This committee met with Deputy Civil Aeronautics Administrator William B. Davis and some of his technical people to define the problem more accurately. At present our association is reviewing material in this field and until its completion is not in a position to support, oppose, or recommend modifications in the bill being considered by your committee. For that reason it is hoped you will find it appropriate to defer action for the present so that we can be of service in advising your committee of the results of the study and the recommendations resulting therefrom.

Attached is a list of the special American Medical Association committee. And there is attached a list of very distinguished medical men. I might if I may, Mr. Chairman, comment that the letter points out that the Under Secretary of Commerce set up this committee in February of this year and S. 1045 was introduced on February 4.

Senator MONRONEY. We have another witness from the Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association, Mr. A. G. Armstrong, representing the Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association.

Mr. Armstrong, we are glad to have you here and we will be happy to hear your statement.

STATEMENT OF A. G. ARMSTRONG, ON BEHALF OF THE AIRCRAFT OWNERS & PILOTS ASSOCIATION

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. AOPA considers it a real privilege to speak before this committee in connection with this

matter.

If I may I would like to read a letter which the President of AOPA has directed to yourself, sir. This letter is addressed to Senator Monroney, and its tenor is as follows:

The Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association-AOPA-having studied S. 1045 with care, respectfully requests your committee to consider our serious and considered opposition to the objectives proposed.

AOPA considers that the delegation of rulemaking to, and the establishment of regulations by, technical persons rather than regularly constituted bodies having broad overall responsiiblities, is fundamentally wrong. With respect to the cost of establishing a third medical empire, duplicating the vast aviation medical establishments of the Navy and the Air Force, AOPA strongly believes the taxpayer should be spared such an unnecessary expenditure.

AOPA is a nonprofit association of over 65,000 pilots and owners of civil aircraft. We act only for and in the interest of our members. In this instance, our members overwhelmingly oppose both the objective and the wasteful and unnecessary expenditure of public funds which this legislation would authorize. The duplication of existing aviation medical facilities already available to the Government, would further increase the shortage of capable personnel necessary to our national scientific and medical efforts.

AOPA actively supports aviation safety by every means available. A majority of our members make voluntary contributions to the AOPA Safety Foundation, Inc., for safety and research. AOPA knows of no organization devoted to safety which supports the objectives of this bill.

A brief discussion of pertinent provisions of the proposed legislation follows. Should the committee wish for a more detailed discussion of S. 1045, members of our headquarters staff will be available

for a further presentation of the many aspects determining our position.

With respect to section 1405 which authorizes the Civil Air Surgeon to promulgate regulations. It cannot be questioned that a medically trained man is most familiar with the needs for medical and physical fitness for airmen. There is no question but that the medically trained man can assist the aircraft designing engineer in establishing an optimum cockpit designed to fit human limitation. In neither case, however, should such regulations be promulgated by either the medical man or by the aircraft engineer.

Section 1411 prohibits current administrative functions of the CAB and the CAA long estiblished by Congress. The making of rules and regulations by the CAB and the CAA for physical fitness of airmen, and the airworthiness of aircraft currently authorized, is considered fundamentally proper.

Section 1416 authorizes the establishment of a civil aeronautics medical research facility. It is well known that both the Navy and the Air Force have invested many millions of dollars in medical research facilities primarily concerned with the physical fitness of airmen. To duplicate such an expenditure is considered wasteful and unnecessary since the results of all the work done by the military is or can be made availble to the Medical Division of the CAA.

If the military are not now cooperating with the Medical Division, Office of Aviation Safety, of the CAA, the Congress could well ascertain why. On the other hand, if our understanding is correct that there is full cooperation and coordination between the military and the Medical Division of the CAA, then there is utterly no excuse for such an expenditure of public funds.

In brief summary, AOPA considers that increased "safety in air commerce through the development and application of sound medical knowledge in civil aviation" is most desirable. We believe these objectives can be achieved under existing laws and within the present organization of the Medical Division of the Office of Aviation Safety of the Civil Aeronautics Administration, and at a minute fraction of the cost to the American taxpayer of the foregoing proposed legislation."

This letter is signed by J. B. Hartranft, president of AOPA.

Senator MONRONEY. You mentioned that you might have some further comment to make or a more detailed discussion of this matter, particularly with reference to the cockpit designs.

