[Peetwo]

Related to BM's frustration; Sandy latest news to AVMAD madness!!   

Every once in a while.....

Master Morgan of the AOPA on occasion provides a video on the face-book platform which is well worth the time to watch and listen. The subject is pilot medicals and it is fairly well articulated; however, the really important message runs a little deeper. The message delivers an accurate overview of the way in which not only CASA standard operational practice works, it drags in the incredible waste of time and money spent working against industry efforts to have a sensible, practical, working system of administration and regulation fit for purpose.

_ HERE _ is the link; take the time to watch and 'hear' the underlying message.

Well done Master Morgan; nicely played..

Via Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sandy.reith.31

Sandy Reith

CASA’s medical certification system, AVMED (or AVMAD) is designed purely to keep them in work.
Myself, latest news, after my DAME who has at least 40 years experience clears me no problem for C 2 after checking all blood tests etc.  etc.  I get only 2 months because AVMED says they need to review, part of their make work system.

Call them end of 2 months, their medicos haven’t had time to look so get another 2 months interim certificate. Now they want my GP to report on the bloods. It never stops and every year I get grief. Wonder if it’s because I’m too complimentary towards CASA?

Four months and two interim certificates plus having to do annual cardio tests that the cardiologist has written to AVMED he would not recommend any such tests.

But quite apart from our individual cases, overall costs must be $millions and wasting our time and precious medical resources for zero aviation safety outcomes.

Reforms have been mooted and we did have one much vaunted new type of certificate for Private Pilots following the USA and UK reforms around six years ago. Unfortunately the new Aussie Basic Class 2 was so restrictive it’s known as the Clayton’s medical reform. The latest from CASA, after yet another ‘consultation’ which gained 600 submissions calling for reforms that are urgently needed, is to tell us that they expect to formulate some reform ideas for …..wait for it…. Yet another consultation before July next year.  Isn’t it brilliant?

Reform from CASA is like watching a snail decide which gear to select, and often enough it selects reverse.

Illustrations from USA authorities.

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

Game on – Again.....

On Pprune - Papakurapilot wrote:-

“I am unfortunately not even slightly surprised to be writing this post. As someone who had CASA send a letter to my employer years ago telling them to consider if having me fly for them was safe given I have a colour vision defect, my opinion on CASA on this topic is very bleak. CASA about two years ago saw some sense and allowed pilots with a colour vision defect to do an assessment to prove their safety. This was a huge turning point in a very long and dark saga with CASA and for almost two brief years they had a progressive policy that aligned with NZ CAA and the FAA.

That was until early this year. Early this year CASA began rejecting completed flight test forms for this test. This was even though their website still had the OCVA published as an approved assessment, not a single testing officer was told it was now not accepted and THEIR OWN medical department was still telling applicants to take this test (the OCVA). I have contact with multiple people who have paid thousands to do this test through certified testing officers and still been rejected for this even though they have jumped through all of CASA's imposed hoops. I suspect that there would be some cause here for some legal action given the applicants did exactly what CASA asked and followed the published and current procedures exactly.

I cannot imagine having sat my ATPL flight test years ago CASA now sending me an email stating 'Sorry mate, we've changed the process now and you are back to being a CPL'. That's effectively what they've done here.CASA now has removed the OCVA from their website with no replacement on the horizon. They have said they are 'developing' a new test with zero time frame or explanation on what that might entail. They need to provide clear detail on their exact intentions with an exact time frame on this. I have regular contact with students who are beginning their training who now cannot be issued a medical due to an insane decision. What am I supposed to tell these young aspiring pilots? Just to continue your training with a vague promise by CASA that they will develop a new test with literally no timeline attached? After enduring CASA's constant attacks on the colour vision defective pilot community I am at a loss as to what to say to these young people!

I write this here out of exasperation as what can only be describes as an incredibly unjust process by our national regulator. I hope by this writing to bring awareness to what surely has to be some of the most insanely deficient processes that our regulator seems to be following. Hopefully some pressure comes onto the national regulator to reimpose the OCVA until a suitable alternative is put in place.”

While this may only affect a very small number of the tribe, it serves as a warning to those who may have a special medical requirement for which a 'test' of some sort must be completed to allow them to continue flying"...

For those CVD pilots who may not have actually had the pleasure of a dance with CASA Avmed at the AAT, a history lesson and some solid advice from many years ago may be found on Pro Aviation; drafted by Paul Phelan and well worth the time taken to study. It is in black and white, so no worries. _ _ HERE _ _

Toot – toot....

[Wombat]

"They have said they are 'developing' a new test with zero time frame or explanation on what that might entail. They need to provide clear detail on their exact intentions with an exact time frame on this. I have regular contact with students who are beginning their training who now cannot be issued a medical due to an insane decision. What am I supposed to tell these young aspiring pilots? Just to continue your training with a vague promise by CASA that they will develop a new test with literally no timeline attached? "


....and furthermore, if CASA is permitted to develop its own test regime for CVD be it either novel or constructed by cherry picking research papers, what is to stop CASA then developing a whole suite of its own uniquely Australian tests for all sorts of conditions?

For example CASA's approach to alcohol usage is predicated on the concept of "risky drinking" and the associated research on identifying "risky drinkers". A good thing you may think except for the fact that CASA has taken the research entirely and completely out of context.

If you actually read the research, the concept of "risky drinking" therein is NOT related to increased risk of operating an aircraft or heavy machinery or any equipment at all, it is related to the increased risk of long term negative general health outcomes from alcohol use. It has nothing whatever to do with aviation risk levels whatsoever.

