ave8rr

Looking good Ian. Great work. Cheers Mike.

CASA says it’s SAFE: Now end the dual standards on private pilot medicals

Wednesday, 24th October 2018

Mr Shane Carmody

Director of Aviation Safety, CASA

GPO BOX 2005

Canberra ACT 2601, Australia

Mr Rob Walker

Group Manager Stakeholder Engagement

GPO BOX 2005

Canberra ACT 2601, Australia

Mr Michael McCormack MP

Deputy Prime Minister

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport

PO Box 6022

House of Representatives

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT 2600, Australia

Dear Mr Carmody,

As you would be aware, the AOPA Australia since August of 2016 has sent numerous letters to your office, calling on CASA to explain why RPL and PPL pilots operating Australian (VH) registered aircraft with an MTOW of up to 600kgs, with one passenger outside of controlled airspace, have been denied the use of a self-certification private drivers licence medical. A medical standard that CASA has permitted pilots within the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited self-administration to use for the past 30 years.

No explanations have ever been provided to AOPA Australia or the general aviation industry, nor has any supporting risk-assessments or safety/medical studies been published by CASA to support it’s continued refusal to provide a self-certification private drivers licence medical for RPL/PPL holders.

My last such letter was sent to your office on the 18th September 2018, asking the following question;

“SAFE or UNSAFE, WHICH IS IT? is it safe for an Australian private pilot to fly an Australian registered aircraft with an MTOW of 600kgs in Australian airspace with one passenger on a self-certification private drivers licence medical?”.

On the 10th October 2018, Senator Glen Sterle announced to Australian Flying that he was seeking the support of the Senate RRAT Committee to initiate a Senate Inquiry into the self-administration of Australia’s general aviation industry, seeking to investigate the inequity in private pilot medicals between the RAAus and RPL/PPL holders.

Exactly one day later, on the 11th October 2018, Mr Rob Walker on behalf of your office responded with;

“The answer is yes. The key requirement, as you have rightly stated it, outside controlled airspace.”

Under the current regulations, CASA continues to deny RPL/PPL holders with access to a self-certification private driver license medical standard, forcing these pilots to buy their medicals from a private business - the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited (RAAus).

Under Section 9© of the Civil Aviation Act 1998, CASA is responsible for developing and promulgating appropriate, clear and concise aviation safety standards.

Given that your office (via Mr Rob Walker) has acknowledged that it is SAFE for RPL/PPL pilots to use a self-certification drivers licence medical standard when operating VH registered aircraft with an MTOW of up to 600kgs outside of controlled airspace with one passenger – when can we expect CASA to promulgate this safe medical standard, making it available for all RPL/PPL holders?

This unfair and unreasonable situation cannot continue and AOPA Australia urges CASA to immediately announce the availability of a self-certification private drivers licence medical standard for RPL/PPL holders who wish to operate VH registered aircraft with an MTOW of up to 600kgs, outside of controlled airspace with one passenger.

Thank you in advance for your time and we look forward to CASA’s announcement.

Yours Sincerely,

BENJAMIN MORGAN

Executive Director

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association of Australia

I guess there will be no more RV4 etc registered RAAus as they have a MTOW of around 680kg.

If RAAus get the higher weight then they will make it in but will require LAME maint unless built by the owner.

ATSB input to this accident.

Investigation: AE-2017-056 - Technical Assistance to RAAus - Collision with terrain involving Monnett Sonerai, 19-3971, near Murwillumbah, NSW on 16 May 2017

If and when RAAus get CTA then the aircraft will require all the instrument inspections including transponder by a Avionics LAME. Not Cheap.

We are seeing more of these type of accidents with LSA. Not enough design testing I would say and Instructors not being taught spin recovery. Don't forget about the Piper Sport in Bundy a few years back which was reported as being in a flat spin killing both instructor and student.

Ian, I like the layout especially as I view the site on my Samsung Mobile 95% or more of the time. Cheers Mike

You must be getting frustrated at times Ian. Keep working at it and I am sure you will have a great modern site. Cheers Mike

This was posted in the AOPA RAA Thread.

CASA CONFIRMS AND DOUBLES DOWN ON PRIVATE PILOT DOUBLE STANDARDS!