Of course, on some transport planes they have been notoriously small for midgets and with tiny slots for visibility, but that would be more or less a matter of working it out rather than medically, would it not, with the engineers and with the pilots who must fly the planes?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Chairman, with respect to cockpit visibility, AOPA has been carrying on quite an effort to get increased visibility. We have written to the manufacturers of aircraft and permit me, sir, we are concerned primarily with the smaller plane manufacturers, but by the same sign we recognize that many of the smaller aircraft have better visibility than some of the larger aircraft. We have concerned ourselves seriously with that problem.

Senator MONRONEY. Small planes have to have better visibility to get out of the way sometimes.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. If I may, Mr. Chairman, I do have a few remarks that I would like to make if the committee has a moment.

Senator MONRONEY. We would like to hear them.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. I would like to say specifically that AOPA recognizes the great contribution of the medical profession, medical science to aviation, we do not decry their importance in any aspect. We do feel, however, that they are only a part of the picture, that the aircraft is a compromise from start to finish. It has been and I would assume it always will be.

If you let the electronic engineer have his way you would not have room for the passengers, of course, and all of the other aspects. It is a compromise and the Congress has seen fit in its wisdom to set up certain administrative functions in the CAB and the CAA, AOPA does not necessarily agree with everything that they do, but we support them in their carrying out their duties established by law.

If I may make some additional observations, sir.

I would like to make sure that it is understood that even though I am a retired admiral in the United States Navy, after more than 30 years active duty of which the majority was as a naval aviator, I am not speaking for the military nor for the air transport people they have their own problems-but these observations are from my general experience and general knowledge.

As I said, AOPA has a safety foundation, we have developed something which we feel is very important for aviation safety, that is 180° rating which AOPA has made available to State aviation officials to teach. That is just one of the many things.

We feel that the medical profession has a great contribution but not as an empire. And the reason I say that is we feel that doctors are human. I would like to give a couple of brief cases.

One of the most outstanding pilots who ever went through Pensacola, he went through with the shortest time and highest grades and with no difficulty. In other words, he was medically perfect in every way, crashed and killed himself within 3 months of the time he joined the fleet.

I know another young pilot that went through Pensacola and was given a very high rating. His skill and ability in the squadron were most outstanding. Yet, he found himself unable to live with certain requirements, rules, and regulations and he crashed and killed himself and four other people.

Now, no medical problem was there at all. Foolhearty.

Senator MONRONEY. Carelessness does not show up in a medical examination?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. No, sir.

Senator MONRONEY. Through nervousness or anything?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. I was just going to say, sir, that the biggest problem, the most important job of the flight surgeon in the Navy is not given to the annual physical examination which is given and which we think is important, but it is seeing those people at the hours they are going to fly, looking at them; and they stop them when they are not fit to fly.

Again, I am not speaking for the military I am speaking from my own experience. This business of increased length of time between physical examinations, we are referring to the private pilot, we feel

that the private pilot and the automobile driver have a great deal in common. It was stated that the private pilot is the menace to aviation. We feel that it is not the physical sandards, it is the traffic control, it is that we must have human engineering in our control of traffic rather than in the engineering of the man. We cannot change the man, we have got to accept him. If it is going to be a general operation as the automobile, it must be accepted.

Finally, sir, I will only repeat that we feel that the CAB and the CAA can and must make their own recommendations with respect not only to medicine but with regard to the other aspects of safety involved in aviation.

Senator MONRONEY. What do you think about the stretchout on the examination time? You have heard that the ATA and various others oppose this rather vigorously and I am wondering if the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association supported it since they were, I think, 5 years' time between examinations they were offering.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. I am not prepared, sir, to give you any great amount of data. I can say that we do not particularly oppose lengthening the period between physical examinations and I base that on something that the American Automobile Association puts out. They say that the individual's mental condition at a particular time is more important in whether he will have an accident going home from work after he has had a fuss with the boss or going to work in the morning after he has had a fuss with his wife or something like that, than his long-term physical condition. That is our viewpoint. We feel aviation is for all Americans within minor limits.

Senator MONRONEY. And do you think, though, if they had those examinations as often as they have today that that might cut down a few?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. AOPA

Senator MONRONEY. You don't have to have them every 2 years, I don't think, in private flying and this change, as I understood the testimony, would lengthen it out to 5 years.

Mr. ARMSTRONG. We do not particularly support nor de we particularly object to it. We feel that the individual has got to keep himself in proper condition between the 2 year periods or he should stay out of the air and unless we are prepared to police him in his daily movements and living we cannot control him.

