Use this forum to flag up examples of red tape and gold plate
By diverdriver
#1411581
Posting this out of frustration.
I sent a long rant to the GA dept regarding ever increasing unnecessary costs and restrictions at my local GA airport.
The airport has no commercial movements, 99% are training flights by light aircraft.

Along with many restrictions, it has just introduced mandatory air-side passes, AND is charging for them - at which point I had a sense of humour failure.

Unsurprisingly usage of the airport has massively declined over a 15 year period.
I was delighted by the outcome of the recent Plymouth debacle and so asked the GA dept if they thought that what was going on at xyz was good for GA and in keeping with their remit to "encourage a dynamic GA sector"; their reply
"we cannot comment on any commercial activity undertaken by xyz"

So, are they really bothered about encouraging GA? I don't think so.
User avatar
By flybymike
#1411686
Which airport?
I think security requirements are normally imposed by Department of Transport not the CAA.
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
#1411730
It also has nothing to do with the CAA's red tape and gold plate challenge, so I'd move it to GA.
User avatar
By kanga
#1411823
diverdriver wrote:.. remit to "encourage a dynamic GA sector"; their reply
"we cannot comment on any commercial activity undertaken by xyz"

So, are they really bothered about encouraging GA? I don't think so.


er, 'remit' from whom ? Not in the CAA Act as passed by Parliament, IIRC .. There have been encourging words to that effect from (IIRC, from AOPA magazine) Head of GA Unit, but that will not give CAA any extra powers to intervene in a commercial decision , including in one of interpretation by an aerodrome operator in how to comply with regulations imposed by another part of Government...

[at CGHI, those with airside passes had to get new ones to work with new swipe pads on the airside gates, latter prsumably required by DfT regulations reflecting the few CAT movements. There was little hassle, it was all dealt with by MP3's ever lovely people at Terminal Reception, and they did not cost very much; I did not resent the transition at all]
By bookworm
#1411878
Paul_Sengupta wrote:It also has nothing to do with the CAA's red tape and gold plate challenge, so I'd move it to GA.


I beg to differ. It was the Government's RTC that gave rise to this forum and the panel's report (p 51-2) included airside security in scope.
By diverdriver
#1411917
'remit' - quoted directly from the first page of the GA Unit web site (www.caa.co.uk/ga)
In the case of the airport concerned airside passes are a simply commercial decision on their part, nothing to do with DFT requirements as they aren't a commercial airport.
#1411933
The wellbeing of GA should be close to the CAA's heart.
By Rusty Spanner
#1411938
diverdriver wrote:'remit' - quoted directly from the first page of the GA Unit web site (http://www.caa.co.uk/ga)
In the case of the airport concerned airside passes are a simply commercial decision on their part, nothing to do with DFT requirements as they aren't a commercial airport.



Am I missing something?, if its a purely commercial consideration, how can you blame the CAA? or are you wanting them to make some new rule to regulate this? (would be exactly what the red tape challenge is NOT about)
By diverdriver
#1411940
I'm not blaming the CAA GA Dept - I'm asking for their help.
As the web site states their job is to '...encourage a dynamic GA sector' and therefore it seems if one sees over-regulation and un-necessary costs being introduced I would have thought they would be exactly the right people to contact.
I didn't expect a one line 'fob off' reply for this reason, I hoped for some support.
Perhaps 'encourage' has a narrower definition by the CAA than I was expecting. I probably shouldn't be surprised by that.
By diverdriver
#1412136
I was hoping they'd ask me that.
Anyway I've done some more digging and discovered that EASA regulations are the cause so it seems not anything the CAA is likely to be able to help with.
#1412216
It's very obvious to me what airport it is, as I'm a regular user, and had seen the emails circulating encouraging everybody getting frustrated over the mismanagement of the airport to report it to the GA Unit.

However, I have to say - it really isn't that I can see anything to do with the CAA. It's clearly not the CAA imposing the multiple restrictions on GA operations there, as there are other places with similar licences and similar or greater utilisation which are vastly more user friendly, under the same regulatory regime. The only thing that will really make a difference is the whole user community there getting together and acting as one - which shows absolutely no sign of happening so far.

G