The sexual life of the camel

Not exactly aviation related, but still..

https://www.facebook.com/jacquilambienet...798760343/
Reply

St Commode adopts NZed standards (for CVD Pilots) - WTD?  Rolleyes

Via the Fort Fumble missive: https://www.casa.gov.au/publications-and...ruary-2020

Dear crminals, peasants and fellow sinners...



A solution has been found to a somewhat thorny and long-running issue that is important to a group of pilots. The issue is colour vision deficiency and the way CASA manages safety related assessments as part of the medical certification process. Colour vision deficiency affects about 400 Australian pilots and a three-stage testing process has been in place for some time, with a pass at any stage allowing an unrestricted medical to be issued. Where all three tests are failed then a medical certificate can be issued subject to conditions.

Research in recent years has shown relying on diagnostic tests alone may be unnecessarily limiting when considering the impact of colour vision deficiency on aviation safety. Advances in technology, operating techniques and human factors training can now mitigate many of the safety risks of colour vision deficiency. Technology to assist pilots has developed significantly and the impact of colour vision deficiency on aviation safety should take these changes into account. These factors have been recognised overseas, most recently in New Zealand where a new approach to colour vision deficiency came into effect in May 2019, which includes an operational colour vision assessment. This assessment comprises a ground-based assessment and an in-flight assessment which looks at a pilot’s ability to interpret visual information. A separate assessment is done for day flying and for night flying.

We have decided to adopt this approach to colour vision deficiency assessment and in the short term we will recognise the New Zealand operational colour vision assessment as an alternative to Australia’s current third level of testing. Work is already well underway on the development of an Australian operational test for colour vision deficiency by mid-2020. Any Australian pilots who wish to use the New Zealand assessment can do so now, although it will require travel to that country. CASA has carefully examined all relevant safety issues and believes this new approach offers a practical alternative assessment for colour vision deficient pilots. We have listened to the views of pilots and made judgements based on research and evidence.


And/or via Oz Flying:

Quote: [Image: panel_colours.jpg]

CASA throws a Lifeline to CVD Pilots
28 February 2020
Comments 0 Comments

CASA has proposed a new solution for assessing the impact of colour-vision deficiency (CVD) in pilots.

Pilots with CVD have been subject to a three-stage testing process in the past, which organisations such as the Colour Vision Deficiency Pilots Association (CVDPA) have long railed against because it was purely diagnostic.

Now CASA is proposing that the impacts of CVD be assessed in flight also.

"Research in recent years has shown relying on diagnostic tests alone may be unnecessarily limiting when considering the impact of colour vision deficiency on aviation safety," said CASA Director of Aviation Safety and CEO Shane Carmody in his February CASA Briefing newsletter.

"Advances in technology, operating techniques and human factors training can now mitigate many of the safety risks of colour vision deficiency. Technology to assist pilots has developed significantly and the impact of colour vision deficiency on aviation safety should take these changes into account.

"These factors have been recognised overseas, most recently in New Zealand where a new approach to colour vision deficiency came into effect in May 2019, which includes an operational colour vision assessment. This assessment comprises a ground-based assessment and an in-flight assessment which looks at a pilot’s ability to interpret visual information. A separate assessment is done for day flying and for night flying."

The CVDPA has been critical of the Aviation Colour Perception Standard that was put in place around 90 years ago, saying the testing was "inherently flawed" and that there is now evidence that CVD doesn't impact a pilot's operational ability to the extent that CASA has presumed.

CASA has said it is working on an Australian operational assessment system, which it hopes to complete by mid-2020, but in the meantime is prepared to accept the NZ test in lieu of the third tier of testing currently in place.

..Work is already well underway on the development of an Australian operational test for colour vision deficiency by mid-2020...

Hmm..here's a unique idea why not just adopt the NZed system? And while they've got the rule books out, why stop there? - Why not just adopt all of their regs and regionally accepted/adopted air safety standards?  Big Grin 

 MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

No doubt Aviation Hearse, oops House, will pay the lost wages, NZ accommodation and flight tickets for those wishing to avail themselves of the NZ CVD tests.

Marvellous, no hint of concern about the practicalities of the NZ option, but then CASA has never had the slightest bother about costs because “we are all about safety.”

Why not the same tests here? One can only surmise that we don’t have the technical ability to devise suitable tests even with the NZ example. Maybe over the ditch they’ve got a patent on their testing regime?
Reply

Finally found one? - ie good news Oz aviation story... Wink   

Via the CVDPA (c/o John O and AP)



[Image: CVDPA_Email_Signature_v1.jpg]


 CASA changes CVD policy

Dear Members and Supporters,

 
It's been quite a while since our last update, but rest assured that work has been ongoing behind the scenes now for some time.  We are pleased to advise that these lobbying efforts culminated last week with CASA CEO Shane Carmody announcing the most significant shift in Australian colour vision policy in over three decades.

CVDPA congratulates CASA on the below announcement which finally recognises what we have been arguing all along.  Whilst it should never have taken this long and Australia shouldn't have needed to wait for the New Zealand CAA to lead the way with their changes last year, it is however a result that we are very pleased with and one which opens the door for all current and aspiring CVD pilots to reach their full career ambitions.



THE CASA BRIEFING - FEBRUARY 2020

 
[Image: 86aacb56-be6c-4f87-8d1e-fcdfb80cb8b7.jpg]

A solution has been found to a somewhat thorny and long-running issue that is important to a group of pilots. The issue is colour vision deficiency and the way CASA manages safety related assessments as part of the medical certification process. Colour vision deficiency affects about 400 Australian pilots and a three-stage testing process has been in place for some time, with a pass at any stage allowing an unrestricted medical to be issued. Where all three tests are failed then a medical certificate can be issued subject to conditions.

