Post by sleemanj on Apr 11, 2008 16:00:57 GMT 12
So the notice of the pending rule for the Recreational Pilot's Licence was released today, along with an AC about it ( www.caa.govt.nz/rules/pending_rules.htm )
My (somewhat rhetorical) question is, why. Why all this expense, all this time (years in the making), all this thought and argument, to produce, what is in my opinion, little different than the status quo.
What it basically allows is for people who are already PPL to continue to fly (heavier than microlight) aircraft after their medical status devolves.
Ok, that's all well and good, but the medical standards seem to be, really, not that much less stringent. Basically, you need to be fit enough to drive a bus full of people without undue risk. You can't even say to your good ol' doc that you only want the medical so you can bimble about in your C150 with a mate, because if the doc gives you that medical you COULD go and (get a licence to) drive a bus full of passengers. What doctor would open themselves up to this kind of risk unless you absolutely are fit enough to drive a bus full of paying passengers.
Compare with say the RAANZ (and probably SAC but I'm not familiar with these) medical requirements which are far simpler ("are you fit to drive a private car, yes, no problem then") and have (so far) been operating for a long time without any particular major issues.
In fact during the consultation period for this rule I wrote to various high up people including the director of land transport raising some concerns I had, one of the responses I got back was (I don't have the letter to hand) along the lines of "the LTNZ has recognised aviation medicals as equivalent to our own medicals, the basic reasoning behind this rule proposal is for the CAA to recognise LTNZ medicals as equivalent to an aviation medical". Great. Pointless, but great.
We have also wound up in this decidedly peculiar situation whereby the only way a prospective student can get an RPL, is to effectively get a PPL first and then downgrade - because in order to be a GA student pilot (solo) you MUST have a Class 2 medical, and if you can get a Class 2 medical, why would you not just go for the PPL if you want to fly GA aircraft.
So basically the only people this rule change benefits is probably a handful of older folks who want to keep hopping about in their flying bricks a little longer, after which they will probably switch to some nice little micro anyway because their medical will drop below that LTNZ level.
How much has this all cost. I hate to think.
I guess it's not all bad, at least it means that microlight club membership numbers are not in any real and present danger. Then again, I'm half expecting the day when the CAA says "yeah, all you people flying high performance micros, you're going to need to get an RPL if you want to keep flying".
I think the CAA has taken a leaf out the FAA's book on this one, they also have an RPL, the list of holders of it is also somewhat deserted because it's even more pointless than our RPL appears to have turned out (hard to believe, but it is); while the "Sport Pilot" numbers continue to rocket away - much the same as the NZ micro scene.
My (somewhat rhetorical) question is, why. Why all this expense, all this time (years in the making), all this thought and argument, to produce, what is in my opinion, little different than the status quo.
What it basically allows is for people who are already PPL to continue to fly (heavier than microlight) aircraft after their medical status devolves.
Ok, that's all well and good, but the medical standards seem to be, really, not that much less stringent. Basically, you need to be fit enough to drive a bus full of people without undue risk. You can't even say to your good ol' doc that you only want the medical so you can bimble about in your C150 with a mate, because if the doc gives you that medical you COULD go and (get a licence to) drive a bus full of passengers. What doctor would open themselves up to this kind of risk unless you absolutely are fit enough to drive a bus full of paying passengers.
Compare with say the RAANZ (and probably SAC but I'm not familiar with these) medical requirements which are far simpler ("are you fit to drive a private car, yes, no problem then") and have (so far) been operating for a long time without any particular major issues.
In fact during the consultation period for this rule I wrote to various high up people including the director of land transport raising some concerns I had, one of the responses I got back was (I don't have the letter to hand) along the lines of "the LTNZ has recognised aviation medicals as equivalent to our own medicals, the basic reasoning behind this rule proposal is for the CAA to recognise LTNZ medicals as equivalent to an aviation medical". Great. Pointless, but great.
We have also wound up in this decidedly peculiar situation whereby the only way a prospective student can get an RPL, is to effectively get a PPL first and then downgrade - because in order to be a GA student pilot (solo) you MUST have a Class 2 medical, and if you can get a Class 2 medical, why would you not just go for the PPL if you want to fly GA aircraft.
So basically the only people this rule change benefits is probably a handful of older folks who want to keep hopping about in their flying bricks a little longer, after which they will probably switch to some nice little micro anyway because their medical will drop below that LTNZ level.
How much has this all cost. I hate to think.
I guess it's not all bad, at least it means that microlight club membership numbers are not in any real and present danger. Then again, I'm half expecting the day when the CAA says "yeah, all you people flying high performance micros, you're going to need to get an RPL if you want to keep flying".
I think the CAA has taken a leaf out the FAA's book on this one, they also have an RPL, the list of holders of it is also somewhat deserted because it's even more pointless than our RPL appears to have turned out (hard to believe, but it is); while the "Sport Pilot" numbers continue to rocket away - much the same as the NZ micro scene.
) but substantially cheaper and easier to obtain (I had to drive to Te Puke to get my last medical as the Waikato doesn't have enough appropriately endorsed doctors). In NZ our RPL rule is written differently to the USA as it still allows pilots to fly aircraft with CSU props, retractable undercarriages etc (which the US rule doesn't) In practice it fits neatly between the PPL and microlight certificate. Amendments to the SPL definition will follow. Its suits the style of flying a lot of people take part in - all of my flying in the last 6 months could be carried out on RPL, and should a medical prove to be an issue in the future (Possible due to family history of heart disease and diabetes - when the PPL med computer simulator reaches a certain risk factor I'm out) I will most certainly switch to RPL and continue flying my own aircraft. 