[P7_TOM]

Grossly Unfair...

Years now since the great debate and changes made; then, without a warning – a back-flip. 

“This was a huge turning point in a very long and dark saga with CASA and for almost two brief years they had a progressive policy that aligned with NZ CAA and the FAA.”

“That was until early this year. Early this year CASA began rejecting completed flight test forms for this test.”

Could this be a general warning to all who rely on some form of 'specialist' input to their medical certification? Seriously, if a non sequitur like CVD in the 'pilot safety medical check' can be changed in a heartbeat, then how long is going to be before other more serious, specialised medication required items are given the same treatment?

There is a serious discussion going on about this being the thin end of a large wedge to drive 'private' operations into the ever open coffers of the RA Oz outfit – they do have a seat at the CASA 'discussion' group ( see AOPA latest on medical reform.)..

The whole business of medicals seems to becoming a game of 'cat and mouse'; crew torn between honesty and a variation thereof; don't mention a headache or tummy ache outside of the privacy and protection of your doctor's office; and be certain not to mention a hang nail on your application – totally counter productive exercise..

Another black mark to add to the many..Can a NZ ATPL operate a VH mark? Is there parity? If not why not? There's a thought..Do read the Phelan articles - valid back then, still bang on the money today.

[Peetwo]

CASA/AVMAD evidence of duplicity in process?? - 

Keeping in mind the above posts, in regards to (again) the 'Empire Strikes back on CVD Pilots', please witness the following evidence provided by Su_Spence and Co in relation to medical side effect issues with the COVID-19 vaccinations and professional high capacity RPT pilots:   

Budget Estimates - CASA & ASA but no AMSA (yet)? 

Via the APH (from 08:25):

Now consider this Youtube video segment off last night's Rowan Dean Sky News Australia episode (from 31:10)...

Then go to this referred to website: https://www.aussiefreedomflyers.com/

And these videos: https://rumble.com/v13bo0k-hoodys-heroes...n-pt1.html (PMO Kate Manderson fm 22:50) & https://rumble.com/v13krdl-hoodys-heroes...-of-2.html

Former Qantas Captain, Graham Hood, in an investigative discussion and critique of Dr. Kate Manderson's (head of CASA medical) opinion of the risk posed to Airline Pilots from the Covid-19 vaccinations.

Video recorded 30th April 2022. The circumstances leading to the recording of this video were the increasing volume of reports pointing to serious side effects in vaccinated individuals.

Side effects of concern were those that posed a Risk-to-Flight should they happen to a pilot of an airliner. It became abundantly clear that the airlines and the regulators were not motivated to screen pilots for issues that they may be experiencing. The consequences of an over zealous vaccine program, that has gone wrong, has the potential to ground airlines around the globe.

Pilots were reluctant to come forward for fear of losing their medical clearance to fly, with the added potential to loose their entire career and income.

In the interests of Passenger safety we ask the tough questions the regulator should be asking.

In summary. The doctors and flight surgeons in this interview recommend all vaccinated pilots, at a minimum should order:
1 Cardiac MRI
2 D Dimer test
3 Troponin level test
4 Cardiac Stress ECG
With follow ups at three month intervals.

Follow AussieFreedomFlyers.com and Graham Hood on Facebook

Hmm...nothing to see here right?? 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

CASA/AVMAD evidence of duplicity hypocrisy in process? - Part II

Ref:

CASA/AVMAD evidence of duplicity in process?? - 

Keeping in mind the above posts, in regards to (again) the 'Empire Strikes back on CVD Pilots', please witness the following evidence provided by Su_Spence and Co in relation to medical side effect issues with the COVID-19 vaccinations and professional high capacity RPT pilots:   

Budget Estimates - CASA & ASA but no AMSA (yet)? 

Via the APH (from 08:25):

Now consider this Youtube video segment off last night's Rowan Dean Sky News Australia episode (from 31:10)...

Then go to this referred to website: https://www.aussiefreedomflyers.com/

And these videos: https://rumble.com/v13bo0k-hoodys-heroes...n-pt1.html (PMO Kate Manderson fm 22:50) & https://rumble.com/v13krdl-hoodys-heroes...-of-2.html

Former Qantas Captain, Graham Hood, in an investigative discussion and critique of Dr. Kate Manderson's (head of CASA medical) opinion of the risk posed to Airline Pilots from the Covid-19 vaccinations.

Video recorded 30th April 2022. The circumstances leading to the recording of this video were the increasing volume of reports pointing to serious side effects in vaccinated individuals.

Side effects of concern were those that posed a Risk-to-Flight should they happen to a pilot of an airliner. It became abundantly clear that the airlines and the regulators were not motivated to screen pilots for issues that they may be experiencing. The consequences of an over zealous vaccine program, that has gone wrong, has the potential to ground airlines around the globe.

Pilots were reluctant to come forward for fear of losing their medical clearance to fly, with the added potential to loose their entire career and income.

In the interests of Passenger safety we ask the tough questions the regulator should be asking.

In summary. The doctors and flight surgeons in this interview recommend all vaccinated pilots, at a minimum should order:
1 Cardiac MRI
2 D Dimer test
3 Troponin level test
4 Cardiac Stress ECG
With follow ups at three month intervals.

Follow AussieFreedomFlyers.com and Graham Hood on Facebook

Hmm...nothing to see here right?? 

Hansard, via APH:

CHAIR: Senator Roberts?

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for appearing here today. Is it CASA that is responsible for aeromedical safety for pilots in Australia?

Ms Spence : Yes.

