RAA Medical - Proposed changes

[Vev]

I read the RAA Board email note sent out a few days ago and felt somewhat concerned about what changes might come out of these amendments... see extract below. Does anyone else share my concern?

 

Cheers

 

Vev

 

Medicals

 

In light of recent developments around the world and the resulting decisions about medical standards, the board had a discussion about the standards required for recreational aircraft. The board has agreed to develop a 'fitness to fly' document along the same lines as the Australian Parachute Federation's 'fitness to parachute' guidelines. The board has also agreed to undertake a review of the current standards with a view to creating a clearer alignment with drivers' licence requirements that are well understood by medical practitioners.

 

 

[frank marriott]

I am confident we will all regret giving total control of the board to 4 people. Greater input produces better decisions - not minority control. Expect more restrictions in the name of safety - sound familiar !!!

 

 

[facthunter]

Why not work with AOPA? I think RAAus was noticeably absent from the last meeting with CASA, There is a big risk that to get CASA off their back they will err on the "harder on US than absolutely necessary" solution. The fine balance between working in our interests and covering the need to administer a penalty situation will need scrutiny of the highest order. Nev

 

 

[storchy neil]

My thoughts are that fan ain't high enough the lack of good governance is going to hurt Neil

 

 

[Yenn]

What are you trying to say Neil? I don't quite understand.

 

 

[DWF]

I think that the RAAus constitution needs to be amended to include the requirement for a NPRM process to be followed before significant changes to RAAus rules and regs (Ops and Tech manuals, etc.) can be made.

 

 

[coljones]

I am confident we will all regret giving total control of the board to 4 people. Greater input produces better decisions - not minority control. Expect more restrictions in the name of safety - sound familiar !!!

In the olden days, the executive of 3 ran RAA between board meetings, of which there were only 2 per year.

 

 

[kasper]

In the olden days, the executive of 3 ran RAA between board meetings, of which there were only 2 per year.

And in the good old days we got drafts of the Ops manual and Tech Manual before they were imposed on us ... swings and roundabouts

 

 

[storchy neil]

As pointed out finally by president at the last two meetings I have attended mistakes have occurred in the pasted this goes directly to the top where persons who should have known failed in duty off care to follow the deed of agreement between CASA and RAA

 

I note that since another organization has been rumoured to start up all this sort messaging has started

 

In my opinion many members have continued to fail the organisation in failure to see the big picture off the writing off of RAA it will only take another please explain (yes Pauline quote) to screw us all

 

A person at Oshkosh narromine asked me about the deed I was quoting on some posts as I had a hard copy with me and asked him to read it he was amazed at what it stated of what the organisation had to follow

 

Now this deed was NOT written by CASA it was written by CEO and President as they signed it off

 

As another has said scrutiny will be at the fore frount off CASA Neil

 

 

[coljones]

As pointed out finally by president at the last two meetings I have attended mistakes have occurred in the pasted this goes directly to the top where persons who should have known failed in duty off care to follow the deed of agreement between CASA and RAAI note that since another organization has been rumoured to start up all this sort messaging has started

In my opinion many members have continued to fail the organisation in failure to see the big picture off the writing off of RAA it will only take another please explain (yes Pauline quote) to screw us all

 

A person at Oshkosh narromine asked me about the deed I was quoting on some posts as I had a hard copy with me and asked him to read it he was amazed at what it stated of what the organisation had to follow

 

Now this deed was NOT written by CASA it was written by CEO and President as they signed it off

 

As another has said scrutiny will be at the fore frount off CASA Neil

The 2IC of CASA is a lawyer. Writing turgid deeds is what they do. I expect that CASA presented RAA with a final copy of the deed with the words "cop this, sport. Sign it by lunchtime or your planes are grounded by supper!) Unless there is some bastardy afoot I would expect the ELAAA to face the same intransigence from CASA.

 

 

[kasper]

The 2IC of CASA is a lawyer. Writing turgid deeds is what they do. I expect that CASA presented RAA with a final copy of the deed with the words "cop this, sport. Sign it by lunchtime or your planes are grounded by supper!) Unless there is some bastardy afoot I would expect the ELAAA to face the same intransigence from CASA.

Yes and no.

RAAus is entirely free to not sign a deed of agreement and the outcome is we as an association do not get the CASA funding we currently do ... now given the funding is less than 1/10th the COST to RAAus of providing the services AND RAAus claim that for CASA to delveir that same service would be likely more than 20 times the money they pay us how about calling CASA on this and NOT signing up to spend $9 of member money for every $1 of CASA money we get?

 

After all do we stop being an SAAAO and being named in the CAOs because we do not have a deed? Does our Tech or ops manual suddenly become unacceptable to CASA?

 

So there you go - ELAAA do not need a deed of agreement if they do not need CASA funding - plain and simple. So no bastardry needed to cock up ELAAA on this one provided they do not need the CASA funding for their business model to work.

 

Currently RAAus need the deed as we are structured and staffed to deliver all the requirements of the Deed and the last thing we need is less cash coming in when its not as easy to shift the personnel out to reduce the costs ...

 

 

[facthunter]

Yes, we have been dudded on the dough, and I'm sure they could have been more helpful in other ways too. Currently Mr Alec appears to be the "Chief". The legals have been calling the shots for years now. Aviation dies a slow death. Nev

 

 

[frank marriott]

In the olden days, the executive of 3 ran RAA between board meetings, of which there were only 2 per year.

Only when the other members were not prepared to get off their arse and call them to task. MAY have happened but should not have been tolerated.

 

 

[Vev]

I'm concerned this review may increase the Med standards required, when AOPA are trying to reduce standards for Class 2 Avmed. My own observations tells me the current RAA requirements seem to be sufficient, evidenced by the lack of medical related accidents.

