Sun Aug 04, 2019 4:47 pm
Bottom line, the PIR can lead to a change of airspace but it has to be shown that the ACP did not meet it’s stated objectives.
As an aside, there’s a good point in the PIR that is worth noting for anyone thinking of responding to an ACP consultation. Can’t remember, nor be bothered to find, the exact wording, but the point was that many of the letters the CAA received (from stakeholders), were more focussed on the ACP itself than the implementation. Having read all the Kirkhope evidence, the same applies with plenty focussing on complaint about ongoing ACP’s rather than the specifics of the inquiry.
As we were all told at school, read the question. I’ve been lucky (?) enough to read some ACP consultation responses. It’s amazing how many add little or nothing to the debate and are merely used as a vehicle for the writer to vent, abuse and threaten. Hopefully CAP 1616 will bring a more positive environment which in turn will help mend some fences between us (the GA community) and the CAA