Perfect Example Of CASA Outrageaous Behaviour?
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, it’s signed by the executive in charge of CASA’s” Permissions Centre,” sometimes referred to by disenchanted permission seekers as the “Sheltered Workshop.”
If he has indeed made this foolish decision then his head should roll as a result. Then again, accountability isn't part of CAsA's framework so keep the stupid illogical biased decisions coming Fort Fumble! It's what we are accustomed too.
TICK TOCK
----- for finding narrowed arteries are still very limited
Actually, nothing could be further from the truth, you obviously have not kept up to date with modern medical imaging technology. It is really quite amazing to look at every little variation in diameter of all the heart arteries, and look at and measure the efficiencies of the delivery of arterial blood to every sector of the heart.
Don't anybody tell CASA, they will want to mandate it for every medical. It ain't cheap, but it is not limited.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wtf is the agenda here? If CASA has research that says cvd pilots are a safety threat then they should cite the evidence. From where I see it, the evidence supports the contention that cvd are safe.
Bill, the issue with PAPI is a bit of a furphy, IMHO. According to ICAO annex 14, PAPI is designed and intended to be used within 5000m of the tdz. Although the color differential between red and white can be seen at much greater distances by color normals, pilots with a 'mild' cvd can still use the PAPI within 5km. Besides, there are other methods of determining "on slope" besides a PAPI.
Like you, Bill, I have a cvd. I have also held a professional flight crew licence for 30 years and have some 14,000 hours of flight time. I have never had any issues with colour differentiation on the flight deck or with aerodrome aids, such as PAPI. As a sailor, the nature of my cvd is evident as I am able to differentiate between yellow and white navigational markers at distances well beyond what colour 'normal' sailors can.
Bill, the issue with PAPI is a bit of a furphy, IMHO. According to ICAO annex 14, PAPI is designed and intended to be used within 5000m of the tdz. Although the color differential between red and white can be seen at much greater distances by color normals, pilots with a 'mild' cvd can still use the PAPI within 5km. Besides, there are other methods of determining "on slope" besides a PAPI.
Like you, Bill, I have a cvd. I have also held a professional flight crew licence for 30 years and have some 14,000 hours of flight time. I have never had any issues with colour differentiation on the flight deck or with aerodrome aids, such as PAPI. As a sailor, the nature of my cvd is evident as I am able to differentiate between yellow and white navigational markers at distances well beyond what colour 'normal' sailors can.
Anthill,
I think you have misunderstood me. I have no more problem with the PAPI as any of my colour normal colleagues do. Depending on the state of the system, WX, long grass :-) and some of our ports the serviceability is dubious to say the least.
I know that all the doubters out there are going to bring up the PAPI. PAPI is unreliable in certain atmospheric conditions, our Flight manual states not to be used below 200’. I certainly would rather use a DME vs Height check or a VNAV guidance than rely on a PAPI in any weather conditions.
Notwithstanding this I have never had trouble interpreting PAPI indications or any other lighting system.
I hope you've helped the cause with a donation
I think you have misunderstood me. I have no more problem with the PAPI as any of my colour normal colleagues do. Depending on the state of the system, WX, long grass :-) and some of our ports the serviceability is dubious to say the least.
I know that all the doubters out there are going to bring up the PAPI. PAPI is unreliable in certain atmospheric conditions, our Flight manual states not to be used below 200’. I certainly would rather use a DME vs Height check or a VNAV guidance than rely on a PAPI in any weather conditions.
Notwithstanding this I have never had trouble interpreting PAPI indications or any other lighting system.
I hope you've helped the cause with a donation
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand,Bill Smith and agree. I've never had any issues with PAPI either. What I am saying is that PAPI has limitations and ICAO is aware of these (Iknow that we are in agreement here ).In fact, Annex 14 describes when PAPI is suitable for glide path reference and that's in close proximity to the aerodrome.
When CASA introduce the PAPI as the pivotal element of their argument they are clutching at straws; they are totally mis-representing its utility in operations. They are also wrong in saying that CAD should be the sole test to determine the ability of a pilot to discriminate between colours within the design parameters of ground based aids. If there are flaws in their argument (which there are) then they simply can't mount a safety case.
