CASA - Is this the beginning of the end?
I think CASA come off pretty well in this video. Why would CASA disagree with a urologist? Because the flight risk is different (and a much tougher requirement) that the Urologist is used to dealing with.
Started off well………until the good Senator went total antivax…
‘Then CASA puts their foot in it ; “our interest is ONLY aviation safety…..” You could have fooled me sunshine…..
‘Then CASA puts their foot in it ; “our interest is ONLY aviation safety…..” You could have fooled me sunshine…..
The following users liked this post:
She is saying that only 100 medicals out of 25,000 a year are refused
I’m going to assume that old-mate who has a pacemaker who can’t fly on his own who is given a medical but with a safety pilot clause, is not included in the 100.
I’m going to assume that old-mate who has a pacemaker who can’t fly on his own who is given a medical but with a safety pilot clause, is not included in the 100.
Because any idiot with access to the internet can do this job, could someone ascertain for me the probabilities of a residual, tiny kidney stone causing sudden and debilitating symptoms such that a pilot could not continue to perform duties?
Someone will usually pipe up and say: No matter how remote the probabilities, it’s a risk to the safety of air navigation and, therefore, need not and should not be taken! Again, any idiot can do that. Even me.
Could someone now ascertain for me the probabilities of an average pilot having kidney stones of which the pilot is not aware? What if the answer to this question is a number bigger than the answer to the first question?
Could someone also ascertain for me the number of pilots who know they have kidney stones of the kind referred to in the hearing, but who don’t hold - because they don’t need to hold - a medical certificate issued by CASA? Remember: Passengers on RPT jets share the skies with aircraft whose pilots don’t hold medical certificates. Or is it that the sudden incapacitation of those pilots presents absolutely zero risk to other aircraft? Absolutely zero? If it’s not zero, how can it be consistent to allow that to happen? No matter how remote the probabilities, it’s a risk to the safety of air navigation and, therefore, need not and should not be taken!
(We’ll leave aside the medical certificate holding pilots who have not told CASA about some condition because, according to CASA, those pilots don’t exist. According to CASA, there is no perverse incentive to withhold information from CASA because the prospect of having one’s medical certificate suspended or refused or made subject to costly and potentially risky conditions which qualified professionals consider ‘over-kill’ is, apparently, of absolutely no concern to certificate holders. No concern whatsoever. They are lined up waiting for the next bus under which they can throw themselves.)
Finally, could someone ascertain what the ATSB’s data shows is the most likely cause of sudden, debilitating symptoms resulting in the pilots of commercial aircraft being unable to continue duties in flight? Real pilots being really debilitated and unable to continue duties in the real world. Once that’s been ascertained, could someone further ascertain what CASA has done to prevent pilots from being exposed to what causes those symptoms?
Spinning a medical ‘condition’ into an aviation disaster is easy. Any idiot with access to the internet can find ‘evidence’ to ‘prove’ it ‘could’ happen. The substantial risk to aviation safety arises from over-reactions to marshmallow sized risks while doing nothing effective to mitigate the 88mm Howitzer sized risks. Pilots are very easy targets. Dealing with the big risks is hard.
Lots of questions taken on notice.
Might be the end of CASA one of these years, it must be time for a change of name. Maybe going back to Department of Civil Aviation? They'll need more staff naturally plus a hoard of people to rewrite all the regs. I liked the old sign where there were arrows pointing all different directions, some wag printed T shirts with "Don't follow us we're lost". I think it might have been the Department of Aviation.
An appropriate acronym DOA
Might be the end of CASA one of these years, it must be time for a change of name. Maybe going back to Department of Civil Aviation? They'll need more staff naturally plus a hoard of people to rewrite all the regs. I liked the old sign where there were arrows pointing all different directions, some wag printed T shirts with "Don't follow us we're lost". I think it might have been the Department of Aviation.