Friday, 21th September 2018

Mr Shane Carmody

Director of Aviation Safety, CASA

GPO BOX 2005

Canberra ACT 2601, Australia

Mr Michael McCormack MP

Deputy Prime Minister

Minister for Infrastructure and Transport

PO Box 6022, House of Representatives

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT 2600, Australia

Dear Mr Carmody,

Further to our previous correspondence on self-certification private drivers licence medicals for government regulated Recreational Pilots Licence (RPL) and Private Pilots Licence (PPL) holders. In today’s Australian newspaper, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority has gone on the record to state;

“…the authority had carefully assessed the safety issues and risks in determining the various classes of aviation medical certificates, taking into account things like other airspace users, aircraft passengers and people and property on the ground… CASA considers self-medical certification to be appropriate for recreational pilots operating in small aircraft with one passenger, and outside controlled airspace under licences issued by Recreational Aviation Australia.”

If CASA considers it safe for a private ‘recreational’ pilot to operate in small aircraft with one passenger outside of controlled airspace, then why has CASA denied all government regulated RPL and PPL holders of this risk-appropriate permission?

Why has CASA implemented aviation medical safety standards that serve to force RPL and PPL holders into a private business (the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited) that exposes them to unregulated monopoly fees and charges?

Why are Australia’s aviation safety regulations being used to benefit one specific private business, whilst denying all CASA RPL and PPL holders of their rights?

Could CASA please provide a copy of its ‘risk-assessment’ that details how the regulator arrived at the conclusion that it is safer for a pilot of a light aircraft with an MTOW of 600Kgs to be flown outside of controlled airspace by a member of the Recreational Aviation Australia Limited versus a CASA regulated RPL or PPL pilot?

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your reply.

Yours Sincerely,

BENJAMIN MORGAN

Executive Director

Can't see CASA backing down. Medicals for all RAAus pilots??

This could well mean no weight increase or medicals for ALL.

Any word yet as to the possible cause of this accident?

I am in the assumption that CASA aircraft do not have to have there registered numbers on said plane,why do RAA insist on their planes showing rego numbers.

Airfield manager, s only have to take note of the rego, to put in a claim, unlike CASA aircraft without the sign writing.

 

My aircraft spotting is much harder with missing registration on their wings.

 

spacesailor

I can assure you ALL that there are are alot of hidden costs in running an airfield. More so if available for night ops.

May not yet happen. I believe there is court action by a few local pilots.

What makes you say Bundaberg may follow?

I have been trying to become accredited to maintain an experimental GA plane, with no result as there appears to be no reasonable pathway. Yet I could pass any exam or test, given the syllabus and some time to prepare. RAAus could do more towards offering training in maintenance, and they could work with an accreditation authority if there was the right attitude on both sides. CASA is the current accreditation authority for aviation and I would hope that they would be helpful. After all, their jobs depend on aviation keeping going.

So how about we ask our RAAus board members to commission a syllabus etc that would get people to the standard of the CASA lame exam they use for immigrants? I am sure that many RAAus members would do this for the fun and satisfaction.

There are not many LAME's left that can do wood inspections. Won't be long and all those aircraft with wood spars etc will be grounded.

Thanks for the post, are you able to mention aircraft type?

Condolences to family a nd friends.

It might pay to examine the documents.

All CASA ASIC are issued by ID Australia.

I was informed by the CEO a year or so back that RAAus will have to publish the register once Part149 comes in.

It is not only the aircraft register that is on line in alot of countries but also the register of Radio Licences. My Amateur Radio Licence Is available for viewing on the ACMA website. Many other countries publish their Licence data also.

I reckon a 760kg plane will be perfect for me. Self, wife, fuel, luggage and a bit more structural strength for touring. 600kg means a very light structure and fuel limitations. After experiencing this with a 550kg LSA I am currently flying GA so there will be an operating cost saving for me, but will probably have to pay a great deal more for an aeroplane. A capable C172 or PA28 can be had for $50k or so, but a new 760kg LSA will be north of $150k and self-build not much less. So the cost of RAA fees etc pale into insignificance. If someone like me has Avmed issues and wants to go RAA then RAA fees are not important. I appreciate that others are different, just saying my point of view.

I hope the pilot is not too seriously injured. That tree is right in the stbd side of the cockpit. Savannah?

You can fly a more capable aeroplane without a medical.

Thanks Ian. You have done well considering your late departure out of SYD. Cheers Mike.