How soon for Australia

[rutan around]

How soon will we see this or something very close to it in Australia???

Breaking News
http://download.aopa.org/images/ePilot2017/170413_Sierra.jpg

Advocacy
FAA releases BasicMed checklist, approves AOPA course
The FAA on April 24 released the official BasicMed Comprehensive Medical Examination Checklist (http://send.aopa.org/link.cfm?r=2687136147&sid=111098081&m=14186403&u=AOPA_2&j=37149173&s=http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Form/FAA_Form_8700-2_.pdf) that pilots who wish to fly under BasicMed need to fill out and have completed by the state-licensed physician performing the medical examination. The agency also published a link to AOPA's Medical Self-Assessment: A Pilot's Guide to Flying Healthy online aeromedical course (http://send.aopa.org/link.cfm?r=2687136147&sid=111098082&m=14186403&u=AOPA_2&j=37149173&s=https://basicmedicalcourse.aopa.org/client/app.html#/auth/logon?utm_content=tts&utm_campaign=170426special) that satisfies the requirement for pilots to complete a medical education course prior to operating under BasicMed. Although qualified pilots cannot fly under BasicMed until May 1, they can go ahead and make a doctor's appointment, have the checklist filled out by the physician, and complete the online medical course. Read more > (http://send.aopa.org/link.cfm?r=2687136147&sid=111098083&m=14186403&u=AOPA_2&j=37149173&s=https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/april/24/FAA-releases-BasicMed-checklist-approves-AOPA-course?utm_source=ePilot&utm_medium=Content&utm_content=tts&utm_campaign=170426special)

Access the course and checklist
Download the BasicMed Comprehensive Medical Examination Checklist (http://send.aopa.org/link.cfm?r=2687136147&sid=111098084&m=14186403&u=AOPA_2&j=37149173&s=http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Form/FAA_Form_8700-2_.pdf)
Complete AOPA's 'Medical Self-Assessment: A Pilot's Guide to Flying Healthy' (http://send.aopa.org/link.cfm?r=2687136147&sid=111098085&m=14186403&u=AOPA_2&j=37149173&s=https://basicmedicalcourse.aopa.org/client/app.html#/auth/logon?utm_content=tts&utm_campaign=170426special)


Medical Regulation Highlights
Pilot Eligibility
Pilots must hold a valid U.S. driver's license and comply with any restrictions; have held a valid FAA medical certificate, regular or special issuance, on or after July 15, 2006; and not had their most recent medical revoked, suspended, or withdrawn, or most recent application denied. Pilots with a medical history or diagnosis of certain cardiac, neurological, or mental health conditions will need a one-time-only special issuance for each condition.
Aircraft Specifications
Up to 6 seats, up to 6,000 lbs (no limitations on horsepower, number of engines, or gear type)
Flight Rules
Day or night, VFR or IFR
Passengers
Up to 5 passengers
Altitude Restriction
Up to 18,000 feet msl
Geographic Limitation
Within the United States (unless authorized)
Speed Limitation
250 knots indicated airspeed
Operating Limitation
Cannot operate for compensation or hire, except for flight instruction and as permitted by 14 CFR 61.113
Aeromedical Training
Free online course required every two years (24 calendar months)
Physician Visit
Every four years (48 calendar months)

[aroa]

With CAsA and Reg reform abt 30 years and counting, I'd say probably not in our lifetimes.
Never... Flying is a very unsafe activity remember. Been on the roads lately?

There have been Strategic Groups, Renewal programs, Task Forces even, producing nothing/****e/or some changes for the sake of change with no "safety"case.
They eventually subside back into the swamp and vanish, before surfacing again with a flash new title. And doing it all again

Was it ever thus.

I rest my case.

[kaz3g]

I got a bit of practice for the Anzac service fly past in Tatura this morning...spun 3 times and stalled on the way there.

Bloody oil on the road and the BMW let go without warning. I knew I should have been flying instead of taking my life in my hands in the car.