Research in recent years has shown relying on diagnostic tests alone may be unnecessarily limiting when considering the impact of colour vision deficiency on aviation safety. Advances in technology, operating techniques and human factors training can now mitigate many of the safety risks of colour vision deficiency. Technology to assist pilots has developed significantly and the impact of colour vision deficiency on aviation safety should take these changes into account. These factors have been recognised overseas, most recently in New Zealand where a new approach to colour vision deficiency came into effect in May 2019, which includes an operational colour vision assessment. This assessment comprises a ground-based assessment and an in-flight assessment which looks at a pilot’s ability to interpret visual information. A separate assessment is done for day flying and for night flying.

We have decided to adopt this approach to colour vision deficiency assessment and in the short term we will recognise the New Zealand operational colour vision assessment as an alternative to Australia’s current third level of testing. Work is already well underway on the development of an Australian operational test for colour vision deficiency by mid-2020. Any Australian pilots who wish to use the New Zealand assessment can do so now, although it will require travel to that country. CASA has carefully examined all relevant safety issues and believes this new approach offers a practical alternative assessment for colour vision deficient pilots. We have listened to the views of pilots and made judgements based on research and evidence.


Best wishes
Shane Carmody



FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

CVDPA is expecting CASA to publish further detailed information on their website shortly regarding these changes, however in the interim, the below summary provides an idea of what can be expected based upon the discussions that we have been having with them in recent weeks.

What do the changes mean for the current CVD restrictions?
 
There are currently several groups of CVD pilots:

-  Those who have passed previous CVD tests;
-  Those who have failed CVD tests prior to the 2014 changes and have some restrictions;
-  Those who have failed CVD tests since the 2014 changes.

Any pilot who has passed a CVD test (including the previous control tower signal gun test) in the past should have no restrictions on their medical and this situation remains unchanged.

Pilots who held a medical pre-2014 but who have failed the various CVD tests will likely have medical restrictions (1) not valid for ATPL operations and (2) holder does not fully meet requirements of ICAO Convention Chapter 6 of Annex 1 (which prevents international operations).

Newer pilots who have received a medical post-2014 have been issued with severe restrictions including the two mentioned above + (3) Limited to flights by Day Visual Flight Rules only.

CASA have agreed with us that the more recent restriction limiting flights to 'Visual Flight Rules only' is unnecessary and that Instrument Flight Rules operations should not be prohibited.  As a result, restriction (3) will be amended to simply 'Not valid for night flying' until the OCVA  night component is passed.

What will the new testing process be?

The testing will continue to follow the three tier testing process as per CASR 67.150 (6), with the operational colour vision assessment (OCVA) replacing the CAD as the third level test:

(a)  Screening - Ishihara;
(b)  Clinical - Farnsworth or CAD;
©  Operational - OCVA (day and night).

If I pass the OCVA, will I have any medical restrictions?

A pass in any of the above tests (including the OCVA) will result in the removal of ALL restrictions and a clean medical certificate will be issued allowing full ATPL / Day / Night / IFR and international flying privileges.

When will the OCVA be available in Australia?

As mentioned in CASA's announcement, it is anticipated that the OCVA will be available at locations around Australia by mid-year, once the various flying schools and instructors/examiners have received training in how to conduct the assessment.

How do I arrange to complete an OCVA in New Zealand if I don't want to wait until mid-year?

The New Zealand CAA website has a significant amount of information available on how the assessment is conducted, including various guides for candidates as well as assessors.  The published guidance material makes it clear that the assessment is not to be a "colour naming" exercise, but rather an assessment of ability to correctly interpret the meaning of information conveyed by charts, instruments or lights and to assess terrain conditions or obstructions as presented in an operational environment.  As such, we would recommend that candidates have at least some flying experience prior to undertaking the OCVA.  Please refer to the New Zealand CAA website link below to review all the information prior to contacting one of the approved OCVA assessors to arrange for an assessment.


New Zealand Civil Aviation Safety Authority | Colour Vision Assessment

Please note that Australian pilots wishing to undertake this assessment are not required to obtain a New Zealand licence or medical.  You will be required to present the assessor with a form of photographic identification and a copy of your CASA licence/medical which shows your present restrictions. The OCVA assessor will complete the relevant form and the candidate then provides a copy to CASA upon return to Australia at which point an unrestricted medical certificate will be issued.



MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Via Sandy off Facebook: ref - https://www.facebook.com/sandy.reith.31?...ZflVgmjZrX

Original post: 


Quote:Sandy Reith
31 July · 


My GP passed me fit to drive heavy vehicles commercially, ie buses or trucks two years in a row so I could fly on a Basic Class 2 (restrictive private flying medical certificate).


CASA’s AVMED section stopped that certification avenue on a technicality (curative operation 18 years ago) and invited me to undertake a full blown CASA type medical, standard private flyer Class 2.


Notwithstanding CV19 I’ve had to make trips to Geelong for medical testing that was not medically indicated and therefore not Medicare applicable.


Due to some unavoidable circumstances, including having to make appointments with a CASA accredited doctor, all this has taken several months, not allowed to fly my own plane.


I have passed all tests and the results were sent to AVMED last Tuesday week. I rang AVMED last Tuesday to inquire when can I expect my certificate, no news to date.


This whole saga is completely without rational basis, there is no safety case. There are several thousand low weight category pilots flying who do not require any medical examination, simply self declaring fit to drive a motor vehicle.


I have been denied my right to fly for no good reason, spent upwards of $800 and many hours for no good reason.


The Morrison government talks “red tape reduction,” but it is apparent, so far, that it doesn’t have the willpower to take on the entrenched bureaucracy particularly in the ever increasing number of virtually unaccountable independent Commonwealth corporate administrators and regulators.



Some comments in reply:

Mike Smith I'd love to think the government would seek to appoint a new Director of Aviation Safety with a mandate to remove red tape. The economic fall-out from the Covid-19 pandemic should spur governments to encourage industry growth through reduced bureaucracy.




William J Hamilton Folks, The CASA "driver's license medical" is the driver's license medical you have when you are NOT having a driver's licence medical --- in total contrast to the FAA scheme --- which was, after all, modelled after the Australian (then) AUF, now Recreational Aviation Australia system, as the original precedent. But with FEWER restrictions. In short, the CASA "driver's license" medical was never intended to work, as Sandy and many others have found out. The answer, standardise on the long proven ( 40 years??) AUSTRALIAN non-CASA aviation medical system for all private operations and instructional flying.???

