I had been of the understanding that the same applied here - the pilot is simply asked "Can you take us here, and bring back 1/2/3 etc patients?" The decision is based on the normal operational criteria, and has zip to do with the patient condition - which is often not as it is given anyway.
There have been several replies to this and other RFDS threads that seem to say otherwise though; I distinctly remember someone saying "Patient going flat, must go" in one thread, and "must fly through cyclonic conditions to treat the patient" in another.
There is no - repeat NO - clinical situation that warrants risking beyond the normal and regulatory operational practices, a multi million dollar a/c and up to 4-5 lives on board.
If AUS RFDS does not use the 'nil info' policy in tasking, it should consider adopting it.
What happened with this SA crash - who knows? Do these a/c have CVRs or FDRs? Don't they have GPWS and Radar altimetry? Was it a VCA from a NPA?
A tragedy for sure; even more so on top of the Eastland crash and at this time of year.
Regards
[ 12 December 2001: Message edited by: Jamair ]