Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
Does anyone know if the CAA intends to consolidate ORS exemption now that we have left EASA?

For example, ORS4 1421 allows the use of PDM to fly previously defined EASA G Reg aircraft (now Part 21 aircraft) until the end of Mach 2021 with certain limitations.

I presume that as the CAA are now not constrained by EASA regulations, they have the authority to make these exemption permanent if they are so minded.

Some early wins would be great.
flybymike liked this
User avatar
By MattL
As we have ported over a snapshot in time of EASA FCL into U.K. law, I think the regulatory swamp will get worse before it gets better sadly.

I think we need to give the CAA teams a bit of breathing space to sort a plan and deliver some swept up stuff; if we press gang them into a bunch of knee jerk crowd pleasers it could get a right mess.

The clever thing (IMHO) would be for GA to collaborate and come up with a ‘top 5 - can we really concentrate on these please’ rather than trying to satisfy all kind of edge cases and stuff all early on.
Flying_john, JAFO, Kemble Pitts and 2 others liked this
By Longfinal
It’s not as though they haven’t had (4) years to prepare - best case/worst case. I’m usually willing to give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to regulators but we currently have a real mess. One way recognition of qualifications (not in our favour); 21/not 21 confusion; LAPL that is an NPPL with restrictions .... the list is pretty long before we get into the real complexity.

Not much optimism here given that our Regulator seems to have nobody that can understand the practical issues (let alone respond to a formal request within its already appalling response time).
Stampe liked this
By patowalker
Longfinal wrote:One way recognition of qualifications (not in our favour); 21/not 21 confusion; LAPL that is an NPPL with restrictions ....

If we want mutual recognition of the LAPL, we need to keep it unchanged. They are never going to recognise the NPPL.
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
patowalker wrote:Get the recognition before reinstating the sensible transition path. There is no point in a transition if there is no recognition.

Well, quite. But EASA moves at glacial speeds if at all, while making all the right noises that things will get better and then doing the exact opposite. I'll be pleasantly surprised if they, despite their bureaucracy and dogma, just swipe a pen and accept the UK LAPL in the next couple of months. There's no air safety reason not to.
By patowalker
It is unfortunate that our weather, airspace and the Channel work against us. Many UK LAPL holders want to fly in the EU, but it is not the case vice-versa, so no pressure on EASA. The same happens with microlights. We think nothing of crossing the Channel behind or in front of a Rotax, but les autres are extremely wary of doing the same.
User avatar
By Irv Lee
Chatting at a couple of grass roots clubs in Normandy and Brittany a few years ago, it seemed the language proficiency requirement in the licence was a major item in the planning for which direction to fly off in during the summer.
As for discussing and implementing future rules, it has already started badly, it needs full disclosure of who has been saying what behind closed doors, their background in civil aviation and the level they operate at currently.
In my experience of official discussions behind closed doors, in a group of aviation experts, there is usually a large majority wanting to be fair and open, but results/decisions are often skewed by one or two others, often in respected official positions, but with very personal agendas. One in particular I experienced was obsessed with old scores to settle. These "influencers" often have with far too much say on topics that really have nothing much to do with their supposed expertise or position.