And a recent Sandy response;

Quote:Sandy Reith By dint of spending the whole day on the phone to AVMAD and others, plus a dash into Colac for one last completely unnecessary piece of paper, my Class 2 finally arrived. I will thank the AVMED officers who took my several calls because they kept their cool and listened politely to my numerous points, at length, about the obvious faults and the bad consequences of the present CASA policies, even in other areas such as the destruction of flying training and disincentives to gain or maintain the IFR rating. One of them agreed that the risk to the general public of a medical incapacity was probably worse on the roads than that occurring to a pilot in flight. However she offered the thought that CASA was protecting the pilot who can’t ‘pull over’ like a sick car driver. This seemingly plausible argument falls apart when one notices that around 10,000 RAAus pilots have been self declaring for more than 30 years, no problem. Similarly the USA private pilot standard, which sensibly allows IFR, no problem, actually that USA reform brought around 17,000 pilots back to flying GA and is recognised as a real success and boost to GA.

Come on you CASA people, it’s not hard, put your country and fellow Aussies before your power games, egos and ladder climbing by being the harshest and most unrelenting GA basher. You could start tomorrow introducing easy medical reforms, independent instructors same as USA, and stop Cessna SIDs. Then get your Minister to rid us of the useless and extremely costly ASICard ($283 every two yrs) or at least make it valid for longer periods for good behaviour or years of industry participation or additional qualifications like instructor ratings. This would put incentives into the system. Another, buy a plane and get say five years between check flights. Get instructor rating and never have to do another.

We must have reforms now, urgently.

Finally to you RAAUS people don’t think this doesn’t matter much to you. If you are stuck with 600 or 750 kg and the rest of GA virtually dies, you will never fly charters or IFR or take your growing family with you. You will find it impossible to progress and no doubt as VH ends up in the tip CASA will come after your dollars with it’s fee gouging ways plus submerge your ops with thousands of pages of regulations all inappropriately migrated into the criminal code with strict liability for ease of prosecution just the same as current VH. GA. Cheers!


MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Via AOPA Oz: Dr Rob Liddell (Avmed legend) nails it! -  Wink 



[Image: AATXAJwC4uHcrAwW4YKbkCCcr-imhCn2M_Z0Fnre...f-no-rj-mo] AOPA Australia
143 subscribers


DR ROBERT LIDDELL:  WHY CASA MUST CHANGE
AOPA AUSTRALIA FACEBOOK LIVE - TUES, 6TH OCT, 7PM AEST

Join the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia for an open and candid conversation with former CASA PMO, Dr Robert Liddell, about his experiences working as the Principal Medical Officer, andwhy CASA must change if the aviation industry is to move forward.

THIS WEEKS PANELISTS
- Mr Benjamin Morgan: AOPA Australia CEO
- Dr Robert Liddell:  DAME and Former CASA PMO
- Dr Sean Runacres:  DAME, Aircraft Owner and Pilot

JOIN IN THE DISCUSSION - LIVE
AOPA Australia invites you to post your comments and questions during the live panel broadcast.

POST YOUR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
AOPA Australia invites our members and industry supporters to post questions and comments during the broadcast.  Please refrain from using abusive language and/or personal attacks.

NOT A MEMBER?  WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT!
Join today:  www.aopa.com.au/membership

AOPA Australia | Your Freedom to Fly


From 23:40 :-


And for comments check out AOPA Oz on FB: https://www.facebook.com/AOPAaustralia/v...029028072/


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Aviation Medical GOOD NEWS stories... Big Grin  

Via AOPA Oz:


Quote:NEW ZEALAND CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY DELIVERS PPL DRIVERS LICENCE MEDICAL

March 9, 2021 By Benjamin Morgan

[Image: New-ZealandAviation-800x500.jpg]

The New Zealand Civil Aviaiton Authority has announced that it will deliver a cheaper and more accessible aviation medical, based on a drivers license medical standard for Private Pilot Licence holders, coming into full effect 5th April 2021.

New Zealand PPL holders flying with the new DL9 medical can;
  • Fly single and multi-engine aircraft up to MCTOW not exceeding 2,730kg

  • Fly with a maximum of 5 passengers, unless performing aerobatics

  • Perform solo aerobatic maneuvers above 3,000ft

  • Operate into and out of controlled airspace

  • Fly pressurised aircraft up to 25,000ft

  • Fly at night within 25nm of a lit aerodrome

  • Perform helicopter sling loading operations

  • Perform banner tow operations not below 500ft

  • Perform parachute drop operations not exceeding 10,000ft AMSL

  • Perform drogue tow operations not below 500ft

In introducing the new drivers licence medical standard for PPL holders, the NZ CAA has moved to revoke the Recreational Pilot License (RPL) from New Zealand aviation regulations.  Curernt holders of a NZ CAA RPL will instead be issued with a PPL.

AOPA Australia has today written to the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority seeking further information on this important announcement, the association has also reached out to AOPA New Zealand, which we hope to interview in the coming week.

Civil Aviation Authority’s acting Licensing and Standards Manager, David Harrison, says these changes help reduce a significant cost barrier for pilots and bring New Zealand broadly in line with other international aviation authorities.

“Private pilots have been calling for the CAA to adopt an alternative PPL medical standard for some time now. We have listened carefully, consulted widely and have concluded that we can make these changes without adding any unacceptable risk for New Zealand’s aviation system,” Mr Harrison said.

“Most pilots will be able to get a DL9 medical from a local medical practitioner, such as their family GP, and unlike class 2 medicals there will be no CAA charges involved.

“These changes will be welcome news for the approximately 5,500 pilots flying recreationally in New Zealand with a class 2 medical.

“They will also lower barriers to entry for any individual who wishes to become a pilot.”

KEY INFORMATION ABOUT THE NEW ZEALAND PPL DL9 REFORM:
  • From 5 April 2021 private pilot licence holders will be able to fly on a DL9 driver licence medical, provided it is current and they have supplied this to the CAA.