Kaz

[jonkster]

You can fly in Oz single engine, private operations, with a passenger (not passengers) in aircraft with MTOW < 1500kg with a medical practioner's certificate (RAMPC) if I read https://www.casa.gov.au/standard-page/medical-requirements-flight-crew correctly. (have I?)


The RAMPC replaced the Driver Licence Medical (Aviation) (DLMA) on 1 September 2014. The DLMA was based on an exemption granted by the Director of Aviation Safety on 29 June 2012. It allowed holders of a CASA-issued student pilot licence, PPL, CPL or ATPL to fly without a medical certificate when the pilot was conducting private operations, complied with certain limitations and had undergone a modified driver licence medical examination.

The requirements of the new RAMPC are essentially the same; however there is no need for an exemption under the new Part 61 rules.
...
...
If you have a RAMPC the following conditions apply:

you can only fly below 10,000ft
you can only fly by day under the visual flight rules (VFR)
you can only carry one passenger.
Please note the limitations on the number of passengers you can carry, and flight above 10,000ft do not apply if you have another pilot with you who occupies a flight control seat, has either a class 1 or 2 medical certificate and is authorised to pilot the aircraft.


I am not trying to say CASA is all sunshine and flowers and the above exemption from a DAME examination is certainly not as generous as the FAA but it is not totally inflexible either and certainly more relaxed than back in the 'good old days'. Lots of GA bugsmashers with MTOW < 1500kg. Lots of weekend warriors only fly solo or 2 up and would fit in with the requirements surely? Perhaps there is hope after all.

IMO, anything that is a sensible move to encourage GA to recover from its current doldrums is a plus and if my reading of the situation with RAMPCs is correct, I would commend the regulators for at least taking a step in the right direction.

[Aussie Bob]

Why would anyone bother? Next to useless and little different to the hoops of a Class 1 or 2 in practice, leaving the Avmed control freaks well and truly in charge. The FAA version is much more in line with a sensible interpretation of real risk.

Precisely! Also if you have ever had problems getting a class 2 medical and take up this as an alternative you will most likely find it cancelled with 24 hours of issue (it is issued automatically upon completion) pending a requirement to complete more tests.

[thorn bird]

"I am not trying to say CASA is all sunshine and flowers"

more like as black as the Hobbs of hell, and a garden full of weeds"

" the above exemption from a DAME"

That would imply that CAsA trusts DAME's, which they don't. DAME's are viewed much like pilots are, as incompetent criminals.

[rutan around]

Clearedtoreenter said

The FAA version is much more in line with a sensible interpretation of real risk.:ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok ::ok:

[halas]

Is there an easier way to load/unload a Beech Skipper/Sierra.

halas

[LeadSled]

I am not trying to say CASA is all sunshine and flowers and the above exemption from a DAME examination is certainly not as generous as the FAA but it is not totally inflexible either and certainly more relaxed than back in the 'good old days'.

Jonkster,
Seems like you have only eyeballed the headline and not the not so fine print!
Tootle pip!!

[jonkster]

Lead I am not saying it is perfect - what I am saying is can you imagine this happening 20 or 30 years ago? Back when they reluctantly allowed what are now Sport's Aircraft to only fly under 500' single pilot no passengers and not fly across any roads?

Now that class of flying is actually growing and keeping grass roots aviation alive, operating in aircraft that often can outperform the typical GA single engine trainers we have and people are doing stuff that once upon a time required a PPL and seems light years from the old rag and tube 'ultralights' of the 80s and 90s.


I would say 'Great step CASA!' but keep lobbying for more rather than throw my hands up in despair.


It is like when a child starts to learn a new task - if they are moving in the right direction, no matter how small the step, encourage it. And keep pushing for the next step.

I guess that is why I am seeing it as at least an indication things can improve in the future. If GA is to survive in Oz anything moving to help is a good one.


I am sure you see me as naive but that is where I sit. :)

[B772]

We really need to start draining the swamp. Politicians, Government Departments, Public Servants etc etc etc. We are being left behind in the 21st Century. I wonder if Cory Bernardi can make a difference.

[topdrop]

We are being left behind in the 21st Century. I wonder if Cory Bernardi can make a difference.
Do you expect someone from the 19th century to make a difference?

