Waivers and SODA

[judy]

I have read with interest the FAA system
of waivers and sodas . I have a young son devastated by an eyesight problem .

If he was able to be certified using this system can he get a reasonable flying job?

Do any of the major US carriers recruit people with these waivers?

I can see how a major US carrier would accept this to keep a very experienced captain employed , but would they accept a new joining first officer with a wiaver?

I just wonder if this is a system which allows certification , but the unfortunate individual will find it very hard to forge a resonable career as a commercial pilot ?

hopeful parent

[inverted flatspin]

Flying for the airlines is unlikley, however not impossible. The best thing is to see if you can get the medical issued without a waiver, this may be possible and a good source of info is AOPA. If so no US airline can refuse employment on medical grounds. The medical certification process in the US is the most progressive anywhere, the attitude being 'If you can show that you are safe then you can fly'.

Talk to the airlines, they should be able to help you.

[777AV8R]

I am not sure that these people can help, but give them a try and I hope it works out for him: http://www.aviationmedicine.com/index.html

[Constable Clipcock]

judy:

In answer to your questions....
I have read with interest the FAA system of waivers and sodas.
The acronym SODA denotes "Statement of Demonstrated Ability". I have one of these myself, which was issued back in 1984. Under the old requirements that were in effect back then, the FAA First-/Second-Class medicals both required an uncorrected distant visual acuity of 20/100 or better, correcatble to 20/20 or better; my uncorrected DVA was 20/200. We've never had a refraction limit in this country however. The uncorrected DVA rule was dropped in 1996, but I still have to present my original SODA on every medical exam — simply because of the fact that my records show I was issued one — despite the fact that my waiver was for a requirement that no longer exists!

I have a young son devastated by an eyesight problem.

Understood. I grew up never wanting to be anything except a military pilot. I was still able to enter into a military career that involved being out there on the "sharp end", but in a much different role (I became a paratrooper). Working towards a a position as a law-enforcement pilot now instead.

If he was able to be certified using this system can he get a reasonable flying job?

Yes.

Do any of the major US carriers recruit people with these waivers?

Yes. They're required by law to do so.

I can see how a major US carrier would accept this to keep a very experienced captain employed, but would they accept a new joining first officer with a wiaver?

See above remark.

I just wonder if this is a system which allows certification , but the unfortunate individual will find it very hard to forge a resonable career as a commercial pilot?

Vision is not an issue in the US, as long as you can tell red from green and are correctable to 20/20.

[inverted flatspin]

CC at your next medical you can ask to have the SODA removed from your records. I am 100% sure of this, It says so on the AOPA website.

[judy]

Thankyou CC for your reply , later today I will show your answer to my son. It is very encouraging to be enlightened to the faa system, unfortunatly many many good aviators have been grounded by our caa , who will not bend on vision or colour vision requirements .

As a captain of a caa regulated airliner , I would rather have a poor sighted corrected, colour deficient co pilot with a bit of common sense, than some crap they themselves pass and certify as competent.

Thankyou again for your reply

[Constable Clipcock]

judy:

You're welcome. I presume you have family connections here in the US then? Getting the proper visa here is extremely difficult otherwise.

Another national system your son may wish to consider is that of Australia. Their medical requirements with respect to eyesight are every bit as lenient as those of the US, if not more so.