  • Amendments to the Civil Aviation Rules were signed by the Minister of Transport in mid-February to enable these changes to occur.

  • The recreational pilot licence category (which allowed pilots to fly on a DL9 but with substantial restrictions) will be revoked, and licence holders will be issued with a PPL.

  • There are 195 pilots in New Zealand with an active recreational pilot licence who will be issued with a PPL. Of these pilots, 178 have a licence to fly an aeroplane and 17 to fly a helicopter.

  • As of 3 March there were 5,529 pilots in New Zealand with an active class 2 medical, including more than 3,500 pilots who hold commercial or airline pilot licences but who are flying only recreationally these days.

  • Pilots flying on a DL9 medical will still need to meet all the other conditions of their licence. These include:
    • Having a flight check with an instructor every two years;
    • Having safely conducted three take-offs and landings in the last 90 days if they are going to carry passengers.

MORE INFORMATION
https://www.aviation.govt.nz/about-us/media-releases/show/New-medical-standard-to-make-flying-more-accessible
https://www.aviation.govt.nz/licensing-and-certification/pilots/pilot-licensing/ppl-privileges-by-type-of-medical-certificate/

Plus via the CVDPA: https://www.facebook.com/ColourVisionDef...sociation/

Quote:Colour Vision Defective Pilots Association (www.cvdpa.com)

9 January

We are pleased to advise that CASA have recently completed training for the OCVA assessors in Australia and a list of approved persons who can provide testing is now available on their website.  We understand that CASA is still finalising the assessment form and associated guidance material, which should be published in the coming weeks.  In the meantime, we encourage you to reach out and make contact with one of the assessors in your area to make a booking.  Once the OCVA is passed, you will be eligible to receive an unrestricted Class 1 medical!



Colour Vision Defective Pilots Association (www.cvdpa.com)

28 January

With the OCVA now finally available in Australia, here’s some feedback from a candidate who recently successfully passed the assessment:

“Well I recently completed it and passed it with flying colours. I have just received my medical with no restrictions on it and I am over the moon. Funny how I had 3 doctors basically tell me to quit because I could never hold a class 1 or ever get a decent job.

I just want to say thanks to you for showing me the way and giving me advice for this test. I just wanted you to know so you can tell fellow pilots to never give up on their dreams despite what others say.”

Contact one of the assessors listed on the CASA website to book your assessment today!

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Why 'we' never win at Rugby.

Did you ever wonder why that is so; or, even why the world and it's wife thinks beating the All Blacks at rugger is a prize to be valued? The answer of course is a simple one; they stick to first principals.

They have applied that straightforward, no bull principal to their aviation industry. Long have they been the envy of the world; even the FAA is actively parring down the verbiage in their own, first class regulatory system to make 'simple' to comply; and their rules and system is a world leader – go figure. Seriously, the stress, strain and responsibility a PPL on 'private' operations in nowhere near the 'legal' load a skipper of a 'commercial' operation (and size don't matter in this instance). Once again, the Kiwi's show they way. Bravo, well done and probably a big thanks from the national PPL cohort.

Then, we must pay tribute the John O'Brien and Arthur Pape, and all those who have patiently, determinedly and quietly managed to clear the hurdle of CVD embuggerance. Magnificent effort; full marks and unlimited Tim-Tams. But it's a funny business – this CVD. I can pass the Ishiara test standing on my head – easy. But I was party to a demonstration by a 'wise owl' who rigged up several light sources – dark room, one chair, one book – surprise! In some light sources we are all a little bit CVD; particularly in the low voltage quasi light of a terminal; or some neon; it all has to do with 'colour temperature'.

From Wiki – and from Westinghouse – well worthy of consideration. I just wonder why CVD was 'black-listed' for so very long; I really do. No matter, well done the CVD crew. Enjoy being able to fly without restriction. It is a significant milestone and a monumental achievement.

Toot – toot.
Reply

AOPA Oz live: CASA PMO Dr Kate Manderson

Via Youtube:


Quote:The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia extends a very warm welcome to CASA’s new Principal Medical Officer, Dr Kate Manderson, who will be joining AOPA Australia for a LIVE Panel Discussion tonight at 7pm, Wednesday 13th October.

Our panel will discuss a broad range of pilot medical topics and more broadly a conversation on risk and how it influences aviation medicine.  We invite AOPA Australia members and industry supporters to join us and to be part of the discussion, by posting your comments and questions live.

PANELISTS WILL INCLUDE:
- Benjamin Morgan, Chief Executive AOPA Australia
- Dr Kate Manderson, Principal Medical Officer CASA
- Dr David Hooke, Director AOPA Australia
- Dr Sean Runacres, Director AOPA Australia

We look forward to having you all join us next week, in what we hope will become a more regular engagement with Dr Kate and CASA.

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

With respect, and welcome to the new PMO, I think we could fairly ask why do we need to discuss risk in relation to the medical standards applied by AVMED? Presumably in the context of maintaining ‘safety’ but we know this is not an issue.
    Clearly there’s no risk worth more than a passing acknowledgment. Thirty years of self declared car driver standard for the low weight category of RAAUS is proof of almost zero risk.
  But look elsewhere, NZ or the USA for even more proof that our onerous, expensive and time consuming AVMED regime is completely devoid of rationality and has stopped untold numbers from flying or pushed them into the very small aircraft of the low weight category. In many cases into arguably less “safe” and certainly far less capable aircraft of the RAAUS low weight category.
  The USA BasicMed certification, unlike our ‘Clayton’s’ version has 66,000 private pilots, and of course includes IFR.
It beggars belief that our BasicMed. by being only available for VFR, virtually encourages pilots not to fly in the most efficient, most controlled and safe environment of the Instrument Flight Rules system.
It just goes on and on, wherever you look at CASA’s micro management and regulatory overkill there’s example after example of the stifling of the individual and business destroying legal minefield that’s imposed on Australia’s General Aviation.
Barnaby Joyce has an opportunity to make himself a hero to many thousands of his fellow Australians and see a great resurgence of economic activity with GA growth.
Ring, write contact your MPs and State Senators and request reforms for GA.
Reply

You have got to read - THIS - :::Brilliant stuff, cribbed from the UP.

