"Ah, With your indulgence M’lud".
I would like to draw the courts attention to the following paragraph:-
"As the assessment not only involves a proficiency check but ‘an assessment of the holder’s management of an unplanned weather related diversion designed to assess the holder’s in-flight command decision making’ this will involve a flight of significant duration with a diversion near a critical point in the aircraft’s flight range. It would be impractical and unsafe to conduct this assessment during actual flight so the assessment will need to be conducted in a flight simulator."
To the uninformed; this may seem like a fair and reasonable requirement, placed on a pilot. To those who understand the ‘system’ it is an unmitigated stupidity. My learned colleague will object, however, with your indulgence, I will point out some salient details, which have been neatly been brushed over in the unseemly haste to justify an untenable position.
Item 1) ‘[an] assessment of the holder’s management of an unplanned weather related diversion designed to assess the holder’s in-flight command decision making’ this will involve a flight of significant duration with a diversion near a critical point in the aircraft’s flight range.
This ‘check’ is routinely conducted as part of the basic flight test for a Private pilot licence. The PPL flight test is a ‘navigation’ exercise; the diversion is called for at the discretion of the testing pilot. At some point during the planned flight from Mud-hut to Kickatinalong; the examiner will say “OK, the weather is lousy ahead; let’s divert to Mums Farm. The candidate then is obliged to execute the diversion, in a timely manner, without compromising any of the tenets of ‘safe navigation’.
The same pilot, a little later in his training will undergo exactly the same test to gain a basic ‘commercial’ pilots licence.
Further along the road to becoming a professional pilot the same man will undergo exactly the same test; only by reference to instruments and navigation aids, to gain an instrument rating.
Even further down the road, the pilot will require an Airline Transport Licence. To achieve this, there are some ferocious, theoretical, complex questions to be answered in the examination which require the calculation of Critical (Equal) time points and complex Point of No Return (PNR) questions. These questions involve engine and other systems failures, which further complicate the manual (head scratching) calculations. These questions must be resolved, under time pressure – in short, they ain’t easy.
The rubbish at Item 1 ignores the fact that the proposed ‘checks’ have been passed many times previously as have the examinations. To add insult to injury, the proposal ignores the basic pattern of any ‘jet’ class operation – the critical areas of flight are identified, pre departure, and there are no ‘unexpected’ or unanticipated ‘diversions’. The gateways are always identified; for all critical scenarios. Release points, if you like. If AB or C happens before X then we divert to Y. If AB or C happens after X then we divert to W.
So, I humbly ask the court to consider the value of the ‘safety case’ which will be served by this proposed ‘check’; particularly as the ‘victim’ is due for a routine proficiency check, which could be observed as part of the routine check flight system, approved by the CASA.
I call bollocks M’lud, with a dash of bastardy and a spoon full of embuggerance. I ask the court to order that CASA stick it where the sun don’t shine. Thank you.
Toot – bloody - toot.
I would like to draw the courts attention to the following paragraph:-
"As the assessment not only involves a proficiency check but ‘an assessment of the holder’s management of an unplanned weather related diversion designed to assess the holder’s in-flight command decision making’ this will involve a flight of significant duration with a diversion near a critical point in the aircraft’s flight range. It would be impractical and unsafe to conduct this assessment during actual flight so the assessment will need to be conducted in a flight simulator."
To the uninformed; this may seem like a fair and reasonable requirement, placed on a pilot. To those who understand the ‘system’ it is an unmitigated stupidity. My learned colleague will object, however, with your indulgence, I will point out some salient details, which have been neatly been brushed over in the unseemly haste to justify an untenable position.
Item 1) ‘[an] assessment of the holder’s management of an unplanned weather related diversion designed to assess the holder’s in-flight command decision making’ this will involve a flight of significant duration with a diversion near a critical point in the aircraft’s flight range.
This ‘check’ is routinely conducted as part of the basic flight test for a Private pilot licence. The PPL flight test is a ‘navigation’ exercise; the diversion is called for at the discretion of the testing pilot. At some point during the planned flight from Mud-hut to Kickatinalong; the examiner will say “OK, the weather is lousy ahead; let’s divert to Mums Farm. The candidate then is obliged to execute the diversion, in a timely manner, without compromising any of the tenets of ‘safe navigation’.
The same pilot, a little later in his training will undergo exactly the same test to gain a basic ‘commercial’ pilots licence.
Further along the road to becoming a professional pilot the same man will undergo exactly the same test; only by reference to instruments and navigation aids, to gain an instrument rating.
Even further down the road, the pilot will require an Airline Transport Licence. To achieve this, there are some ferocious, theoretical, complex questions to be answered in the examination which require the calculation of Critical (Equal) time points and complex Point of No Return (PNR) questions. These questions involve engine and other systems failures, which further complicate the manual (head scratching) calculations. These questions must be resolved, under time pressure – in short, they ain’t easy.
The rubbish at Item 1 ignores the fact that the proposed ‘checks’ have been passed many times previously as have the examinations. To add insult to injury, the proposal ignores the basic pattern of any ‘jet’ class operation – the critical areas of flight are identified, pre departure, and there are no ‘unexpected’ or unanticipated ‘diversions’. The gateways are always identified; for all critical scenarios. Release points, if you like. If AB or C happens before X then we divert to Y. If AB or C happens after X then we divert to W.
So, I humbly ask the court to consider the value of the ‘safety case’ which will be served by this proposed ‘check’; particularly as the ‘victim’ is due for a routine proficiency check, which could be observed as part of the routine check flight system, approved by the CASA.
I call bollocks M’lud, with a dash of bastardy and a spoon full of embuggerance. I ask the court to order that CASA stick it where the sun don’t shine. Thank you.
Toot – bloody - toot.