Jack Cook wrote:
It's online, google hoover t-28 accident.
I'll ***"assume"*** the flying was part of their process to get his medical back. Possibly to show them he was competent
and not just have experts testify. It clearly says a flight in the Shrike was part of the court case so if you ask why was the T-28 flight was taped
(has anyone asked themselves why was that T-28 flight taped
) it's a easy jump to believe the tape would have been presented has evidence. Except it iended up in a completely different court case.
now go find that tape so we all can see for ourselves!
Well it's an assumption I wouldn't make but that's "dealer's choice".
However your google suggestion bore some fruit, which I will post below.
First a question:
The transcript referenced below says that Hoover lost his medical in 1993:
Was it subsequently given back and then revoked again? Or is this the "revocation" under discussion?
Now to some transcript:
If you don't want to read the excerpts I listed below (understandable), the upshot is that the issue at hand was neurological; that lots of docs gave him standard ground based, non-flying, neurological tests; no one asked for a flight test; the wanting to fly to remove 10 months of rust was mentioned but NOT in any way connected with the issue of the medical. In fact the T-28 event was mentioned along with lots of other well handled emergencies to try and show that Hoover was mentally capable of handling problems.
In my opinion, the T-28 flight had ZERO to do with getting the rust off in order to pass a medical.
the full transcript can be read at:
http://meer.net/users/waa/oralarg.html
Oral Arguments
_________________________________________________________________
............................IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
............................FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
............................CASE NO. 94-1318
___________________________________________________________________
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE
OPINION AND ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION
SAFETY BOARD
NTSB Order No. EA-4094
___________________________________________________________________
ROBERT ANDERSON HOOVER,
Petitioner,
v.
DAVID R. HINSON, Administrator
Federal Aviation Administration,
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION
SAFETY BOARD,
I note:
"The FAA revoked Hoover's airman medical certificate on an emergency basis on December 14, 1993, alleging that Hoover did not meet the medical standards of 14 C.F.R. 67.15(d)(2)(ii) and (f)(2) and 14 C.F.R. 67.17(d)(2)(ii) and (f)(2)."
These sections state that in order to be eligible for a medical certificate, an airman must have:
(d) Mental and neurologic .....
(2) Neurologic ....
(ii) No other convulsive disorder, disturbance of consciousness, or neurologic condition that the Federal Air Surgeon finds -
(a) makes the applicant unable to safely perform the duties or exercise the priviliges of the airman certificate that he holds or for which he is applying; or
(b) may reasonably be expected, within two years after the finding, to make him unable to perform those duties or exercise those privileges;
and the findings are based on the case history and appropriate, qualified, medical judgment relating to the condition involved.
(f) General medical condition ...
(2) No other organic, functional, or structural disease, defect or limitation that the Federal Air Surgeon finds -
(i) makes the applicant unable to safely perform the duties or exercise the privileges of the airman certificate that he holds or for which he is applying; or
(ii) may reasonably be expected within two years after the finding to make him unable to perform those duties or exercise those privileges;
and the findings are based on the case history and appropriate, qualified, medical judgment relating to the condition involved.
A. The Administrator did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Hoover has a neurologic or organic, functional or structural disease, defect or limitation
.........................
These statements were filed, and the next day, August 27, 1992, the FAA, acting on the inspectors' strikingly similar and unsubstantiated allegations of substandard performance at an air show more than two months earlier, demanded that Hoover undergo psychiatric evaluations by doctors of the FAA's choosing.
.....................
Dr. Robert W. Elliott
The FAA called Dr. Elliott as an expert in the field of neuropsychology. (A16-20) Elliott has personally known Dr. Barton Pakull for 16 or 17 years. (A123-24) One-third of Elliott's income is generated by work from the FAA (A119-20) Elliott examined Hoover in October, 1992 pursuant to a referral by Dr. Garrett O'Connor. (A23-4) Elliott testified that in testing Hoover, he was attempting to assess whether there was evidence of neuropathology; he was not, in any way, assessing Hoover's ability to perform as a pilot:
THE WITNESS: When I am looking to identify neuropathology, I may use a different set of norms than I would if I were directly attempting to assess piloting skills.
JUDGE MULLINS: What were you attempting to assess in this --
THE WITNESS: In this particular case, I was attempting to assess whether, in fact there was evidence of neuropathology.
(Q) Okay. Were you assessing in any way his ability to perform as a pilot? (A31-32)
(A) No. That was not what I was designated to do. (A32)
................
Dr. Elliott administered 12 tests, one of which was excluded due to its experimental nature. The tests administered were as follows: the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Revised (WAIS-R); the Trail Making Test (Parts A and B); the Booklet Category Test; the Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure Test; the Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test; the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test; the Boston Naming Test; the Wechsler Memory Scale - Revised; the Controlled Oral Word Association Test; the Manual Finger Tapping Test; and the FAA Computerized Cognitive Screening Battery (COGSCREEN). According to Elliott, Hoover's performance varied. His verbal and perceptual organization skills were intact, but his problems arose in speed, executive functions, using trial and error learning, problem solving and sequencing. (A65-66) Elliott testified that the results of his standard battery of neuropsychological testing reflected an individual who has difficulty in reasoning processes and thinking through situations, particularly situations that are novel. (A68)
....................
Dr. Pincus is a neurologist. (A284-86) Pincus is the Chairman of Georgetown University's Neurology Department, which receives grants from the FAA. (A297) Pincus opined that Hoover's medical records establish a neurologic condition and that the condition makes him unable to safely exercise the privileges of a second class airman's certificate, and to do so in the next two years. (A295-96) Part of the basis for Pincus' opinion is his experience in predicting dysfunction in driving automobiles (A341), and the fact that Hoover has had several aviation violations in the 10 year period preceding 1992. (A289) Pincus testified that an increase in aviation violations is of neurological significance and indicates recent impairment (A308; 323), just as people who repeatedly speed in their automobiles have neurological deterioration. (A308-09) Although committing several aviation violations was a factor which led Pincus to believe that Hoover was cognitively impaired, Pincus never reviewed any of the violations to determine their nature. However, to Pincus, that is not significant to his testimony. (A309) Pincus testified that it may be true that there are no studies in which test batteries have been validated against actual flight performance of experienced pilots. (A300)
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