The feedback that I have heard in the industry is that the current Medical Section of CASA is regarded by DAMEs and specialists as being a pack of idiots. My own DAME is clear about this, he says they should be sent back to where they came from. A mate who is a specialist (also holds a CPL+IR) tells me that CASA frequently order tests on pilots that have no scientific validity within his field! CASA are ordering these tests to determine if a pilot can return to work after a medical issue. He says that these tests are ordered by the medical section after he has already been determined that the pilot is fit to return to flying. I emphasise: he states that the tests that they order have NO VALIDITY as a diagnostic tool in his field of speciality! I will be writing to Senator Fielding about shortly.
).In fact, Annex 14 describes when PAPI is suitable for glide path reference and that's in close proximity to the aerodrome. When CASA introduce the PAPI as the pivotal element of their argument they are clutching at straws; they are totally mis-representing its utility in operations. They are also wrong in saying that CAD should be the sole test to determine the ability of a pilot to discriminate between colours within the design parameters of ground based aids. If there are flaws in their argument (which there are) then they simply can't mount a safety case.
The feedback that I have heard in the industry is that the current Medical Section of CASA is regarded by DAMEs and specialists as being a pack of idiots. My own DAME is clear about this, he says they should be sent back to where they came from. A mate who is a specialist (also holds a CPL+IR) tells me that CASA frequently order tests on pilots that have no scientific validity within his field! CASA are ordering these tests to determine if a pilot can return to work after a medical issue. He says that these tests are ordered by the medical section after he has already been determined that the pilot is fit to return to flying. I emphasise: he states that the tests that they order have NO VALIDITY as a diagnostic tool in his field of speciality! I will be writing to Senator Fielding about shortly.
Last edited by Anthill; 8th Jun 2014 at 01:14.
Weren't we luck when one of ours (CAA/CASA medical) went over the be one of yours. P N I'm thinking of.
Though to be fair we still have one of yours (D W) as our PMO and he's caused a few issues this side of the Tasman and isn't all that highly regarded by some DME's and AMA's.
Though to be fair we still have one of yours (D W) as our PMO and he's caused a few issues this side of the Tasman and isn't all that highly regarded by some DME's and AMA's.
If CASA has research that says cvd pilots are a safety threat
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This needs to be stopped in its tracks, first they'll get rid of those pilots who have CVD restrictions on their Class 1's, then once the overall numbers are reduced they'll come after those who have passed one of the practical tests and currently have no restrictions. The agenda here is to have the minimum standard of the CAD test period and if you do some research you'll be surprised how many colour normals who can easily read the ishihara plates cant pass the CAD.
The big issue here is that CASA are fighting with public money and the pilots have to fund this from there own wallet. Years ago an AAT case qualified for legal aid, what the hell happened to that? Its just not cricket, we need AIPA and the AFAP to come to step up and earn their keep, this is why we pay our fees.
SN
The big issue here is that CASA are fighting with public money and the pilots have to fund this from there own wallet. Years ago an AAT case qualified for legal aid, what the hell happened to that? Its just not cricket, we need AIPA and the AFAP to come to step up and earn their keep, this is why we pay our fees.
SN
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
note in the following that I don't use effing irritating abbreviations.
Pilots who are deficient in their abilities to sense colours and colors have no deficit in intelligence.
they have no deficit in self discipline.
in fact the colour/color deficit pilots that I personally know are seen by their critical peers as above average skilled pilots.
so my considered conclusion is that CAsA are total utter wankers in this matter.
my advise to CAsA, backed up by centuries of roman catholic church wisdom, is that if you don't stop wanking on this subject you'll all go blind.
bannning CVD (colour vision deficient) pilots is a stupid piece of pseudoscience.
can we make it plainer than that to the incompetents in CAsA?
....or do we have to shoot them?
Pilots who are deficient in their abilities to sense colours and colors have no deficit in intelligence.
they have no deficit in self discipline.
in fact the colour/color deficit pilots that I personally know are seen by their critical peers as above average skilled pilots.
so my considered conclusion is that CAsA are total utter wankers in this matter.
my advise to CAsA, backed up by centuries of roman catholic church wisdom, is that if you don't stop wanking on this subject you'll all go blind.
bannning CVD (colour vision deficient) pilots is a stupid piece of pseudoscience.
can we make it plainer than that to the incompetents in CAsA?
....or do we have to shoot them?
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The hong kong mason
What an incredulous Tool .
Do you actually have an aviation department in Aus ? - sounds like a beurocratic wing of the HK cad to me .
Spineless governmental rubbish .
Screaming skull never had the nuts to scream at Bundy B .
Nail these axxxxxes
Do you actually have an aviation department in Aus ? - sounds like a beurocratic wing of the HK cad to me .
Spineless governmental rubbish .
Screaming skull never had the nuts to scream at Bundy B .
Nail these axxxxxes
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call the next witness.
What we are witnessing, through the actions against CVD pilots is classic, clandestine CASA operating in broad daylight. Normally, witnessing this kind of 'treatment' is not a spectator sport; usually it's by special, private invitation only. Ever see a Chief pilot weeping in the car park; or an operator tearing hair out in the bank managers office, or a fellow pilot on the dole queue, well that's the result of a special invitation.
Until the cold, clammy hand of the 'regulator' has slithered around your neck, it is not possible for the average 'Joe' to remotely contemplate, let alone come to grips with exactly what individual victims are forced to deal with. I'll try to explain. There are 'classically' three elements to a CASA smoke, mirrors and safety show: an unfortunate, a 'safety' issue and an agenda.
The 'unfortunate' part is played by the hapless victim who has normally, in some way, had an 'event', take Quadrio for an example. A video on U bend tube leads to an administrative 'conviction'. The road to that 'conviction' and subsequent denial of an ability to earn a humble living as a joy flight pilot has been the subject of an intense two year investigative effort. The mere fact that evidence was always available to prove that Quadrio was not the pilot on the day has as yet, had no impact on his situation. In Pel Air – anyone could be forgiven reasonable doubts, the 'event' generated enough smoke to cover the agenda, had it not been publicly, openly and robustly examined the opinions formed and the event, would have been 'filed' away. This is not so in the CVD story; there is no 'event'.
Nothing untoward has occurred; except 20 years of reliable, normal service. This cannot therefore be parlayed into a 'safety case' through an 'event'. This is what makes the CVD issue unique; the 'safety-case' cannot be generated from event smoke, why? there ain't none, that's why. So other means must be used to satisfy 'the agenda'. I dare say O'Brien can enunciate and document the tale of woe and can probably find a handful of similar, supporting cases. There is a trail of breadcrumbs to follow from initial embuggerance to the final despicable 'letter' distribution. Classic tactics, only in public this time, against a bunch of innocents and their employers.
There was never a more valid reason nor better time to examine, in depth, the unsupportable machinations of a 'regulator' against the industry it serves. The list of damaged, disadvantaged operators, from the McComic years is long; the list of pilots administratively and clandestinely denied the right to work and put food on the table is as long again.
It is understandable that DPM Truss is reluctant to look retrospectively and to a degree, I can agree with the pragmatic approach but: to re-establish industry confidence – in short order – without addressing some of the aberrations and atrocities of the past five years will only serve to delay true rehabilitation. The CVD pilot embuggerance is occurring on 'his watch'. As a responsible, honest, competent minister of the crown he must act. Act swiftly, fairly, openly and honestly – and, while the tools are out, why not buff some of the detritus off the image of the 'regulator' by examining, in camera under Senate confidentiality some of the more onerous, outrageous events of the past few years.
Soft soap and white paper are very nice to have; but, equality, fairness and justice are the essentials men and women of this country fought and died for. We waste millions on land rights for gay whales, how about a little be put aside to give honest, hardworking Australian pilots a fair go. Those, who, through no fault of their own are being penalised in the most draconian way, loss of profession, loss of earning, loss of pride, loss of dignity, loss of mortgage, loss of kids education – just because some minor medico's running a sheltered workshop have decided to make it so. It's Bollocks.
It will cost less and achieve more to mount a Senate inquiry than it will to allow the flummery and hypocrisy of yet another AAAT 'hearing'. The commonwealth spent the money, 20 odd years ago to provide the ruling which has been proven correct, over two decades of 'non events'. It is not the AAT ruling which is flawed.
Selah – steam off.
Until the cold, clammy hand of the 'regulator' has slithered around your neck, it is not possible for the average 'Joe' to remotely contemplate, let alone come to grips with exactly what individual victims are forced to deal with. I'll try to explain. There are 'classically' three elements to a CASA smoke, mirrors and safety show: an unfortunate, a 'safety' issue and an agenda.
The 'unfortunate' part is played by the hapless victim who has normally, in some way, had an 'event', take Quadrio for an example. A video on U bend tube leads to an administrative 'conviction'. The road to that 'conviction' and subsequent denial of an ability to earn a humble living as a joy flight pilot has been the subject of an intense two year investigative effort. The mere fact that evidence was always available to prove that Quadrio was not the pilot on the day has as yet, had no impact on his situation. In Pel Air – anyone could be forgiven reasonable doubts, the 'event' generated enough smoke to cover the agenda, had it not been publicly, openly and robustly examined the opinions formed and the event, would have been 'filed' away. This is not so in the CVD story; there is no 'event'.
Nothing untoward has occurred; except 20 years of reliable, normal service. This cannot therefore be parlayed into a 'safety case' through an 'event'. This is what makes the CVD issue unique; the 'safety-case' cannot be generated from event smoke, why? there ain't none, that's why. So other means must be used to satisfy 'the agenda'. I dare say O'Brien can enunciate and document the tale of woe and can probably find a handful of similar, supporting cases. There is a trail of breadcrumbs to follow from initial embuggerance to the final despicable 'letter' distribution. Classic tactics, only in public this time, against a bunch of innocents and their employers.
There was never a more valid reason nor better time to examine, in depth, the unsupportable machinations of a 'regulator' against the industry it serves. The list of damaged, disadvantaged operators, from the McComic years is long; the list of pilots administratively and clandestinely denied the right to work and put food on the table is as long again.
It is understandable that DPM Truss is reluctant to look retrospectively and to a degree, I can agree with the pragmatic approach but: to re-establish industry confidence – in short order – without addressing some of the aberrations and atrocities of the past five years will only serve to delay true rehabilitation. The CVD pilot embuggerance is occurring on 'his watch'. As a responsible, honest, competent minister of the crown he must act. Act swiftly, fairly, openly and honestly – and, while the tools are out, why not buff some of the detritus off the image of the 'regulator' by examining, in camera under Senate confidentiality some of the more onerous, outrageous events of the past few years.
Soft soap and white paper are very nice to have; but, equality, fairness and justice are the essentials men and women of this country fought and died for. We waste millions on land rights for gay whales, how about a little be put aside to give honest, hardworking Australian pilots a fair go. Those, who, through no fault of their own are being penalised in the most draconian way, loss of profession, loss of earning, loss of pride, loss of dignity, loss of mortgage, loss of kids education – just because some minor medico's running a sheltered workshop have decided to make it so. It's Bollocks.
It will cost less and achieve more to mount a Senate inquiry than it will to allow the flummery and hypocrisy of yet another AAAT 'hearing'. The commonwealth spent the money, 20 odd years ago to provide the ruling which has been proven correct, over two decades of 'non events'. It is not the AAT ruling which is flawed.
Selah – steam off.
Last edited by Kharon; 8th Jun 2014 at 21:07.
A Truth commission..??
When so many ***** in CAsA dont know the meaning of the word "truth" then we have a problem.
A Judicial enquiry, to allow the Quadrios and Butsons of this industry be heard...and actions taken, wrongs righted and a new proper regulator, based on common sense and sanity bought into being.
Its either a complete make over or a revolution, civil disobedience , whatever.
Root and branch, twig, trunk and dead wood, the whole CAsA tree needs up- rooting and the axe.
Chop, chop, W Truss. time is short.
A Judicial enquiry, to allow the Quadrios and Butsons of this industry be heard...and actions taken, wrongs righted and a new proper regulator, based on common sense and sanity bought into being.
Its either a complete make over or a revolution, civil disobedience , whatever.
Root and branch, twig, trunk and dead wood, the whole CAsA tree needs up- rooting and the axe.
Chop, chop, W Truss. time is short.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aroa, I heartily agree, the "Truth Commission" was very much tongue in cheek, but the truth commission in SA was very much about Government embuggerance and the corruption it generated.
Sen Fawcett -Chair of Parliamentary Friends of Aviation
Senator Fawcett has championed many aviation related causes and now he is banging the drum on the CVD phallacy i.e. that CVD pilots are, contrary to empirical evidence, a risk to aviation safety.
At the recent Estimates, in an exchange with McComic & the PMO, DF made this statement:
Do you reckon the bloke has got a handle on the CVD matter?? You bet... Do you think he is going to NOW slap down the matter with an obligatory wet lettuce...hmm well if his campaign on Airports is anything to go by FF/ATsBeaker/Dept etc are simply dreaming...
{Comment: Also recently DF was made the Chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Aviation, see..The Fawcett Flyer March 2014}
At the recent Estimates, in an exchange with McComic & the PMO, DF made this statement:
Senator FAWCETT: Before we go to Dr Navathe on that, your previous principal medical officers—Brock, Liddell and Wilkins—have all had a different view. They respect the medical science but Brock, in particular, has gone to ICAO and some of his documentation indicates that at the vision and colour deficient working group they actually acknowledged that a lot of their current rule set was not necessarily good at determining whether a person was competent to fly an aircraft. It was just good at determining if they had a colour vision deficiency. It was for that reason that Mr Brock allowed people to do a flight test where they could demonstrate in an aircraft their ability to operate it. On that basis, there are now people who have CVD—that is proven, and they do not dispute that—who are now operating airline aircrafts as captains around the world. So CASA has in fact previously established a precedent that has shown there is an alternative third level of testing that accepts the fact that somebody may have CVD but that is not a determinant as to whether they can competently and safely operate an aircraft. My question is, with all due respect to the theoretical approach, which the CAA in the UK has taken: what steps have we taken to build upon Australia's 25 years of experience to provide an alternative means of demonstrating whether a person is safe in an aircraft and not whether he or she has a colour vision deficiency?
Do you think he is going to NOW slap down the matter with an obligatory wet lettuce...hmm well if his campaign on Airports is anything to go by FF/ATsBeaker/Dept etc are simply dreaming...{Comment: Also recently DF was made the Chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Aviation, see..The Fawcett Flyer March 2014}
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm?? thought bubble expanding here....
Is CAsA getting a little pressure put on them by ICAO??..you know as in..
"Now old boy, really!! team effort an all that..you cant just go running off and doing your own thing...I mean team spirit and all that...united front, what!... cant have "evidence" interfering with things can we!!...more caviar old boy...another cigar??"
Which sort of begs the question?....
If we cant influence ICAO with indisputable "Evidence", what the hell are we doing spending Gazillions sending numpies to gabfests and various ICAO committee meetings all over the world...I mean what the hell are they going to "Influence" they don't understand half of what's happening here!!
In other words " WHATS IN IT FOR US" and by that I mean Australian industry and those that work in it, not the industry Rejects that inhabit CAsA.
Oh and Sarc'si, he knows, he knows. Finally a Pollie who can recognize Bullsh..t from half a mile away...would love to see the last video, he who must not be named was very close to losing it.
Is CAsA getting a little pressure put on them by ICAO??..you know as in..
"Now old boy, really!! team effort an all that..you cant just go running off and doing your own thing...I mean team spirit and all that...united front, what!... cant have "evidence" interfering with things can we!!...more caviar old boy...another cigar??"
Which sort of begs the question?....
If we cant influence ICAO with indisputable "Evidence", what the hell are we doing spending Gazillions sending numpies to gabfests and various ICAO committee meetings all over the world...I mean what the hell are they going to "Influence" they don't understand half of what's happening here!!
In other words " WHATS IN IT FOR US" and by that I mean Australian industry and those that work in it, not the industry Rejects that inhabit CAsA.
Oh and Sarc'si, he knows, he knows. Finally a Pollie who can recognize Bullsh..t from half a mile away...would love to see the last video, he who must not be named was very close to losing it.
Last edited by thorn bird; 9th Jun 2014 at 07:21.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh and Sarc'si, he knows, he knows. Finally a Pollie who can recognize Bullsh..t from half a mile away...would love to see the last video, he who must not be named was very close to losing it.
All CASA are doing here is shifting the responsiability elsewhere & in this case onto the AOC holder, one less thing for CASA to be held responsible for
It's all about ass covering & we all know how CASA have that down real pat!
Wmk2
It's all about ass covering & we all know how CASA have that down real pat!
Wmk2