An appropriate acronym DOA
Squawk, that would be my guess because their medical has not been refused. It has been granted with a restriction.
What does refused mean anyway? Does it mean suspended, cancelled or both?
What does refused mean anyway? Does it mean suspended, cancelled or both?
That senator is bonkers and it is a concern that he related two completly isolated subjects are being related to each other. The change of Cardiac Risk Assesement has nothing to do with COVID vaccines??
The following 2 users liked this post by Ollie Onion:
She is saying that only 100 medicals out of 25,000 a year are refused
That's 100 pilot's who have lost their ability to follow their passion, and in a lot of cases, their livelihood.
The following 2 users liked this post by Capt Fathom:
CASA suggested that cardiac conditions can be attributed to Covid.
What they don’t say, is of those having had Covid and suffer a condition, how many actually had the vaccine.
Such a complex discussion to be had around statistics and hard to cover off in a senate discussion.
The following users liked this post:
He’s suggesting that the cardiac conditions can be linked to the Covid vaccine.
CASA suggested that cardiac conditions can be attributed to Covid.
What they don’t say, is of those having had Covid and suffer a condition, how many actually had the vaccine.
Such a complex discussion to be had around statistics and hard to cover off in a senate discussion.
CASA suggested that cardiac conditions can be attributed to Covid.
What they don’t say, is of those having had Covid and suffer a condition, how many actually had the vaccine.
Such a complex discussion to be had around statistics and hard to cover off in a senate discussion.
The following 2 users liked this post by Ollie Onion:
It’s not the end of CASA. it’s just a senator, well known as an anti-science nut-bag, abusing the proper role of the committee system to ride a few of his personal hobbyhorses. He’s a disgrace to parliament, and that’s a pretty high bar to get over.
Last edited by JustinHeywood; 16th Feb 2023 at 10:24.
The following users liked this post:
You guys are funny, he's an elected senator, he represents citizens, just like Lidia Thorpe does. He has 'personal hobbyhorses' 
just like Lidia Thorpe?
Disgrace to parliament, another for you. Did you see the fellow who quoted statistics on the NBA v NFL? But it turned out it was Congress, you're judging politician v politician? Some are better than others are they? Newsflash, they're all excrement, and they're probably similar to the thugs in avmed. As a pilot on medical audit, who's career depends on a yearly signoff from unqualified d!ckheads over ruling a cardiologist, I'm glad there are 'nut-bags' like him sticking it up CAsA.
And you idiots continually quoting 'the science' who have no ******* concept of science, mindless group think fools.
just like Lidia Thorpe?Disgrace to parliament, another
for you. Did you see the fellow who quoted statistics on the NBA v NFL? But it turned out it was Congress, you're judging politician v politician? Some are better than others are they? Newsflash, they're all excrement, and they're probably similar to the thugs in avmed. As a pilot on medical audit, who's career depends on a yearly signoff from unqualified d!ckheads over ruling a cardiologist, I'm glad there are 'nut-bags' like him sticking it up CAsA. And you idiots continually quoting 'the science' who have no ******* concept of science, mindless group think fools.
The following 4 users liked this post by tossbag:
You guys are funny, he's an elected senator, he represents citizens, just like Lidia Thorpe does. He has 'personal hobbyhorses' just like Lidia Thorpe?
Disgrace to parliament, another for you. Did you see the fellow who quoted statistics on the NBA v NFL? But it turned out it was Congress, you're judging politician v politician? Some are better than others are they? Newsflash, they're all excrement, and they're probably similar to the thugs in avmed. As a pilot on medical audit, who's career depends on a yearly signoff from unqualified d!ckheads over ruling a cardiologist, I'm glad there are 'nut-bags' like him sticking it up CAsA.
