RAA pilots will require CASA medical certificate under part 103?

[aro]

An interesting snippet in the CASA discussion paper on 760kg. It looks like the current RAA self certification medical is planned to be replaced by CASA administered medical certificates (RAMPC / Basic Class 2 etc). The relevant section:

 

Medical requirements

 

This proposal would apply the ASAO's current medical arrangements for pilots operating aircraft up to 600 kg, to 760 kg.

 

Eventually, Part 103 of CASR (Sport and Recreational Aviation Operations) will consolidate the rules for private recreational operations including these medical requirements. Until the proposed Part 103 commences, the medical standards for Part 103 aircraft pilots including instructors will be prescribed in the respective ASAO's operational manuals approved by CASA. (Emphasis mine)

 

My reading of this is:

 

• There will not be separate medical requirements for 600-760kg aircraft
   
  
• The RAA medical standards from the ops manual i.e. self declared fitness to drive a car will only apply until part 103 begins.
   
  
• Part 103 will apply the same medical standards to RAA pilots as for the CASA RPL.
   
  
• Under Part 103 you will need a CASA recognised medical certificate.
   
  

 

[kasper]

Possibly not.

 

I agree with your reading of the CASA proposal as your first two dot points but disagree with your view on dots 3-4

 

Consolidation of medical requirements could be met with either a sub-ICAO CASA medical or by allowing the ASAOs to align their own requirements to a consolidated form between the ASAOs covering 103 ... that would currently be RAAus, HGFA and I think ASRA (though might be wrong on ASRA as have not read fully 103 proposal to see if gyros are in or not).

 

If the ASAOs have to align their operations to requirements set out in 103 on medicals ... that are the consolidation of existing ASAOs requirements ... we could well still see self declared medicals under 103 ... which by definition I suppose becomes a CASA recognised medical declaration if not certificate.

 

 

[aro]

Until the proposed Part 103 commences, the medical standards for Part 103 aircraft pilots including instructors will be prescribed in the respective ASAO's operational manuals

 

That doesn't sound like they intend that the medical standards will be prescribed in the ops manuals AFTER part 103 commences.

 

 

[robinsm]

the old saying of be careful what you wish for applies.   Could be the most important ruling as far as Recreational pilots are concverned.   This will put a crimp in an avenue for enjoying the sport if it is correct....

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

In Recreational Aviation Australia Ltd's response to CASA Medical Certification Standards Discussion Paper (December 2016 - page 13) it said:

 

"Adoption of a self-certification model by CASA would put CASA in direct competition with RAAus and create the untenable situation of RAAus having to compete with the body that controls its very existence – a conflict of interest for CASA that could have significant adverse consequences."

 

It may be that CASA could overcome this by requiring medical certification for all (despite international regulators moving towards self certification in varying degrees.) Has RAAus shot itself in the foot?

 

 

[walrus]

You had better hope that your “basic class 2” medical standard does NOT become law or RAA pilot numbers will collapse and with it your association.

 

I think it is well understood that a major source of RAA membership is previously CASA licensed pilots migrating to RAA aircraft when it becomes expensive or difficult to hold a class 1 or 2 medical certificate. RAA can research this number if they like.

 

However while you are told by CASA that their new basic class 2 is the same as the Australian truck driving standard, that’s not quite correct. It’s “based” on that standard but CASA has the same nasty twists as before which makes it far more difficult to obtain than mere self certification. You will not notice this until you read the instructions to certifying doctors and the application paperwork itself - which is not too my knowledge freely available on the web for download. You have o sign up for one of these things to get access to it.

 

Then you get to read the fine print......The doctor has to sign that she has “no reservations and unreservedly certifies” that you meet  the standard, but the whole list of conditions that make it hard to keep a class2 - diabetes, heart conditions, stents, blood pressure, etc., etc. have to be disclosed and are by definition reasons to make reservations. Catch 22.

 

To put that another way “joe blow meets the requirements but for (insert condition)” and you don’t get your certificate.

 

Furthermore doctors realise they are carrying the full legal liability for certifying you. Instead of today, where you carry the liability of certifying you.

 

Sure, there are let outs for hearing and visual standards, but that is all.

 

And the truck driving standard is harder to meet then the current car driving standard

 

 

[frank marriott]

I hope all who voted for (& gave their proxies) to M&M to allow the take over of RAA from a member organisation are happy with the direction they have taken it.  I have serious concerns for the future of RAA but I continue to see some still happy in their “private place” as unbelievable as it may be.

