docjell

Short answer is that the intent of RAAus looking at health standards is to assist members to make an informed medical declaration. If you mak a false or careless declaration and are, subsequent to an incident, seen to have had a medical issue that should have been taken into account in making your declaration you risk issues with your insurer and CASA. RAAus will be the very least of your problems. Considering you probably carry liability insurance of $10 million or more, you need to be prepared to cough up a sum as large as that if you make a false or negligent declaration.There is no need nor desire to change the Pilot Cert medical standard.

 

Every year I go to my GP for a thorough examination. Anyone over 55 who does not do that might consider the wisdom of their health care strategy. As one of the by-products of that examination, my GP consults the checklist for the issue of an ordinary drivers licence in NSW. He then provides me with a statement of meeting the standard required for issue of a drivers licence in NSW. I submit a copy to RAAus. Out of respect for the well being of myself and my passengers, I am very happy to go through that process.

Hi Don- interested in your post as an ex-GP, and now a staff specialist anaesthetist and hyperbaric medicine specialist for the past 15 years. You motives are very honourable but unfortunately there is very little to be gained from the "thorough examination" annually that is not picked up by a good history and a few very basic tests- Blood pressure, urine analysis, and perhaps a routine haematology and chemical pathology screen. Excercise tolerance is probably the most sensitive test we have- far more important most screening tests. Having said that - all we are really concerned about as pilots is the chance of sudden incapacitation as P1, and almost nothing we do as doctors can predict this. Epilepsy, unstable ischaemic heart disease, tendency to unheralded black-outs (Stokes Adams attacks) are some of the obvious "no no's and therefore reasonably render then participant unfit to drive, or fly. But as for the rest? My squash playing,cross country running non-smoking 50 year old cousin .dropped dead from a cerebral aneurysm. If I hade examined him the day before he would have passed 100%

I have been practising medicine for 40'years and have never been able to predict a healthy outcome from a 'normal physical ' examination. Physical signs demonstrate ongoing pathology confirm the diagnosis made during the history taking. They are not usually predictive in any way.

 

I agree that "fitness to drive" more than covers the requirements

 

 

Funny that Phil! Three of us built a Longeze in the UK in the eighties- I cannot now remember quite why though! She's still around apparently- G-MUSO. What a nasty, uncomfortable beast she was! Sold her to an RAF pilot who obviously found all her handling problems and physical discomfort perhaps preferable to his work 'ride'. She has now moved on, and the latest owner contacted me to inquire after photos of the build. They were lost during my divorce- not really that bothered!

 

 

Great to catch up again Phil- how's flying in Pomgolia! I'd hope that most pilots are"switched on" so understand and appropriately cope with differing types and weights- this is not difficult- it's about basic airmanship isn't it? Responses like 'Birdseye's ' response " nonsense " is arrogant and doesn't contribute much to helpful discussion.

 

Stay well and rug up!

 

 

Some "woops" Phil but a great photo and so glad no one was hurt physically (but how'd you live that down in the aero club bar lol)

There but for the grace etc - life and flying both have very steep learning curves! ( remeber our chats a while back about the late Ross Millard)

 

 

Silly incident where the pilot immediately admitted that he got it too slow on the approach,. . . stalled it briefly, and left wing dropped, . . . but he managed to regain control again, but too late to go around nor prevent a hard landing off to the left of the grass runway,. . . picture shows the moment of impact. . . . .with bits of grass and earth flying into the air. . . No injuries, but substantial damage to the undercarriage, the airframe and a shockload to the engine. . . . a couple of seconds after this frame was taken,. . .the aircraft settled in a level atttitude, and the pilot / passenger evacuated with nil injuries. ( I think this aircraft is similar to the Evektor 'Sportstar' machine marketed in OZ )[ATTACH=full]45536[/ATTACH]

 

Oft repeated mistake with all sorts of aeroplanes, but this time,. . .no injuries.

