docjell

Hi Don- interested in your post as an ex-GP, and now a staff specialist anaesthetist and hyperbaric medicine specialist for the past 15 years. You motives are very honourable but unfortunately there is very little to be gained from the "thorough examination" annually that is not picked up by a good history and a few very basic tests- Blood pressure, urine analysis, and perhaps a routine haematology and chemical pathology screen. Excercise tolerance is probably the most sensitive test we have- far more important most screening tests. Having said that - all we are really concerned about as pilots is the chance of sudden incapacitation as P1, and almost nothing we do as doctors can predict this. Epilepsy, unstable ischaemic heart disease, tendency to unheralded black-outs (Stokes Adams attacks) are some of the obvious "no no's and therefore reasonably render then participant unfit to drive, or fly. But as for the rest? My squash playing,cross country running non-smoking 50 year old cousin .dropped dead from a cerebral aneurysm. If I hade examined him the day before he would have passed 100% I have been practising medicine for 40'years and have never been able to predict a healthy outcome from a 'normal physical ' examination. Physical signs demonstrate ongoing pathology confirm the diagnosis made during the history taking. They are not usually predictive in any way. I agree that "fitness to drive" more than covers the requirements

Funny that Phil! Three of us built a Longeze in the UK in the eighties- I cannot now remember quite why though! She's still around apparently- G-MUSO. What a nasty, uncomfortable beast she was! Sold her to an RAF pilot who obviously found all her handling problems and physical discomfort perhaps preferable to his work 'ride'. She has now moved on, and the latest owner contacted me to inquire after photos of the build. They were lost during my divorce- not really that bothered!

Great to catch up again Phil- how's flying in Pomgolia! I'd hope that most pilots are"switched on" so understand and appropriately cope with differing types and weights- this is not difficult- it's about basic airmanship isn't it? Responses like 'Birdseye's ' response " nonsense " is arrogant and doesn't contribute much to helpful discussion. Stay well and rug up!

Some "woops" Phil but a great photo and so glad no one was hurt physically (but how'd you live that down in the aero club bar lol) There but for the grace etc - life and flying both have very steep learning curves! ( remeber our chats a while back about the late Ross Millard)

Come on guys-loosen up - you know exactly what I mean! But that is the delight of these forums! The 172 and Sportstar DO "land themselves" - compared with for example the Eagle 150 or the Rutan Longeze - what nasty planes are they! Uncomfortable, bad visibility, no sense of humour at all, a constant battle all the way down finals to balance speed and descent rate, and depressing when your co-pilot/senior pilot with many thousands of hours under the belt stuffs up the landings as often as you and swears almost as much! I'd rather go back to sky-diving that fly those beasts again - would make about as much sense!

The prevailing wind at my strip is virtually always at 90 degrees to the strip direction. Perhaps we just have a different skill mix

Not in my experience Birdseye- I found going from a C172 to the Sportstar incredibly easy and intuitive. The Sporty, like the 172, virtually lands herself with minimal interference . It does look and behave like a 'conventional' aircraft in every sense.

Petitions aside- AOPA's initiative is so right. A class 2 medical is an anachronistic throwback that means little patho- physiologically but probably lots financially/ politically to CASA. I am a very experienced diver and private pilot. I've also been subjecting folk to medicals they didn't need for years.(always no charge) As a senior staff medical specialist I have carried out numerous (meaningless) examinations for divers , and despite years of appropriate experience CASA does not regard me as "qualified" to carry out class 2 medicals(which are a meaningless joke). I could of course 'qualify' to do this this but at great expense - why should I? I cynically think that my profession has spent a lot of time and energy mystifying medical "fitness" for a lot of pursuits- diving,climbing,flying, but at the end of the day most medical problems are totally predictable and yet we insist on punishing sufferers of completely unrelated conditions to bans or extra money for what? I would happily dive with a diabetic buddy (I do) and would,very happily fly with a hypertensive/diabetic / ischaemia heart disease sufferer - who was well controlled . There are a very few medical conditions that lend themselves to mandating' on the ground or on the surface' restricitions- we know what they are and so do the patients . My cousin- with whom I dived often - was a fit non smoking guy who had a subarachnoid haemorrhage that killed him within 6 hours of onset. His medicals were always rubber-stamp perfect. He was 51 . Go figure Cheers docjell

Ahah! I'll just write it down - or in the words of the constipated mathetician - just work it out with a pencil

Docs are always castigated for using docspeak ! To me - "primary paint" is what my grandaughter does at daycare in the mornings- WTF?

Er - yes - not quite sure what the cancelled airshow and Hervey Bay have to do with the original post stickshaker but thats what democracy is all about! The right to pen irrelivancies and post nonsense!

Bundaberg without any doubt - I lived there for two years and the climate for flying was absolutely perfect. It was within easy reach of Brisbane (if big cities are your thing) by road or plane, and via the Bundy Aero club a number of really good flying venues were on the menu! Picking up mates from Brisbane's main airport in a C172 was easy and a blast! Being asked to "line up behind the departing A380 having due regard to wake turbulence" was so much fun ! Bundy enjoys superb weather patterns, is a cheap place to live (by our extraordinarily inflated Aussie standards) and the airport was very pro-pilots and pro-avaiation in general. It was run (well) by the Bundy council and local casual aviators used the facilities without landing fees. The city was very pro-flying - Bert Hinkler and Jabiru Aircraft both boast Bundy as their homes. But- there is always a but eh!- Bundaberg is not the hub of the universe by any means! The city is parochial, narrow minded, not on the beach, has high unemployment, not much social infrastructure , and had a couple of utterly disastrous flooding episodes in the last 24 months which I can only imagine will have dealt a mortal blow to property sales in the area. But - I have flown in the UK and Far North Queensland, and would 'regroup' to Bundy in a heartbeat- but ONLY for the awesome flying!

Sorry for the dilatory reply,Bats. This situation is in no way, shape or form analogous to road registration because rego is a tax specifically applied to road users to pay for upkeep of gazetted roads, and has nothing at all to do with vehicle condition. Since (bizarrely IMO) our state government doesn't require regular vehicle maintenance (cf the annual 'MOT' vehicle check mandated in the UK- similar if you like to an aircraft '100 hrly/ annual inspection) they thus require a condition report as the only ( rather inadequate) means of ascertaining vehicle safety. My 'public ranting' was frustration at the blinkered and submissive attitude of so many of our fellow pilots who I suspect have been brow- beaten by years of bureaucracy to the extent that they actually believe that administrators have our fundamental interests at heart. They do not- we have become obsessed with process not product. It was also telling that you felt that my 'rant' would 'damage my cause'. I don't have a 'cause'- I am seeking a sensible, reasonable and responsible resolution to a completely soluble problem - perhaps if more people would intelligently and politely 'rant' we could politely and sensibly have a voice in the evolvement of future rule making that effects us all I have had a reasonable and productive discussion with RAAus technical division, and a good result seems achievable . Cheers Docjell

Thanks Nobody- but the form specifically requires a VH registration as far as I can see- is this negotiable (surely not - it's CASA )