My comment to the recent LMH:-
Quote:Sandy Reith Mike Borgelt • 5 hours ago
Agree in principle with Mike but a car driver’s licence medical and self reporting (as in the USA, BasicMed) is totally logical on the basis of risk.
In regards to RAAus the CASA position of weight increase is of course logical within an illogical and shockingly wasteful framework of a split system. The great irony is that the RAAus Operations Manual that I received a few years ago was virtually a copy of that which obtained for all of General Aviation (GA) from the 60s through to the 80s. So assuming no great changes I think we can see a turning of the wheel, however reluctantly, in effect being forced on the regulator because in 30 years of attempting to rewrite, and ‘simplify the rules’ (it’s words ’89 & 2010) it has patently failed dismally.
Adding to the wreckage of GA is the Aviation Security Identification Card, only 2 years validity and cost c. $300 for what? Having held a flying licence for 50 years, and former Instructor with CASA testing approvals, I consider it an insulting affront to have my Government question my law abiding disposition with regard to me being a terrorist threat. The cost and paperwork adding to the injury. Can anyone in Government, with now the benefit of many years experience, claim that the ASIC system has prevented terrorist type high-jacking plots? Might a red card seen swinging from someone’s neck induce a false sense of security around an airport? Would it be better to keep one’s eyes open? Why don’t they have such an ID system in the home of ’9/11?
Government must act because the losses are accumulating at an increasing rate.
http://disq.us/p/1to5mh6