Thread removal.

[goldeneaglepilot]

I must admit I find it quite incredible that after the thread had been removed, so many people chose to perpetuate its content by referral by name and even by explaining to the lessor computer literate how to find it again using Google cache.

The thread (as has been stated previously) was removed at a point in time when it was seen to have achieved the desired result. For the sake of clarity the posting was nothing to do with her association with Weaver or indeed anything other than a genuine desire to try to prevent both a potential accident and the person continuing to create themselves a greater potential personal problem.

Perhaps the explanation of the steps that were taken by various people to try to explain to Indy (prior to posting on here) the merits and risks of her actions need repeating. So here goes:

Indy herself had stated to me that she had the angioplasty, which is a treatment to try to reverse a problem that in its self is extremely serious and life threatening. The underlying problem causes restriction of blood to the heart and causes inefficiency in the heart. It is exasperated by altitude (as the air gets thinner). I was told by a doctor that to help understand the implications of flying following an angioplasty (even as a passenger - until medically cleared) consideration should be made to how even a fit person will feel after going up a few thousand feet for a days fun at the ski resort, should a persons heart be affected by damage or disease then of course the effect will be compounded. I have good friends who are doctors and prior to any posting I spent time trying to discover if going flying was a real risk for someone following an angioplasty and just the extent of the real threat. I know the CAA are clear, its an automatic minimum 6 months of no flying medical following an angioplasty, but I needed to establish in my own mind if it was a real risk and balance that fact with what will probably be seemed as a selfish equation - should I remain silent on the matter and let fate run its course and thus prevent any personal criticism or is the risk to both herself and to others based on what facts I had established too great to remain silent.

A doctor described a person following angioplasty in the scenario described as a person playing Russian roulette not only with their own life but the life of others, with an unknown number of bullets in the chambers of the revolver. Legally something which should not happen but in reality something that was happening. It was said to me that I should consider a parallel situation of an apparently drunk driver - one that you had witnessed drinking in the pub but visibly struggling to function, should you ignore it and not say something to anyone (the potential passengers of the car - even if they are strangers) call the Police quietly and hope that they can get to the person to check that they are fit to drive or wait until after the person has crashed maybe killing a passenger on the way and then say to all your friends - yes I saw them drinking and they were drunk, bound to have happened.

In addition to this she decided to use her own aircraft to give a trial lesson after the ARC had expired. That was on a day when the weather at best was marginal VFR, I know as I flew that day. Due to the visibility that day the workload for a pilot was high.

Indy was approached by various people to try to get her to stop flying prior to the post. She ignored that. It was done quietly at that stage to help prevent embarrassment for her.

It should be remembered that angioplasty is a procedure that is ONLY ever done to help someone with a very serious life threatening condition. In terms of threat to flying activities and fitness to fly afterwards it requires more intensive tests to confirm that a person is fit to fly than someone who has had a heart attack.

Publishing the fact that Indy had an angioplasty was to draw attention to the severity of her health issues. They are unseen issues, if a person is affected by a stroke then the issues are often very visible but not in the case of someone with heart disease. She had no personal issue telling a stranger of her condition.

So to recap on the facts, Indy had made public to a stranger the nature of her health issues and treatment. She was very aware and understood the restrictions the issues placed upon her legal flying activities. She continued to fly and instruct. She flew her own aircraft after its ARC had expired.

The airfield that she operated at is not controlled by a control tower so it was almost impossible to get the airfield to stop her activities. The airfield has a number of people operating on it, a lot were unaware prior to the posts of her or any problems she faced

I am told that she has now stopped flying, mainly through the fact that many people at the airfield did become aware of the problems and she can not hide her activities anymore, everyone now knows who she is and is aware that she does not have a valid medical.