S enator ROBERTS: Can you tell me a bit more about the responsibility?

Ms Spence : I might invite my colleague who looks after the avmed area within CASA to provide you a bit more information about how we operate in that space.

Senator ROBERTS: Which area was that?

Ms Spence : It's the Stakeholder Engagement Division, but he's responsible for the aviation medicine team within CASA.

Senator ROBERTS: Mr Marcelja, what are your responsibilities?

Mr Marcelja : I look after the area that runs our medical certification area.

Senator ROBERTS: Certification of pilots?

Mr Marcelja : For aviation medicine, yes. We run a certification process where anyone that wants to be granted a pilot licence needs to meet a medical standard. Depending on the level of licence they would like to hold, there are different medical standards they can apply for. Some of those range from being granted, effectively, by a GP all the way up to CASA doing robust assessments.

Senator ROBERTS: Second question: did the airlines have to consult CASA at all before implementing vaccine mandates?

Mr Marcelja : They would not have, no. The vaccine mandates were a matter for health agencies, not us.

Senator ROBERTS: But CASA is responsible for aeromedical safety, and airlines were mandating a medical procedure—mandating.

Mr Marcelja : Our policy when it comes to vaccination, from an aviation safety perspective, is fairly straightforward. We have a 24-hour standdown period—we request that crews don't operate for 24 hours—and that accounts for any adverse reactions that might happen on any vaccination. Beyond that, our requirement is that, if there are effects being experienced, pilots declare that either to us or to their medical examiner and stand down from duties. It's a pretty standard process we have for vaccinations.

Senator ROBERTS: So you would expect the effects to be over within 24 hours?

Mr Marcelja : The immediate effects. Our concern is around incapacitation—is there a risk of sudden incapacitation for a pilot? The medical evidence suggests that that takes place in the first 24 hours following the vaccine.

Senator ROBERTS: Where did the evidence come from?

Mr Marcelja : That's a globally accepted standard. All aviation regulators—

Senator ROBERTS: So you didn't check where the evidence came from; you just accepted the globally accepted—

Ms Spence : As Mr Marcelja said, this is for all vaccinations, and that is a longstanding practice that has been in place around that 24 hours. What we're talking about is our general processes.

Senator ROBERTS: So there is nothing exceptional about the way COVID injections are treated?

Ms Spence : No.

Senator ROBERTS: Is CASA aware that the COVID injections only hold provisional approval?

Mr Marcelja : We take the advice from the health authorities that have approved those vaccinations for use in Australia, and, as far as we're concerned, we don't question that. We don't second-guess that. That's a—

Senator ROBERTS: I wasn't asking that question, Mr Marcelja. I was asking if you're aware that the COVID injections only have provisional approval, not approval.

Mr Marcelja : We are aware that the vaccines are approved for use in Australia, and that's what matters to us.

Senator ROBERTS: Provisionally approved. You're not aware that they were provisionally approved?

Mr Marcelja : I am aware that they are provisionally approved—

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. Are you aware that the provisional approval means the health regulators only have preliminary data on the medication and are awaiting the full suite of data from pharmaceutical companies from further monitoring, which could include risks and harms not identified in preliminary data? Are you aware of that?

Mr Marcelja : As I said, from our perspective, they have been approved by health authorities for use in Australia. That's the extent of our concern.

Senator ROBERTS: Given what I just said and the uncertainty there, is there a possibility that vaccine mandates inject a level of risk onto pilots flying planes? Is there a level of uncertainty introduced?

Ms Spence : As Mr Marcelja said, we're following the medical advice, and we have not got any reason to have concerns around the impact of COVID vaccinations in Australia.

Senator ROBERTS: Who gave you the medical advice?

Ms Spence : We're following the announced advice that comes from the—

Senator ROBER TS: Who gave you that announced medical advice?

Ms Spence : We're following the advice that's provided across the country. We hear what the CMOs are saying—

Senator ROBERTS: Is it the Chief Medical Officer, AHPRA, the secretary of the federal—

Ms S pence : We're following the published advice.

Senator ROBERTS: Who published it?

Ms Spence : I'm sorry, I don't know who—

Senator ROBERTS: You didn't check?

Ms Spence : We're following the advice that's out there, and we're treating the COVID vaccinations the same way we do with every other vaccination in the country.

Senator ROBERTS: Thank you for acknowledging that. Does CASA collect reports of COVID-19 vaccine effects, side effects and adverse events in class 1 to 3 medical certificate holders, and how is this data collected?

Mr Marcelja : Medical certificate holders are required to see their medical examiners on a regular basis. We do expect them to disclose effects if they've had them. We have nothing in any of the data we hold that indicates any adverse effects from COVID vaccination.

Senator ROBERTS: You have nothing in the data, but you don't go and specifically collect it.

Ms Spence : Yes, we do. It is required to be provided to us, but nothing has been provided to us.

Senator ROBERTS: Whom do you require to provide it?

Ms Spence : The pilots.

Senator ROBERTS: Do you believe there may be a perverse incentive for a pilot to not report if they have suffered an adverse event? If they report an event, they are putting their financial livelihood at risk.

Ms Spence : No, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: You don't?

Ms Spence : No, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: How does CASA detect pilots who may have a medical problem if they have not self-reported it to CASA?

Mr Marcelja : As I said earlier, medical certificate holders are required to see an examiner on a frequent basis. It depends on their age. It depends on the class of medical. In order to hold a medical certificate for most classes of medicals you need to see a medical examiner on a frequent basis, so other than self-declaration that's the other control that we have in our medical system.

