[HedgeHopper]

That was the root of the current system, didn't then really change much since until recently when BMAA started to relax it on known "weight stable" types

Relax meaning what?, I'm not aware of any changes being implemented, just talked about (as is the norm)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Fair point. It was discussed at the last BMAA AGM, but I've seen no actual rule change yet.

G

[SteveN]

- During April 2014 we will provide approval for the Light Aircraft Association (LAA) to commence its night / IFR (instrument flight rules) certification programme. This will provide added incentive to GA pilots to train for instrument qualifications, helping them become safer pilots.

Did they? I've seen nothing from LAA.

[Paultheparaglider]

Maybe the CAA were busy with the 300kg ssdr that was first expected last November, then beginning of April and now who knows when.

It is all beginning to sound like a classic Yes, Minister episode.

[HedgeHopper]

You know, in the mid 1940's this country could take a project from the design office to in service state of the art fighter in a matter of months, look at us now.
Frankly its pathetic, There will come a time for us in the lightweight- fly from a field section of our sport, when the cons of not complying with all this b0ll0x will be outweighed by the freedom of saying eff it all and going rogue, Ive already planned for when the balance tips for me personally.

[joe-fbs]

Then we'll start counting the bodies as the uneducated and the untrained build their personal death traps. Now, the strong libertarian streak in me says, grown-ups should be allowed to kill themselves as long as they don't fly over anyone else or have more than one seat in the aeroplane. Apart from the idiotic nature of some of our laws which don't seem to want to allow us to be adults, there is another aspect if these unregulated devices have more than one seat. One of my favourite bits of flying is taking other people's children flying. When I do it in a 152 or PA28 I am doing it in a machine with with some technical credibilty and I have been properly trained. My friends don't know that but they probably unconsciously assume something along those lines. How does that work if we go unregulated? I think SSDR is probably sound but anything with more than one seat does I think need some oversight for machine and pilot.

[HedgeHopper]

I'm talking about myself Joe, no passengers on this ride

Then we'll start counting the bodies as the uneducated and the untrained build their personal death traps

Personal being the operative word, when was the last time you heard about a microlight killing an innocent person on the ground?

Sorry, but your statement sounds like something from the daily mail.

[joe-fbs]

HH, I hope I did not come across as making a personal attack. Sorry if I did.

As I said, I am pretty libertarian and would want you to be allowed to do it yourself and alone.

Nor was I trying to be sensationalist but we only need look at the early days of hang gliding to see that people over estimate their own abilities and under estimate the difficulties of doing engineering properly. Your point about microlights is valid as far as I know and that is why I think SSDR is OK. My thoughts were more to provide a counterpoint to some posters in these hallowed halls who appear to want to build multi-seat IMC machines with equal lack of oversight.

There's some interesting historical discussion to be had as well. Yes, some miracles were performed in short time scales but there were also failures some forgotten after being relegated to target towing or such and some now remembered for their achievements but with their lethal sort-comings almost forgotten, like the Typhoon with (IIRC) tails prone to fall of and horribly unreliable engines. As I hinted, we could spend an entire very enjoyable evening in the pub talking about all of this. Don't suppose you are anywhere near Lincoln in the week?

[Paultheparaglider]

Joe,

I'm inclined to agree. To a point.

The evidence seems to show that the problems mostly stem from pilot error, and not from airworthiness - at least not in the more mature market that currently exists. Even ssdr requires pilot licences, and I've rarely heard people argue strongly against the need for structured training. Even the unregulated in respect of licences foot launched market advocates getting proper training.

So, the question is what protection is needed for third parties. Here, I personally draw a distinction between someone like my wife who has been a passenger with me for over two decades and a complete stranger prepared to pay for a flight. I don't think my wife needs any more protection than I do, and a paying passenger does deserve more. Your suggestion regarding someone else's kids lies somewhere in between.

I can take kids in my car with an mot and insurance. So, a permit and insurance seems reasonable for an aviation comparative. But, my wife knows the risks and accepts them. There is a place, in my opinion, for two seat deregulated from airworthiness machines for consenting adults subject to reasonable training because the risks in this case to totally innocent third parties are vanishingly negligible.

Hedgehopper, I suspect you and I have a lot in common.

Paul.

[Keef]

Attractive as the comparison with WW2 fighters is, there was an element then of extreme urgency with a war to be won or lost. I don't think it's quite that urgent at the moment.

Nevertheless, it would be good if committed timetables were met, or explanations and apologies given (thinking of the Red Tape Report, now a tad overdue if I read the timetable aright).

[joe-fbs]

Fair point. In between my early and current stints in aviation, I engineered cars and they had (I think still have) something called Single Vehicle Approval. Probably parallel to LAA inspection (but someone who knows more than me about LAA may know better, I know a lot about SVA but little about LAA, my aircraft certification expertise is parts 23 and 25 only). I think anything less than this is not a good idea for anything with more than one seat. As far as I know, there are no completely unregulated motor vehicles. So interestingly if SSDR is exactly what it says, we have more freedom to build an aeroplane than a car. Is that right?

I'm getting out of area here. Anyone have informed thoughts?

[HedgeHopper]

Keef, you're right of course, WW2 was a completely different situation, It exaggerated my point.
Though the spirit of doing stuff did seem to continue for some time after, unfortunately I feel its faded from the UK mindset now.

Joe, good point about SSDR not even needing as much oversight as a Car.
I think the concept relies, to a great extent on the builders/flyers sense of self preservation.

[Paultheparaglider]

So interestingly if SSDR is exactly what it says, we have more freedom to build an aeroplane than a car. Is that right?

Not necessarily. Yes, if you want to drive that car on a narrow public road with other traffic near schools and puppy farms. No if you are going to drive on private land. Think about motocross bikes, race cars etc.

The regulators step in when there are risks to non participating innocent third parties. In respect of ssdr, or even the low energy dsdr I'd like to see, these risks are vanishingly small.

[joe-fbs]

Interesting stuff even if we have hijacked the thread somewhat!

I'm not sure there is an aviation equivalent of a private off-road driving facility. Military ranges possibly?

Of course some of those who we set or set themselves over us do not take the reasonable view that consenting adults should be free to risk themselves. When I was riding motorbikes about ten years ago (I only stopped because I now spend my "toys" money elsewhere), there was a group of lunatics, I think originating in Sweden but having influence in Brussels, called Vision Zero whose attitude to road safety would completely destroyed any prospect of using a motorcycle. According to Wikipedia (so it must be right):

" Vision Zero is a road traffic safety project started in Sweden in 1997 which aims to achieve a highway system with no fatalities or serious injuries in road traffic. A core principle of the vision is that 'Life and health can never be exchanged for other benefits within the society' "

Bunch of idiots clearly but politicians and civil servants listen to them. Their website is here:

http://www.visionzeroinitiative.com/en/Concept/

[Bill McCarthy]

According to the BMAA forum, it looks like SSDR will get the nod at the end of this month. Here's hoping - I've got a couple of simple mods I need to do on the Sluka.