Class 2 Medical: Two Sets of Specs for Assessment
Must be middle admin staff gone mad.
It is something that has been niggling at me for ages. I've been trying to define, concisely, the CASA characteristic that is of most concern to the industry.
Over the years, many people have alleged 'corruption' against various people in CASA or CASA generally. But the word 'corruption' has a number of connotations. The word is usually understood to mean actions taken by an individual for the individual's personal gain. But corruption in that sense is a very rare occurrence and, I suggest, not the main cause of the problems about which the aviation industry generally complains.
Then I stumbled across the definition of a different kind of 'corruption', and I had an epiphany: Noble Cause Corruption.
From Wikipedia:
Noble cause corruption is corruption caused by the adherence to a teleological ethical system, suggesting that people will use unethical or illegal means to attain desirable goals, a result which appears to benefit the greater good. Where traditional corruption is defined by personal gain, noble cause corruptions[sic] forms when someone is convinced of their righteousness, and will do anything within their powers to achieve the desired result. An example of noble cause corruption is police misconduct "committed in the name of good ends" or neglect of due process through “a moral commitment to make the world a safer place to live."
Conditions for such corruption usually occur where individuals feel no administrative accountability, lack morale and leadership, and lose faith in the criminal justice system. These conditions can be compounded by arrogance and weak supervision.
Conditions for such corruption usually occur where individuals feel no administrative accountability, lack morale and leadership, and lose faith in the criminal justice system. These conditions can be compounded by arrogance and weak supervision.
The "safety of air navigation" is such a very, very noble cause.
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: South Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi There! First post and looking forward to using this great resource some more.
I'm looking to start towards RPL then PPL. However, I want to get my medical out of the way first before I spend a lot of money on training.
I wear specs and have been told I need to bring two pairs of glasses to my CASA Class 2 medical. I understand you require a spare when flying but didn't think I would need to present both pairs at the medical.
My prescription is pretty specialised (read expensive) so I was only planning on buying another set of specs once I was told I was OK from a medical perspective since I have no need for a spare in my daily life.
Can anybody confirm this is the requirement or whether the receptionist just got it wrong? I thought they were testing my eyesight, not my glasses!
Appreciate any advice you guys have!
Thanks,
Watson
I'm looking to start towards RPL then PPL. However, I want to get my medical out of the way first before I spend a lot of money on training.
I wear specs and have been told I need to bring two pairs of glasses to my CASA Class 2 medical. I understand you require a spare when flying but didn't think I would need to present both pairs at the medical.
My prescription is pretty specialised (read expensive) so I was only planning on buying another set of specs once I was told I was OK from a medical perspective since I have no need for a spare in my daily life.
Can anybody confirm this is the requirement or whether the receptionist just got it wrong? I thought they were testing my eyesight, not my glasses!
Appreciate any advice you guys have!
Thanks,
Watson
Clinton... what a fabulous find and timely nugget of info to put me straight about CAsA.
The CAsA Soviet is corrupt, their style of "governance" is corrupt, and there are people in the rotten place known to be corrupt.
The place is a Clusterfcuk of the 1st Magnitude.
But now I am wiser, thanks.. the correct terminology is then Noble Cause Corruption.
ps Just reading Bomber Command, memoir of Sir Arthur Harris.
Top read ...and I quote his comment of early 1943
"...the progressive multiplication of government regulations and controls, operated by 'civil servants', who themselves are multiplying fast, is leading the country to catastrophe...complete and perhaps irreparable."
Nearly there.
The CAsA Soviet is corrupt, their style of "governance" is corrupt, and there are people in the rotten place known to be corrupt.
The place is a Clusterfcuk of the 1st Magnitude.
But now I am wiser, thanks.. the correct terminology is then Noble Cause Corruption.
ps Just reading Bomber Command, memoir of Sir Arthur Harris.
Top read ...and I quote his comment of early 1943
"...the progressive multiplication of government regulations and controls, operated by 'civil servants', who themselves are multiplying fast, is leading the country to catastrophe...complete and perhaps irreparable."
Nearly there.
So a lot of us have heard of this, but nobody thus far can show us where it says to take two pair with you to the DAME? My last medical, I didn't get told, I didn't take two, guess what happened? Nothing.