[rutan around]

It is like when a child starts to learn a new task - if they are moving in the right direction, no matter how small the step, encourage it. And keep pushing for the next step.I understand where Jonkster is coming from but why the hell should we have to pussyfoot around and treat like children the supreme controllers of aviation in Australia.

Why is it every time they make a rule change they have to go back 2 or three times before they get it right. To me it is plain stupid and possibly dangerous to take me out of an aircraft type that I have been flying for for over 40 years and put me in a 2 seat puddle jumper that bounces me all over the place in even light turbulence, doesn't have auto pilot or a decent range to get around this big country. I have worked all my life to acquire some comfort and joy in retirement. It would appear the killjoys in CASA have other ideas.

As another poster noted if it's acceptably safe in the US why not here. After all they have 10 times the population and infrastructure and they're not worried about grey nomads raining down upon them. CASA should immediately adopt the new US rules which would earn them some respect and make a bunch of old ,not so bold* pilots very happy.

* It must be true--we're still alive aren't we?

[jonkster]

I think it all stems from CASA's mission "to enhance and promote aviation safety through effective safety regulation and by encouraging industry to deliver high standards of safety"


Give civil servants a task, they will do it. If the task given is "Just make things safe" - sure - can do - we will regulate all the dangers away. Anything that even smells of possible risk is a target. *Keeping GA alive is not what is asked of them* - why are we then surprised that keeping GA alive is not their priority?

Imagine instead if their mission was "to promote a safe, viable and sustainable civil aviation industry"?

Why not lobby politicians to make that change?

What is in it for the pollies? Lots. Pollies want to be seen keeping jobs and promoting things that encourage the economy and helping regional areas etc (and for the genuine "want to make a positive difference" pollies they actually want that for real). We can help!

Having a thriving (not just safe) GA industry would tick those boxes. Yes -
keep it safe. But also keep it sustainable and thriving and don't kill it to keep it safe.

Make CASA the body that promotes safety to keep the industry alive, not that promotes safety to protect us from the industry.


Like I said. A man has to dream. :)

[B772]

If we were to adopt the FAA rules and regulations we would be much better off. If not the FAA then New Zealand rules and regulations.

Until this happens aviation in Australia is doomed !

[rutan around]

Going Direct: BasicMed Has Real Advantages


By Robert Goyer
6 (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#)
BasicMed is here, and there’s real interest from pilots in using it. While it’s not everything we asked for, here’s how a lot of pilots can benefit.
I’ve been critical of the FAA’s new alternative medical certification process known as BasicMed, and for good reason. As far pilots’ rights are concerned, it’s not as good a process as the Sport Pilot “driver’s license” medical, which puts the power in the hands of the pilot to decide his or her medical fitness to fly.
Still, BasicMed has some huge advantages over both Sport Pilot and regular Third Class medical certification.
Flying under BasicMed is better than using the Sport Pilot driver’s license route for a few big reasons: You can fly bigger, faster and more complex planes and with more passengers, too under BasicMed. Under Sport Pilot, you’re limited to an LSA conforming plane and a single passenger, making it truly a sport flying alternative. With BasicMed you can fly very high performance planes (up to 250 kts), with up to six occupants and up to 18,000 feet, among other fairly liberal allowances.
While BasicMed does limit pilots from flying above 18,000 feet and faster than 250 knots (the two are closely linked for most planes), that still leaves open a wide array of very sophisticated single and twin-engine planes. BasicMed essentially keeps Daher TBM pilots from flying (the plane does its thing best above 20,000 feet, not below, but the allowances still leave open planes like the Beech Baron, the Piper M350 (Mirage) and just about everything below.
You can’t fly for hire under BasicMed, which makes sense because flying for hire typically requires a Second Class medical certificate, whereas BasicMed’s mandate is to offer an alternative to Third Class certification.
The advantages to BasicMed over the Third-Class medical are related to physical limitations more than operational ones. Pilots flying under BasicMed can have and be managing a wide range of health concerns that would typically be disqualifying under conventional Third-Class medical certification. These conditions include everything from heart issues to mental health challenges. Many pilots have complained that the disqualifying threshold for the Third-Class medical is far too strict, and we agree. For a lot of pilots, BasicMed solves that problem. True, there are requirements for having passed your most recent FAA physical, and to have passed one within the past 10 years, but this limitation will affect relatively few pilots.
BasicMed is not everything we might have wanted it to be. But what it does provide—the ability for pilots with safely managed medical and mental health conditions that might have been disqualifying under the Third-Class rules to keep flying—will make BasicMed worth the wait for a lot of pilots, and that’s one improvement we roundly applaud.
If you want more commentary on all things aviation, go to our Going Direct blog archive (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/category/blog/robert-goyer/#.V-vsRNzDHoU).