 

"Extremely lightly built aircraft will 'Bend' equally easily when misused. . " ( Quote from Mike Whittaker, designer of the MW series of basic aeroplanes. . . )

Come on guys-loosen up - you know exactly what I mean! But that is the delight of these forums! The 172 and Sportstar DO "land themselves" - compared with for example the Eagle 150 or the Rutan Longeze - what nasty planes are they! Uncomfortable, bad visibility, no sense of humour at all, a constant battle all the way down finals to balance speed and descent rate, and depressing when your co-pilot/senior pilot with many thousands of hours under the belt stuffs up the landings as often as you and swears almost as much! I'd rather go back to sky-diving that fly those beasts again - would make about as much sense!

 

 

The prevailing wind at my strip is virtually always at 90 degrees to the strip direction. Perhaps we just have a different skill mix

 

 

Based on my experience, due to its appearance and configuration, its very easy to regard the Eurostar/Sportstar as a conventional light aircraft and try to fly it as such. However, if you try to fly it like a Cherokee or C172 you'll quickly find that it is actually a very light aircraft that lacks the inertia of heavier 'light' aircraft and requires greater finesse in handling near to the ground. Maybe that's the trap some fall into?

Not in my experience Birdseye- I found going from a C172 to the Sportstar incredibly easy and intuitive. The Sporty, like the 172, virtually lands herself with minimal interference . It does look and behave like a 'conventional' aircraft in every sense.

 

 

Petitions aside- AOPA's initiative is so right. A class 2 medical is an anachronistic throwback that

 

means little patho- physiologically but probably lots financially/ politically to CASA. I am a very experienced diver and private pilot. I've also been subjecting folk to medicals they didn't need for years.(always no charge)

 

As a senior staff medical specialist I have carried out numerous (meaningless) examinations for divers , and despite years of appropriate experience CASA does not regard me as "qualified" to carry out class 2 medicals(which are a meaningless joke). I could of course 'qualify' to do this this but at great expense - why should I?

 

I cynically think that my profession has spent a lot of time and energy mystifying medical "fitness" for a lot of pursuits- diving,climbing,flying, but at the end of the day most medical problems are totally predictable and yet we insist on punishing sufferers of completely unrelated conditions to bans or extra money for what? I would happily dive with a diabetic buddy (I do) and would,very happily fly with a hypertensive/diabetic / ischaemia heart disease sufferer - who was well controlled . There are a very few medical conditions that lend themselves to mandating' on the ground or on the surface' restricitions- we know what they are and so do the patients .

 

My cousin- with whom I dived often - was a fit non smoking guy who had a subarachnoid haemorrhage that killed him within 6 hours of onset. His medicals were always rubber-stamp perfect. He was 51 . Go figure

 

Cheers docjell

 

 

Ahah! I'll just write it down - or in the words of the constipated mathetician - just work it out with a pencil

 

 

Docs are always castigated for using docspeak ! To me - "primary paint" is what my grandaughter does at daycare in the mornings- WTF?

 

 

Er - yes - not quite sure what the cancelled airshow and Hervey Bay have to do with the original post stickshaker but thats what democracy is all about! The right to pen irrelivancies and post nonsense!

 

 

Bundaberg without any doubt - I lived there for two years and the climate for flying was absolutely perfect. It was within easy reach of Brisbane (if big cities are your thing) by road or plane, and via the Bundy Aero club a number of really good flying venues were on the menu! Picking up mates from Brisbane's main airport in a C172 was easy and a blast! Being asked to "line up behind the departing A380 having due regard to wake turbulence" was so much fun ! Bundy enjoys superb weather patterns, is a cheap place to live (by our extraordinarily inflated Aussie standards) and the airport was very pro-pilots and pro-avaiation in general. It was run (well) by the Bundy council and local casual aviators used the facilities without landing fees.

 

The city was very pro-flying - Bert Hinkler and Jabiru Aircraft both boast Bundy as their homes.

 

But- there is always a but eh!- Bundaberg is not the hub of the universe by any means! The city is parochial, narrow minded, not on the beach, has high unemployment, not much social infrastructure , and had a couple of utterly disastrous flooding episodes in the last 24 months which I can only imagine will have dealt a mortal blow to property sales in the area.

