CAE not social distancing
It’s naive to think that you would not catch the virus working in a control tower more than a couple of metres from your co-worker.
It’s all about surfaces, bathrooms, door handles and the like. It may slow it down but it won’t stop it.
It’s all about surfaces, bathrooms, door handles and the like. It may slow it down but it won’t stop it.
That's it exactly, the plan is not to stop it but to slow it down.
This from a DAME a couple of days ago:
"Having said that, I support the current government process and am very resistant to the calls to shut us down further at this time - that time will come. Currently the World-o-Meters has us pegged with 23 serious cases in Australia. Hardly sufficient to overwhelm our health care (I think 2200 ICU beds across the country).
COVID-19 was identified as a pandemic in mid-January by the Australian Government. If the world wanted to "eradicate" COVID-19, that was the time to act. The problem is, if we eradicated it in Australia, we would have to permanently close the borders or instigate a quarantine for ALL entrants to Australia forever! This is because it was rampant elsewhere and we could never know who would or wouldn’t have it.
The alternative, which the Australian Government chose, was to allow it to occur, but to manage the spread. The idea is that at the end of the pandemic, we have an entire country that has been exposed to it and either died or recovered (hopefully with immunity).
COVID-19 transfers very easily between community members and the problem with this is that, while 80% of the population experience mild symptoms, the remaining 20% can get very sick, some needing up to 2 weeks in ICU. If the entire population of Australia (25M) was exposed within a month, say, then we would be looking at managing 5M sick people within that month. The health system can’t manage that!
Everyone has heard of "flattening the curve”. All we are trying to do is, instead of managing 5M in 1 month, we want to manage the same 5M over say, 6 months.
Isolation is for suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19. This is a 2 week period of not leaving your home until you are either show no signs of symptoms or you have testing come back as negative.
Distancing is designed to slow the spread with people who may have contracted but have no/minor symptoms.
I have posted on private doctors’ forums my opinion of the current situation these simple facts:
- Nearly 100% of the population will be exposed - we can’t help that
- There is no cure
- There is no vaccine and unlikely to be one for 12-18 months
- 80%+ of the population will barely notice contracting the virus
- There is an issue with overwhelming the healthcare system - hence we need to slow the spread to ensure that people will have adequate healthcare available when they need it
- The people who are likely to struggle with it the most are old, immunocompromised or have significant co-morbidities (mainly respiratory)
The issue with a complete lockdown, is all we achieve is postponing an inevitable event.
Let’s say we made everyone sit at home for 2 weeks (except healthcare workers and emergency services). Let’s assume we could get food/water etc to everyone for the two weeks. At the end of the two weeks there would likely be no more cases within Australia. Then we return to full normal functions and one person re-introduces it back - whether it be by travel, or a number of people without symptoms acting as a reservoir. That puts us back at square one to start again. This just doesn’t work!
We need to control the spread of the virus through our population. Unfortunately, we don’t have many ways to do this - its not like we can see who has it and is spreading it. So that leaves us with very blunt levers.
Currently the opinion is that healthy children are very unaffected by the virus. Therefore they have been allowed to continue with their schooling. I can’t work out the reason for this - to reduce them spreading it to parents/grandparents? to keep their parents (especially healthcare workers) working? To promote some spread within the population? I always say that if there is a number of plausible explanations, it is probably a combination of them all, rather than one specific reason.
So now the government is trying to slow this spread, but keep the spread going.
If we close down to fast, then we don’t have enough spread, numbers dwindle, peoples patience fatigues meaning that when we actually need to shut everything down - people resist and we return to a steep curve. Further, our health care system will be working significantly below capacity, prolonging the time to 100% infection in the community.
If we close down too slow, we are back to the steep curve with an overwhelmed health care system.
So the blunt levers that the government has is restriction of movement for well people - this can be tighter/looser depending on our current infection numbers. I am predicting that when the numbers get high, we will close down schools, hair dressers, take-aways etc and when the numbers dwindle these will be re-opened, and I think we will see this open/close/open/close process as we cycle through the process.
So back to your question, we should be isolating those with genuine risk, and distancing those who haven’t had it yet.
As for complete isolation for remote areas, I don’t see the point (remember, I don’t have all the information that the government has), because, they will need to be exposed at some point (unless they want to be locked down for 18 months while a vaccine is developed and introduced.
The same as when you get in a car/plane/motorcycle, you take safety precautions (seatbelts, transponders, helmets, follow the rules), we need to be doing this now.
Does it guarantee your safety, nope, all life ends. Cars/motorbikes have accidents, planes fall out of the sky, but it doesn’t stop you living.
My biggest critique of the current government is the lack of information they have provided to support their plan and the massive amount of fear-mongering going on within the community, both medical and non-medical."
This from a DAME a couple of days ago:
"Having said that, I support the current government process and am very resistant to the calls to shut us down further at this time - that time will come. Currently the World-o-Meters has us pegged with 23 serious cases in Australia. Hardly sufficient to overwhelm our health care (I think 2200 ICU beds across the country).
