =20

Dang, if those tired pilots had woken up 25 miles *prior* to destination we m=
ight not be having this discussion.

Paul

>=20
>  It does
> not seem unreasonable to me to apply some screening process to consider
> evaluation for pilots who may be  at risk.
>=20
> It is my understanding that this rule was presented after a commercial cre=
w
> (the captain did have a diagnosis of sleep apnea that was not treated, the=

> first officer just was tired, but without sleep apnea) BOTH went to sleep
> and overflew the destination by 25 miles  before they happened to wake up.=

>=20
>=20