Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1871872
xtophe wrote:Some DA have a Statutory Instrument associated with them making them effectively Restricted area. However, it seems the CAA rather keep the ambiguity and publish unclear stats.


Sounds like its a question that could be asked, doesnt it.
#1872068
I find it ridiculous that there are thousands of LAA PtF aircraft flying in exactly the same airspace as I do, under both VFR and IFR with far more sophisticated, modern and considerably cheaper instrumentation, autopilots and navigation sytems than I can fit to my privately owned and flown Part 21 aircraft.
One good thing EASA has been doing is to recognise the safety case for making it easier to fit items like digital engine instrumentation, GPS and even energy absorbing seat cushions using the CS-STAN (Standard changes and repairs) methodology to non commercially operated light aircraft. They are continuing to widen the scope of CS_STAN , with a revised version due early next year.
The question is will the CAA automatically and immediately incorporate the latest additions to CS-STAN for G registered aircraft?
G-BLEW liked this
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1872076
Marchettiman wrote:The question is will the CAA automatically and immediately incorporate the latest additions to CS-STAN for G registered aircraft?

And if not, why not? It should surely be justified as a simple acceptance of previous EASA due diligence.
G-BLEW liked this
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1872093
Another question:

Please can CAA fees - especially, but not limited to FCL - be proportionate to the effort applied and quality of service provided, rather than gouging a captive market?
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1872149
With around 50% of applications to the CAA not being able to be processed for one reason or another, can the CAA agree that the application process is fundamentally flawed and must be entirely overhauled.

Almost all of the information required to be submitted is already held by the CAA, wasting everyone's time. Almost all of the submissions have had input from a professional pilot ( examiner or instructor) so the admin could be delegated to them, if details are online.
#1872151
CoFA aircrafts, why not have blanket approvals for EASA STC & FAA STC as best of the two world? and expand UK CS-STAN? we are not expecting EU/US manufacturers to go the hassle of getting their STC approved past the narrow UK market

Gliding, why transit to worst regulatory requirement for the sport (Part-FCL)? instead of reverting to the old successful UK BGA system or adopting new Part-SFCL from other EASA countries

Licences, bring back the old upgrade paths between non-FCL licences and FCL licences, also pilots to have the option to get private licences & ratings dealt with by special “GA licensing teams” (maybe LAA, BGA, BMAA, PPLIR?) who can process these and makes recommandations to CAA for printing rather than getting things lost in the shared services between office number 329 & office number 127…
#1872152
Ibra wrote:Gliding, why transit to worst regulatory requirement for the sport (Part-FCL)? instead of reverting to the old successful UK BGA system or adopting new Part-SFCL from other EASA countries


Part-SFCL has been adopted and retained by the UK.
You can fly on the BGA system until 8 December 2023. There has been noise that the latest extension (Dec 21 to Dec 23) is to review the sailplane licensing topic. So we might still stay on the BGA system.
#1872158
Ibra wrote:
xtophe wrote:Part-SFCL has been adopted and retained by the UK


After 2023, as ongoing basis? or the late 2020 snapshot?


Late 2020.
Is there any reg we are going to follow the amendments (either good or bad)? We may as well rejoin.

It is CAP2050A01 which currently is a straigh copy of the EASA easy access rules for Sailplanes. Only an additional front page and no sign of tweaks by DfT, gov lawyers or CAA.
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplic ... l&id=10055
Ibra liked this
#1872159
xtophe wrote:It is CAP2050A01 which currently is a straigh copy of the EASA easy access rules for Sailplanes. Only an additional front page and no sign of tweaks by DfT, gov lawyers or CAA.
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplic ... l&id=10055


Thanks, with barely 2 months between Oct2020 & Jan2021, half of it eating Turkey for Christmas and the other half stuck working at home, I doubt there was much room to edit anything :lol:

I still think reverting to old BGA rules is better but yes no one knows if we are rejoining again…
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1872163
Dave W wrote:Please can CAA fees - especially, but not limited to FCL - be proportionate to the effort applied and quality of service provided, rather than gouging a captive market?


Problem is they waste far too much effort, as has been mentioned above!

Many things in FCL could be automated by computer! :-)
By Stampe
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1872338
What is the point of engaging with such a failed dysfunctional organisation.Until they can manage simple functions such as answering phone calls email and letter enquiries, employing properly qualified staff and issuing licences and approvals promptly we are all wasting our precious time.
Regards Stampe
Fly Safe Fly Considerate Fly Compliant.
Boxkite liked this
#1872502
With around 50% of applications to the CAA not being able to be processed for one reason or another.
Surely there must be some common factor on why these applications are failing.
In which case why are the CAA not looking at why this is occurring maybe there a problem with the application process. Ie wording / miss understanding.

Also should the CAA not put something on their website to what the common problems are so the applicant can check there application against these.
#1872503
Prior to EASA a student pilot could do a skills test as part of the 45 hours ( i think it was 42 hours prior to EASA), t hen under EASA this was changed so a student couldn't be put forward for a Skills test until he had completed 45 hours of instruction. Therefore adding more hours before getting a Licence.

Can the CAA change the wording so the Skills test can be done as part of the 45 hours.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7