COVID-19 was identified as a pandemic in mid-January by the Australian Government. If the world wanted to "eradicate" COVID-19, that was the time to act. The problem is, if we eradicated it in Australia, we would have to permanently close the borders or instigate a quarantine for ALL entrants to Australia forever! This is because it was rampant elsewhere and we could never know who would or wouldn’t have it.
The alternative, which the Australian Government chose, was to allow it to occur, but to manage the spread. The idea is that at the end of the pandemic, we have an entire country that has been exposed to it and either died or recovered (hopefully with immunity).
COVID-19 transfers very easily between community members and the problem with this is that, while 80% of the population experience mild symptoms, the remaining 20% can get very sick, some needing up to 2 weeks in ICU. If the entire population of Australia (25M) was exposed within a month, say, then we would be looking at managing 5M sick people within that month. The health system can’t manage that!
Everyone has heard of "flattening the curve”. All we are trying to do is, instead of managing 5M in 1 month, we want to manage the same 5M over say, 6 months.
Isolation is for suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19. This is a 2 week period of not leaving your home until you are either show no signs of symptoms or you have testing come back as negative.
Distancing is designed to slow the spread with people who may have contracted but have no/minor symptoms.
I have posted on private doctors’ forums my opinion of the current situation these simple facts:
- Nearly 100% of the population will be exposed - we can’t help that
- There is no cure
- There is no vaccine and unlikely to be one for 12-18 months
- 80%+ of the population will barely notice contracting the virus
- There is an issue with overwhelming the healthcare system - hence we need to slow the spread to ensure that people will have adequate healthcare available when they need it
- The people who are likely to struggle with it the most are old, immunocompromised or have significant co-morbidities (mainly respiratory)
The issue with a complete lockdown, is all we achieve is postponing an inevitable event.
Let’s say we made everyone sit at home for 2 weeks (except healthcare workers and emergency services). Let’s assume we could get food/water etc to everyone for the two weeks. At the end of the two weeks there would likely be no more cases within Australia. Then we return to full normal functions and one person re-introduces it back - whether it be by travel, or a number of people without symptoms acting as a reservoir. That puts us back at square one to start again. This just doesn’t work!
We need to control the spread of the virus through our population. Unfortunately, we don’t have many ways to do this - its not like we can see who has it and is spreading it. So that leaves us with very blunt levers.
Currently the opinion is that healthy children are very unaffected by the virus. Therefore they have been allowed to continue with their schooling. I can’t work out the reason for this - to reduce them spreading it to parents/grandparents? to keep their parents (especially healthcare workers) working? To promote some spread within the population? I always say that if there is a number of plausible explanations, it is probably a combination of them all, rather than one specific reason.
So now the government is trying to slow this spread, but keep the spread going.
If we close down to fast, then we don’t have enough spread, numbers dwindle, peoples patience fatigues meaning that when we actually need to shut everything down - people resist and we return to a steep curve. Further, our health care system will be working significantly below capacity, prolonging the time to 100% infection in the community.
If we close down too slow, we are back to the steep curve with an overwhelmed health care system.
So the blunt levers that the government has is restriction of movement for well people - this can be tighter/looser depending on our current infection numbers. I am predicting that when the numbers get high, we will close down schools, hair dressers, take-aways etc and when the numbers dwindle these will be re-opened, and I think we will see this open/close/open/close process as we cycle through the process.
So back to your question, we should be isolating those with genuine risk, and distancing those who haven’t had it yet.
As for complete isolation for remote areas, I don’t see the point (remember, I don’t have all the information that the government has), because, they will need to be exposed at some point (unless they want to be locked down for 18 months while a vaccine is developed and introduced.
The same as when you get in a car/plane/motorcycle, you take safety precautions (seatbelts, transponders, helmets, follow the rules), we need to be doing this now.
Does it guarantee your safety, nope, all life ends. Cars/motorbikes have accidents, planes fall out of the sky, but it doesn’t stop you living.
My biggest critique of the current government is the lack of information they have provided to support their plan and the massive amount of fear-mongering going on within the community, both medical and non-medical."
It’s a simple fact that it appears governments don’t want to state simply:
Most if not all of us are going to be infected, eventually.
The plan is to try to ensure the infection rate does not overwhelm our ICU capacity, by slowing the spread.
Most if not all of us are going to be infected, eventually.
The plan is to try to ensure the infection rate does not overwhelm our ICU capacity, by slowing the spread.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite what my personal opinion is on this whole COVID-19 situation and how this is handled worldwide, the fact is that as a responsible flight school you should not continue your operations. CAE Phoenix only started to take some cleaning measures a few days ago and they still allow training flights with both student and FI's sitting in a confined space together. Instead of closing down their ops temporarily they are letting the choice to fly or not to fly up to both students and instructors. They are trying to let students return home (at own expense of course) which they in fact prefer as they are dealing with severe training capacity constraints in PHX and this would give them a temporarily relief. The question is not if remaining open is acceptable or safe to do so, because that doesn't even matter nowadays. In these times it would be irresponsible as a company to keep on doing as if nothing is happening. The public opinion is very strong and they will decide what is acceptable or not. At the moment they say they are considered an 'essential' company or service, but is it? Nobody is waiting for these pilots to finish their training because there are no planes to fly with now, so of course this is not essential in these times
In Europe CAE did already close training facilities etc, so no point in rushing the flight training.