CHAIR: We're very tight for time, we've got three other agencies and a lot of us have got questions. Frankly, this is bullshit.

Senator ROBERTS: Thanks for the endorsement. That means a lot. Are you aware that the COVID injections were not fully tested and barely partially tested? Are you aware; yes or no?

Mr Marcelja : Senator, it's not a matter for us. We are an aviation safety agency, and we take the advice, when it comes to vaccination, from the authorities that are charged with making those decisions.

Senator ROBERTS: Are you aware—I haven't checked this myself, but I'm told by a lawyer in America—that 1,000 Southwest Airlines pilots cannot pass their medical after being injected? That's a hell of a lot of pilots in America just with one airline.

Ms Spence : We haven't had that data provided to us.

Senator ROBERTS: Are you aware that the Pfizer trials were sloppy, unscientific and shut down early, apparently due to deaths? Are you aware?

Ms Spence : Senator, I don't think there's anything else that we can really add to the line of questioning.

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, much as I enjoy working with you, I really think the officers cannot answer your line of questioning here.

Senator ROBERTS: No, that has become clear.

CHAIR: And I would please urge, Senator Roberts, as we are so tight for time, that if there are any more, would you put them on notice?

Senator ROBERTS: I will hand back, Chair.

  
Hmm...yet when it comes to private pilots self-certifying under a drivers license medical standard; or a private pilot diagnosed with CVD looking to be certified under a operational test scenario, the medical boffins in AVMAD and the medically biased Part 67 TWG simply ignore the factual evidence provided by international counterparts and the overwhelming evidence of incident free flying of the professional fraternity of CVD pilots - the hypocrisy here is UFB!

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

CASA AvMAD evidence of total incompetence and negligence on ADHD/ASD medical policy?? -   

Interesting developments on the UP 'ADHD/ASD and CASA medicals' thread.

Courtesy AOPA Oz Director Clinton McKenzie...
  

Clinton McKenzie

I have now received documents in response to my second FOI request about CASA Form 420. I will try to provide a link to the documents. I am doing a forensic review of the content, but note the following preliminary matters that have already become obvious.

The footer of the currently published version of Form 420 says this:

ADHD Instructors Questionnaire │V 1│CASA-04-1896│03/2022

The “V 1” represents that it is the first and only version of the Form. That is a misrepresentation. As we know, at least the sick joke was airbrushed out of it, with no trace as to who decided to do that and who did it. I can see other versions in the disclosed documents, which versions were evidently used because ‘outsiders’ have commented on or complained about them. There is nothing in the Form to indicate the differences between different versions. (It evidently remains beyond CASA’s current corporate competence to understand the difference between “impatient” and “inpatient”.)

More fundamentally, given the circumstances in which CASA Avmed has required the Form to be completed and the implications if the requirement is not complied with, ASD has now been deleted from the heading. As we will see, someone in CASA Avmed finally decided that the questions in the Form were aimed at behaviours typical of ADHD rather than ASD and – guess what - ASD and ADHD are apparently two quite distinct conditions.

CASA’s quality control is so poor that when the deletion of ASD from the heading of the Form was going through the approval process, nobody bothered to review the rest of the Form. The Form continues to say, under the heading “Purpose of this form”:

This behavioural questionnaire is for Flight Instructors of individuals with ASD and/or ADHD.

But rewind to 2018, when an applicant for a medical certificate made a complaint to the CASA ICC about the requirement, imposed by CASA Avmed, for the applicant to provide a completed Form 420 (plus Medicare consultation and prescription records for the past five years; academic and employment history; copies of any special reports (such as QEEG or neuropsychological testing); previous specialists reports). The applicant had low level ASD and complained that the Form related to ADHD, with which the applicant had never been diagnosed.

The ICC’s letter to the applicant, dated 17 July 2018, contains a chronology, 27 dot points long, spanning the period 4 October 2017 (when the applicant’s application was submitted to the MRS) through to 27 June 2018, at which point the applicant had still not been issued a medical certificate, because CASA was “currently waiting for you to return the Authority to Release Medical’in-confidence Information’ form before it can complete your certificate application”.

The events in between were the usual mixture of Avmed overreach and pedantry. The penultimate paragraph in the ICC’s chronology says in part:

Avmed also advised the instructor’s name wasn’t on the Form 420 you’d submitted and you clarified it was. AvMed agreed it was, stating ’the instructor name is…where it would have expected to see (your) name.’

It’s hard to imagine the extent of the stress caused to Avmed by the instructor’s name having been put on the Form where Avmed expected to see the applicant’s name, much less the extent of the consequential risks to the safety of air navigation.

The ICC’s findings included;

I agree Form 420 is confusing. It’s clearly states it relates to ADHD and is an extract from that condition’s assessment protocol. …

Form 420 contains no instructions for the level of detail it seeks from the flying instructor who is completing it. It asks a closed question (‘normal?’) and then seeks comments. …

As we know, that entirely inappropriate question has also been disappeared from the Form.

The ICC also found that CASA Avmed created an expectation in the applicant’s mind and then acted contrary to the expectation created:

In my view, AvMed created an expectation the information you’d provided would reviewed at the point it was received, rather than cumulatively. In reaching that conclusion, I note when you asked if you were to ’start sending through information … to help the transition go faster.’ AvMed replied on 10 January [2018] that ’it would be very helpful if you could send through anything you have available.’