While I do carry a spare pair, and I suspect most pilots do likewise, I also use a flight helmet, and while I could remove my glasses if say a lens fell out, there is not one chance in hell of getting the spare pair of specs back on in flight. I've also not had a spectacle failure in over 50 years. i.e. never.
Nice research Clint.
While I do carry a spare pair, and I suspect most pilots do likewise, I also use a flight helmet, and while I could remove my glasses if say a lens fell out, there is not one chance in hell of getting the spare pair of specs back on in flight. I've also not had a spectacle failure in over 50 years. i.e. never.
Nice research Clint.
From the "DAME Newsletter - September 2016" here: https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and...september-2016
Why are applicants "required to bring" a spare pair to the medical examination? Because someone in AVMED woke up one morning and decided it was a bright idea to help save the world, that's why.
AVMED just makes this **** up as they go along.
Wear glasses when they fly? Remind them to bring their spare pair
If an applicant wears contact lenses or glasses when they fly, they are required to bring their spare pair of glasses with them to their aviation medical examination.
To avoid any unnecessary delay in the medical certification process, ask your receptionists to remind applicants to bring their spare glasses when booking aviation medicals.
If an applicant wears contact lenses or glasses when they fly, they are required to bring their spare pair of glasses with them to their aviation medical examination.
To avoid any unnecessary delay in the medical certification process, ask your receptionists to remind applicants to bring their spare glasses when booking aviation medicals.
AVMED just makes this **** up as they go along.
Seriously..? Two pairs to the medical renewal? Thank God I go to a DAME that see's things practically. Ticks the pointless boxes that need to be be ticked and then spends the majority of the time making sure I'm healthy.
A health care professional spending his time on my health and not mindless Casa bureaucracy... Who would of thought.
A health care professional spending his time on my health and not mindless Casa bureaucracy... Who would of thought.
Next requirement will be for the glasses to be certified by the DAME so CASA can check that the designated glasses are in your possession when ramp checked..
Me? I just keep multiple pairs of cheap readers (which is all I need) in pockets, flight bags, etc. Luckily all I need is 'reading correction"/ i tried multifocals once and almost pranged the aircraft on landing. Glasses are now removed by final.
Me? I just keep multiple pairs of cheap readers (which is all I need) in pockets, flight bags, etc. Luckily all I need is 'reading correction"/ i tried multifocals once and almost pranged the aircraft on landing. Glasses are now removed by final.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 日本
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's okay, it's not just CASA 
The JCAB (Japanese) LOVE this bull and they certainly do test the glasses as well as the person. At my last medical I did the eyesight test without glasses and passed. Well done me but it didn't end there. The girl saw that I had glasses in my hand (since I couldn't leave them anywhere else and was in the eyesight department) and I explained that at night I get a bit of short-sightedness but surely that's irrelevant. No, no!! Even more unfortunate was I had a pair of progressive glasses (since my near-sight is pretty much spot on) and a straight pair of glasses for the bit of short-sight. Well, first of all was the sucking of teeth to decide if that counted as two pairs of glasses....all the while ignoring the very fact that I did not need them....eventually, after raising my blood pressure a bit and suggesting the whole bloody thing was stupid and that I'd come back another day with NO glasses on my person, they relented and decided that it was almost okay. But wait, "now you have glasses you must do a test with the glasses". No, no kidding. Even though I'm fine without, I then had to do the whole thing again, TWICE, using the progressive and straight prescription (even though they're both the same strength). Near sight AND far sight, the whole gambit. 1:20 for the eyesight test!!! That was in addition to waiting for the girl to test the glasses....both pairs of course.