 

But - I have flown in the UK and Far North Queensland, and would 'regroup' to Bundy in a heartbeat- but ONLY for the awesome flying!

 

 

The problem is; you know that, we have your assurance that this is the case, whereas RA Aus apparently have neither, so on the face of it the situation IS analogous to registering a car that has been off the road. The rules are a little inflexible, but are intended to cover the majority of situations - in general if an aircraft hasn't been registered and by implication not flown, it suggests that there has been something wrong and I agree it is on the face of it reasonable to require an aircraft condition certificate. For all anyone knows it has been sitting in the weather for 2 years deteriorating. Annoying in your case, but as suggested, an approach direct to the man is the way to go - a public rant such as this is more likely to damage your cause imo.

Sorry for the dilatory reply,Bats. This situation is in no way, shape or form analogous to road registration because rego is a tax specifically applied to road users to pay for upkeep of gazetted roads, and has nothing at all to do with vehicle condition. Since (bizarrely IMO) our state government doesn't require regular vehicle maintenance (cf the annual 'MOT' vehicle check mandated in the UK- similar if you like to an aircraft '100 hrly/ annual inspection) they thus require a condition report as the only ( rather inadequate) means of ascertaining vehicle safety.

My 'public ranting' was frustration at the blinkered and submissive attitude of so many of our fellow pilots who I suspect have been brow- beaten by years of bureaucracy to the extent that they actually believe that administrators have our fundamental interests at heart. They do not- we have become obsessed with process not product. It was also telling that you felt that my 'rant' would 'damage my cause'. I don't have a 'cause'- I am seeking a sensible, reasonable and responsible resolution to a completely soluble problem - perhaps if more people would intelligently and politely 'rant' we could politely and sensibly have a voice in the evolvement of future rule making that effects us all

 

I have had a reasonable and productive discussion with RAAus technical division, and a good result seems achievable . Cheers Docjell

 

 

Here is the CASA form.https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjUoMDMgZjOAhVKjpQKHXz4Do0QFggbMAA&url=https://www.casa.gov.au/file/138806/download?token=fKKfWri6&usg=AFQjCNFBVc1Qfhps67Byc0xRPimOYmvv2A&sig2=bAjtnF-vWPAIQXW9j7szqQ&bvm=bv.128617741,d.dGo

Thanks Nobody- but the form specifically requires a VH registration as far as I can see- is this negotiable (surely not - it's CASA )

 

 

What you say is true but that's not an argument for keeping it unavailable. I personally wouldn't want to be authorising some of this stuff to fly if it's been sitting for ages. There would be high risk with a lot of it, and possible little risk with other examples. It would be very variable.Most of the "permit" stuff involves configuration issues, ie Gear locked down, Unpressurised, One engine not operating etc designed to get it safely (without payload) to a maintenance facility. Nev

Absolutely Nev- I concur 200%- but this is not about "stuff that's been sitting around for ages" - it's about machinery that has all the necessary mandated maintenance issues complied with ,carried out by a person or persons legally deems competent so to do, and yet not 'legally' flyable because the rego is out of date. This is fundamentally different from a road vehicle - the rego fee if basically a tax to pay for the upkeep of gazetted roads and bears no relationship whatever to,the vehicles fitness for purpose in terms of maintenance. Indeed it is interesting that in QLD there is no requirement to maintain a vehicle in safe condition in practical terms - it only requires a "roadworthy" when it is up for sale.

I have yet to fully understand what the RAAus annual fees for registration for the aircraft and pilot are actually for- other than providing money for the RAAus. I am not sure I am getting bang for my buck! My PPL remains current in perpetuity dependant on a biennial flight review and a medical, not registration fees.

 

 

Because neither the CAO's or the Tech Manual give RAAus Tech the authority to treat an aircraft as being registered when it is not current.Flight not in accordance with the CAO's can be authorised by CASA but not by RAAus.

That interesting Kasper. Is there therefore an option to apply to CASA for such authorisation for an RAAus aircraft - for example to fly an unregistered aircraft to a place that has facilities for required maintenenance/ avionics checks et ?