There is an old saying which, IMO is extraordinarily applicable to not only life itself but to the way things are. I shall quote it as I heard it " a boil on your arse is not as painful as boil on mine". Countless years of watching others basted and roasted - until - suddenly - it's you on the way to Golgotha (Calvary). Even so - No matter - Master Lead Balloon wins a Choc frog. Bravo Sir, well said, indeed.
Reply

(10-22-2021, 07:10 PM)P7_TOM Wrote:  You have got to read - THIS - :::Brilliant stuff, cribbed from the UP.

There is an old saying which, IMO is extraordinarily applicable to not only life itself but to the way things are. I shall quote it as I heard it " a boil on your arse is not as painful as boil on mine". Countless years of watching others basted and roasted - until - suddenly - it's you on the way to Golgotha (Calvary). Even so - No matter - Master Lead Balloon wins a Choc frog. Bravo Sir, well said, indeed.

Footnote to last Rolleyes 

Via RRAT 20/20 inquiry submissions page:SAR Aviation Medicine (PDF 182 KB)

Quote:I write as a Designated Aviation Medical Examiner (DAME) for the Civil Aviation Safety
Authority (CASA) under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (Cth) (CASR) 67.045. I have
worked in this capacity since 2014 and am on record as being one of the busiest DAMEs in
the country, currently seeing between 300 and 400 applicants annually. I am also a private
(non-commercial) pilot and an aeroplane owner.

In my role, I primarily see pilots (30% non-commercial, 70% commercial), but have
occasionally seen cabin crew, aviation fire-fighters, parachute instructors and air traffic
controllers. Once I have seen an applicant and submitted my findings, CASA will review the
application and make a determination on whether the applicant is fit to hold a medical
clearance.

As a comparison, when a Licenced Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (LAME) (a “motor
mechanic” for aeroplanes), completes work on an aeroplane, they sign the relevant
paperwork and the aircraft is available to fly. When I, as a DAME complete the relevant
paperwork on a pilot, CASA then reviews my paperwork and, never having met the pilot, may
overturn my recommendation, request the applicant provide more information or issue a
medical clearance.

For clarity, my role has been extended by Instrument Number CASA 26/18, dated 3 April 2018
(The Instrument), whereby I have been delegated CASA’s powers and functions for Class 2
(non-commercial) medical applications under CASR 67.165, 67.175, 67.180 and 67.195.

This allows me to make all the relevant decisions, independent of CASA, with the exception
that I cannot deny a medical clearance and if I believe that a pilot is unfit, I need to forward
the application to CASA.

CASA does not trust DAME’s with this decision making process, as all certificates issued under
The Instrument are reviewed. I have instances of my decisions being altered without my
consent, for which I do not believe there is legislation providing CASA the ability to alter the
decisions.

As a medical professional, it is the only area of medicine, that I am aware of, that a
government regulator will review and over rule the decision of a clinician working alongside
the applicant.
It is worth noting that most medical officers within CASA are not pilots and have little practical
experience in aviation.
My issues with the Aviation Medicine section of CASA (AvMed) is the bureaucratic over-reach,
with no consideration to cost, health risk and time of the applicant, for very little gain to the
safety of air-navigation. Specialist opinion is disregarded by AvMed doctors underqualified in
the relevant specialty, but “experts” in armchair bureaucracy.

I provide two examples:

Ms X
Ms X at the time (2019), was a 50yo fit and healthy female, who had held a Class 2 medical
for a number of years. She is an accomplished helicopter and aeroplane pilot and had made
the decision to obtain a Class 1 medical so that she could instruct. As a routine part of this
examination, she was required to undertake an ECG. This was sent to an eminent aviation
cardiologist who reviewed an anomaly and requested a clinical review with the patient.

Following some in depth investigations and review, the cardiologist provided the opinion:
“This is an unusual finding…. but there is no evidence at this stage of any significant
underlying cardiac disease. I do not believe that further investigation is indicated, and
in my opinion, Miss X is fit for all activities, including flying”.


The cardiologist made the recommendation for annual testing and cardiologist review.
CASA restricted both her Class 1 and 2 medical certificates, forbidding her to fly without a
qualified pilot in the aircraft and shortened her medical certificates from two to one year. In
the letter advising of this, CASA stated:

“Assessment of your application and specialist reports indicates that you presently fail
to meet the relevant medical standard and I am satisfied that this may pose a risk to
the safety of air navigation due to the risk of subtle and overt incapacitation... Your
finding of rate-related left bundle branch block carries adverse prognostic significance
including elevated risk of cardiac events and death”.


This decision appears to be based on one medical paper, which compares Ms X, a fit and
healthy young female to a 58yo female and an 80yo male, both with significant heart disease.
CASA advised the removal of these restrictions would require angiography and
electrophysiological studies. It is important to note that the AvMed doctor making this
decision is not a cardiologist.

The risks from these investigations came with an approximate 1:10,000 risk of death and a
1:2,000 risk of stroke. The case was reviewed by a cardiologist who specialises in
electrophysiology, who expressed that the extra testing was not warranted and the risks far
outweighed any potential benefits. It was only after very significant public pressure was
applied by the original cardiologist, myself and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of
Australia (AOPA), that CASA relented, accepted a CT Scan and provided Ms X with an
unrestricted, full length (two years) medical certificate. She is now too frightened to reapply
for her Class 1 medical certificate and has given up on the prospect of instructing.

Mr Y
Mr Y was a 37yo make when he first approached me for assistance. I was not his first DAME
and his first application had been refused. Following a short course of ZybanTM (bupropion)
to assist with smoking cessation, Mr Y experienced an episode of psychosis. Not being
involved at the time, I can’t be sure of the exact details, but this disclosure and a history of
drug experimentation 15-20 years earlier, appears to have triggered a cascade of events,
eventually resulting in a hair drug test.