And you idiots continually quoting 'the science' who have no ******* concept of science, mindless group think fools.
just like Lidia Thorpe?Disgrace to parliament, another
for you. Did you see the fellow who quoted statistics on the NBA v NFL? But it turned out it was Congress, you're judging politician v politician? Some are better than others are they? Newsflash, they're all excrement, and they're probably similar to the thugs in avmed. As a pilot on medical audit, who's career depends on a yearly signoff from unqualified d!ckheads over ruling a cardiologist, I'm glad there are 'nut-bags' like him sticking it up CAsA.And you idiots continually quoting 'the science' who have no ******* concept of science, mindless group think fools.
slow clap for this valuable contribution :-)
The following 2 users liked this post by Ollie Onion:
The short answer to the OP's question is: No.
There's nothing new about bizarre and mind-boggling interactions between CASA and parliamentarians.
There's nothing new about bizarre and mind-boggling interactions between CASA and parliamentarians.
The following users liked this post:
I do know that you don’t cherry pick ‘the science’ to match your ideology, as the good senator has a habit of doing.
If you’re not an expert in a field, you go with whatever the consensus is. If you think you know better than the majority of experts, you’re just an an angry, arrogant idiot.
If you think you know better than the majority of experts, you’re just an an angry, arrogant idiot.
The following 4 users liked this post by Lead Balloon:
100 out of 25,000?
1. we have 25,000 pilots? I guess the number must include ATC as well?
2. I must come across a lot of pilots as I personally know of 2 of these hundred who have had it happen in the last year, which seems statistically unusual given only 0.004% get rejected. I would advise you stay away from me. I am bad luck.
3. If the hazard is so significant (for say a PPL) their driver's licence should also be pulled surely? If there is a serious risk that someone becomes incapacitated whilst driving that is a significant danger to the public as well.
4. The major cause (by far), of medical incapacitation of pilots in flight in Australia is... food poisoning and lasers. CASA's AVMEd section would be doing far more for aviation safety by testing airport cafeterias perhaps? And supplying us with mirrored Raybans.
From ATSB (https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2015/ar-2015-096)
My medical was suspended a few years ago, meaning I couldn't work. They then gave me the ability to fly multi-crew which was next to useless as I do not do multicrew flying. They said I had a condition that made me a hazard to air navigation despite the specialist saying I was fine to return to flying. CASA said they would review the suspenson every 12 months but could give me no timeframe or criteria they would use to re-assess it and no guarantee it would be re-issued. I was devasted. I believed my career was over. Fortunately I came across a DAME (by chance who was at my local GP's and who heard about my situation) who took up my cause.
After several specialists reports and multiple tests and correspondence CASA decided I was actually fine and re-issued my medical with no conditions. It took 2 specialist reports and thousands in tests to convince them I had suffered an infection, not a brain injury. 6 months no wages.
1. we have 25,000 pilots? I guess the number must include ATC as well?
2. I must come across a lot of pilots as I personally know of 2 of these hundred who have had it happen in the last year, which seems statistically unusual given only 0.004% get rejected. I would advise you stay away from me. I am bad luck.
3. If the hazard is so significant (for say a PPL) their driver's licence should also be pulled surely? If there is a serious risk that someone becomes incapacitated whilst driving that is a significant danger to the public as well.
4. The major cause (by far), of medical incapacitation of pilots in flight in Australia is... food poisoning and lasers. CASA's AVMEd section would be doing far more for aviation safety by testing airport cafeterias perhaps? And supplying us with mirrored Raybans.
From ATSB (https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2015/ar-2015-096)
In the past 5 years, there have been 23 pilot incapacitation occurrences reported per year on average. Nearly 75 per cent of the incapacitation occurrences happened in high capacity air transport operations (about 1 in every 34,000 flights), with the main cause being gastrointestinal illness, followed by laser strikes.
After several specialists reports and multiple tests and correspondence CASA decided I was actually fine and re-issued my medical with no conditions. It took 2 specialist reports and thousands in tests to convince them I had suffered an infection, not a brain injury. 6 months no wages.
The following 4 users liked this post by jonkster: