Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:28 pm
@ Falcoflyer You insinuate that the maintenance in private hands is most probably going to be inadequate.
The statistics do not support this position. To the contrary, SSDR is now completely unregulated, I guess it's on the basis that anyone who satisfies the requirement to hold the appropriate Pilot's licence, demonstrably has sufficient intelligence to mitigate the risks to his own skin.
I would guess that the vast majority of Permit -flyers do -so primarily because of the lack of overbearing, unrealistic rules of compliance.
CAA now allows overflight of buildings by Permit Aircraft.
Night flight is under consideration....Instrument flight?
CAA has accepted there is no "unsafe" case to answer with amateur-maintenance. (Owners of classic cars are now completely exempt from annual MOT test!)
I would suggest that the owner-maintainer has no commercial-pressure and time-constraints and knows his own aircraft far more intimately than a person who may very rarely work on the specific type. He also has that added incentive of self-preservation!
Do not forget, also, a second pair of eyes inthe form of an LAA inspector, is there to pickup any error....they are not infallible, but as many will testify, neither are the C of A safeguards.
ISTR seeing that one may now train in a Permit aircraft that one doesnot own, and froman unlicensed "aerodrome" BUT UNDER THE CONTROL OF AN APPROVED TRAINING ORGANISATION....
Again, quite logical,if you think about it....What actual control does an instructor have, when he sends you off somewhere to do something solo?
Jumping up and down , screaming "get back here, NOW you clown" doesn't really do it, does it?
It's great to see some common-sense entering the regulatory regime, - hopefully, it'll resurect the corpse of GA in this country.