RAA pilots will require CASA medical certificate under part 103?

[Bruce Tuncks]

Col, you are sure proving about how the observation about dumb people causing much more than their share of road accidents is so politically incorrect it will never be even looked at.

 

But I don't know why a plane needs a "higher " medical than driving a car.  A momentary lapse can put you into the oncoming lane with a car.

 

The only explanation could be that it take longer to get a plane on the ground than it does to pull over with a car. To me, this is a lesser risk than the first (momentary lapse ) one.

 

 

[old man emu]

I think that there have been sufficient examples of apparently "healthy" people keeling over suddenly with no prior warning which prove that meeting the standards of a medical assessment of health is not a 100% proof of continued well-being and physical capacity to operate any sort of machine. There are some things that can show up in a medical assessment which might affect the operation of machines in particular environments. Take colour-blindness as an example.

 

Is the inability to discern colour really important in operating a machine? How to colour-blind people know what colour a traffic light is? Simple answer - they learn that the top light is red (Stop); the bottom light is green (Go), and the middle light is amber (floor it!). The same with idiot lights on instrument panels. If the light is not ON - all OK. If the light is ON - take action. And how long is it since you have seen signalling lights used on an aerodrome? https://vfrg.casa.gov.au/general/aerodrome-markings/light-and-ground-signals/  The only signs I can see that could cause problems are the colours of cone markers, but, once again, a person soon learns to recognise the nuances of the red stripe on a white cone, and the difference in hue between a yellow and white cone.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Is the inability to discern colour really important in operating a machine? How to colour-blind people know what colour a traffic light is? 

 

If your radio is out or the tower has a radio failure, the Controller is going to give you a green light to land, or if there's a hazard (which you may not have noticed) a red light to go round.

 

So you need to be able to determine red from green.

 

 

[kasper]

If your radio is out or the tower has a radio failure, the Controller is going to give you a green light to land, or if there's a hazard (which you may not have noticed) a red light to go round.

 

So you need to be able to determine red from green.

 

And if you are flying an aircraft at a non-tower aerodrome - 99% of Australian Airfield’s - then this is not an actual issue is it?

 

So why not manage the issue with operational limits?

 

and FYI the 1 time I did have radio failure at a tower controlled airfield the tower made no light signals and I visually conformed with existing traffic in the pattern and reported to tower after landing.  Not in oz I’ll admit but the Uk follow the same rules on this one. 

 

I prefer to look for practical workarounds rather than putting absolute rules in place when not required.   

 

 

[turboplanner]

I prefer to look for practical workarounds rather than putting absolute rules in place when not required.   

 

No one is puttting any new rules in place.

 

 

[kaz3g]

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.

 

You can appeal but AAT is not a no-costs jurisdiction. Better to get a Specialist report and lodge through your DAME.

 

I had my medical suspended for 4 months after I feinted on the loo one night. I was pretty sure I had double dosed BP pills but they were being ultra-careful. I had a massively thorough check up by a physician and now back to 2 year class 2 at 75.

 

 

[spacesailor]

I'm ready for a new hip. All the medicals they demanded is "IMHO" unwarranted. ECG , 24 h blood pressure & heart (halter) monitor.

 

Lung capacity test with (blow hard through a tube),  Cholesterol & diabetes.. AND now ---

 

GLAUCOMA.

 

An eye test ! to go for a hip operation.

 

Good job I'm on the FREEbies list. LoL

 

And I'm Not colourblind, BUT my electrician was, All the electric heaters were LIVE to TOUCH. Blew my Metre when testing them.

 

Now I can't tell the colours of the wiring anymore.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[robinsm]

If your radio is out or the tower has a radio failure, the Controller is going to give you a green light to land, or if there's a hazard (which you may not have noticed) a red light to go round.

 

So you need to be able to determine red from green.

 

So does your drivers licence, doesn't need a DAME to verify your car licence.

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

My advice is to not tell anybody if you have a problem like being color-blind. As soon as you tell, you are making "them" responsible and of course they can ban you. But if you don't tell, then "they" are not carrying responsibility  and even if they have suspicions, they are legally in the clear.

 

Of course, you are really liable if you don't tell and then stuff up. This is fine by me. An extra incentive to not stuff up.

 

 

[spacesailor]

"My advice is to not tell anybody if you have a problem like being color-blind"

 

BUT 

 

It seems color blindness is worst than being completely blind !.

 

Blind pilot lands at mascot to civic reception, while flying around the world.

 

Beats me, must have had a very long white cane.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

I wonder what fraction of RAAus would be forced out for medical reasons if the thing actually was enforced. My impression is more than half. Most people over 70 would have something is my guess.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

And if you are flying an aircraft at a non-tower aerodrome - 99% of Australian Airfield’s - then this is not an actual issue is it?

 

So why not manage the issue with operational limits?

 

and FYI the 1 time I did have radio failure at a tower controlled airfield the tower made no light signals and I visually conformed with existing traffic in the pattern and reported to tower after landing.  Not in oz I’ll admit but the Uk follow the same rules on this one. 

 

I prefer to look for practical workarounds rather than putting absolute rules in place when not required.   

 

The one time I had a radio failure I phoned the tower on my blue tooth light speed Zulu headset and after confirming I had enough battery time I got treated like I was on the radio and got brought in as normal but over the phone. Class C at Cairns international airport. Unbelievably great service and it worked fine. 

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I wonder what fraction of RAAus would be forced out for medical reasons if the thing actually was enforced. My impression is more than half. Most people over 70 would have something is my guess.

 

Its not just the “forced out for medical reasons” it’s also those who would say it’s just not worth the extra effort and cost to jump through all the hoops to drag a pass out of the system. Probably way more than half. 

 

 

[kgwilson]

What does a high or low IQ got to do with common sense. There are plenty of people who are highly intelligent with very little common sense. Drivers with good common sense are safer than those with bugger all.

 

 

[kgwilson]

The thing with proposed medical changes and whatever is based on perceived risk which is not evidential. Where are all the RA pilots who self certify falling out of the sky? There is enough history to determine what if any issues there are. The instructor who had a seizure on a training flight in WA recently demonstrates the flaws of the medical standard that he had passed. It was only good for the time he was at the doctors surgery.

 

When the  UK got rid of medicals for PPLs (only for non EASA aircraft) they initially surveyed all pilots, then looked at causes of all fatal accidents over a long period of time & eventually found none directly attributable to medical incapacitation and only 4 that may have had an impact but there was no conclusive evidence of this. No one or organisation in this country seems to be able to lobby government or CASA for genuine change based on facts.

 

 

[spacesailor]

" Most people over 70 would have something is my guess."

 

Iv'e just turned 77, (Gee that one date makes a year's difference ).

 

I don't normally wear glasses,for driving.

 

Seems to upset some people.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Yenn]

If there was no requirement for a medical do you think that those who know they have a problem and therefore don't try to get a medical, would not just declare they are fit and go fly.

 

I can see the problem CASA has, if they relax the laws, all the problem fliers will be up there and then we will have medically caused crashes.

 

My doctor is worried that if she gives me my RAMPC certificate next year, she may be in trouble. She wants me to see a geriatric specialist. She cannot find anything wrong with me and wonders what she is missing.

 

When I get asked what medication I am on and reply "None" I seem to be considered a liar and then get asked if I am on this or that and that is for such things as having a bone density scan.

 

Maybe I will go for a class 2 next year.

 

 

[Thruster88]

If there was no requirement for a medical do you think that those who know they have a problem and therefore don't try to get a medical, would not just declare they are fit and go fly.

 

If there are such pilots hopefully they are flying single seat or with another pilot. The stats on RAAus dont show a problem with self declaration. 

 

 

[kgwilson]

Well, this doesn't seem to happen in other countries nor Australia for RA pilots who self declare that they are fit to drive a motor vehicle. In the UK they found that pilots who felt unwell or perceived they had an issue generally didn't fly. Even if you passed your last Class 2 you can still have an issue as demonstrated in WA. It is though entirely possible that a complete idiot will declare him/her self fit to fly & go for it. That possibility has always been there anyway regardless of rules and regulations.

 

 

[turboplanner]

If there was no requirement for a medical do you think that those who know they have a problem and therefore don't try to get a medical, would not just declare they are fit and go fly.

 

Ironically RAA pilots today are safe and secure within the self-stated car licence requirement, and there are many aircraft they can choose to go flying in legally.

 

Will they be overweight with a passenger and full fuel? Yes of course just the same as the next biggest and the next biggest and the next biggest aircraft where someone wants to operate with full passengers and full range flight. At every level there is a flight planning compromise to be made which can usually be fixed by dropping 1 passenger or shortening the legs for more fuel stops.