 

Two options :  Sit back and watch (will be too late soon)

 

         OR          Take back control (although I don’t see much action happening in that area)

 

 

[fly_tornado]

its inevitable that the RAA does what its told regardless of what the members want. the only control the RAA have is the $5 or $10 yearly increase in fees.

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

And where is the evidence basis for these changes as they seem not to be "safety related" or is the object to drive us from the skies to make room for legions of drones (acting behalf of Amazon, Google et al) delivering parcels, dinner and whatever else can packed into a pilotless vehicle?

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

You had better hope that your “basic class 2” medical standard does NOT become law or RAA pilot numbers will collapse and with it your association.

 

I think it is well understood that a major source of RAA membership is previously CASA licensed pilots migrating to RAA aircraft when it becomes expensive or difficult to hold a class 1 or 2 medical certificate. RAA can research this number if they like.

 

However while you are told by CASA that their new basic class 2 is the same as the Australian truck driving standard, that’s not quite correct. It’s “based” on that standard but CASA has the same nasty twists as before which makes it far more difficult to obtain than mere self certification. You will not notice this until you read the instructions to certifying doctors and the application paperwork itself - which is not too my knowledge freely available on the web for download. You have o sign up for one of these things to get access to it.

 

Then you get to read the fine print......The doctor has to sign that she has “no reservations and unreservedly certifies” that you meet  the standard, but the whole list of conditions that make it hard to keep a class2 - diabetes, heart conditions, stents, blood pressure, etc., etc. have to be disclosed and are by definition reasons to make reservations. Catch 22.

 

To put that another way “joe blow meets the requirements but for (insert condition)” and you don’t get your certificate.

 

Furthermore doctors realise they are carrying the full legal liability for certifying you. Instead of today, where you carry the liability of certifying you.

 

Sure, there are let outs for hearing and visual standards, but that is all.

 

And the truck driving standard is harder to meet then the current car driving standard

 

 

 

Walrus your are sort of correct but not.

 

The basic class 2 is based on the Austroads HEAVY vehicle licence. This usually costs you a 2 slot visit at the local doctor to get done and about $150. If you have any issues like CABG or stents or diabeties and quite a few other like have had cancer extra and you pass all the required physical tests you get your Austroads licence "with conditions" so your licence is now conditional. This means every year you must pass the tests to keep your licence. 

 

CASA state you can get a basic class 2 using the Austroads Heavy vehicle licence from your local doctor but if you have any conditions on it then you must go and see a DAME and he will make the determination if you can have the basic class 2 after they have checked out your conditions will not cause any unusual situations or dramas. 

 

The big thing is you are now dealing with a DAME who is a lot more sensible and knowledgable than some public servant sitting behind a desk at CASA saying yes or no. In the DAME's opinion he thinks after reviewing your tests and records that you do not present any risk then he can sign you off online and away you go. The big thing about this is it is a "proper" person making the decision and these guys are usually the best placed to make that decision.

 

I have had a triple bypass 6 years ago and a type 2 diabetic and I was issued a basic class 2.

 

I bought along my Austroads heavy vehicle licence , current stress test and other records and a blood test with the latest HB1AC results for the past 2 years and did the tests he required in his office. I have bought my HB1AC down from over 10 to under a 7 and it continues to get lower and I passed my stress test only 2 weeks before with a 97% pass mark. My current HB1AC taken just over a month ago is now 6.5.

 

The truth be known I actually know how my body responds and I am monitored every year by a cardiologist and I have blood tests every 3 months. My risk factor is most likely less than most out there flying as they actually do not know the state of their heart or their sugar/blood. I also monitor myself and any sign of any issue I go and see about it ....this is the difference between me and most.

 

I think the basic class 2 is a very good way of checking your medical as I am paying for the regular tests myself and yes this is a cost to me over a year but its part of what I normally do and I am grateful that after more than 20 years of fighting with CASA over the normal Class 2 system that finally some sense has prevailed in this area...well for people that have similar issues to me that before were just blanketed as a no prospect no matter what for obtaining a licence.

 

The DAME was not so concerned about the ticker issue it was the diabeties he was mainly concerned about and told me to make sure I keep it down and monitor it and he would see me in 2 years. I am 60 now so it will be every year from now on to pay him a visit to make sure he is comfortable with me and of course I will have all the latest tests results when I go but I am across all of them regularly so know what I have to do to maintain them or try to get those results even better

 

Dont take here say as law. Do go and see a DAME and explain it and go armed with all the latest current tests and actually let someone who knows exactly what they are doing make the decision

 

 

[aro]

if you have any conditions on it then you must go and see a DAME and he will make the determination if you can have the basic class 2 after they have checked out your conditions will not cause any unusual situations or dramas. 

 

...

 

I have had a triple bypass 6 years ago and a type 2 diabetic and I was issued a basic class 2.

 

Did you end up with a Basic Class 2 or a Class 2 medical?

 

There are certainly circumstances where you are not eligible for a RAMPC or Basic Class 2, but you can get a Class 2. You have to see a DAME and perhaps do extra tests, but end up with a full Class 2 (which can also have conditions). That sounds more like the process you went through.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Basically its pretty impossible to get a normal class2 if you have any issues at all. The basic class 2 CASA bought out to absolve themselves of any responsibility I think as it all now goes to the DAME

 

I have a basic class 2...thats all I want. It allows me to get a RPL and I have no interest in controlled airspace endorsement. I just want to fly my next build which is heavier than 600kg. Its MTOW will be 727kg so if the 760 comes in I will slot it back to RAA. I have no interest in going any deeper than that and I think you will find there are a hell of a lot out there like me wanting this 

 

 

[aro]

Basically its pretty impossible to get a normal class2 if you have any issues at all.

 

That's not really true. There might be a few things that are permitted under basic class 2 that will not be allowed in normal class 2, but there are far more that make you ineligible for a basic class 2 but CASA will let you have a class 2 after appropriate investigations.

 

Basic class 2 is not a medical for people who can't get a regular class 2. It is a simplified process (no DAME required) for people who don't need complex assessment. It's supposed to be easier and cheaper, but not really a lower standard.

 

If you have anything complex, CASA want you to get a class 2 so they can keep an eye on you. 

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

The basic class 2 hinges on the Austroads heavy vehicle medical. It is a lot tougher medical standard than a normal drivers licence medical.

 

Your GP can sign you off after the required tests for one then you can get the basic class 2 medical.

 

If you have conditions on your Austroads heavy vehicle licence then you must go to a DAME to get signed off. This avenue was never open before where you can get a doctor to make the decision not CASA if you have any conditions.

 

I wrote to CASA telling them I was going to take them to court with the equal opertunities tribunal over if I can be licenced to drive a 64 tonne B double truck through a major city I should be allowed to fly a aircraft weighing under 1500kg with only 1 other person on board outside controlled airspace.

 

I had a CASA guy from Canberra ring me after a week when I sent the letter and we had discussions about it then they told me the ins and outs of the basic class 2 and if I can get a DAME to sign me off they would be happy to issue me that licence automatically if the DAME was ok so sign off on it.

 

As I explained before this is what I did and of course I have that licence now. So there is a path for people that do have some conditions that would normally preclude you from a normal class 2 medical and normally my experience with CASA has been a big fat NO.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

My DAME issued me with a 2 year renewal on a Class 2. CASA wrote and cancelled it and issued me a 12 month renewal. They insist on 6 monthly specialist reports which my specialist says are unnecessary. Not happy.

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

The CASA guy in Canberra told me directly that if the DAME signs you off on the basic class 2 they do not interfere in any way with his decision. AKA they have shifted all responsibility to the DAME

 

 

[poteroo]

CASA Avmed have long been a law unto themselves, but are improving. 

 

In February this year, I had a pacemaker fitted to correct a missing beat in the ticker. I had noticed that my recovery from any energetic cycling was becoming slower and that I was needing a daily 'nana-nap' of ever longer time. After 8 weeks, the cardiologist checked everything and declared I was ok to go. Avmed disagreed, and insisted on 12 weeks - 'policy' they said. At the 12 weeks point, they discovered that they did not hold the original Holter Monitor data that lead to the pacemaker being required back in Feb. After much angst, it turned out to be residing in my DAMEs computer. It wasn't Avmeds fault. Finally, I had my Class 1 re-instated: and without any additional limitations. I'm back instructing in both GA and RAAus, and can fly VFR twin charter if I want.  I'm enjoying my instructing as never before - nothing like a scare!

 

It appears to me that CASA do have a 'grand plan' for 'recreational' aviation, and that it is evidenced by the converging of the RPC and RPL standards, the MTOW changes, and the medical standards.  It could end up with a stratified recreational licencing system with the medical requirements determining what MTOW is yours, whether you have CTA access, and whether you can instruct.  With instruction, I can only hope that they sensibly reduce the Part 141 requirements, rather than raise the RPC training requirements - but that's for another thread perhaps.

 

happy days,

 

 

[Jabiru7252]

Considering the stupid things pilots are doing lately, perhaps IQ tests should be introduced...

 

 

[Litespeed]

Don't give the buggers ideas

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I once read that the road toll could be reduced 90% by using IQ tests on driver candidates. 

 

This idea is so politically incorrect that of course it got demolished as racist.

 

 

[walrus]

I once read that the road toll could be reduced 90% by using IQ tests on driver candidates. 

 

This idea is so politically incorrect that of course it got demolished as racist.

 

You are completely missing the point.

 

What must be understood is that safety, like all other decisions, is about costs and benefits. You have forgotten the benefits side of the equation like most people.

 

So yes, you might possibly be right about reducing accidents but have you considered the economic benefits of car driving? No.

 

You can easily reduce car accidents to zero by prohibiting driving. The trouble is you are then faced with the massive economic consequences and costs of moving goods and people manually.

 

Use horses? They had massive costs including safety issues as well. Use public transport? Same same.

 

The free market generally works and the driving standards and technology we currently use provide something like the lowest cost option. Electric cars and self driving technology may reduce those costs again.

 

This is why CASA approach to aviation regulation is such a disaster, they refuse to use a risk management cost benefit approach, even though ICAO codified everything I’ve said in manuals, right down to the probability figures to be used as thresholds.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Well said walrus. The actual thing I read was that 90% of road accidents are done by the lowest 10% IQ wise on the road.  When I tried to check this out, no info could be found. Personally, I find it to be accurate from the few road accidents where I know the perpetrator well enough.

 

But your point about cost/benefit analysis is so good that I have to agree.

 

 

[spacesailor]

NZ had a fuel shortage, (aussie Tanker strike) The accident rate, with all behaving Nicely .was a big fat ZERO.

 

So It's not a problem for the law maker's to correct but belongs solely with DRIVERS being  good to each-other,

 

instead of "MY TAXES, MY ROAD".

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Mike Borgelt]

Oh well, it seems that RAAus, GFA etc have fallen in to CASA's Part 149 trap.

 

Once an organisation takes on a government function it becomes the government.

 

RAAus, GFA etc are in fact now mini CASA's but with "plausible deniability" by CASA when it comes to liability.

 

The rather silly and limited people, who take themselves far too seriously, running the recreational aviation organisations, have only one question for CASA when CASA says "jump".

 

"How high, sir?"

 

This is after they have sold out the interests of their members to get a pat on the head by CASA and a "good, dog, sit, have a treat" which they take as an invitation to hump CASA's leg. CASA enjoys this.

 

Looks like RAAus HAS shot itself in the foot over medicals. They should have got behind AOPA and most of the other responders, including the former CASA Chief medical Officer,  when the medical standard consultation was done instead of taking their disgusting, stupid, narrow, self interested approach. Might be smart for you RAAus members to call a special general meeting and replace the board, fire the two M's and get rid of the substantial numbers of hangers on at HQ, all of whom are costing you your hard earned money.

 

RAAUs doesn't even need to exist as a regulatory body.

 

Two small changes to CASA regs are all that is required.

 

Maintenance can be done and signed for by the owner if the aircraft is under 600Kg gross weight.

 

Pilot medical standard if the aircraft is under 600Kg is self declaration or holding a State Private Motor Vehicle Driver's licence.

 

Then RAAus can be a promotion, safety education and advisory body as well as an effective political lobby. See EAA in the US.

 

 

[coljones]

Well said walrus. The actual thing I read was that 90% of road accidents are done by the lowest 10% IQ wise on the road.  When I tried to check this out, no info could be found. Personally, I find it to be accurate from the few road accidents where I know the perpetrator well enough.

 

But your point about cost/benefit analysis is so good that I have to agree.

 

Sounds like fake news. The top 10% IQ can be as dopey as dogshit quite a lot of the time and the bottom 90% aren't much better.