AQONs have
finally been released, see
here...
Sampling..
On CVD... QON No 197:
Senator FAWCETT: I can give you the letter afterwards. I have it sitting right here in front of me from your organisation dated 24 January doing exactly that. I will put it to you that with due respect this is not moving forward, despite the evidence that you gave here at estimates in November that CASA had no agenda or no plans to wind back the gains of the Denison case. This is, in fact, a very deliberate effort to adopt a standard which might medically ascertain that somebody does have a colour vision deficiency, but clearly as evidenced by multiple pilots that have flown for over two decades, it is not an accurate or effective measure of their ability to safely operate an aircraft. This is going backwards and not, in fact, forwards.
Mr McCormick: As I said, what has happened between November when I was here and that letter, this is the first that I know of it. We were, of course, expecting to be in the AAT to respond to a Mr O'Brien in February 2012, however, those proceedings are currently not listed for hearing as the previous hearing to commence on 31 March was vacated at the applicant's request. So we have not had the opportunity to test these things. As I said, that is news to me. I will take it on notice and find out what we have been doing.
…
Senator FAWCETT: If you want to come back to experts, your organisation's previous experts, Ladel, Brock, Wilkins and others, were very proactive in recognising that practical tests were a viable alternative and, in fact, that many people with a CVD were able to fly. Their judgment has proven correct by virtue of the incident-free 20 years of flying. Is it the case that a personality has changed, not the science and not the safety? A personality has changed and now CASA's approach to this issue is changing?
Mr McCormick: I am not aware of any changes around our approach to this. As I said, that letter is news to me. I am not across everything that leaves the building, particularly medical matters where I normally do not involve myself. We will take it on notice and I will get you an answer about what has transpired.
And AQON...
"...
CASA is unaware of any specific instances where a pilot’s privileges have been removed by CASA following completion of a CAD test. Since the Senate Estimates hearings, a decision has been made in relation to one applicant who underwent and failed CAD testing, to impose modified conditions of operation on his licence. This included a restriction upon the pilot operating solo at night time. Otherwise the pilot remains able, as has been the position for approximately the past nine years, to operate under the privileges of his commercial pilot licence but not his air transport pilot licence (ATPL).
CASA obtained detailed specialist opinions from within Australia and internationally which supported the restriction upon ATPL operations. The applicant represents a person who has among the most severe form of colour deficiencies and has failed (to CASA’s knowledge) at least eight separate colour vision tests.
CASA also looked at the current aviation medical research across the world in relation to colour vision testing to ensure that a fair and appropriate test was undertaken and that medical certification requirements were properly undertaken. Accordingly CASA is satisfied that it has made a decision that balances the safety of aviation against the privileges of the pilot.
It is not the case that CASA is seeking to “wind back” the Dennison decision. CASA has endeavoured to ensure that the regulatory requirements were satisfied in the interests of aviation safety, this being a position consistently adopted by CASA over the last two decades. CASA remains of the opinion that to permit a pilot with a severe colour vision deficiency to exercise the privileges of an ATPL would be contrary to the interests of aviation safety.
The aviation medicine field has long recognised the deficiencies in the existing testing methods such as lantern and other colour vision tests, and has funded research to improve testing methods over the last decade. CASA considers the creation of new aviation-specific tests (such as the CAD test) are better suited than the previously used practical tests for detecting colour vision deficiency due to their direct relevance to aviation specific tasks and aviation safety concepts. In the case of the CAD test it has also been developed through industry consultation and by reference to medical research methodologies which allow it to be validated as an appropriate and more sophisticated method of testing, providing both vocationally relevant information and a colour vision diagnosis..."
Mrdak on TSBC review...QON No 194:
Senator XENOPHON: Further to Senator Fawcett's line of questioning, is the review by the Canadian TSB one on the documents or are they actually seeking to interview people involved in that incident and in the investigation?
Mr Mrdak: I do not know the full circumstances of what they are reviewing. I will take that on notice and come back to you.
And AQON...
"...
The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) has agreed to review the ATSB’s investigation methodologies and processes. Specifically, the review is examining the ATSB’s:
• Investigation methodology and its application
• Management and governance in relation to investigations
• Process for compiling an investigation report
• Approach to communicating with persons and organisations external to the ATSB in relation to an investigation.
As part of the review, the TSB has undertaken to examine the application of the ATSB methodologies to the Norfolk Island investigation and two others.
The review was instigated in response to Senate References Committee criticisms that the ATSB investigation of the Norfolk Island accident did not comply with the requirements of ICAO Annex 13 or the ATSB’s written standards. The review is also intended as part of the ATSB response to Inquiry recommendations concerning the adequacy of the ATSB’s investigation policies, procedures and training.
The exercise is not a reinvestigation of the occurrence, and hence the TSB has not sought to reinterview involved parties. However, as part of reviewing the ATSB’s investigations, the statements and other evidence of involved parties have been available to the review team..."
Clear as mud...read it and weep!