 

I think RAA need to tread very carefully on this issue, as this is one of the key areas (reduced medical standards) of differentiation that attracts people to join and participate in aviation.

 

Does anyone know what the APF "fitness to parachute" document says or has a copy?

 

Cheers

 

Vev

 

 

[Keith Page]

I am confident we will all regret giving total control of the board to 4 people. Greater input produces better decisions - not minority control. Expect more restrictions in the name of safety - sound familiar !!!

Did not take them long, Eh Frank.

KP

 

 

[Yenn]

Keith. I like your funny statement about giving control to 4 people. Oh sorry ELAAA is 5 people. Couldn't resist!

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Short answer is that the intent of RAAus looking at health standards is to assist members to make an informed medical declaration. If you mak a false or careless declaration and are, subsequent to an incident, seen to have had a medical issue that should have been taken into account in making your declaration you risk issues with your insurer and CASA. RAAus will be the very least of your problems. Considering you probably carry liability insurance of $10 million or more, you need to be prepared to cough up a sum as large as that if you make a false or negligent declaration.

 

There is no need nor desire to change the Pilot Cert medical standard.

 

Every year I go to my GP for a thorough examination. Anyone over 55 who does not do that might consider the wisdom of their health care strategy. As one of the by-products of that examination, my GP consults the checklist for the issue of an ordinary drivers licence in NSW. He then provides me with a statement of meeting the standard required for issue of a drivers licence in NSW. I submit a copy to RAAus. Out of respect for the well being of myself and my passengers, I am very happy to go through that process.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Don I don't mind the idea of having a "guide" form with info on it BUT if changing our standards to more align with a drivers license standards (isn't that what our declaration already is?) has us ending up with anything similar to the rpl one it will be a disaster.

 

Is there evidence of this being a problem?

 

 

[Happyflyer]

I had a look on the APF web site and the only thing I could find about medical conditions was on their application of member ship form CL8 which has a Disclosure of Medical Condition section (see below). It goes info a fair bit more detail than the RAAus medical declaration and is much more specific but there is nothing in there that worries me. It may make insurers happy and could keep insurance costs down. Perhaps RAAus could have given a bit more detail in their statement to keep conspiracy theorists' blood pressure down.

 

(i) Disclosure of Medical Conditions – You warrant that you:

 

(i) are and must continue to be medically and physically fit and able to undertake and participate in the Parachuting Activities;

 

(ii) are not a danger to yourself or to the health and safety of others;

 

(iii) have not at any time suffered any blackout, seizure, convulsion, fainting or dizzy spells; and

 

(iv) are not presently receiving treatment for any condition, illness, disorder or injury which would render it unsafe for you to take part in parachuting or flying including undertaking the Parachuting Activities.

 

You acknowledge that you must, and you agree that you will, disclose any pre-existing medical or other condition that may affect the risk that either you or any other person will suffer injury, loss or damage. You acknowledge that the APF and the Providers rely on information provided by you and that all such information is accurate and complete. You agree to report any accidents, injuries, loss or damage you suffer during any Parachuting Activities to the APF and the Providers before you leave any relevant venue.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Don I don't mind the idea of having a "guide" form with info on it BUT if changing our standards to more align with a drivers license standards (isn't that what our declaration already is?) has us ending up with anything similar to the rpl one it will be a disaster.

I know of no move to change the RAAus medical standard.

Yes, it is the same standard as you need to drive a car in, in our case, NSW.

 

I guess we will have to wait and see what they come up with but like you, I have no knowledge of it being a problem.

 

I could be wrong but I'm thinking that some Pilot Cert holders make the health declaration without even knowing exactly what the standard is and may deliberately not ask their GP for fear of being given the wrong answer. I know of people who make a declaration to the NSW RMS (drivers licensing office) so that they can continue to drive either knowing that they might not meet the standard. If you have a 5 year licence and you have any material change in your health standard during the 5 years you are obliged to "self-report". Plenty of people do not do that.

 

Like you, I agree a guide would help RAAus members be better informed when making the declaration. I could see it coming out as one of the new fangled RAAPs.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Rather than more forms or regulations, how about some education? Some decent online training material would be a good start.

 

 

[DonRamsay]

Rather than more forms or regulations, how about some education? Some decent online training material would be a good start.

From my reading of the newsletter that is exactly what they are looking at doing.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

From my reading of the newsletter that is exactly what they are looking at doing.

Yep, I've been reading that we're going to get lots of on-line training for a couple of years now. The new website has been saying "watch this space" since it went live. The only online training produced is a rehash of the L1 package created a few years ago. There's heaps of great quality material available from CASA, FAA and CAA NZ. I don't know why RAAus doesn't simply post links to relevant items created by these bodies, it might just save a few lives. I started watching the RAAus video in the last news post, but gave up after the very poor introduction.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Rather than more forms or regulations, how about some education? Some decent online training material would be a good start.

You are a breath of fresh air, education and culture training. (Great to see.) I will add more - we need face to face education not news letters as Don is saying.

The case being, with reading one (student) can not always understand the gist of the exercise however with a presenter, the presenter can verify that the correct message is getting out to the pilots.

 

I am advocating sitting down face to face and getting class involvement presenting that education will develop a culture people will remember and it will go viral.

 

People (students) will give up when there is only reading.

 

What I have found when training , people do have to ask questions to confirm and verify their thought track. The other important aspect confirm that the answer has answered the question. Quite often the question we here is not the information you are being asked, just us being humans.

 

When one has achieved that -- there is your safety -- it is just a by product. So simple not SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY.

 

KP

 

 

[Roundsounds]

When one has achieved that -- there is your safety -- it is just a by product. So simple not SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY,SAFETY.KP

After a while SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY becomes BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH....