BASIC CLASS 2 - PRIVATE PILOT MEDICAL ANNOUNCED!

[kgwilson]

People, this is "reform" in name only. Nothing like the UK or US, some stupid restrictions such as piston engine only and not likely to get people into aviation or keep them. It's a dud. The RAMPC will likely be abolished and the Basic Class 2 replace it. ZERO change in medical standards really and I bet it will come with a list of conditions that require you to see a DAME anyway, just like the RAMPC.Looks at this point like the RPC is exempted but I wouldn't count on that forever as Carmody apparently has asked "how come RAAus pilots can fly without a aviation medical".

Yep its an absolute crock. There is no pragmatism at all. I reckon the UK are so far ahead of us it is ridiculous. The UK CAP1397 shows what real logic is about. Below is an extract of the CAP which shows medicals are a waste of time.

a) GA fatal accidents with potential medical causes GA fatal accidents which may have a possible (not conclusive) medical cause are uncommon. Over a 10 year period from 2004 – 2013, there were a total of 151 GA fatal accidents of which 20 had possible medical causes. These included factors such as hypoxia, fatigue, dehydration, alcohol and suicide. However, there is a degree of uncertainty in these statistics as the cause of the accident is often unconfirmed and a medical cause only suspected. Given the uncertainty in the medical cause data and the wide range of causes covered, not all of which would be affected by the change in medical CAP 1397 Background April 2016 Page 8 standards, it was decided to focus the risk analysis on serious incapacitation in flight.

 

b) Third party risk History shows that the probability of a GA accident causing injury to people on the ground is extremely low. Over a 10 year period from 2004-2013, out of the 151 GA fatal accidents, there were a total of six GA accidents involving third parties on the ground. Only two of these resulted in fatalities and both of these involved third parties involved in aviation activities rather than being uninvolved third parties. There were no fatalities to a third party as a result of serious incapacitation of the pilot. This proposal has been assessed using the GA Policy Framework which is our method to assess the risk of changing regulation on third parties with no significant increased risk to third parties identified.

 

c) Risk of incapacitation in flight Consideration was given to the risk of incapacitation in flight by looking at the likelihood of different medical conditions occurring which could result in pilot incapacitation. The focus was on conditions which could result in sudden incapacitation (e.g. heart attack, seizure) where the pilot may be unaware of symptoms at the start of the flight. This is based on an assumption that private pilots do not generally take part in recreational flying if they feel unwell and this is supported by feedback from the consultation. Based on the maximum number of private pilots who could possibly take advantage of this new proposal, it is estimated that there could be a total of approximately two acute medical incapacitations events in-flight per year compared with approximately one at present. Whilst the risk of pilot medical incapacitation is increased, the absolute risk of a medically caused accident is assessed to remain very low

 

And the decision was simple

 

We will reduce the current medical requirements for private pilots, so that those with a UK Private Pilot Licence (PPL) or a National Private Pilot Licence (NPPL) will only be required to meet the Group 1 Ordinary Driving Licence (i.e. private driving) medical standard with no routine requirement to attend for a medical examination. The pilot will be required to complete an on-line CAA form once prior to the age of 70 (and every three years after the age of 70) to make a legally binding statement that they meet this standard. For balloon pilots, the same revised medical requirements will apply for the UK PPL(B) and UK Restricted CPL(B). In making these changes, we will remove the NPPL medical system. Anyone who does not meet the new medical requirements will be required to hold a LAPL medical certificate. This new more proportionate approach should reduce both the amount of time and money spent on medical examinations and tests by UK private pilots while having little impact on overall safety standards.

 

 

[01rmb]

A missed opportunity to have made a real difference as it still is more complicated than necessary. Although an improvement of the current system, if they had simply copied and pasted the UK medical requirements they could have done away with a huge amount of bureaucracy and need for CASA staff to run a system that has evidence to show no real safety benefit. The last revamp of the CASA medical questionnaire was a joke.

 

If you are safe enough to be on the road then there would be no more danger to yourself or the public in the air.

 

private pilots do not generally take part in recreational flying if they feel unwell

[Yenn]

Given that CASA is charged with keeping flying safe. No other requirements. Do you think they would have any interest is making life easier for pilots.

 

If they can stop us flying, they can prevent us from having an accident.

 

Who decides what is clinically indicated? Being over 80, I start off 5 points over the requirement for an ECG. I don't know what my cholesterols are, and my blood pressure is good, but I doubt that I could get a class 2 medical without an ECG.

 

I have no desire to fly night VFR nor on instruments, so I see the Basic Class 2 as a good thing. It will save me the cost of gong to a DAME and also paying CASA their fee, while it will do what I want. There has been no mention of aerobatics, which I have lived without for a number of years, but it would be good to fly the RV other than Straight and level.

 

The whole problem with CASA is that they are not given the same job as the FAA in USA, but the usual Australian political stuff up.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

A missed opportunity to have made a real difference as it still is more complicated than necessary. Although an improvement of the current system, if they had simply copied and pasted the UK medical requirements they could have done away with a huge amount of bureaucracy and need for CASA staff to run a system that has evidence to show no real safety benefit. The last revamp of the CASA medical questionnaire was a joke.If you are safe enough to be on the road then there would be no more danger to yourself or the public in the air.

You know that and I know that ( and I bet CASA know that ) but c'mon we all know that's not the CASA way!

 

But seriously, it seems that no matter what is proven in the rest of the world we have a system here that nurtures the demi-gods to believe that somehow we are different and we require a different set of rules.

 

But even more radically than the rest of the world - Short of a few real medical issues like frequent epileptic fits or very unstable type 1 diabetes or some ( only some) unstable cardiac issues the real world experience is that - if CASA were to be honest and open minded and if we actually started with a clean slate - the statistics actually show that we propbably actually don't need ANY medical for ANY form of licence.

 

Sounds radical but -The gut-feeling that society has that flying an aircraft is so stressful or demanding that people with underlying diseases will suddenly have medical incapacitations is actually not supported by any evidence. Sure there have been studies that show your heart rate goes up and BP goes up etc. but there is no evidence that these are actually detrimental to the kind of person who feels fit enough and interested enough to go flying.

 

RAAus and ultralight licences around the world are full of people with medical issues that preclude them passing formal aviation medicals that's frequently they got into that form of flying and there is no evidence from any country who does so that these pilots have any increased incidence of medical incapacitations over pilots with medicals.

 

I have managed the medical conditions of a number of commercial pilot over the years who I am sure have been, shall-we-say, "careful" with what they have told their DAME and they continued to fly for decades without an incident. The sky has been full of people with underlying severe disease that they didn't know about but which medically speaking must have been present for years ( because that's the known history of these diseases). They have passed their class 1 and 2 medicals and flown safely without incident until the disease was picked up -often incidentally by a non-aviation medical or when symptoms started to appear. They were diagnosed, treated and got better in the non-aviation world of medicals and as far as the aviation medicals were concerned the world turned blissfully onward as if they were perfectly well the whole told time.

 

If CASA were to adopt an honest evidence based approach I suspect we would have no medicals at all for any level except for a self declaring medical with the guidance of being safe to drive a car ( at a private car licence level).

 

But of course that's all too much to expect.

 

 

[djpacro]

CASA to introduce New Basic Class 2 Medical Standard - Australian Flying[/url] - Steve must've asked the question. You'll have to visit the USA or fly with me.

[Happyflyer]

Interestingly, the official CASA document ( Classes of medical certificates | Civil Aviation Safety Authority ) does not prohibit aerobatics with the basic class 2 medical as far as I can see. The only restrictions were weight, pax and day VFR. Now is the time to lobby CASA so aeros can be done on this medical.

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

"The gut-feeling that society has that flying an aircraft is so stressful or demanding that people with underlying diseases will suddenly have medical incapacitations is actually not supported by any evidence."

 

Not helped by Hollywood depictions of sweating pilots wrestling aircraft through the sky. The dirty little secret of aviation is that aircraft do a pretty good job of flying themselves most of the time and the decision cycle is measured in minutes much of the time, not in seconds or fractions thereof as in a motor vehicle.

 

In a car you are risking yourself and your passengers as much as you are putting other road users at risk and there is a not inconsiderable risk to innocent bystanders such as pedestrians but society accepts this (while making rules to attempt to minimise the human cost) as it would be too inconvenient and expensive to do otherwise given the huge numbers of people involved.

