Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By ls8pilot
#1807425
Flyingfemme wrote:I can answer all that in 3 words........simplify, simplify, simplify.


I'd add "delegate, delegate, delegate"

BGA managed most aspects of gliding (eg licencing, medicals, training, airworthiness) for many many years prior to EASA. The only thing we've gained from EASA is that SLMG and TMG are now properly recognised as sailplanes rather than powered aircraft (although a TMG can in effect be either, which I think is sensible). EASA has added nothing but cost and paperwork with no positive impact on safety.

The CAA has no understanding of gliding, and in practice rely on the BGA anyway, so why not just let them have control back?
rf3flyer, cirrostratus liked this
By johnm
#1807445
Just lie about your name and don't give 'em email, simples :D

The best answer is give owners of certified aircraft the choice to follow EASA or FAA as the 2 reg and (I think) M reg do.

Do NOT invent anything new.
Flyin'Dutch' liked this
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
#1807465
Well that was a fun way to finish off Friday afternoon. I was rather detailed, and suspect I may go back in a month and do it again (of course making it clear that's what I am doing). I thought that it asked the right questions in a pretty constructive way. I like having the option to download my responses as a PDF at the end.

G
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer on Fri Nov 06, 2020 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Genghis the Engineer
#1807467
BoeingBoy wrote:Another link here to a survey. Nice of the CAA to ask our opinion but why do I have to give my identity, ethnic origin and sexual preferences? It's not as if you can get up to much in a Cessna 150 (although I did try in my youth) :lol:

https://consultations.caa.co.uk/ga/uk-general-aviation-opportunities-after-easa/


So that they can demonstrate the demographic GA serves, when challenged, probably.

G
#1807471
What the heck, I think that the three priorities, and what's better overseas questions are the meat. Having done it, I'm going to post my responses here, in case anybody wants to agree, disagree, take ideas from, or just argue with me.

Your priorities - Priority 1
Please select your top priority to help UK GA thrive in a post EASA context, for the benefit of all. Please select which area of the GA sector it best fits into, from:
Licensing and Flying Training

Simplification/Rationalisation

Please describe your suggestion below (using a maximum of 250 words):
All of the above, but particularly:-

- Get rid of lots of (either UK designed or EASA imposed) gold plating (just look at the UK/EASA IR versus FAA IR requirements, which itself exceeds ICAO minima as a glaring example, another is the requirement for CAA staff examiner use for initial professional licence issues: a requirement that does not exist elsewhere in EASA)

- Delegate to organisations closer to the coalface (as BMAA and LAA are for example) and with clear service standard mandates as well as competence mandates.

- Stop using the term "just culture" to imply a punitive one.

- Ensure rapid response from CAA or its delegates: 2 month PPL issues, multi-month delays in responses, etc. to queries are a constant problem. [And considerpermitting examiners to issue temporary licences, as in the USA.]

- Ensure universally accessible clear guidance on as many regulations as possible.

- Try to minimise UK exceptionalism. E.G. UK VFR Air traffic services that resemble those of no other country, complex airspace structures and low level class A unnecessary elsewhere.

- Concentrate on providing very clear guidance material, and ensure it is universally consistent and applied.


Your priorities - Priority 2
Please select a second priority to help UK GA thrive in a post EASA context, for the benefit of all. Please select which area of the GA sector it best fits into, from:
Rules of the Air
Streamlining process or procedures

Please describe your suggestion below (using a maximum of 250 words):
- Have a system no more slow and onerous than the FAA's for design and implementation of IAPs, including at unlicenced aerodromes.

- Clear transition levels, preferably a single one across the country.

- Permit regional controllers to provide approach control for multiple aerodromes as is the case in, e.g. the USA and Spain, thus removing requirements for eachairfield with an IAP to have full ATC, and also enhancing safety by encouraging aircraft in a common area to use the same controllers.

- Eliminate as much low level class A as possible (the USA has none below FL179!)

- Stop using sharp corners on controlled airspace! Aeroplanes fly around curves, and the corners become unusable space both inside and outside.

- Have a single LARS service, where every region has availability, on a single frequency per mapped region.

- A bit radical, but consider eliminating most of the class G and replacing it with US style class E, where VFR and IFR are both better managed alongside each other.


Your priorities - Priority 3
Please select your third priority to help UK GA thrive in a post EASA context, for the benefit of all. Please select which area of the GA sector it best fits into, from:
Airworthiness and Maintenance
Offering more proportionate regulation

Please describe your suggestion below (using a maximum of 250 words):
Enhancing modifications to PtF aircraft through the BMAA and LAA are readily done in the UK. The same is not true of CofA aeroplanes, but the technical demands are substantially the same. The FAA manages this well through its DAR system that allows well qualified individuals, personally accountable to the FAA, to manage modification and whole aircraft approvals, without the expensive monoliths of part 21 organisations. That system would be a major improvement, and drive job-creating innovation. The universities could work with CAA to help qualify such people if needed.


Are there examples of GA regulation which you have experienced overseas which you think might also be beneficial within the UK?
Yes
If you answered 'Yes', please describe the example(s) below, including the country involved and the benefit you believe it would bring to the UK:

- The FAA DAR system for airworthiness approvals.

- The FAA approach to airspace classification (class G at low level, class E between 1200ft and FL179, class A from FL179 upwards, classes B/C/D as requiredelsewhere. Airways alongside VFR traffic within class E, strict enforcement of cloud separation and visibility minima for VFR traffic in class E). This also eliminates the UK's unique, and arguably dangerous, approach of permitting IFR flight OCAS.