Posted in Robert Goyer (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/category/blog/robert-goyer/), Blog (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/category/blog/)

10 thoughts on “Going Direct: BasicMed Has Real Advantages”



http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/baab5359019b391d48c86223496970b4?s=32&d=mm&r=g John Jerez says:
May 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5380)
Can U fly with BasicMed in Mexico?
http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/c98a096b768056975e0c1ddd247d6bfc?s=32&d=mm&r=g Doug says:
May 3, 2017 at 11:19 AM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5381)
I received my third class medical but it was a painful process. A senior AME deferred my application even though he had the authority to approve it. When it hit the FAA bureaucracy it took 3 months of trading paper to get my medical back. Basic Med for me from now on!
http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/fb5da430ff8c953fdf5abdc167d44d23?s=32&d=mm&r=g Mark Singer says:
May 3, 2017 at 11:41 AM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5382)
My 3rd class ran out on 03/31/17. I went the month of April without a medical instead opting for Basic Med. This made sense to me due to the fact that I own and fly a Cessna 177 and have no desire to fly (or the ability) in the Flight Levels or for hire. The cost of my 3rd class was getting very costly due to medical conditions and FAA requirements of an annual medical and annual medical submissions from two other physicians. Basic Med was painless and frankly affordable. The Basic Med requirements will extend my flying for years to come. I recommend this option for other certificated pilots in my situation.
http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/73a67c993d40c0eb070ae64a988a2458?s=32&d=mm&r=g Bob Mosier says:
May 3, 2017 at 11:45 AM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5383)
What Doctor will sign off on it without psychiatric and neurological sign offs by other specialists, this is not a good deal as it will be just as expensive as 3 or 4 class 3’s. I wish everyone would quit trying to kiss aopa’ s an the faa’s tails. Not the great deal aopa is trying to sell.
http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/6d40636df0333028edc2c68c11fae6d3?s=32&d=mm&r=g Tripp says:
May 3, 2017 at 11:55 AM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5384)
“BasicMed Has Real Advantages” to a select group of class 3 med. pilots. For that I am grateful but, let’s not be fooled into thinking that the government,s forcing of the FAA into this was a big favor to GA – it was anything but. We still toil because of the FAA’s faulure to continually work at their mission of promoting and seeing as many pilots can take to the air. The FAA is another in a long line of disgraceful government agencies……
http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/b9ac6bc3edea4f49edad87a80e938731?s=32&d=mm&r=g Rich says:
May 3, 2017 at 12:03 PM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5385)
I am one of the people who have completed all BasicMed requirements and went flying yesterday to complete a Flight Review. For me BasicMed works very well as I can avoid several thousand of dollars annually for repetitive testing required of a Special Issuance. Yes it really was a choice of not flying due to the expensive 3rd Class – or – BasicMed. A clear win in my opinion.
http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/5146ff40b64a0026859f9b4a1a4370e5?s=32&d=mm&r=g Colin Peverley says:
May 3, 2017 at 12:37 PM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5386)
Will basic Med be available in Canada and when
http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/786e6404e2ddf27e0d14c5c3d2c8b1ef?s=32&d=mm&r=g Jack A. Milavic says:
May 3, 2017 at 12:46 PM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5387)
Basic Med does indeed allow more pilots to enjoy flying. At the same time it also allows for lower medical standards thus endangering passengers and the non flying public. At 77 I have no problem visiting a Aviation Medical Examiner and undergoing a medical examination to ensure I am physically capable of flying safely. I owe this procedure to any and all entrusting their life to me.
http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/052eb2bcd4e188e92641bfe50cd59d78?s=32&d=mm&r=g Greg Young says:
May 3, 2017 at 1:26 PM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5388)
We need to watch the wording on this. “Pilots flying under BasicMed can have and be managing a wide range of health concerns that would typically be disqualifying under conventional Third-Class medical certification.” While technically correct, that could get an “OMG – unsafe pilots can fly” reaction from the general public and media. The benefit is those folks will no longer have to endure the cost and bureaucratic torture of getting a special issuance.
http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/9909523fc9fb52a848179d31de3782f3?s=32&d=mm&r=g Jim says:
May 3, 2017 at 1:28 PM (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/going-direct-basicmed-real-advantages/#comment-5389)
I know BasicMed is good for many, but I am disappointed. After many years of flying on 3rd class medical , I needed stents. While this issue is well under control and my cardiologist agrees that flying is ok, I am not (and have not been) willing to a “do or die ” with the FAA. To fly under BasicMed, I have to go thru the Special Issuance Process which evaluates me for everything, not just the stent issue as defined in the new BasicMed law. SportsPilot is the reasonable choice for me. A one time Special Issuance is one time too many, if I have a choice, and I do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Comment
Name *
Email *