The hair drug test demonstrated the presence of methylamphetamine at 50pg/mg of hair.

The report noted that the Level of Detection (LOD) was 50pg/mg of hair.

Interpretation of drug testing results are complicated and require a specialist training package
from, and membership with, the Australasian Medical Review Officers Association (AMROA).

There is no Australian or international standard for hair testing results, however the Society
of Hair Testing (SoHT) (an international organisation) describes that LOD is the sensitivity of
the relevant laboratory to consistently test a specified amount of substance. In this case, the
laboratory is able to consistently detect 50pg/mg of hair, ie for every mg of hair analysed, the
laboratory can detect 0.00000005mg of methylamphetamine.

However, the SoHT reports cutoffs for single use of methylamphetamine is 02.ng/mg of hair
(or 200pg/mg of hair).

Mr Y’s hair test result demonstrated 50pg/mg of hair, at the lowermost level for laboratory
detection, but four-fold lower than is internationally accepted as evidence of an single event
of drug use. In addition, no metabolites were present. In his defence, Mr Y reports he is
employed as a luxury yacht chef, that he is constantly exposed to amphetamines and other
drugs in the course of his employment, but does not use any illicit substance.

The hair test for Mr Y should be reported by an AMROA member as a negative result, and
CASA should have acted accordingly on that report.

Mr Y saw a psychiatrist who, recognising the result
as negative, made no comment on the
drug test at the time of writing a report to CASA.

CASA reviewed the drug test and the psychiatrist report and wrote to Mr Y refusing him a
medical clearance.

In the letter, CASA wrote:
  • “A hair test for drugs performed on 22 Aug 2018 showed a positive result for
   methamphetamine”
  •  “(Your psychiatrist) did not seem to be aware that you had a hair test that was positive
to methamphetamine in the report dated 22/8/2019”
  •  “I have formed the view that you suffer from a problematic use of substances and
have a significant psychiatric history, and that you therefore fail to meet the applicable
Medical Standard. You are also an unreliable historian, having failed to disclose your
medical history to CASA as well as your history of a positive hair drug test for
methamphetamine to your psychiatrist”

As can be seen above, none of these assertions are correct. Based on these conclusions, Mr Y
was declined a medical certificate and barred from reapplying for 12 months.

As discussed above, this all occurred prior to my involvement. He eventually approached me
for assistance with a new application. At this time, I explained to CASA, in writing, my concerns
with their decision and the rationale. I requested to be involved in any patient discussions
held by AvMed medical staff and was declined.

Mr Y has spent the best part of $20,000 trying to obtain and maintain a medical clearance,
based on a CASA opinion that is inherently incorrect.

I could provide many more examples!

As a medical practitioner, I can accept that people make mistakes, but these cases are not
mistakes, these are instances where AvMed doctors have brutalised individuals, for no
particular gain, except the theoretical “safety of air navigation”, which on review, was never
compromised.

As much as I, and many others, enjoy acting as a pilot, we are under no illusions of the
potential of a catastrophic outcome. Aviation is an inherently risky pursuit, whether in a
professional or hobby capacity, but CASA needs to accept that risk should be considered
against the financial and emotional burden of the decisions that have been made. There also
needs to be a willingness by CASA to accept their mistakes, and to make amends to the
individuals wronged.

I would be happy to present to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation
Committee into General Aviation, if you so required.


Hmm...I wonder why Senator McDolittle hasn't (as yet) invited submitter 56 to present before the committee? (HINT) Perhaps the committee could have a joint sitting with sub 56, Clinton McKenzie, Sandy Reith and EAA Chapter 1308??  Shy


MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

CASA promises self-declared medical reform?? - Let's do the timewarp again!! Dodgy 


Via the latest Su_Spence (bollocks) CASA Briefing: The CASA Briefing - November 2021

Quote:Work starts on new self-declared medical

Work is underway on the development of a new self-declared medical certificate for pilots.

Details on how the new medical certificate would operate are being examined by a joint CASA and aviation community technical working group.

Once the technical working group has completed its review CASA will put out a detailed proposal for broad consultation. This is likely to occur in the first part of 2022.

The new medical certificate is likely to reflect the self-declaration system used by Recreational Aviation Australia for its members. The technical working group is also broadly reviewing the current medical regulations and changes made to the requirements in 2018.

It is looking at a simplification of the overall approach to medical certification, with the intention of provided greater flexibility and less onerous processes.

Find out more about the medical regulations. 

This has sparked much comment -  Rolleyes  

Via the AP email chains:

Quote:..With the greatest of respect, nobody trusts CASA consultation to take genuine notice of advocates of reform, but always ignores proposals that are not in accord with its pre-conceived ideas, as always, dressed up in a mantle of “safety”.

And I can say, based on long experience, CASA can always be relied upon to drum up “submissions” from vested interests who agree with CASA and oppose reform.

Sometimes (as John Sharp did as Minister, followed by Mark Vaile) it is necessary to implement a policy in the face of concerted, even ferocious, opposition from “the usual suspects”.

 In the period 1996-1999, we (the Minister and his Program Advisory Panel, PAP) had absolutely no interest or intent in heeding the forces, particularly in CASA, arrayed against regulatory reform

Here, your Minister’s policy should be: “Australia, having once led the world in driver’s license medical standards for ultralight aircraft, after approaching half a century, should extend that reform to all private flying”.

After all, the FAA drew on the Australian experience with the Australian Ultralight Federation (AUF, now Recreational Aviation Australia) in its first attempt to introduce a “driver’s license” medical. This proposal failed, not on “safety” grounds, but as a result of US aviation medical examiner associations lobbying DoT and “on the hill”.

The second time around, the lobbying effort of the likes of AOPA US and EAA defeated the doctor’s lobby.

Opposition to reform all about vested interests, dressed up as “safety”.

We should lead, not wind up with some “negotiated” result, which is a bit of what the US has done, a bit of what the UK has done and a bit of what we do here, already.

It should be just the national standard for a private motor car, with no fiddling by CASA,  and apply to all aircraft under 5700 kg, with no artificial limits. There is absolutely nothing in the statistics to justify multi-engine, IFR or airspace limitations (GFA pilots are not limited to Class G, are they?).

