Skip to content

Aviation medicine

CASE-46-BPilot Medical Certification

Authored demonstration. Not a live employer result.

01 · Situation

The disclosure was made. The gate was never enforced.

Illustrative case in which a pilot discloses a new medication; an AME review is required before next scheduled duty.

02 · Evidence

What the record holds.

  1. E1Medication disclosure

    Verified · Day 0

  2. E2AME review request

    Verified · Day 0

  3. E3AME determination

    Not located · Due Day 2, per this demonstration’s illustrative case protocol

  4. E4Duty roster still shows pilot scheduled

    Verified · Day 2

03 · Obligations / Owners

The chain of responsibility.

  1. 01

    Pilot (disclose)

  2. 02

    AME (determine within the illustrative two-day review window)

  3. 03

    Scheduling office (hold roster pending sign-off)

04 · Accountability Break

Where the chain broke.

The roster was never held pending the determination — the gate was bypassed, not missed.

05 · Next Action

The corrective obligation.

Scheduling office holds the roster pending an explicit clearance-to-fly artifact; no default-to-scheduled.

06 · Economic Boundary

Where the evidence stops.

Monetary consequence not established.

07 · Engine Answer

What the Engine can and cannot establish.

The scheduling office was required, under this demonstration’s illustrative case protocol, to hold the roster until the AME determination was documented, due by Day 2. The record shows the disclosure and the review request but no determination, and the pilot remains on the Day 2 roster regardless. The Engine can demonstrate that the scheduling gate was not enforced. It cannot establish why the determination was never produced or completed.

The gate exists on paper. It was not enforced in the schedule.