SO, maybe, taking two pairs of cheaters to the CASA doc isn't such a problem
The JCAB (Japanese) LOVE this bull and they certainly do test the glasses as well as the person. At my last medical I did the eyesight test without glasses and passed. Well done me but it didn't end there. The girl saw that I had glasses in my hand (since I couldn't leave them anywhere else and was in the eyesight department) and I explained that at night I get a bit of short-sightedness but surely that's irrelevant. No, no!! Even more unfortunate was I had a pair of progressive glasses (since my near-sight is pretty much spot on) and a straight pair of glasses for the bit of short-sight. Well, first of all was the sucking of teeth to decide if that counted as two pairs of glasses....all the while ignoring the very fact that I did not need them....eventually, after raising my blood pressure a bit and suggesting the whole bloody thing was stupid and that I'd come back another day with NO glasses on my person, they relented and decided that it was almost okay. But wait, "now you have glasses you must do a test with the glasses". No, no kidding. Even though I'm fine without, I then had to do the whole thing again, TWICE, using the progressive and straight prescription (even though they're both the same strength). Near sight AND far sight, the whole gambit. 1:20 for the eyesight test!!! That was in addition to waiting for the girl to test the glasses....both pairs of course.SO, maybe, taking two pairs of cheaters to the CASA doc isn't such a problem
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All,
Just wanted to update this post in case anybody is interested. I went for photochromatic lenses which have been great so far (though I read in DAME handbook that AvMed don't like them). But I have two pairs of glasses now which is great.
I had congenital cataracts as a child so AvMed requested more information which means I did the eye test for a Class 1 Medical even though I'm going for Class 2.
I had some issues with my contrast vision doing the sine wave tests at the most difficult level. Also, I completely flunked the stereo vision test though I understand from further reading that monocular pilots are OK. I actually didn't even know I had no depth perception (produced by my eyes at least) until the assessment so it was quite interesting. Both my eyes function at the same level from a visual acuity perspective but my brain only takes the signal from one eye at a time.
I'm a little nervous this will negatively impact my application but time will tell and fingers crossed. The RPC is still an option from me if this doesn't work out, or maybe I can do some further types of testing to verify my contrast vision is adequate. Not much i can do about the stereoscopic vision though!
Just wanted to update this post in case anybody is interested. I went for photochromatic lenses which have been great so far (though I read in DAME handbook that AvMed don't like them). But I have two pairs of glasses now which is great.
I had congenital cataracts as a child so AvMed requested more information which means I did the eye test for a Class 1 Medical even though I'm going for Class 2.
I had some issues with my contrast vision doing the sine wave tests at the most difficult level. Also, I completely flunked the stereo vision test though I understand from further reading that monocular pilots are OK. I actually didn't even know I had no depth perception (produced by my eyes at least) until the assessment so it was quite interesting. Both my eyes function at the same level from a visual acuity perspective but my brain only takes the signal from one eye at a time.
I'm a little nervous this will negatively impact my application but time will tell and fingers crossed. The RPC is still an option from me if this doesn't work out, or maybe I can do some further types of testing to verify my contrast vision is adequate. Not much i can do about the stereoscopic vision though!
I once had the screw holding one of the arms fall out during a flight so yes, a spare pair is necessary. CASA probably got wise to people just buying a $9.99 pair of reading glasses to show as a back up and decided to check that they were the correct prescription.
Back in the 1990s the opthalmologist doing my initial eye exam told me that photocromatic lenses weren't allowed because a DC9 Captain had a heavy landing after flying on top in bright sunshine and then descending through low cloud which didn't allow the lenses time to adjust before arrival
Back in the 1990s the opthalmologist doing my initial eye exam told me that photocromatic lenses weren't allowed because a DC9 Captain had a heavy landing after flying on top in bright sunshine and then descending through low cloud which didn't allow the lenses time to adjust before arrival
I once had the screw holding one of the arms fall out during a flight so yes, a spare pair is necessary. CASA probably got wise to people just buying a $9.99 pair of reading glasses to show as a back up and decided to check that they were the correct prescription.
Back in the 1990s the opthalmologist doing my initial eye exam told me that photocromatic lenses weren't allowed because a DC9 Captain had a heavy landing after flying on top in bright sunshine and then descending through low cloud which didn't allow the lenses time to adjust before arrival
Back in the 1990s the opthalmologist doing my initial eye exam told me that photocromatic lenses weren't allowed because a DC9 Captain had a heavy landing after flying on top in bright sunshine and then descending through low cloud which didn't allow the lenses time to adjust before arrival
In the case of the people in the habit of not carrying adequate spare vision correction, how does making them turn up to a doctor’s surgery with it once every one or two years make them change that habit? The people whose thought processes result in them taking the risk of not carrying adequate spare vision correction apply the same thought processes to the problem of turning up at the doctor’s surgery with a spare that can be used to pass the test.
Policing an operational requirement in a non-operational environment is a nonsense.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Toowoomba
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clinton,
You have correctly identified that the problem is noble cause corruption.
