CASA AVMED
The CASA Avmed webinar today 19/6 - Demystifying Avmed.
Did anyone manage to video capture it somehow (like for youtube)?
Or, hopefully CASA themselves may put it up somewhere? (too much to ask?)
Yes I dialled in. Reasonably underwhelming. Lots of questions put in the chat, very few were answered due to 45 min whole webinar time.
Did anyone manage to video capture it somehow (like for youtube)?
Or, hopefully CASA themselves may put it up somewhere? (too much to ask?)
Yes I dialled in. Reasonably underwhelming. Lots of questions put in the chat, very few were answered due to 45 min whole webinar time.
Judge Avmed by what they do, not what they say.
The following 2 users liked this post by Clinton McKenzie:
While researching an issue over the weekend, I coincidentally stumbled across some historical stats on medical certificates issued by CASA. According to CASA’s 2012-13 Annual Report, medical certificates issued from 2008 - 2013 were:
2008-9: 41,781
2009-10: 33,957
2010-11: 25,259
2011-12: 22,809
2012-13: 25,470
If we believe what Mr Carmody said in 2020 and Ms Spence said in 2023 in front of Senate Committees, the number issued each year has remained around 25,000 in the late 2010s – early 2020s.
By my maths, 41,000 down to 25,000 is about a 40% decrease in a period of about 2 years. Most of the reduction was in class 2 medical certificates. That’s the exodus away from ‘traditional’ private GA into 'recreational' flying, to escape Avmed. (I have to say that I’m a bit dubious of the class 2 renewal figure for 12/13. The renewal figure for class 2 certificates plunges from (all figures circa) 20,000 in 08/09 to 11,000 in 9/10 to 6,000 in 10/11 to 4,000 in 11/12 then, apparently, jumped back to 20,000 in 12/13. But maybe there was some quirk as to timing or maybe lots of holders of class 1 certificates decided to apply for class 2 as well for some reason in 12/13.)
The ‘fail’ stats compared to ‘passes’ are also telling.
61 fails and 41,781 passes in 8/9: 0.1%
65 fails and 27,801 passes in 9/10: 0.2%
88 fails and 21,980 passes in 10/11: 0.4%
161 fails and 18,354 passes in 11/12: 0.8%
174 fails and 21,310 passes in 12/13: 0.8%
I note that Pooshan Navathe became CASA PMO in 2008 and left in 2015.
My recollection of the research I did for my submission to one of the ‘reviews’ of medical certification is that the number of applications to the AAT for Avmed-related reviews quadrupled over the period of Navathe’s reign compared to the previous equivalent period, and in half of those reviews the AAT decided that Avmed’s decision should be changed in favour of the applicant. A manifestation of systemically bad decision-making.
If anyone believes those outcomes were the product of some fundamental deterioration in the medical fitness of the pilot population rather than a change of personalities within CASA, I have some cheap shares in the Harbour Bridge to sell. And the latest crusade on CVD is merely another manifestation of changes of personalities in CASA, not some response to any substantial evidence of CVD-related accidents or incidents.
2008-9: 41,781
2009-10: 33,957
2010-11: 25,259
2011-12: 22,809
2012-13: 25,470
If we believe what Mr Carmody said in 2020 and Ms Spence said in 2023 in front of Senate Committees, the number issued each year has remained around 25,000 in the late 2010s – early 2020s.
By my maths, 41,000 down to 25,000 is about a 40% decrease in a period of about 2 years. Most of the reduction was in class 2 medical certificates. That’s the exodus away from ‘traditional’ private GA into 'recreational' flying, to escape Avmed. (I have to say that I’m a bit dubious of the class 2 renewal figure for 12/13. The renewal figure for class 2 certificates plunges from (all figures circa) 20,000 in 08/09 to 11,000 in 9/10 to 6,000 in 10/11 to 4,000 in 11/12 then, apparently, jumped back to 20,000 in 12/13. But maybe there was some quirk as to timing or maybe lots of holders of class 1 certificates decided to apply for class 2 as well for some reason in 12/13.)
The ‘fail’ stats compared to ‘passes’ are also telling.
61 fails and 41,781 passes in 8/9: 0.1%
65 fails and 27,801 passes in 9/10: 0.2%
88 fails and 21,980 passes in 10/11: 0.4%
161 fails and 18,354 passes in 11/12: 0.8%
174 fails and 21,310 passes in 12/13: 0.8%
I note that Pooshan Navathe became CASA PMO in 2008 and left in 2015.
My recollection of the research I did for my submission to one of the ‘reviews’ of medical certification is that the number of applications to the AAT for Avmed-related reviews quadrupled over the period of Navathe’s reign compared to the previous equivalent period, and in half of those reviews the AAT decided that Avmed’s decision should be changed in favour of the applicant. A manifestation of systemically bad decision-making.
If anyone believes those outcomes were the product of some fundamental deterioration in the medical fitness of the pilot population rather than a change of personalities within CASA, I have some cheap shares in the Harbour Bridge to sell. And the latest crusade on CVD is merely another manifestation of changes of personalities in CASA, not some response to any substantial evidence of CVD-related accidents or incidents.
Thank you Clinton for your ongoing research and information.
What I am seeing from the perspective of a long term GA instructor is the increasing number of people who have failed a medical, then jumped through all the hoops asked of them, seen specialists etc. and been recommended a medical by their DAME then being sent to a senior instructor/HOO/FE by AVMED for a flight assessment. This assessment comes complete with paperwork asking for specific checks like landings approaching last light and simple diversions.
I perform all these checks, often at a not inconsiderable expense of the applicant, send the paperwork to AVMED and still nothing happens. They just sit on it.
It makes me rather angry and dissapointed to say the least :-)
What I am seeing from the perspective of a long term GA instructor is the increasing number of people who have failed a medical, then jumped through all the hoops asked of them, seen specialists etc. and been recommended a medical by their DAME then being sent to a senior instructor/HOO/FE by AVMED for a flight assessment. This assessment comes complete with paperwork asking for specific checks like landings approaching last light and simple diversions.
I perform all these checks, often at a not inconsiderable expense of the applicant, send the paperwork to AVMED and still nothing happens. They just sit on it.
It makes me rather angry and dissapointed to say the least :-)
Sadly typical Avmed overreach, AB. There’s insufficient or no governance framework around them.
The unnecessary costs to these pilot guinea pigs are of course not included in the ‘everything’s sweetness and light’ certificate stats trotted out by Mr Carmody and Ms Spence.
The unnecessary costs to these pilot guinea pigs are of course not included in the ‘everything’s sweetness and light’ certificate stats trotted out by Mr Carmody and Ms Spence.
I see RAAus is about to celebrate 40 years of existence. This means 40 years of safe operational history of private flying with no medical certificate needed (and largely, an older demographic). Thank you RAAus.
Yet CASA AVMED says that flying an aeroplane with VH on the side is not safe unless you have a medical certificate.
Could be the exact same type of plane, at the exact same airfield, in the exact same hangar, flown to the exact same places and in some cases, flown by the exact same PERSON.
Kooky eh?
Yet CASA AVMED says that flying an aeroplane with VH on the side is not safe unless you have a medical certificate.
Could be the exact same type of plane, at the exact same airfield, in the exact same hangar, flown to the exact same places and in some cases, flown by the exact same PERSON.
Kooky eh?
Plenty of pilots without medical certificates fly aircraft with “VH” on the side, including in controlled airspace.
“Kooky” is not the word for distinctions in ‘safety’ rules which have no objective safety basis, T5.
“Kooky” is not the word for distinctions in ‘safety’ rules which have no objective safety basis, T5.