 

In this case it looks like the people who want to do this by changing the rules will certainly shoot themselves in the foot and get a taste of the tougher standards in GA, and as someone said, that might knock out half the pilots, leaving a very small rump of 760 kg pilots and a hopelessly small market for some of the people who, it has been suggested want 760 kg so they can import and sell bigger aircraft.

 

When people push for changes like this, and in such a sloppy unprofessional manner, mistakes can happen, misunderstandings can occur, and it wouldn't be the first time that a group of people were left outraged and being squeezed out of their comfort zone and into an unworkable mess, only to be told "That's what your organisation campaigned for; that's what you got."

 

 

[turboplanner]

If there are such pilots hopefully they are flying single seat or with another pilot. The stats on RAAus dont show a problem with self declaration. 

 

It's a grey area. There are plenty of people who are incapacitated without any prior warning. Stroke/heart attack fit ito that category.

 

There are also plenty of people who die suddenly, but either were told they needed corrective action by their doctor, or knew what the problem was and thought they'd go to hospital "if the pain got really bad"

 

I had an experience with a race driver dying on the track in front of me. He really wanted to win, and before the race had told me he'd had another driver test the car and it was right up to speed, so tonight he was going to have to put the pressure on himself to do better, and he did, getting up to the front of the field, but then down went his head and the car rolled to a stop with him dead. He and the family knew he had a heart problem.

 

I've been involved in other high risk situations where the driver/pilot has been found to have had a heart attack, but it's not clear whether the heart attack caused the crash or the crash process caused the heart attack.

 

The stats on RAAus aren't released so we don't actually know whether there's a problem or not, but plenty of aircraft have gone down out of control over the years.

 

The solution in the past in motor racing has been for a person to  hand over the organisation's Medical Form to a doctor of his choice, who then tests him in accordance with the form.  The Doctor is not pronouncing him safe to fly, just providing the result for each test, so the Doctor's liability is no different to you or I just asking him for a check. The temptation for the person being checked to not report, or provide misleading information is greatly reduced also.

 

However, as I said earlier, we are not being asked by CASA to come up with new medical standards.

 

 

[spacesailor]

"When people push for changes like this"

 

I would like a change too !.

 

Put back the clock on 95-10 lightweights, I think it's the only group that has that "WING LOAD" factor .

 

WHY.

 

it's not improved the safety  of any aircraft, merely the opposite. by making the airframe lighter, to comply with bureaucracy.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[kgwilson]

CASA seems to have more of a problem with controlled airspace so self declared fit RA pilots are excluded. If they have a class 2 & are flying a RA aircraft with a transponder then that seems acceptable. I have not bothered to renew my PPL but I reckon I'd pass the Class 2 if I had to. Compared to NZ where I did most of my GA flying controlled airspace is rare in Australia. In NSW there are only 6 & 3 of these are in Sydney. There are 19 in NZ & whether that has anything to do with the more relaxed rules there I don't know. As an RA pilot in NZ you need to have an aircraft with a Transponder and a Controlled airspace endorsement & that's it. You self certify your fitness to fly. Simple & they don't have people dying all over the place just as we don't here.

 

I couldn't give a rats about the weight increase but understand it would be useful for others. My aircraft outperforms a lot of GA singles but does have some weather implications like crosswinds etc that heavier aircraft can handle & only 2 seats. In over 20 years I only had more than 1 passenger a dozen or so times when flying for pleasure. This excludes the time I was the Company air taxi taking colleagues to our other factory. It would be handy though to be able to transit through CTR & perhaps stop on occasions for fuel or food or even as a destination. I just do not understand why it is perceived as a major problem. 

 

 

[turboplanner]

It would be handy though to be able to transit through CTR & perhaps stop on occasions for fuel or food or even as a destination. I just do not understand why it is perceived as a major problem. 

 

It's not a problem; some Flying Schools operate RA aircraft in CTA, so the student is qualified before solo and the aircraft meet the standard.

 

What a few people want is to be able to do it in their non-comforming aircraft and without the training and approval module.

 

 

[gregrobertson]

I haven't contributed to this forum for some time but check it out from time to time. 

 

A couple of point I would like to make.

 

CASA's charter makes CASA responsible for aviation safety in Australia. They can delegate their authority to a third party (RAA) but they can't delegate their responsibility. So they will always set the rules for the third party. BEWARE.

 

Secondly.

 

RAA ,M&M and the RAA board can do anything they want. They know that only around 10% of members vote in board elections, which is just bloody pathetic. What do they have to fear. Until members take an ACTIVE interest they will get the management they deserve.

 

Regards Greg