Once suffering from it a person may then be corrupt in other ways or the organisation operating under this culture is then vulnerable to a few bad actors within it.
The problem isn't confined to CASA, in RAAus to some extent and particularly GFA, the problem of noble cause corruption is embedded in the culture of the organisation.
It can result in unnecessary expense, very poor safety outcomes and bullying and vicious persecution of individuals and small groups within the organisation, made worse by the compulsory membership of the bodies which prevents the operation of market forces by people being able to walk away.
Part 149 will make this worse next year when implemented.
You have correctly identified that the problem is noble cause corruption.
Once suffering from it a person may then be corrupt in other ways or the organisation operating under this culture is then vulnerable to a few bad actors within it.
The problem isn't confined to CASA, in RAAus to some extent and particularly GFA, the problem of noble cause corruption is embedded in the culture of the organisation.
It can result in unnecessary expense, very poor safety outcomes and bullying and vicious persecution of individuals and small groups within the organisation, made worse by the compulsory membership of the bodies which prevents the operation of market forces by people being able to walk away.
Part 149 will make this worse next year when implemented.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A further update: I have been referred to the AvMed Complex Case Management board because of my congenital cataracts. I'm not too surprised, it's pretty rare for a kid to have cataracts. However it adds another couple of weeks at least to a decision or the next step in any case.
I'm starting to realise that RAAus RPC might have been the way to go anyway (which doesn't require the CASA Class 2) but I will still see this process through to the end since I've sunk a fair bit of money into the affair (second pair of glasses, medical, ophthalmic report, CASA processing fee). Also, if I am successful I don't think I'll face the same barriers every 4 years as my condition is completely stable and I may want to get RPL or PPL in future (though reading some of these threads in here makes me wonder if it's worth it!)
Hope this info shows up someday for some "Cataracts Kid" like me when they do some Google searching on cataracts and medicals in the future.
I'm starting to realise that RAAus RPC might have been the way to go anyway (which doesn't require the CASA Class 2) but I will still see this process through to the end since I've sunk a fair bit of money into the affair (second pair of glasses, medical, ophthalmic report, CASA processing fee). Also, if I am successful I don't think I'll face the same barriers every 4 years as my condition is completely stable and I may want to get RPL or PPL in future (though reading some of these threads in here makes me wonder if it's worth it!)
Hope this info shows up someday for some "Cataracts Kid" like me when they do some Google searching on cataracts and medicals in the future.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you hinting at the RAMPC option? I have heard it mentioned but didn't really know the details.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really. From what I understand about that, It’s fine unless you have an anomaly. In which case, they put you through the same expensive hoop jumping exercises. If you ‘fail’, you have to to do a Class 2 anyway. Requirements are not effectively relaxed. You just have the choice of a non CASA examiner.
What I was wondering is if your anomaly is an issue for anyone other than Avmed. It seems possibly not. Presumably, your drivers licence allows you to drive in all weathers, day or night, near schools, shopping centres etc etc, with no significant risk of carnage and mayhem.
What I was wondering is if your anomaly is an issue for anyone other than Avmed. It seems possibly not. Presumably, your drivers licence allows you to drive in all weathers, day or night, near schools, shopping centres etc etc, with no significant risk of carnage and mayhem.
Further update, I've been asked to get a report from an ophthalmologist to provide information on the risk of double vision (how is an ophthalmologist better placed than the owner of a set of eyes to say whether I get double vision) and for information on the effects of my reduced contrast sensitivity to operate at night or in dusk conditions.
Another $250 in the hole. So far CASA has had me spend:
- $1,000 on a second set of glasses (glasses are quite specialised).
- $200 for optometrist consultations.
- $275 for medical (I probably could have got it cheaper if I went out of the CBD).
- $75 for CASA processing fee.
- $250 for ophthalmic review.
And my medical has taken 1 and a half months so far.
They sure know how to take the shine off something that's supposed to be exciting and fun. I understand I shouldn't have these issues when I come to renew my medical but holy God this has been tedious.
Last edited by Econwatson; 9th Nov 2017 at 23:27.
You were going to have to buy, beg, borrow or steal the spare set in order to comply with the carriage requirement in any event. Whilst it may be mitigation for a very remote risk, few would argue that it’s overkill. However, given that you are allowed to drive in any conditions without restriction, the other specialist requirements are typical AVMED overreach.
