ricksheli
You make a valid point! However, the CAA has been backed into a corner by the rescue trusts which have been deliberately misinterpreting the rule for years, and then using their massive public sympathy card every time they are challenged. Combine that with a Minister of Transport who has been warning them behind the scenes for quite some time that they need to up their game. This week he said it very publically.
Super F
The Director is interpreting the rule as it was intended. The exemption that is allowed to the performance criteria is for life or death situations. Broken legs or even backs usually aren't. Most medical cases, whilst often serious, aren't life or death situations.
A key issue is that of inter-hospital transfers! To use the exemption to justify using a single egined helicopter for an inter-hospital transfer is simply not credible. In the time that it takes to prep a patient, even a critically ill/injured patient, for a flight and arrange everything at the receiving hospitals end a suitable machine could be sourced.
The event which has alarmed many people in the corridors of power happened last September - well after this issue became public.
It was a Longranger suffering a main bearing failure shortly after landing at Taranaki Base Hospital. It had just bought a patient back from Wellington Hospital.
Both of those hospital pads are deemed to require Category A, Performance Class 1 aircraft to operate to and fro because of how built out they are.
TK