- The FAA authorising pilot examiners to issue temporary licences following checkrides (skill tests) valid until replaced by a permanent licence, or rescinded bythe authority.

- FAA single exam per aircrew licence, covering core subject matter only, supplemented by scenario based oral examination. The UK / EASA approach exceedsICAO minima massively, the FAA approach by only a small margin, but with no apparent safety deficit as a result, therefore the UK/EASA exam load can only be seen as an unnecessary burden.

- Multiple countries: approach controllers serving multiple airports, many untowered.

- No other country uses the UK's non-standard Basic/Traffic/Deconfliction radio services. We should aim for standardisation, not exceptionalism.

- More onerous, but safety enhancing - the FAA (usually biennial) Flight Review requiring demonstration of a minimum standard of flying, not just being a training flight. The present UK/EASA approach adds costs, without adding any demonstrable safety benefit.

- Having passed both the EASA and FAA CPL tests; I comment that EASA's concentration on antiquated ded-reckoning navigation is quaint and pointless, and would be well replaced by the FAA's preferred concentration upon handling skills. On the other hand, I believe that both spend far too little effort teaching good management of emergencies.


Anybody else want to share their responses?

G
Supercat, ivanmia liked this
User avatar
By CloudHound
#1807517
I've filled it in but in a bit of a mood having had a bad week. They might not like my answers.

What irritated me most is the inability to click more than one radio button assuming I was involved in only one aspect of the various sectors. So, do I fly sub 2 tonne or more than 2 tonne? Well actually both but couldn't register that.

Anyway, I doubt my rant will change anything especially as they know me and my views already.
By Oldfart
#1807522
You only have to read the article by Tim Cooper in the latest Pilot magazine to see how bad the situation is in the CAA. A catalogue of ineptitude, obfuscation, and stupidity.

Renowned display pilot Brian Smith adds his experience of the infringement saga to the sorry tale of woe.

Tim’s Surveyor experience, reminds me of a story I heard from the late Ray Hanna. He was called into his OFMC hanger at Duxford where a CAA Surveyor checking out the paperwork on a Mustang, was having difficulty resolving some issues. Ray found him sitting in a Corsair.
flybymike, johnm, Hooligan and 4 others liked this
User avatar
By flybymike
#1807525
CloudHound wrote:I've filled it in but in a bit of a mood having had a bad week. They might not like my answers.

What irritated me most is the inability to click more than one radio button assuming I was involved in only one aspect of the various sectors. So, do I fly sub 2 tonne or more than 2 tonne? Well actually both but couldn't register that.

Anyway, I doubt my rant will change anything especially as they know me and my views already.

Several of the questions required more than a single option for me too.
#1807529
Oldfart wrote:Tim’s Surveyor experience, reminds me of a story I heard from the late Ray Hanna. He was called into his OFMC hanger at Duxford where a CAA Surveyor checking out the paperwork on a Mustang, was having difficulty resolving some issues. Ray found him sitting in a Corsair.


I had a CAA design liaison surveyor once write to me, demanding to know why I had not mandated a coolant temperature gauge on a microlight aeroplane whose design I'd approved. It had a Rotax 503. They were doubtless on a salary around 50% greater than mine.

G
midlifec, Red, RipAndTear and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By Cardinal Sin
#1807545
BoeingBoy wrote:Another link here to a survey. Nice of the CAA to ask our opinion but why do I have to give my identity, ethnic origin and sexual preferences? It's not as if you can get up to much in a Cessna 150 (although I did try in my youth) :lol:

https://consultations.caa.co.uk/ga/uk-general-aviation-opportunities-after-easa/

I do a fair amount of work on privacy of information and on questionnaire design. I’m quite shocked by this opening page. It will depress responses since people are more likely to give this kind of information at the end of the survey than the beginning. And while I understand that they may want age and gender and possibly ethnicity information because those of different ages may interact with GA differently, relating to experience and income for example, and women and perhaps particular ethnic groups are historically under-represented in GA, I really can’t see what sexual orientation has to do with anything that’s relevant to the survey. And if it isn’t they have no grounds for processing the data.
BoeingBoy liked this
By Red
#1807559
Genghis the Engineer wrote:
Oldfart wrote:Tim’s Surveyor experience, reminds me of a story I heard from the late Ray Hanna. He was called into his OFMC hanger at Duxford where a CAA Surveyor checking out the paperwork on a Mustang, was having difficulty resolving some issues. Ray found him sitting in a Corsair.


I had a CAA design liaison surveyor once write to me, demanding to know why I had not mandated a coolant temperature gauge on a microlight aeroplane whose design I'd approved. It had a Rotax 503. They were doubtless on a salary around 50% greater than mine.

G



I asked a very simple question relating to ADSB devices a month ago, I got a reply to a completely different question I never even asked, so explained again...still not heard back, Likewise an FOI request some weeks ago has produced nothing but a receipt confirmation

You might be able to tell, I'm not convinced that their staff know what they are doing
johnm, RipAndTear liked this
User avatar
By ChampChump
#1807584
I responded rather clumsily, making a stringent comment about the first questions. Simplify and delegate. to those who understand.

The now sadly departed chap who rebuilt 'CC had several stories of his interactions with the CAA; he got to the point of telling the last such visitors not to touch anything.