It seems the PMO can't stick to a decision about CVD pilot applicants.... The
FAQ section of the CAsA website has been changed yet again today
In April we had...
You would have noticed that your recent medical certificate had a condition 13 which read "Limited to flights conducted inside Australian territory" instead of the earlier "Holder does not fully meet requirements of ICAO Convention Chapter 6 of Annex 1".
Recent research undertaken by CASA in the context of an extensive matter before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal revealed that foreign aviation authorities in a number of countries take a much stricter approach to the medical certification of pilots with colour vision deficiencies (CVD) than is currently the case in Australia. Given the significant difference in the treatment of pilots with CVD in other countries, CASA formed the view that medical certificates issued to persons with CVD should be limited to the conduct of operations in Australian territory. The condition 13 on the medical certificates was accordingly modified. This was on the basis that it was not considered appropriate for CASA to authorise persons to fly in the airspace of a foreign country in circumstances where the aviation authorities in that country would not countenance medical certification of the pilot concerned.
On the basis that CASA did not consult with affected pilots prior to making the change to the condition text, it has been decided that a replacement certificate reinstating the previous condition should be issued to you, and that is attached. At this point in time, CASA has no intention of changing the condition text in the immediate future.
I apologise for any inconvenience caused to you, and if you have any questions please contact 1300 4 AVMED.
Aviation Medicine
In May we had...
Initial issue of class 1 medicals
Pilot must undergo all three stages of tests until a pass, as per Part 67. If all tests are failed, the class 1 certificate is refused.
In June we had....
Initial issue of class 1 medicals
A pilot must undergo all three stages of tests until a pass is achieved before a class 1 medical certificate can be issued in accordance with regulation 67.150 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations.
Today we have...
Initial issue of class 1 medicals
Applicants for a Class 1 Medical Certificate must either satisfy the criteria specified in CASR 67.150, or be found by CASA not to pose a danger to safety on account of their CVD. To satisfy the requirements of CASR 67.150, the applicant must first attempt the Ishihara test. If they fail that test, they must then undertake the Farnsworth Lantern test. If the Farnsworth Lantern test is also failed a third level of test specified (for the individual case) by CASA must be undertaken. Failure of that third-level test may allow for the issue of a medical certificate if CASA finds that the applicant’s CVD does not pose a danger to safety. A Medical Certificate issued on this basis will be subject to certain limitations or restrictions.
There is also the debacle of Bill Smith's ATPL privileges being
withdrawn then
re-instated.
Perhaps it's time for the PMO to resign and let someone else assume the role who can at least be consistent with their decisions? Perhaps someone who respects the advice of those who are more qualified and capable of making judgements?
McSherry and Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2014] AATA 119 (6 March 2014)
50. We note that in expressing that opinion,
Associate Professor Navathe differed from both Associate Professor Ward and Dr McRae, each of whom regarded the risk of an incompletely incapacitating bleed causing problems for Mr McSherry whilst he was flying to be extremely small.
Further, we do not consider this aspect of Associate Professor Navathe’s evidence to have been well-supported or well-reasoned and we formed the impression that this aspect of his evidence may well have been influenced by his desire to justify the decision he had made, to impose conditions on Mr McSherry’s class 1 medical certificate. We were also troubled by the significant differences between the opinions expressed in Associate Professor Navathe’s statement of 8 October 2013 on the one hand, and his oral evidence on the other.
56. The respondent’s decision of 6 August 2013 is set aside and in substitution for that decision it is decided that
Mr McSherry is entitled to the issue of class 1 and class 2 medical certificates, without conditions.
How much longer will this bureaucrat be allowed to continue to destroy pilot's livelihoods and send them (and the taxpayer!) broke through the AAT before enough is enough?
I see Senator Fawcett is asking the same question in a written
QON published a few days ago:
273
244
CASA
FAWCETT
Cost of Investigations
1. What was the cost of the investigation ‘Antidepressant Usage and Civilian Aviation Activity in Australia 1993-2004’?
2. What has been the financial cost to CASA of the last five AAT Hearings in which CASA has been involved? Please provide the following:
a. Staff involved;
b. Number of witnesses called;
c. Length of time;
d. Legal fees;
As Creampuff has eloquently highlighted, the CVD matter is boiling down to the PMO's inability to interpret CASR 67.150(6)(c).
The CAD Test does not "simulate" anything, much less an "operational situation" remotely connected to aviation. Therefore, the CAD Test is not a valid test for the purposes of CASR 67.160(6)(c).
The PMO needs to brush up on his comprehension skills and look up the words "simulate", "operational" and "situation" in the dictionary. The phrase "simulates an operational situation" has an obvious and uncontroversial meaning.
He could even start by looking up some of the definitions in the new Part 61. It may give him a few hints on the meanings of those tricky words.
CIVIL AVIATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT REGULATION 2013 (NO. 1) - REG 61.010
"operational endorsement" means any of the following endorsements:
(a) an aerial application endorsement;
(b) a flight activity endorsement;
(c) a flight examiner endorsement;
(d) an instrument endorsement;
(e) a low-level endorsement;
(f) a night VFR endorsement;
(g) a night vision imaging system endorsement;
(h) a private instrument endorsement;
(i) a training endorsement;
(j) a flight engineer examiner endorsement;
(k) a flight engineer training endorsement.
"operational rating" means any of the following ratings:
(a) an aerial application rating;
(b) an examiner rating;
(c) an instructor rating;
(d) an instrument rating;
(e) a low-level rating;
(f) a night VFR rating;
(g) a night vision imaging system rating;
(h) a private instrument rating.
"simulated flight" time means time spent in a flight simulation training device during which a pilot is performing the duties of a pilot.
"simulated IMC" means flight in an aircraft or flight simulation training device during which the pilot is prevented from viewing the external horizon.