You may or may not be aware, but the FAA has a vast library of data on pilot medicals (mostly available on-line) and operational risk (I do not like the word “safety”, it is emotional, and without dimension) outcomes.

The bottom line: there is little to no correlation between air-safety outcomes and the medical certification status of the pilot. After all, pilots self-certify every time they go flying.

Time for action and concerted political direction, and your Minister is just the person to do it!...



...CASA making rules that determine CASA’s own functions and powers under those rules is fundamentally flawed regulatory model.   It’s a process affected by emotion, cognitive bias and vested interests, heavily disguised under a cloak of safety sophistry...



...Referring to the link for the medical Technical Working Group in your first email the following is the list of that group:-
  • Peter Antonenko  (I believe is a psychologist)
  • Dr Priti Bhatt
  • Dr Ian Hosegood
  • Dr Anthony McCarthy
  • Mr John Raby
  • Dr Jeremy Robertson
  • Dr Sara Souter
This Group was initiated, according to the website link in December 2020, with view to:-
  • • provide industry sector insight and expertise for the analysis and review of Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 67
  • • evaluate the discussion paper on Part 67 to ensure it will achieve the outcomes of the review and reflect current practices in aviation medicine.
(To be passed on to the ASAP group.) 
Industry insight?  With a preponderance of those clearly with vested interests the notion of “industry sector insight” is preposterous, unless it speaks of the medical industry. 

I agree fully with XXXX's (the above) assessment. There is no need for more consultations when the overwhelming evidence from some thirty years local experience of the self declared driver licence standard, and the overseas examples, are proof that this reform should not wait. The TWG has had nearly twelve months, asking for yet more time is not on. 

The existing Basic Class 2 could and should be modified immediately to car driver standard even if keeping some of its other pointless and undesirable conditions, like no IFR, in place for the time being. 

This would be hugely popular with practically the whole of the GA community and reflect very favourably on the Minister, who should back this reform now.

There’s no reason for any delay which will be seen as delay for the sake of putting off a decision which can then be lost in the heat of an election and the possibility of a change in government. 

Most of the General Aviation community will see delay as just another excuse for no action. 

We need to be frank because the stakes are higher than ever as the industry is going downhill.  We are losing aviation businesses, skills, manufacturing, flying schools and charter operators. Aircraft are being exported and maintenance personnel are dropping out with no replacements. To make matters worse key GA airports are being lost to non aviation uses. These matters need attention and correction urgently. 

What’s happening is bad for Australia...



...CASA is asking us to prepare for the consultation about the medical reform. This is a total nonsense, most of what is needed for reform was accepted by government out of its 2014 Forsyth report but never implemented, including the recommendation to delete the ASIC. There is no safety case against the proposed medical case, there are many years of studies and experience, including many years of RAAUS which is conclusive to make this reform immediately. The only opponents will be those with vested interests, a handful of medicos might object along with AVMED and perhaps, but hopefully not, the management of RAAUS. The latter because it will assuredly lose some members. 

Timing, well guess what? Election frenzy will provide CASA with the cover and comfort to put off the evil day of reform. Why? Simply because one reform might well lead to others which will lead to loss of power, influence and money. GI (Government Industries) will be upset. It’s still war and Can’tberra’s proposed minor strategic retreat will not be welcomed in the Public Sector, that which used to be known as the Public Service...

MTF...P2  Tongue

ps Referring to the Pip piffle (caution vomit bag may be required -  Confused ), I note that on the one hand PS indicates that CASA are there to assist...

Quote:..I want to thank everyone who has been working through the transition steps and reassure organisations that may be behind their schedule that we will assist you to finish the necessary tasks...

..However in the next breath PS indicates that CASA have effectively knocked off for 2021...

Quote:..Finally, as this will be the last CASA Briefing for 2021, I want to thank everyone for their ongoing commitment to safety during what has been a stressful and challenging year. Despite the COVID disruptions, you have continued to put safety first and you should be proud of that achievement..

...which kind of makes it hard for small aviation businesses, operators etc to get some form of CASA assist till at least the 1st week of 2022 -  Dodgy

Ah yes the fantasy world (underneath the Can'tberra bubble) has once more been inflicted with the AIOS disease.. Angry (Ref: AIOS - & the 21st Century??)

[Image: DqGZMEzU4AAP22L.jpg]
Reply

Ms. Spence quoted here:-
“… organisations that may be behind their schedule that we will assist you to finish the necessary tasks...”
Should have said “unnecessary tasks,” because CASA has piled on a mountain of paperwork that only detracts from running a viable General Aviation business, and detracts from safety. Not only the paperwork but all the fees that CASA gleefully charges it’s helpless victims.

Sorry to say but Ms. Spence has been in the job since May 17th and there’s not been one substantive reform put in place that would give GA a shot in the arm. And Glen Buckley has been palmed off to the Ombudsman instead of CASA reviewing and correcting it’s own actions.

And nothing from the Board of CASA, which is no surprise because it’s never made a real move since inception and might as well not exist, and nothing from Ministerial Joyce.

She’ll be right mate, Chrissy and off to the beach.
Reply

"She’ll be right mate, Chrissy and off to the beach. "

......and then after Chrissy, the Government calls an election for May..

....and Shazam! The minute the election is called, the public service and CASA goes into caretaker mode - no new policy decisions are made.


All work on 760 kg and a new medical standard stops instantly.

A new Minister might decide to continue, but if its labor and the greens in coalition now in Government you can forget any reform at all, indeed the reverse will happen because we are petrosaurs (petrol eating, polluting dinosaurs to be eliminated)

Game set and match to CASA management.

Alternatively lets set up some legally logical but impossible regulations eg:

- A drivers licence medical available only to those whose doctors will attest that they are unconditionally healthy...oh wait!

- A 760 kg MTOW provided the aircraft is weighed before every flight.
Reply

"....and Shazam! The minute the election is called, the public service and CASA goes into caretaker mode - no new policy decisions are made."

