EMS/NVG, this may be an idiot Q.
How many patients % wise have to be transported as near to sea level as possible. Does the med profession stipulate max ROC for critical atmospheric pressure or do they just say it is desirable to fly ‘sucking hole’ patients etc. close to sea level?
It could be that a density alt change rate of 300 FPM (say) is quite ok up to a designated density altitude (at or above LSALT) for that very small % of patients.
Have they ever quantified relationships between atmospheric and different combinations of systolic/diastolic pressures?
Given that if a patient is picked up in the OZ populated coastal fringes where most of the work happens, the machine is hardly going to bore holes in rising terrain to keep a low ambient deck pressure or climb very high unless the patient pick up spot is up in the hinterland.
Does the medical and aviation regulatory professions take into consideration the fact that at night, when NVG’s are required, there will be in most places in OZ a ten degree downward shift in temp and therefore much less density altitude than what they might be thinking of as in daylight hours.
I know that every time I have been asked to make sure the pilot (FW or RW) flies at a low altitude I have asked in return, would height xxxx be acceptable and never was my request able to be quantified.
Every time when asked that I made a point of asking the pilot upon his return “was there any change in the patient when you arrived at altitude xxxx?” They always have said no and such was noted in the company daily diary.
Would it be right to say that in rotary EMS work the only requirement for NVG and the encompassing regs is when the machine is to fly below LSALT on app/dep a remote pick up site?
It may be that there is a whole lot of hype and unnecessary regs bogging down the introduction of these procedures.
Surveillance work, different and a multitude of different skills/quals are perhaps required, no questions.