In Europe CAE did already close training facilities etc, so no point in rushing the flight training.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Currently: A landlocked country with high terrain, otherwise Melbourne, Australia + Washington D.C.
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We were already part of a ‘great experiment’ called ‘natural selection’. Humans have always been merely life support systems for bugs. Sometimes the bugs get too strong and kill their host. Those bugs don’t survive. Sometimes the host kills the bugs. Those hosts don’t survive. It’s a symbiosis.
(PS: Response to PM sent.)
Except the RAAF absolutely has a national security imperative to continue training operations. The demand for pilots within Air Force isn't going anywhere; one could argue in this interesting geopolitical times, it may actually be increasing; as corny as it sounds, you can't hit pause on national security, it is very much an essential service.
Also worth noting that they're sitting almost 1.5 meters away from each other, wearing gloves and breathing out of a mask with OBOGS. It's not a 172.
You probably posted this ironically and I took the bait. That's on me
Also worth noting that they're sitting almost 1.5 meters away from each other, wearing gloves and breathing out of a mask with OBOGS. It's not a 172.
You probably posted this ironically and I took the bait. That's on me
One of the great things about adversity.. good humour rises to the surface... Love it Laughs are good for you.
Rolls of toilet paper are traded increasing in value as Buttcoin
The bog roll hoarders and fighters have proved the country has more ar$eholes that we thought.
Rolls of toilet paper are traded increasing in value as Buttcoin
The bog roll hoarders and fighters have proved the country has more ar$eholes that we thought.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,965
Received 92 Likes
on
53 Posts
Just had a brief look at FR24 showing my area (Riverland South Australia) and there is one FTA DA40 tracking back towards YPFL after having done a few circuits at YWKI.
Situation normal for here.
Situation normal for here.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not 1.5 meters between seats?
https://www.flightradar24.com/-29.32,137.4/5
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Sydney
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep. Whats the point. Fta at parafield have been flying like mad. Must be trying to get as much in before any more restrictions? What is the point of the restrictions if so many dont even bother. We may as well encourage community transmission to build immunity.
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: YMML
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats the difference between this flying traning organisations and airlines in Australia?
Its not 1.5 meters between seats?
https://www.flightradar24.com/-29.32,137.4/5
Its not 1.5 meters between seats?
https://www.flightradar24.com/-29.32,137.4/5
Except the RAAF absolutely has a national security imperative to continue training operations. The demand for pilots within Air Force isn't going anywhere; one could argue in this interesting geopolitical times, it may actually be increasing; as corny as it sounds, you can't hit pause on national security, it is very much an essential service.
Also worth noting that they're sitting almost 1.5 meters away from each other, wearing gloves and breathing out of a mask with OBOGS. It's not a 172.
You probably posted this ironically and I took the bait. That's on me
Also worth noting that they're sitting almost 1.5 meters away from each other, wearing gloves and breathing out of a mask with OBOGS. It's not a 172.
You probably posted this ironically and I took the bait. That's on me
Police are in the same boat. Classrooms of 25 (sometimes 50), graduating every couple of weeks or so, 20-25 at a time.
as some one above said we aren’t being kept informed. The assumption appears to be “we can’t handle the truth” and they’re probably correct.
the intention appears to be to flatten the curve to ensure the medical system isn’t overwhelmed, with the intention that over time we will all be subject to the virus. Basically controlling the infection rate rather than preventing any transmissions
that’s reasonable.
Can anyone give any reference stating the Australian Government's plan is herd immunity? djpil's post is interesting for missing out one word - DEATH. The risk of an individual dying is the same if you do nothing or if you use lockdown to reduce the surge. ie you are not preventing a single death with herd immunity unless you are overwhelming the health services
The death rate is very difficult to estimate due to poor data on the true infection incidence. Original Chinese data was 2% but there is a suspicion they have under reported. In Italy and Spain it is in high single figures of infected cases. Also herd immunity may not get more than 40% of the population infected leading to a possible second wave in a year's time.......Are you really saying we will condemn hundreds of thousands of Australians to death? No other country I know of has gone down this route. Australia has braver politicians than NZ
The death rate is very difficult to estimate due to poor data on the true infection incidence. Original Chinese data was 2% but there is a suspicion they have under reported. In Italy and Spain it is in high single figures of infected cases. Also herd immunity may not get more than 40% of the population infected leading to a possible second wave in a year's time.......Are you really saying we will condemn hundreds of thousands of Australians to death? No other country I know of has gone down this route. Australia has braver politicians than NZ