Senator MONRONEY. Do you have any questions?

Mr. BAYNTON. No questions.

Senator MONRONEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Armstrong, for your statement and that of the Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association. (The following additional statement was submitted:)

AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION,

Senator A. S. MIKE MONRONEY,

Chairman, Aviation Subcommittee,

Washington, D. C., April 5, 1957

Senate Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR SENATOR MONRONEY: AOPA appreciates very much the opportunity given us on April 2 to present our views on S. 1045. We request that your subcommittee consider further comments with respect to testimony of medical officers on standards of physical fitness of pilots.

AOPA specifically questions testimony by medical witnesses that safety in air commerce is hazarded by current physical-fitness standards required for the

private pilot's license. We will not burden the record with the many, many cases of pilots who despite physical handicaps requiring waivers to obtain their airman's licenses, have to our personal knowledge piloted aircraft safely and usefully for business and pleasure. No useful purpose would be served by detailing the accidents known to us personally where the "supermen" (physically perfect airmen by medical standards) have spattered women, children, aircraft and themselves over our countryside in avoidable accidents.

AOPA has a very keen interest in the matter of maintenance of medical standards which are realistic and effective but which at the same time will not burden the industry with unnecessary, expensive and cumbersome proce dures. This interest is both altruistic and monetary. It is altruistic to the extent that we represent 65,000 plus bona fide pilots in all matters regarding their flight activities, and it is monetary from the viewpoint that we have two very large insurance programs for our members in which a deterioration of medical standards could have a very profound financial effect on our operation. From this you will see that we must and have devoted considerable time and energy to determine what medical standards are required to maintain an adequate safety standard and yet at the same time to prevent establishment of theoretically desireable but unnecessary medical standards which would stunt the growth of and the proper expansion of the aviation industry in the public interest.

We pay an insurance premium on each and every member of the association, which covers only flying accidents. A member starts with a $700 death and dismemberment coverage and the amount increases by $100 of coverage each year of uninterrupted membership until a plateau of $1,000 is reached. A high percentage of our members are covered for $1,000. In addition there are medical benefits, which are probably not too germane to your interest. Having acquired a $1,000 policy automatically and as a part of their membership package, the member can then acquire up to $100,000 additional optional coverage. Limits up to $500,000 are also available through arrangements with Lloyd's. The premium volume for the casualty lines of insurance written by the American Mercury Insurance Co. under contract with the association is approximately three-fourths of a million dollars a year.

In a second plan of insurance known as the AOPA life plan, units of $5,000, $10,000, or $20,000 are available at the option of the individual member. This insurance has no aviation markup, and it is available "across the board" for a standard rate irrespective of age or type of flying being conducted; i. e., there are no exclusions for crop dusting, military jet flying, etc. This insurance is handled on an individual underwriting basis and each member is issued an individual contract of insurance, although the aggregate operation is treated as a group insofar as administration is concerned, and AOPA has in effect assured a level premium rate as above described. At the present, approximately $30 million of this life plan is in force and it is experiencing satisfactory growth, as in the case of the casualty (accident) insurance line, which at present amounts to about $1 million of additional insurance in force each month.

From the foregoing, I believe you can understand that we, with all due modesty, feel we are in a position to comment upon medical standards with some substantial degree of authority and experience and that our opinion in these matters is backed up by some pretty important and conclusive arithmetic.

We have very diligently searched all of the records, both within our own operation and other actuarial and Government sources available and we can find no shred of evidence which would justify either a tightening up of medical standards or creation of any new "air surgeon's office" or equivalent.

We have paid out through our insurance program many millions of dollars of benefits. If there were any step which appeared necessary from a study of the accident records and which would to any substantial degree reduce aircraft accidents involving fatalities and injuries, we would be the first to launch a vigorous campaign for such reform.

A statement by a doctor to the effect that waivers on physical fitness of experienced airmen due to normal ravages of age, were favored by the profession, is of interest. It can be assumed that the handicap waived, having been recognized by the individual-he will avoid situations with which he cannot cope. With this thinking, AOPA agrees, and by extending this thinking to the airman who is commencing to fly, we consider that he can, if he is properly motivated, equal or better the safety record of the "superman." It is understood that the AAA finds this philosophy set forth above to be true of the motorist.