Contrary to your expectation, it’s apparent the information wasn’t reviewed by a Doctor until all the information it’d sought had been received. …

Fast forward to 12 October 2021 – more than 3 years after the ICC’s findings. Some bloke named Tony Hochberg sent a string of emails to Nathan Sullivan, Kelsey Kadam and Angela Pearman, all of whom appear to be CASA folk. Mr Hochberg’s string of emails say, among other things:

I have a problem with the combined intent of the ASD/ADHD questionnaire as the behavioural aspects of ADHD and Autism are like opposite ends of the spectrum. …

ADHD questions predominate, however autistic individuals are often socially withdrawn and apprehensive when being looked at and like to be left alone in a corner away from everyone, not near doors or passageways etc. in class.

…

Decision made – please call this questionnaire ADHD instructors questionnaire form and problem solved.

…

The problem is the title includes autism spectrum disorder and if we remove that then the questionnaire is specific to ADHD. Not sure why it was combined into one questionnaire as they are two quite distinct conditions.

…

I note the usual insouciant indifference to the stress, delay, cost and confusion caused by CASA Avmed’s pedantry and flawed forms, none of which contributed anything positive to safety of air navigation. Who cares if people with low level ASD were put through the ADHD process.

At this point I will reiterate advice I have given before: Beware of putting yourself in circumstances in which you can be diagnosed with something. Be extraordinarily careful in answering what appear to be innocuous questions. Ditto anyone of your loved ones who may aspire to any aviation-related activities in circumstances in which CASA’s anachronistic medical certificate requirement applies.

Once diagnosed with something and CASA Avmed becomes aware of it, you are their guinea pig. CASA Avmed will spin almost [i]anything[/i] into an ‘aero-medically relevant condition’, will exaggerate the risks arising from the ‘condition’ and will then impose the most intrusive, expensive and potentially dangerous-to-you requirements in order to ‘satisfy’ them, assuming they don’t just refuse to issue a certificate to you. It does not matter if the weight of qualified expert opinion is contrary to Avmed’s.

They have a noble cause and they believe that, but for their crusade in the interests of that cause, it would be raining aluminium. They only back down if there’s a risk they’ll be embarrassed, and that will cost you a lot of time and money to make happen.

Choc frog that man...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

CASA AVMAD madness reaches new levels?? - 

Via AOPA Oz on FB:

WHY CASA PART 67 MEDICAL CERTIFICATION REFORM MATTERS, IT'S TIME TO END THE DISCRIMINATION

I am encouraging everyone across Australia to read this ABC article on young Hayden McDonald and his journey, as it showcases how broken and how utterly discriminatory and corrupt the Civil Aviation Safety Authority AvMed system has been and continues to be for pilots nationwide.

Unable to obtain a CASA Class 2 medical certificate and told he was a risk to aviation safety because of a diagnosis of Autism, he walked away from the general aviation community.

Unable to fight the regulator, Hayden had nowhere else to turn, and was instead forced to pursue his aviation dream through the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited or RAAus.  A private company that is approved by CASA to permit it's member pilots to fly aircraft in Australian skies self-declaring their medical fitness - as long as they pay a membership fee.

How totally absurd is this ongoing situation!

CASA actively discriminates pilots and informs them that they're a risk to aviation safety, but then encourages them to pay a private company (that is CASA approved) a fee for permission to do the very thing the safety regulator claims is so unsafe.

If it is safe for pilots to fly using a self-declared medical certification, then why are pilots being forced to pay a private company for this right?

It's time to end the discrimination and importantly, it's time to end the corruption.

BENJAMIN MORGAN
Chief Executive, AOPA Australia
Mobile: 0415 577 724
Email:  ben.morgan@aopa.com.au



Via the other Aunty: Hayden is flying around Australia to show others living with autism that the sky's the limit

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Aeromed commonsense in another hemisphere?? - 

Via AvWeb:

FAA Report Says BasicMed Hasn’t Raised Accident Risk

By Russ Niles - Published: March 28, 20235



The FAA says BasicMed is safe but it will continue to monitor its impact on GA. The agency sent a report to Congress on March 10 based on a study of aviation activity and accident data accumulated in the first three years after the relaxed medical standards for recreational pilots went into effect in January of 2017. “The FAA determined that while BasicMed did not impact small aircraft activity, it also did not significantly impact aviation safety,” the report said. “No difference was found in the risk of BasicMed and third-class airmen having an aviation accident from the start of BasicMed in 2017 through the end of 2019.”

While the accident rate didn’t go up under BasicMed, the report says its implementation also hasn’t been much of a boost for the industry. “The implementation of BasicMed does not appear to significantly reduce the slow long-term decline in the number of active GA pilots. Estimated aircraft flight hours demonstrate an equivalent rate of growth both before and after the implementation of BasicMed,” the report said. It also noted that those using BasicMed “are much more likely to have required and Special Issuance” and that “reflects a potentially elevated risk of incapacitation among the BasicMed population in the context of reduced FAA oversight.”

AOPA appears to challenge the FAA assessment of the effects of BasicMed on overall GA activity. “The number of individuals holding a private or student pilot certificate in the United States has climbed from 584,000 in 2016 to nearly 757,000 today, a 30 percent increase,” AOPA said in a statement reacting to the report. “According to the FAA report, the total number of aircraft hours flown by pilots under BasicMed increased from over 15 million in 2017, the year FAA implemented BasicMed, to over 16 million in 2019.” AOPA also said the overall GA accident rate is “at its lowest level in decades” according to NTSB data. 

Hmm...the air must be different in the Northern hemisphere?? 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

CASA AVMAD Fiji jaunt to indoctrinate future PASO Nation DAMEs?? -     

Via Linkedin:

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

CASA’s aviation medicine experts have just returned from #Fiji where they supported Designated Aviation Medical Examiner (DAME) training in the #Pacific.

