A Sunday head scratcher.
This CVD issue ain't going away, is it? Seems to me that the more I read the less clear the Avmed pugnacious stance becomes; is it double buggered? Except, and here I'll need help (Creampuff/ Leadie), on a point of law – is an AAT decision considered a precedent? Because if it's not, then must each case of CVD be heard individually? Don't know, but can anyone help?
If this is allowed, the costs will be staggering to the country; if CASA have to round up their overseas experts for each case. Seems to be a two edged sword, because if the industry appellants can't rely on the 1986/ 1989 decision as being a precedent, then how can Avmed rely on a win in one case in the AAT as being 'the' precedent for future actions against CVD pilots??. As I say, it's a puzzle. What, 25 years no accident history, thousands of flight hours logged over 24/7 operations in all kinds of weather, often with non CVD pilot support makes a logical nonsense of shambolic arguments, but the 'black letter' of law may yet make asses of those who think logically. Dunno, gives me a headache.
I did hear some of the old ponypooh – Shambolic has taken to the 1700 Friday email system to announce the restrictions on CVD pilot medicals, here again no confirmation, but hells bells, if true, he is drawing a long bow and very likely to seriously irritate the AAT president on who's good will he may later rely on in court.
Aye well, game on. Gotta love the rumour mill.
Last edited by Kharon; 23rd Feb 2014 at 18:44.
Reason: actuins speaking louder? fixed.