https://pp-cdn-madavor.netdna-ssl.com/2016/03/newsletter-signup.jpg (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/newsletter?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=sidebar_banner&utm_campaign=HP_RR_News_Signup)

[B772]

In 2014, the Commission of Audit recommended that 65 per cent of government agencies could be rationalised or abolished. That’s 890 bodies deemed unnecessary – a fertile ground for savings. And that’s just the start. The government needs to go line by line through every item of expenditure and ask if this spending is still necessary, effective and beneficial.

The two Audit Commission reports suggest up to $70 billion could be saved annually if their recommendations were introduced.

Let's start with CASA, dump all our rules and regulations, just use the FAA rules and regulations.

[thorn bird]

B772, hear bloody hear.

[cessnapete]

UK CAA PPL licence holders now only need GP approval for lic med. if you are fit to drive you are fit to fly. No AME required.
Some a/c weight restrictions and previous serious med condition can apply otherwise as FAA.

[LeadSled]

Thorny, B772,
Guys, it would not matter what the rules were, the "CASA Kulcha" would make them unusable, in no time at all.

There is a lot more to what happens satisfactorily elsewhere, and is a dead weight here, than the words on paper .

A good example is what CASA have done to the "policy interpretation" of Parts 21-35, CASR Parts 23-35 being straight out of the FAA rules book, and this has been the case since 1998.

Nevertheless, bit by bit, the kulcha means that these rules no longer work like the FAA rules, even in the early days straight bureaucratic obstruction rendered some of the more innovative provisions of CASR Part 21 (industry certification of aircraft up to 750kg AUW) unusable ----

---- and don't forget that this Australian "industry certification" preceded the FAA/industry consensus Light Sport Aircraft by fifteen years ----- get that!!!

Australia had the concept of industry consensus standards IN THE LAW --- fifteen years plus before USA, but CASA made certain it was never permitted to be even tried, and later on, under a Labor government, these provisions were quietly repealed, no consultation, just buried in other regulatory amendments.

An even better example is medical standards, we had the "drivers license medical" here over 30 years ago, for what is now probably the majority of active non-professional pilots ---- viz. AUF/RAOz. ---- with a statistically significant record to show it is "safe". Indeed, the Australian ultralight medical record "informed" the FAA proceeding that resulted in the FAA medical standards for the FAA Light Sport category.

Until the "iron ring" is scrapped, nothing will change for the better, and can you imagine any Australian politician (with the exception of Barnaby Joyce and David Fawcett) being prepared to take on the "public guardians of absolute air safety".

John Sharp and Mark Vail did take them on, we made some progress, but later??? All wound back, particularly under Labor and Albo.

Tootle pip!!