Consultation open: Class 5 medical self-declaration
Thread Starter
Consultation open: Class 5 medical self-declaration
Email to complete Class 5 medical self-declaration survey arrived today 27 October, 2023 from CASA. There are three documents to provide a background for what the survey is about totalling 179 pages! This is before I even start the survey! I would contend that if I am capable of this volume of study, and then successfully complete the survey, that this would qualify me for a Class 5 self-declared medical.
There are still "Medical limitations that exclude pilots with certain conditions from the Class 5 medical self-declaration" included. On the other hand, the TWG was, "comfortable in not recommending a mandatory medical assessment by a health professional," and they also noted that, "that a previously cancelled medical certificate should not exclude a pilot from a Class 5 self-declaration as it is a separate medical standard."
CASA sees Class 5 as a replacement for the RAMPC medical, so what, if anything will change?
Will anything change? Is AvMed planning redundancies or redeployment of their staff?
The proposal to allow suitably qualified sport or recreational pilot into Class C & D airspace might get up as the TWG has stated that the ability of pilots to fly in controlled airspace should remain only an issue of pilot training and competency.
There are still "Medical limitations that exclude pilots with certain conditions from the Class 5 medical self-declaration" included. On the other hand, the TWG was, "comfortable in not recommending a mandatory medical assessment by a health professional," and they also noted that, "that a previously cancelled medical certificate should not exclude a pilot from a Class 5 self-declaration as it is a separate medical standard."
CASA sees Class 5 as a replacement for the RAMPC medical, so what, if anything will change?
Will anything change? Is AvMed planning redundancies or redeployment of their staff?
The proposal to allow suitably qualified sport or recreational pilot into Class C & D airspace might get up as the TWG has stated that the ability of pilots to fly in controlled airspace should remain only an issue of pilot training and competency.
The following users liked this post:
I’ve had a quick read. Seems to be a bit too restrictive but on the right track. CASA want to charge $10 for a pilot self declaring a medical that is automatically issued. I suggest they instead pay the pilot from the money they save by laying off some AVMED staff.
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
CASA's proposal is that "Pilots are not eligible for a Class 5 ... if they have previously had a Class 1, 2, or 3 aviation medical certificate refused or cancelled." This is in direct defiance of the Technical Working Group's statement(Second Report 3 August, 2023), "that a previously cancelled medical certificate should not exclude a pilot from a Class 5 self-declaration as it is a separate medical standard."
CASA also includes this proposal in their list of excluded medical conditions as if having a medical certificate refused or cancelled is somehow a medical condition in itself.
CASA also includes this proposal in their list of excluded medical conditions as if having a medical certificate refused or cancelled is somehow a medical condition in itself.
As usual, the wrong process being run by the wrong organisation. A bunch of ordinary medicos with delusions of being world-leaders in ‘aviation medicine’ have, as usual, been let loose to reinvent the wheel and will, as usual, produce something that isn’t round.
'If you had to identify, in one word, the reason why the human race has not achieved, and never will achieve, its full potential, that word would be 'meetings.' ...and... 'Meetings are an addictive, highly self-indulgent activity that corporations and other large organizations habitually engage in only because they cannot actually masturbate'
FP.
Re meetings and that second quip, CASA Avmed's 'complex case management meetings' are a classic example. There's a neat slang term for them which encapsulates the gist of the second quip, but I won't be so crude as to post it.
As to the broader process of medical 'reform', the protracted and unnecessary 'consultation' on the way to implementation of the pre-conceived ideas of the people running the process are the problem. The wrong process being run by the wrong organisation.
The process should be an analysis of data, not a survey of individuals and interest groups. That analysis should be done by disinterested experts in data analysis, not by people who have a direct personal interest in the outcome.
As to the broader process of medical 'reform', the protracted and unnecessary 'consultation' on the way to implementation of the pre-conceived ideas of the people running the process are the problem. The wrong process being run by the wrong organisation.
The process should be an analysis of data, not a survey of individuals and interest groups. That analysis should be done by disinterested experts in data analysis, not by people who have a direct personal interest in the outcome.
