Folks,
Just to add a little "source" to the soup, Natfly was not the problem re. standards observed by the new CASA CEO. Let's just say there were "events" in Vic. and Qld. that were a major consideration.
On another matter, would any of you like to present a rational case as to why the "medical" requirement for the (now stalled) RAOz CTA endorsement has anything to do with air safety outcomes. Present your justification by including the rational for a (proposed) CASA RPL with CTA endorsement having a lesser medical standard than an RAOz pilot certificate, for exactly the same operation.
Perhaps, to clarify the above, the draft CASA RPL standard includes the "driver's license medical" as the ONLY medical standard, there is no proposal/provision for "enhanced"(PPL) medical standards to fly with an RPL into CTA.
This RPL draft is entirely consistent with the FAA Sports Pilot License, and remember that there is likely to be a considerable spread of low level (below 8500) of Class E airspace any time soon.
E is legally controlled airspace.
Tootle pip !!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 8th Aug 2009 at 07:28.