 

In aviation the risk to yourself and anyone silly enough to fly with you is much higher but the risk to innocent third parties is utterly miniscule. Unfortunately not very many people fly themselves (about 1 in 1000 Australians is a pilot in round numbers) and the activity is visible and not many people are inconvenienced when much stupid and ineffective regulation is imposed, so there is no effective political lobby against it.

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

Yenn, clinically indicated would be you had a heart attack, stroke or other identified medical condition.

 

I'll repeat - UNLESS CLINICALLY indicated there is no rule that over 60, PRIVATE pilots must have any extra tests. I've had 5 PPL Class 2 medicals since age 60 and no extra tests. So stop rabbiting on about the points system.

 

 

[normfox]

Yenn, clinically indicated would be you had a heart attack, stroke or other identified medical condition.I'll repeat - UNLESS CLINICALLY indicated there is no rule that over 60, PRIVATE pilots must have any extra tests. I've had 5 PPL Class 2 medicals since age 60 and no extra tests. So stop rabbiting on about the points system.

Well Mike, I guess some folk are just lucky.

I am 71 and was required to do a whole suite of tests for my recent Class 2 - ECG, blood, exercise stress, eyes and hearing. With the CASA fee we are close to a grand in fees and some medical time wasted along with the inconvenience to me.

 

Everything checked came up roses or better. The stress test concluded with "You are very good for your age" and the report stated "no symptoms or signs of cardiac ischaemia".

 

All good you might say.

 

Well not quite. I was granted a two year certificate with a requirement to do another stress test in 12 months and by the looks very 12 months thereafter.

 

Whatever the rule is, I think the CASA doctor is the ruler!

 

I suspect basic Class 2 might just be helpful to me.

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

normfox, I suspect your DAME didn't turn to the next page either. It seems to be not uncommon. One bloke I know, his DAME insisted on the stress ECG for Class 2 because he had turned 60 (no clinical indications or symptoms) and he got completely stuffed up as a result. A stress ECG in itself is a not insignificant risk, let alone the other medically induced disasters inflicted on him. Ask the folk doing it about the syringe full of adrenalin in the trolley for when they induce heart attacks in patients while trying to kill them.

 

Here's the relevant chart from the DAME handbook: https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/avmed/dames/handbook/images/avmed_reference_chart_2.png

 

Note the bottom line in the matrix. Now will you and Yenn please read this ?

 

You just got shafted by your DAME. I'd think about suing him.

 

At this time I wouldn't count on the Basic Class 2 being useful to you . You've already been tagged as needing a stress test every 12 months. I strongly suspect CASA will require a DAME visit for your Class 2 renewal as well as your current stress test regime, otherwise they'd have to admit it wasn't necessary anyway. Your annual stress tests are probably more likely to kill you than your aviation activities but that won't be an aviation accident so CASA will be happy.

 

 

[normfox]

normfox, I suspect your DAME didn't turn to the next page either. It seems to be not uncommon. One bloke I know, his DAME insisted on the stress ECG for Class 2 because he had turned 60 (no clinical indications or symptoms) and he got completely stuffed up as a result. A stress ECG in itself is a not insignificant risk, let alone the other medically induced disasters inflicted on him. Ask the folk doing it about the syringe full of adrenalin in the trolley for when they induce heart attacks in patients while trying to kill them.Here's the relevant chart from the DAME handbook: https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/avmed/dames/handbook/images/avmed_reference_chart_2.png

Note the bottom line in the matrix. Now will you and Yenn please read this ?

 

You just got shafted by your DAME. I'd think about suing him.

 

At this time I wouldn't count on the Basic Class 2 being useful to you . You've already been tagged as needing a stress test every 12 months. I strongly suspect CASA will require a DAME visit for your Class 2 renewal as well as your current stress test regime, otherwise they'd have to admit it wasn't necessary anyway. Your annual stress tests are probably more likely to kill you than your aviation activities but that won't be an aviation accident so CASA will be happy.

Ta Mike. Noted and it sure supports your argument.

I will do a bit of research on the Cardiac Risk Index. DAME thought it was pretty hard for anyone my age and above to get a low enough score.

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

norm, you are welcome but it is very clear the DAME should not be even doing the cardiac risk assessment for Class 2 applicant. How did you get to 71 and this is the first time you had to do the stress test?

 

One of the problems in society is that the law is so complex it is difficult to know what it is so when someone in a position of authority says to do something we tend to believe it. Not necessarily true and they may not even have the backing of the law.