With the support of funding from the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, CASA sponsored 10 doctors from the Pacific to attend the DAME training program from 29 April to 7 May.

The training was facilitated by Dr David Powell, International Air Transport Association Medical Advisor, and supported by CASA’s Dr Tony Hochberg, Deputy Principal Medical Officer and Dr Kate Manderson, Principal Medical Officer.

An important aspect of the training program is the introduction to the aviation workplace. Practical exposure to cockpits, simulation, control towers, and aeromedical retrieval all contribute to an understanding of aviation hazards and the flight environment.

The Australasian Society of Aerospace Medicine DAME training program is well recognised and a great way to ensure Pacific Island countries meet the competency requirements.

The training will contribute to a safer and more secure transport system for Pacific Island citizens, visitors, and people and assets transiting Pacific airspace by upskilling doctors - or maintaining the currency of existing DAMEs - to provide aviation medicine examinations and certification to commercial pilots in the region.

Interesting comment in reply from Andrew Kerans.. :

Andrew Kerans

Consulting Spectrum Management Specialist.
2h

Excellent. Now hand Class 2 medicals (all of them) to DAMEs and stop telling us you are too short handed to process them ?

Hmmm...what say you Sandy at large?? 

MTF...P2 

[Sandy Reith]

Asked what to say?

Firstly it’s all been said over and over again, but to anyone new to the subject there’s not one shred of evidence that CASA and its AVMAD, oops typo AVMED section, contribute to aviation safety.

How is it that CASA can totally ignore 40 years of the successful self declared car driver medical standard for the low eight category of Recreational Aviation Australia? Or the successful implementation of a rational self declared medical certification of private pilots in the USA and UK? 

CASA continues to stall, prevaricate and delay reforms to maintain the power and jobs for itself at a colossal expense to numerous pilots and to the whole General Aviation (GA) community. Having knocked out thousands of pilots from flying more capable VH registered GA aircraft CASA has managed to 2/3rds wreck what was a vibrant Australian General Aviation industry.

Impossible to quantify the $billions lost in economic activity, tax losses, services lost, jobs lost.

Almost all of CASA’s reforms of the last 35 years have been a slight shuffle forward after many steps backwards.

CASA is incapable of administering aviation in a rational fashion that would allow real growth and efficiencies for the benefit of all  Australians. CASA must be disbanded and aviation be administered through a regular Department with a responsible Minister at its head. Ring, write contact your local MP and State Senators regularly.

[Kharon]

Don't mention 'the war'...

Prune carries yet another thread railing against the entrenched official pilot medical certificate issuer – Avmed. Over the decades many challenges have been issued by industry and private participants; there have even been some short lived small victories. The battle of 'Colour Vision' for example; ADHD.ASA another (lunacy writ large) which, – despite all efforts, just as matters seemed settled – all bets are off as a 'new' system is brought into play. The whole long, sorry saga is best represented by a scene from Monty Python's immortal classic sketch.

And yet, when 'men of good will' and a large dollop of common sense prevail the castle walls can be breached; the USA and UK setting the reform standard (again) and reaping the benefits – HERE -. Problem identified, discussed and; just like that, the industry takes on a new lease on life and goes gang-busters. Not in Australia; no Sir; despite all 'expert' medical advice from people like - Dr. Rob Liddell (legend)– and Dr. Arthur Pape (legend) – no amount of rock solid logic seems to penetrate the defensive walls of castle Avmed; or the closed minds within..

This small planet has a long history of 'war' – battles fought for all manner of reasons; some have lasted a good long time, neither side prepared to sort it out and get back to their knitting; or planting Spuds – just need to step around the road blocks the fanatics have built and adopt 'world best' practice – the supporting expert evidence clear and freely available.

“The story of the Reconquista is one of heroism and courage, but it is also a cautionary tale about the dangers of religious fanaticism. It is a story that should be remembered by all of us, so that we may never repeat the mistakes of the past.”

Toot - toot.

[Peetwo]

CASA internal ructions: Pup_Spence's dilemma on non-medical pilots in CTA?? - 

Via LMH: 

To Medical or Not to Medical: that is the Question

13 June 2023






The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is believed to be battling with the question of requiring medical certificates for private operations in controlled airspace (CTA).

CASA has maintained for several years that pilots operating in CTA would always need Class 1 or Class 2 medical certificates, but the requirement has been brought under scrutiny by the projects to permit PPLs to fly on self-declared medical standards (Class 5) and to grant Recreational Aviation Australia's (RAAus) pilots access to CTA.

In the June 2023 CASA Briefing newsletter, Director of Aviation Safety and CEO Pip Spence said the Class 5 medicals project was due by the end of the year, but they were putting a priority on it and as such could bring it forward. As it stands, CASA is expected to release further consultation papers on CASR Part 67 (medicals) within weeks.

The concept of permitting RAAus pilots into CTA should have been completed by now, but it would appear to have been lumped in with the CASR Part 103 project, which is also due at the end of 2023 according to the GA Workplan timeline.
The converging timelines mean that CASA needs to make a decision on the need for pilots to have medical certificates to operate in CTA soon. If the requirement stays for PPLs, removing it for RPC holders would create contrary policy that would be hard to reconcile. If the medicals requirement is also applied to RPCs, it could nobble the concept of allowing them into CTA given that most RAAus pilots fly without medicals.

When questioned about the potential restrictions that could apply to RPCs operating in CTA, a CASA spokesperson outlined several things that were under consideration.

"We’re still developing policy in this area, but a Class 2 medical certificate is required for pilots operating in controlled airspace under current arrangements and we are looking at this requirement as part of our medical review," the spokesperson said.
"Other controls are still to be considered, but could include things like pilot training/competency, aircraft equipment and aircraft performance."

RAAus CEO Matt Bouttell told Australian Flying that he believed his members would be able to fly in CTA without needing the Class 2 medical that is currently required of PPLs.

"As far as the medical is concerned, RAAus has been operating safely with our self-declared system for 40 years, so much so that CASA is looking at emulating this," he said.

"The Part 67 Self-declared medical Technical Working Group is currently working through self-declared medicals. On this basis I am confident that RAAus pilots will have access to CTA without the need for a Class 2 pilot medical."

If Bouttell and RAAus get their wish, it will be very hard to see how CASA could continue to demand that PPLs still require a medical in CTA.

The Pilot Medical Declaration (PMD) used in the UK and BasicMed in the USA both have restrictions on operations without medical certificates, but neither of them bar operations in CTA.

In March this year, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) released a review report into BasicMed after three years of operation. The report showed "no difference in accident risk between flights conducted by pilots operating under BasicMed and flights conducted by pilots holding third-class [Class 2 in Australia] medical certificates."

The report also found that BasicMed had no impact on the slow decline in general aviation in the USA, which was touted as one of the major benefits of self-declared medicals. 

MTF...P2 

[Sandy Reith]

“ The report also found that BasicMed had no impact on the slow decline in general aviation in the USA, which was touted as one of the major benefits of self-declared medicals.”

AOPA USA reported that when BasicMed was introduced it brought back 17,000 pilots.
However they measure “slow decline” that’s a far cry from the CASA induced semi destruction of Australia’s General Aviation industry.

And now in the USA I think I read some 40,000 pilots operate with their BasicMed which must represent an enormous saving in both time and money compared to the previous medical certification process.

Tellingly the USA authorities report that they cannot detect any safety issues with the new system. You have to ask why are CASA dragging their feet?

[Sandy Reith]

Quote AOPA USA:-
“ Nearly 80,000 pilots have qualified to fly safely under BasicMed since its inception in 2017. “

This would represent a huge benefit to pilots in terms the previous costly and time consuming medical examinations that pertained under the old regulations.

Without any idea of actual medical examination costs in the USA, let’s assume an average saving of $500 multiplied by 80,000 that equals $40million.

With any reasonable system in place the last 20 years I personally could have been $10,000 in front.

[Peetwo]

The Empire Strikes Back (AGAIN -   ) on CVD Pilots!! -    

CM via the UP: https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-a...st11453304

Colour Vision Deficiency - Where To Next?


Those of you who’ve been watching or are affected by CASA’s approach to CVD will be aware that the brief period of enlightenment during which CASA adopted the NZ CAA's Operational Colour Vision Assessment came to an abrupt end with no warning recently, with CASA Avmed deciding it knows better. Out with the OCVA and in with the ACVA.

I made an FOI application to CASA for access to:

Internal and external CASA correspondence and CASA records relating to:

(a) the analysis, by CASA staff members or consultants or the CASA Director, of the Operational Colour Vision Assessment implemented by the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority (‘OCVA’)

(b) the decision by CASA to implement the OCVA

© the decision by CASA to discard the OCVA

(d) the development of the aviation colour vision assessment test referred to in CASA’s Designated Medical Examiners Handbook (‘ACVA’)

(e) the analysis, by CASA staff members or consultants or the CASA Director, of the differences between the OCVA and AVCA

(f) the qualifications of the people involved in any of the analyses referred to at (a) and (e), and

(g) any conflict of interest of any of the people involved in any of the analyses referred to at (a) and

(e), any of the decisions referred to at (b) and © and the development referred to (d).

CASA has refused the request. Here is a link to the refusal letter.

I have applied to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner for review of that decision. My application says:

The public interest overrides the reasons given for not granting access.

A substantial portion of the population has a colour vision deficiency. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority's recent decisions on the testing regime for colour vision deficiency affect, profoundly, the interests of pilots and prospective pilots with colour vision deficiency. The CASA decisions have been made without any consultation with and without giving any notice or explanation to people who are trying to make fundamentally important career and related commitments, and all that is thrown into disarray when CASA makes unilateral changes without notice or explanation.

The basis of the decisions should be easily explicable on the basis of the objective operational risk data taken into consideration by those making the decisions, all of which should be recorded. The date range of the request is not very wide. I have already been advised, by CASA, that its searches indicate there are no documents within the scope of the part of the request relating to conflict of interest.

Finally, I was not even given the option to pay for the application to be processed.

I will keep everyone informed of progress.

Meanwhile, I’ve teed up an online discussion with a legend and veteran fighter against the CVD zealots in Avmed: Dr Arthur Pape. If I can master the tech, it will commence at 7pm EST tomorrow (Tuesday 20 June).

MTF...P2 

[Wombat]

AVMED - Is this One more nail in the coffin of Australian Aviation?

How does this behaviour advance the cause of safety?

[P7_TOM]

Ben M has just had his first real contact with “the system”.

_ HERE -

[Kharon]

'Stick it where the sun don't shine!'

I wonder if Spence and Co. realise that Ben Morgan's opinion of the CASA TWG represents and clearly articulates the general industry view of all within. Those who are forced to deal with, or work under, or comply with the beyond all reason rubbish the CASA system imposes, for no tangible benefit.  Perhaps a link to Morgan's video should be used as a sign off to any and all correspondence with Spence and Co.