The problem is that when any and every perceived risk is conjured into an aviation catastrophe, any and all purported mitigation actions can be justified in theory. Sadly, the practical effects can be adverse to safety. There are many other manifestations of this problem.
You are getting a clear (vision-corrected) insight into some of the things that are killing the Australian aviation industry.
The problem is that when any and every perceived risk is conjured into an aviation catastrophe, any and all purported mitigation actions can be justified in theory. Sadly, the practical effects can be adverse to safety. There are many other manifestations of this problem.
You are getting a clear (vision-corrected) insight into some of the things that are killing the Australian aviation industry.
Last edited by Clinton McKenzie; 10th Nov 2017 at 23:44. Reason: Fixed spello
Provided the legal requirement of available adequate spare correction is at least met, individuals are of course free to take whatever extra precautions they consider appropriate.
I’m guessing you don’t take the third set to your medical examination? I’m also guessing that you consider yourself perfectly capable of determining whether the third set is adequate by, for example, using this complex procedure:
1. Don spare vision correction.
2. Confirm that you can see everything you need to see, properly.
If that’s what you’re doing, are you sure you’re not being irresponsibly dangerous?
If your second set is only adequate if it’s been confirmed adequate during your medical examination, as required by AVMED, it follows that your third set is not an adequate backup in the event of failure of the first two sets, unless the third set has been confirmed adequate during your medical examination. This is the inexorable conclusion of AVMED’s reasoning.
I’m guessing you don’t take the third set to your medical examination? I’m also guessing that you consider yourself perfectly capable of determining whether the third set is adequate by, for example, using this complex procedure:
1. Don spare vision correction.
2. Confirm that you can see everything you need to see, properly.
If that’s what you’re doing, are you sure you’re not being irresponsibly dangerous?
If your second set is only adequate if it’s been confirmed adequate during your medical examination, as required by AVMED, it follows that your third set is not an adequate backup in the event of failure of the first two sets, unless the third set has been confirmed adequate during your medical examination. This is the inexorable conclusion of AVMED’s reasoning.
Next requirement will be for the glasses to be certified by the DAME so CASA can check that the designated glasses are in your possession when ramp checked..
Me? I just keep multiple pairs of cheap readers (which is all I need) in pockets, flight bags, etc. Luckily all I need is 'reading correction"/ i tried multifocals once and almost pranged the aircraft on landing. Glasses are now removed by final.
Me? I just keep multiple pairs of cheap readers (which is all I need) in pockets, flight bags, etc. Luckily all I need is 'reading correction"/ i tried multifocals once and almost pranged the aircraft on landing. Glasses are now removed by final.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All!
Just wanted to provide you with the final chapter of my saga with CASA:
I was asked by CASA to undertake an operational check to determine my ability to read instruments, line up on a runway and judge flare.
This accomplished I provided the report to CASA who have now issued me with a Class 2 Medical. The conditions are that the medical has to be renewed every two years (from the date of my medical which is now 3 months ago and 28 days before the renewal date which means it's basically only valid for 20 months).
It is predictably not valid for ag flying, choppers and specifies I don't meet ICAO Chapter 6. I'm also on audit.
I am really happy I have my Class 2 Medical but it is soured somewhat by the onerous conditions and the 3 months it took to get it. Do you think I should appeal these conditions now or wait until my renewal? With the upcoming changes to the medical system I think I'd be better off waiting to see what the new system looks like.
Cheers!
Just wanted to provide you with the final chapter of my saga with CASA:
I was asked by CASA to undertake an operational check to determine my ability to read instruments, line up on a runway and judge flare.
This accomplished I provided the report to CASA who have now issued me with a Class 2 Medical. The conditions are that the medical has to be renewed every two years (from the date of my medical which is now 3 months ago and 28 days before the renewal date which means it's basically only valid for 20 months).
It is predictably not valid for ag flying, choppers and specifies I don't meet ICAO Chapter 6. I'm also on audit.
I am really happy I have my Class 2 Medical but it is soured somewhat by the onerous conditions and the 3 months it took to get it. Do you think I should appeal these conditions now or wait until my renewal? With the upcoming changes to the medical system I think I'd be better off waiting to see what the new system looks like.
Cheers!