 

 

[shafs64]

As a truck driver I like to see if I pass the new casa standard as I already the driver medical. We will see what happens

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I haven’t read the aforementioned pages. But in medical terminologies if it says “clinically indicated” without actually defining the indications then it is leaving the decision about what is an indication to the doctor.

 

In the real world, in some organ system diseases ( and cardiac system is one) age can be as legitimate an indication as any other. Especially when/if other factors are present. The more others are present the more you might correctly say that age is an indication.

 

Indicators are not absolutes they vary from being minor to significant. Even if no other factors are there age may still be a low level indication.

 

So when a dame believes age is an indication he is right - it is. Whether it is significant enough to justify the test is the question.

 

Of course if the result comes out finding a problem then iPod facto it was justified.

 

While you are correct Mike that stress tests have a risk of inducing a cardiac event the risk is actually very low. And the CASA response would be that if you did have a cardiac event doing a stress test then it proves the point you had unstable disease so shouldn’t be flying till the cause is sorted out. And despite my vehement opposition to most things CASA and medicals I probably would agree with them ( mostly) in that.

 

However I don’t think they should be relying or demanding of so many to have them. It’s pretty obvious when you sit in front of a patient from their history when they are likely to fly through a stress test test without problem. I have a mate who has to have a stress test every 2 years and always passes it. But any idiot will know he will pass it because he does heavy manual labour digging trenches with a shovel in hand every day of the week. He does his own personal stress test every day at work. CASA costs him thousands in unidicated tests as well.

 

 

[djpacro]

....... And the CASA response would be that if you did have a cardiac event doing a stress test then it proves the point you had unstable disease so shouldn’t be flying till the cause is sorted out. And despite my vehement opposition to most things CASA and medicals I probably would agree with them ( mostly) in that....

I was at an Aviation Medical seminar last year - the CASA rep said that they'd rather have a pilot suffer a cardiac event on the treadmill than in an aeroplane.

[old man emu]

BEWARE THE TROLL UNDER THE BRIDGE!!

 

 

 

Forget about cardiac matters in passing a Heavy Vehicle Driver's medical. The most common way to fail this medical is to have a Body Mass Index over 35.

 

Calculate Your BMI - Metric BMI Calculator

 

That means that if you weigh over 110 kg you are nudging the line. Then they send you off for a sleep apnoea test, which, if you are past late middle age, will show that you have a degree of sleep apnoea. Then you have to get a CPAP machine costing about $2000 and use it every night. Just in case you nod off while shooting circuits or taking a local area scenic flight.

 

 

[Yenn]

The wording now seems clear, that I would not necessarily have to do a stress test. Whoopee.

 

The new Basic Class 2 is still going to be far better for me, because I will not have to pay a DAME, nor will I have to pay the CASA fee. I will have to pay my doctor and that has been § 120 in the past. I doubt I would come out ahead if I went for a class 2 medical.

 

Maybe I will take you up on the offer djpacro, if I ever get near Moorabbin again. No desire to go to USA.

 

 

[ave8rr]

I havn't seen anywhere that CASA wont be charging a fee to process. I know they dont charge for the RAMPC. Like a previous poster said, the detail will tell all.

 

On another note: most DAME will do an ECG whether it is required or not for over 60 when doing a class 2 exam based on my expreience just for their piece of mind I believe.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I havn't seen anywhere that CASA wont be charging a fee to process. I know they dont charge for the RAMPC. Like a previous poster said, the detail will tell all.On another note: most DAME will do an ECG whether it is required or not for over 60 when doing a class 2 exam based on my expreience just for their piece of mind I believe.

Yep. The cost thing may turn out to be yet another Trojan horse.

 

Just because it hasn’t been said in black and white they (CASA) won’t charge doesn’t mean they won’t.

 

The other thing is that a GP will charge for a licensing examination - which is not rebateable under Medicare ( and a dr can be fined, made to repay and struck off if they do charge it to Medicare and it is a continuing and frequent offence). There is no “extra” charge for a DAME doing the licence exam than a GP doing essentially the same exam. So there is no reason the cost of going to a GP will be any less than when going to a DAME.

 

And if your medical condition indicates tests being done they will be the same tests as your DAME would have ordered at the same cost.

 

My own feeling is that until all doctors (any doctor) are pulled out of the loop for anything other than the initial and only exam as they are for the American system then there really isn’t a cost saving. It will be a change so CASA can say they’ve changed things, without really changing much at all.