Wombat. Spot on - and it is a very real worry; seen it all before. There has been some excellent work 'lost' during the 'care-taker' stand down, never to resurface under a change of government. Undeniable historical fact.

There are a few things Joyce could make happen, there's still a little time - we hear the interest is there; but the countdown clock is ticking. From about this coming weekend, virtually nothing happens except the great eight week lay off. It's a fair bet that what with the pandemic and all, there will be a lot of folk looking to just get away from it all, find a beach and a cocktail (or three). Been a hellish year.

So, nothing will even be considered until the end of January; election mode to follow (cringe) - then by the time the elected find their way to the exec dunny and the aides work out how to work the tea pot, it will be another six month drifted away, nothing changed and the salaries regularly paid to those who have managed to find a safe haven in the great tax payer funded bubble. Unless Joyce cracks the whip and initiates 'digit extractus' and makes the simple things happen. 'K's' tote board has some 'interesting' options -
Reply

Will BJ's COVID increase or decrease the very slight chance, hope might be a better word, of providing an SOE directive to CASA this side of never, dare the impossible hope, even before Christmas?

I predict that Minister Joyce will not make a move at all unless confronted with a concerted attack by the media about the mess he is presiding over. There’s one issue that might possibly do the trick, the unjustified and abominable treatment of Angel Flight. If this, and the Glen Buckley debacle, were to get good coverage, especially via TV, then maybe some action. Not likely but possible.

Maybe in isolation he'll have time to reflect on the wreckage that the Parliament has inflicted on General Aviation this thirty three years of disastrous incompetence, unworkable rules and swingeing fees via it's experimental, no oversight creature the misnomered Civil Aviation Safety Authority. Misnomered because 'safety' is the least important factor in CASA's reality, in spite of it being the most repeated word.

'Safety',' a concept of many unquantifiable parts, it's continual use is to frighten Parliament into acquiescence and provide the excuse for a vast system of control backed by having the most minute transgressions inappropriately migrated into the criminal code with strict liability for ease of prosecution.

All of which gives reason for huge salaries, splendid superannuation plans and great working conditions.
CASA, a make work fee gouging salary factory par excellence.

Well done Parliament, you’ve thrown the Westminster system of Ministerial responsibility into the waste bin. The non accountable independent corporate regulator is a failed experiment that does not and cannot work in the National interest.
Reply

Via AOPA Oz on Youtube: 

(From start to about 30:00 minutes)

Quote:

AOPA AUSTRALIA | LIVE - TONIGHT 7PM
DR KATE MANDERSON, CASA PMO


Join the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia as we catch up with CASA PMO Dr Kate Manderson, discussing COVID-19 and it's impact on private pilots and the upcoming pilot medical reform public consultation.

OUR PANELISTS TONIGHT
Mr Benjamin Morgan, AOPA Australia CEO
Dr Kate Manderson, CASA PMO

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

Dr Kate Manderson, CASA PMO

Wow! what a breath of fresh air. This practical, intelligent articulate lady has done more good for the CASA relationship with industry during the 12 minutes of the 30 minute segment (where she could get a word in) than any one person who has spoken on behalf of the regulator in the last decade. Bravo, well done and thank you.

IMO Morgan missed a perfect opportunity gifted to him in the first few minutes; Doc Kate mentioned 'complex process' - a perfect opening to discuss 'why' the CASA medical approval process has become so hidebound and complex; it opened up an avenue for a look at why so many cases need to be resolved through the AAT; there was scope to discuss why 'expert' advice was so often discarded. Doc K opened the door a crack - Morgan missed it.

I hope the discussions on an App, Covid and common sense accurately reflect a new, very welcome broom sweeping away the dust and spider webs within the Avmed department. We can only hope that the necessary support, funding and cooperation is provided to the good Doc.

Toot - toot.
Reply

Chocfrog to Doc Kate!  Wink

(01-18-2022, 06:51 AM)Kharon Wrote:  Dr Kate Manderson, CASA PMO

Wow! what a breath of fresh air. This practical, intelligent articulate lady has done more good for the CASA relationship with industry during the 12 minutes of the 30 minute segment (where she could get a word in) than any one person who has spoken on behalf of the regulator in the last decade. Bravo, well done and thank you.

IMO Morgan missed a perfect opportunity gifted to him in the first few minutes; Doc Kate mentioned 'complex process' - a perfect opening to discuss 'why' the CASA medical approval process has become so hidebound and complex; it opened up an avenue for a look at why so many cases need to be resolved through the AAT; there was scope to discuss why 'expert' advice was so often discarded. Doc K opened the door a crack - Morgan missed it.

I hope the discussions on an App, Covid and common sense accurately reflect a new, very welcome broom sweeping away the dust and spider webs within the Avmed department. We can only hope that the necessary support, funding and cooperation is provided to the good Doc.

Toot - toot.

2nd the "K" BRAVO sentiment: Many would say that actions speak louder than words, the following from Avmed central 2 days ago suggest that the good Doctor is actually going to ACT on her words... Wink



Date: 18 January 2022

Use our checklist to assess when and how you can return to aviation activities.
[Image: avmed-latest-news.jpg?h=def3cf70&itok=LkqXPfzK]

Quote:COVID-19 self-assessment checklist

We’ve published information to help you work out whether you are fit to return to work after COVID-19 illness.

Use our self-assessment checklist after you have recovered from COVID-19 to help identify:
  • whether you can go back to aviation activities
  • whether you will need further follow-up and support.

If you answer no to all of the questions, you:
  • can return to your aviation duties
  • do not need to be reviewed by a Designated Aviation Medicine Examiner (DAME)
  • must continue to follow the relevant public health orders for your state or territory.

If you answer yes to any of the questions, you must visit a DAME before returning to aviation activities.

The checklist also has guidance about residual COVID-19 symptoms and when these warrant a review.


Who'd have thought?? CASA Avmed actually providing practical assistance to pilots to 'self-assess' their fitness to fly after coming down with COVID? Chocfrog to Dr Manderson... Big Grin

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 22 Guest(s)