 

 

Thanks all for your informative and interesting contributions! My term "mothballing" was probably innacurate as I am very aware of all the problems associated with long term storage - hence my "mothballed" Rotax was actually started every three weeks and run up to normal operating temperatures and pressures for five minutes at least. Perhaps that's why when we had finished the 100hlry and the mandatory 5 yearly 'rubber everything' change she started first pop (as always) without a murmer. Do love the Rotax!

 

 

Again Kasper- thanks. Have just had a very productive chat with Jared at RAAus, and it will be possible to effect er- registration without an ACR once I have provided the documentary evidence of the required mandated maintenance. Great news!

 

 

Thanks Kasper- I"ll do that- thanks for the advice.

 

And pmccarthy has spectacularly missed the point entirely. You can drive an old bomb around Queensland for years with no mandated maintenance ever - you therefore reasonably have to prove its road worthiness when selling. Aircraft cannot be legally flown without maintenance and inspections carried out in accordance with the manufacturers schedules, and my pristine aircraft is completely up to date with these in all respects. There are no other Sportstars in Far North Queensland, yet I may have to pay our nearest qualified level 2 maintainer to drive 400kms to carry out an inspection on an aircraft he has not seen before. Seems crazy

 

 

I took proud ownership of my Evektor Sportstar in 2011, and happily carried out all the required regular maintenance as permitted by my level 1/owner status IAW the Evektor Sportstar Manual. I suppose I would qualify as a reasonably intelligent bloke- built two aircraft myself, always done my own maintenance as required, 250 hrs P1, Senior Lecturer and Senior Staff Specialist at the Townsville Hospital and JCU .

 

I became unwell in 2014 and grounded myself- I mothballed the aircraft, and when I had been cleared ( I cleared myself with the blessing of my own GP) I went to re- register the aircraft , that had two years no-fly on her logbook. Of course we had carried out an appropriate 100hrly inspection, and a mandated 5 yearly ROTAX complete rubber replacement ( lines, mounts etc) the latter being carried out by an Independant qualified ROTAX engineer.

 

Well- ----------------------gobsmacked

 

I have to pay someone to provide an RAAus "aircraft condition certificate" which is a big ask in FNQ so I can register the aircraft - in other words to CONTINUE TO USE AND FLY THE AIRCAFT I HAVE BEEN MAITAINING FOR

 

THE PAST FIVE YEARS

 

This is fundamentally wrong and costs members money . This is CASA type bullshit- I thought RAAus was all about affordable flying for all. So RAAus, PLEASE "show good cause why you are charging this punitive and uneccessary fee for an aircraft already owned by the registeree and which has no undergone no fundamental changes whatsoever since initial registration .

 

This may extend to a legal challenge RAAus ! Depending on your response. I do not think a resort to "the rules" under these circumstances will be sufficient.

 

Cheers

 

Docjell

 

 

HI ALL- COULD SOMEONE PLEASE ADVISE HOW I PRIVATELY MESSAGE ADMIN TO GET THE BLOCK TAKEN OFF MY ACCESS NOW I HAVE UPDATED MY EMAIL? Thanks

 

 

Apparently the RAAus no longer produce maintenance release forms - the head office advised me to aquire some CASA forms. These work out at $165 per book and I don't need or want 50! Thoughts please!

 

 

Hey Phil- I'm intellectually an uber- Luddite but have t confess that I DO love the new technology! GPS in the cockpit almost gave me a hard-on( OMG happy memories) . I. religiously go through all the legally required bullshit with flight plans etc but the REALbottom line is that my GPS combined with Ozrunways is an unbeatable safe combination and I believe has contributed massively to Aviation safety in Australia.. I was always afraid of getting lost I n the UK, and my recent review of the UK half mil map reminded me of how scary the UK airspace is!

 

Right or wrong if I have a radio( and I have two) then I can guarantee I know where I am and covnvey that Info to air traffic- usually to within a few metres! They are usually very happy.

 

 

Awesome flying post eh!