 

We have to accept that this will be RAMPC mark 2 until proven otherwise.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I was at an Aviation Medical seminar last year - the CASA rep said that they'd rather have a pilot suffer a cardiac event on the treadmill than in an aeroplane.

Well .... yes but that’s a flippant response that carries little or no evidential backing.

We’d all also like our pilots to have their food poisoning at home and their laser strike while fixing the Christmas lights on the tree not in the cockpit. Doesn’t mean making them eat off prawns or doing the lights at home will stop it happening at work or change any risk of it happening at work.

 

The people who have events on the treadmill are always people with symptoms and plenty of evidence that have problems.

 

I have done heaps of stress ecgs ( as the doctor not the treadmiller) and the only time we had to resuscitate anyone or the few with significant events were people in whom we had a high index of suspicion before the event. I have never seen or heard of someone, locally ( although yes there are very isolated reports in the literature) with basically minimal or only age or single indications for the test being done having an major event.

 

 

[Bennyboy320]

It’s all going to be a personal choice, I’ve held a military equivalent to the class one ( A1G1Z1) & civilian class one for over 35 years, my current medical has been with a foreign authority for the last 20 years, I’m going to give the class two & CASA a very wide birth & will stick to the current self diagnose medical we have with RAAus. As I said it’s all going to come down to what suits the individual pilot, I suppose I’ll just have to remain OCTA.

 

 

[David Isaac]

It looks good to me. I have been using RAMPC for a while now. I have no doubt that I could pass a class 2 medical, but my age makes me need extra tests which cost extra money, so the RAMPC works well for me. I heard today from CASA that they expect 6 months before it is passed into law and when that happens RAMPC will automaticly become Basic class 2.That will allow me to do aerobatics and also hire a bigger plane and take more than one passenger.

Hennesy ol buddy, it is my understanding that aerobatics are not permitted under the new basic Class 2, you need to have an unrestricted class 2 for aeros ... damn it. I don’t understand that logic at all.

 

 

[David Isaac]

The biggest mistake I ever made in my class 2 medical was to be honest. I told the DAME I had 3 migraines in previous 12 months. That was the end of my class 2. I had held unrestricted class 2 since age 16, now 64.

 

 

[SSCBD]

Class 2 is a croc of ---- . CASA is just moving the deck chairs. No real improvement of the CASA culture. As stated above here, UK have dumped the requirement, so why are we so bubble wrapped. Its a joke as you can con your way to a med2 by not saying a word in fact a DAME said to me don't tell me anything I don't ask for and little as possible. But he flew, was a good guy however looked in worse shape then me.

 

It seems CASA want to keep people on the payroll not reduce overheads - sound familiar.

 

A few Commercial pilots have died in flight or taken ill WITH heart problems that never showed up on their commercial medical so who has the crystal ball?.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Hennesy ol buddy, it is my understanding that aerobatics are not permitted under the new basic Class 2, you need to have an unrestricted class 2 for aeros ... damn it. I don’t understand that logic at all.

Too many people putting in their two cents worth about what they interpret from something that has not actually gone beyond a thought bubble.

 

It seems to me the statements of aerobatics originated not from CASA but in an article by Flying Magazine. The CASA media release (which as far as I can tell has been the only word from CASA about this whole thing) doesn't say anything about it.

 

But the Flying article says two things completely unsupported by the CASA media release - firstly that aerobatics will be excluded from the basic Class 2 and secondly that non-passenger carrying commercial ops will be covered by the basic Class 2 which is not what CASA media release says at all. ( they say the standard Class 2 will be all that's required for these)

 

So I think the confusion has arisen from poor reporting in t he Flying Magazine article.

 

There is so much confusion about this.

 

This is mainly I think because everyone is forgetting the absolute fact -which is:

 

firstly this basic class 2 does not actually exist and no actual wording or even draft legislation has even been written or at least published.

 

The announcement was from CASA to say " we now have a policy to think about introducing a new version of a medical which we haven't actually written and don't have any idea what it's actually going to be. It will based on a standard which we will then modify to suit our perceptions but which have yet to be thought out. "

 

While it's fun to speculate there are people who are getting really wound up about it and talking like it exists and it's cast in stone and that it's going to be their saviour or their downfall.