Originally Posted by
43Inches
Unfortunately Angelflight has been it's own worst enemy more than CASA destroying it. With at least two accidents where patients were killed and then claiming that CASA is responsible for the level of competence a pilot has, rather than having some form of review, training or checking system for its' own pilots. Aeromedical flights is a well known danger area for pushing into situations to get patients where they need to go and whilst this is not emergency transfers there is still a lot of pressure to get people where they want to be. Questions have to be asked why the service was needed at all for the Mt Gambier accident when they could have bought tickets on Rex for a few hundred $ and AF paid the tickets instead of a light aircraft.
If you operate a truck, bus, taxi and so on, you can't blame the road authority for driver standards, that's up to the operator to maintain. Even on the road hospitals and other healthcare services pay a high price for simple patient transfers by professional companies.
What I like most about you, 43", is the cocksure confidence with which you share your wisdom on any and every subject, unperturbed by minor things called 'facts'.
Angelflight isn't an operator of anything. It simply coordinates volunteers.
Angelflight is entitled, like anyone else, to assume that the holder of a licence - of whatever kind - is competent to hold that licence and complies with the conditions on it. People do it all day, every day, when they jump on a train or into an aircraft or buy food from a shop.
Political pressure resulted in a regulatory change, supported by spun statistics and without any cost-benefit analysis. "Some people have died so some law must be made to fix it" was the response of our 'leaders' in Parliament.
Please tell us: How many people who would otherwise have been carried on Angel Flights, but for the regulatory change, have died of their condition for lack of treatment or on the road travelling for treatment? Don't know? Nor does CASA. CASA doesn't care.
VFR flight into IMC is not an unknown issue to the regulator. Nor is 'get home-itis'. More laws are not the answer, particularly in aviation.