Originally Posted by
Checkboard
I think CASA come off pretty well in this video. Why would CASA disagree with a urologist? Because the flight risk is different (and a much tougher requirement) that the Urologist is used to dealing with.
Ah, the good ol’ mystique of aviation. Aviation is so mysterious and scary that you don’t even need to have any medical qualifications, much less specialist qualifications, to spin risks into disaster.
Because any idiot with access to the internet can do this job, could someone ascertain for me the
probabilities of a residual, tiny kidney stone causing sudden and debilitating symptoms such that a pilot could not continue to perform duties?
Someone will usually pipe up and say: No matter how remote the probabilities, it’s a risk to the safety of air navigation and, therefore, need not and should not be taken! Again, any idiot can do that. Even me.
Could someone now ascertain for me the
probabilities of an average pilot having kidney stones of which the pilot is not aware? What if the answer to this question is a number bigger than the answer to the first question?
Could someone also ascertain for me the number of pilots who know they have kidney stones of the kind referred to in the hearing, but who don’t hold - because they don’t need to hold - a medical certificate issued by CASA? Remember: Passengers on RPT jets share the skies with aircraft whose pilots don’t hold medical certificates. Or is it that the sudden incapacitation of those pilots presents absolutely zero risk to other aircraft? Absolutely zero? If it’s not zero, how can it be consistent to allow that to happen? No matter how remote the probabilities, it’s a risk to the safety of air navigation and, therefore, need not and should not be taken!
(We’ll leave aside the medical certificate holding pilots who have not told CASA about some condition because, according to CASA, those pilots don’t exist. According to CASA, there is no perverse incentive to withhold information from CASA because the prospect of having one’s medical certificate suspended or refused or made subject to costly and potentially risky conditions which qualified professionals consider ‘over-kill’ is, apparently, of absolutely no concern to certificate holders. No concern whatsoever. They are lined up waiting for the next bus under which they can throw themselves.)
Finally, could someone ascertain what the ATSB’s data shows is the most likely cause of sudden, debilitating symptoms resulting in the pilots of commercial aircraft being unable to continue duties in flight? Real pilots being really debilitated and unable to continue duties in the real world. Once that’s been ascertained, could someone further ascertain what CASA has done to prevent pilots from being exposed to what causes those symptoms?
Spinning a medical ‘condition’ into an aviation disaster is easy. Any idiot with access to the internet can find ‘evidence’ to ‘prove’ it ‘could’ happen. The substantial risk to aviation safety arises from over-reactions to marshmallow sized risks while doing nothing effective to mitigate the 88mm Howitzer sized risks. Pilots are very easy targets. Dealing with the big risks is hard.