Beats seven bells out 'kind regards' and is, very much so, an accurate representation of general opinion.

Toot – toot...

[Peetwo]

'Stick it where the sun don't shine!'

I wonder if Spence and Co. realise that Ben Morgan's opinion of the CASA TWG represents and clearly articulates the general industry view of all within. Those who are forced to deal with, or work under, or comply with the beyond all reason rubbish the CASA system imposes, for no tangible benefit.  Perhaps a link to Morgan's video should be used as a sign off to any and all correspondence with Spence and Co.

Beats seven bells out 'kind regards' and is, very much so, an accurate representation of general opinion.

Toot – toot...

Addendum: Comments in reply to BM...

Geoff Breust

I share your utter frustration and disgust. The time has come for the industry to March on Canberra, both the CASA offices and Parliament House and cause one mighty ruckus…..the fat cats will continue to do this until they are physically stopped….unless the pollies see votes going elsewhere it won’t change

---

Sandy Reith

So those of us flying a Baron are all over 2000kg. Great.

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Australia

Sandy Reith I actually raised the issue of Baron owners specifically, because a 2,000kg MTOW would leave these owners out... Yet, these owners are just like all other private/recreational pilots, out enjoying a weekend flight to have fun. The entire situation is simply absurd. Many years ago CASA created this problem by incorrectly arguing that medical certification was directly linked to aircraft weight. This fraud has continued for several decades, and now is creating all manner of problems because they can't untangle themselves out of it.

---

Sandy Reith

Just as Clinton McKenzie has shown with Glen Buckley and Arthur Pape recently in video discussions, the CASA standard is to lie, obfuscate, delay and deny. Its only concern is to administer and regulate in in such a manner as suits its own interests.

This self serving independent corporation doesn’t give a damn for the harm done to the General Aviation industry or any GA individuals, let alone the National interest.

Only a prominent public campaign will cause Parliament to make changes to prevent the further destruction of our GA industry. CASA must be disbanded and aviation given to a Department with a responsible Minister as is the Westminster system. That’s not perfect but at least there’s a direct line between an elected official and the voters.

The independent corporate model is a failed experiment of governance, and, reading Hansard, the expressions in 1988 by MPs against the new concept have been truly vindicated, just as forecast.

---

Lorraine MacGillivray

Ben 1 July - AntiCorruption Commission.

---

Lorraine MacGillivray

People should revolt and just do what they want to or need to do.

---

Lorraine MacGillivray

Where is Pip Spence? Or is she just another irresponsible incompetent fat cat?

---

Ian Tucker

Unbelievable, more CASA buggery ? bloody disgrace. Sorry you have to put up with this shit Ben. Where to from here? Our political representatives need to pull this SASA rabble into line.

---

Sandie Kelly

This type of stupidity is across the board Ben. Perhaps contact Ex Qantas pilot Graham Hood or Cafe Locked Out. They are all about getting the stories out there.

---

Hop Harrigan

Ben, you need to take a break Mate. I agree with the suggestions of Sharon Bailey however South Australia Senator Alex Antic has more common sense than all of the Labor Senators combined. Give his office a call.

---

Clinton McKenzie

We always predicted the ‘review’ and the Part 67 TWG process was going to be an Avmed scam to justify a forgone conclusion. At least you gave it go.

We should all judge Avmed by what they do, not what they say.

---

Mark Mc Donald

Do not resign Ben, That will give Manderson a little personal win

---

Koos de Wet

Ben, I admire how you have tried to inject some common sense, factsbased evidence and considered logic into a clearly compromised regulatory organization and now is not the time to throw in the towel. You are doing great work in my book and if you cannot get results I don't know who can. Tough it out buddy because whether it probably seems to you now that you are not making progress, your tenacity is clearly rattling the cages in Canberra from what you are sharing with us. Now is not the time to hoist the white flag, but rather the time to first calm down a bit and then go in even harder. Let there be no doubt in your mind Ben the vast majority of us are 100% behind you and proud, yes proud and appreciative of what you are doing for us. You are a true aviation hero in my book, so go get em tiger.

---

Debi Jefferson

The creation of a technical working group is just another tactical delay and to set a weight limit or make us sign a statutory declaration is exactly the same as offered at RRAus all pointless.

---

Sharon Bailey

Please ask for an interview with Graham Hood and John Larter . They have been discussing the compromises in pilot standards and Kate Anderson's lack of aviation knowledge and the medical standards that should apply. Please see Malcolm Roberts attempt to get her to Senate estimates to answer questions. She has not showed twice.

Thank you for speaking out. Please get together with Hoody and the many pilots who are concerned about the current direction of aviation in Aus.

---

Dave Berenholtz

Thanks so much Ben for you advocacy on this and so many other issues. I hope you chose to continue the fight for reasonable evidenced based outcomes. I hope too that SAAA and others support your stance vocally on behalf of all pilots.

I’d suggest that all private ops that a pilot is licensed for including, multi IFR, come under new regs in line with the data available from the FAA with their huge number of GA aircraft and many years of simple medical requirements. We have a great model already tested for us.

That seems the simple easy option for the working group to put forward.

David Evans

Dave Berenholtz the SAAA is on the current CASA TWG working this exact issue so yes, the SAAA are right behind this.

---

Normie Edmunds

If it was a CASA run meeting, on TEAMS (coz they don’t use zoom) it was probably recorded.

Sandy Reith

Normie Edmunds maybe an FOI? Wouldn’t that be something?

MTF...P2