ELT issues and being prepared

The report also contained other information of vital safety interest to pilots.

It was noted the aircraft-installed emergency locator beacon had not activated and that a personal ELT carried in the aircraft was inaccessible. The reason why the fitted ELT had not been activated was not determined. The report closed with the comment that “A personal ELT… survival equipment …should be carried on the person so that it was readily available when most needed.”

OK. Let us look at this from two angles.

This accident is yet another in which the fitted ELT has failed to operate as designed. In this case for undetermined reasons.

In the November issue of AA this column ran advice that CASA was proposing to issue CASR Part 135 with the requirement that fitted ELT beacons be required for all flights over 50nm. It was argued that some fitted ELTs did not operate when needed just as in the case noted above. There was also the issue that there had been no public discussion regarding the merits of fitted against portable ELT units, an argument that was last waged more than 10 years ago. At that time the agreed result was that either a fitted or portable unit should be carried when the aircraft went beyond 50nm from home base.

The second angle is that if a portable unit is to be carried in the aircraft, as allowed by current requirements, it may make more sense to physically carry the unit on your person (belt) so that in the event of surviving the accident, but being unable to access a fitted or portable ELT unit kept in the aircraft, as in the case above, then the unit would be close to hand and useable. The best ELT unit would be the type that transmits the GPS location co-ordinates.

In the event of a pilot surviving an accident but slowly expiring due to injuries a speedy rescue would be the desired outcome. One way to ensure this would be to physically carry a GPS ELT. Back that up with a sharp knife and a fire lighter on one’s person and you have an immediate personal survival kit for remote area flying. Be like the scouts, be prepared.

MOCA TEST ALREADY HERE

Further to the item in the November issue of AA regarding the soon-to-be-advised MOCA (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) test, as part of the ageing pilot’s aviation medical, information has been received that the test is already being used.

The MOCA test is a test conducted by the DAME to check and see if there are any signs of cognitive issues, dementia being the prime candidate.

It has been reported to this column that CASA recently advised a former airline pilot to check with his DAME to have the MOCA test conducted. When the said pilot heard what the test was about he threw up his hands and said forget it he would stick with his RA licence and not bother to keep his Class 2 medical.

The introduction of the MOCA test will bring with it several factors possibly not considered.

The first is that the test will result in extra time being taken by the DAME to conduct the aviation medical. Extra time will result in a bigger fee being charged.

The MOCA test also requires a flight test and the two assessed together. The flight test can be the biennial flight review as long as it is done within 90 days of the aviation medical. A flight review is required to be carried out every two years.

If the MOCA test is part of the annual Class 1 medical does this mean that a pilot

doing the test will have to do a flight review every year in order to be MOCA compliant, or does it mean that another flight test will have to be undertaken by the pilot to satisfy the requirements?

What happens if the flight review is carried out in excess of 90 days before the aviation medical? Does this mean that the candidate has to do another flight review or test to pair up with the aviation medical MOCA test?

We can only wait with interest for the statement from the CASA Av Med Section on how the MOCA test is to be conducted.

Contact Dave by email at [email protected]