When this was first thrashed through in the 1950s,
(in those days the litmus event was a heart attack)
and BGA did the review of general aviation in England:
accident rate by in-flight event by type of prior medical
and the consensus was there was no safety change achieved by
aviation medical vs 'drivers license' level medical.
That is why the self declaration form came into being and was accepted
within the sport, by granny nanny, and under exemption by the regulator.
The CASA license requirement, as said before here, aligns procedures to
ICAO, and achieves what Australian pilots flying o/s want - a license,
so enjoy.
My original post was to remind ourselves that it is not helpful to have
a single blanket rule for everyone/everything in a sport with such
diverse forms (local flying LSA through to international Open Class
racer).
A rule for the top end kills off the potential at other layers, and the
sport as a whole declines.
On 18/05/2012, at 6:09 PM, Texler, Michael wrote:
Emilis alluded to data to support the converse showing that there was
no difference to the accident rate between self reported and medically
endorsed pilots. It would be interesting to see that report.
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
