they still have comfortable jobs
Is that why so many are leaving? 33% of the remaining FEs leave at the end of the month.
The CAA still gold plate, provide a poor service, can’t answer simple questions, don’t understand their own rules and documents; fail to update documents to their stated schedule. The new GA dept is all Wind and Water, no Substance! Full of politicians promises.
Well if the CAA become more GA-friendly than other NAAs, and attract additional aircraft onto the G register as a result, who cares what the rest of Europe (i.e. the NAAs) thinks? As Achim says, they still have comfortable jobs. Pilot owners across Europe get better regulation, and the CAA earn a bit more income. Everyone wins!
I see your position here, and agree up to a point. I think where we differ is that I worry about what happens after that the competition of NAA registrations starts at a level that matters. If a G-Reg crashes in Germany then the German Authorities will be involved, and lead, with the accident investigation. I can see arguments about maintenance standards and regulations stifling any promised progress progress that has been made. As always politics gets in the way of truth and facts. The UK CAA are, quite agreeably, making noises about reducing GA regulations for private pilots to a reasonable and fit for purpose level, but they would not reduce the red tape to the point that it becomes unsafe, probably not. Whether this all actually gets delivered or not is outside of the scope of my point here, and we can discuss that elsewhere.
If a G-Reg crashes in Germany then the German Authorities will be involved, and lead, with the accident investigation.
You sure? I remember the N-registered P210 that crashed at EBCI (see other thread), the investigation was by Belgian CAA.
But perhaps it is different between EASA member states..?
You sure? I remember the N-registered P210 that crashed at EBCI (see other thread), the investigation was by Belgian CAA.
But perhaps it is different between EASA member states..?
Aren’t we saying the same thing?
I am afraid so, yes, I wrote the earlier message very very early this morning after a rather demanding day yesterday: took grandson to visit aerodrome.
Then again, I don’t see a lot of difference between the ways various European CAA’s investigate and report on accidents/incidents, so what’s the relevance?
Maybe I am being a bit sensitive on the issue, but at the moment most NAAs follow and implement guidance from EASA, but if the UK lowers the GA requirements to the more fit for purpose level this will leave it open for questions. We are talking about Germany in this thread, but it applies to all other NAAs also. Say you have a German Pilot flying in German airspace, but in a British aircraft. (Equally say an Italian pilot in Italian airspace, british aircraft, or Spanish, or French) do you not think that given half a chance the CAA would come under pressure to tighten the regs again. The temptation would be there to blame aircraft serviceability before pilot error in the political sense. There can be vicious rivalry between the NAAs especially at procedural and regulatory working levels.
The data would show a less restrictive regulation and increasing accident rates in absolute numbers, simply because there are more of G reg flying around. It will turn political, and then the statistics and spin will kick in. That is my worry, that if it comes in it won’t be able to last long.
As I said maybe I am being a bit too sensitive and therefore analytical about it.
As I said maybe I am being a bit too sensitive and therefore analytical about it.
Yes, I think this is simply a core advantage of the EU and you can benefit from regulatory arbitrage. If a G-reg plane crashes in Germany because of the CAA’s leniency (like their despicable attitude towards the so needed Cessna SIDs!), the German authorities will lead the investigation (UK participates) and in the end, the Germans will compile a few bullet points how they think such accidents can be avoided. I am sure such lists will be looked at by the UK CAA but their response is not going to be “Yes, Sir!”. The German CAA would be much more inclined to promptly implement the suggestions, just given the proximity and personal relationships of the two authorities.
There is a lot of upside to seeking regulatory arbitrage. It better protects our rights because it makes data exchange more difficult which would be reason enough to do it. Going FAA gives me even more regulatory arbitrage but if this path wasn’t available, I would surely go G-reg as it stands now (Cessna SIDs mainly). The EU was created to improve our welfare and being able to flee my incompetent home CAA with almost no effort is one of the more tangible results of tons of EU legislation 
I am sure such lists will be looked at by the UK CAA but their response is not going to be “Yes, Sir!”. The German CAA would be much more inclined to promptly implement the suggestions, just given the proximity and personal relationships of the two authorities.
Interesting. From someone I know who is involved in negotiations, from the UK side at some level, I get the reverse impression.
I do agree with you above and hope that it works positively, in the way you and Jan suggest, because hopefully it will drive some level of competition between NAAs, drive down red tape and unnecessary cost and we could see a resurgence in our numbers as maintenance, regulation and costs become easier. Maybe one day I could afford my own CofA kite as well. (At the moment I think permit to fly my be my only realistic option)
I have linked my statements in with what I have heard about the resistance to IMC rating during the EASA rollout, for example. Members at my club in Germany have always commented when they found out about me having the UK IMCr and said they really wished Germany had something similar. When I explained that in the UK it was lobbied for by pilot groups, the response is that the German CAA listen to no one and do what they like. The same comments were made about landing in Germany with no-one on the ground, comments at my club were the German CAA didn’t listen to the GA community, stated the practice is unsafe, despite pretty much every other NAA allowing it and apparently have blocked any further appeals.
It is these examples and the experiences that I had when I was trying to find a club here that make me think that we could be in a situation where an NAA blames inadequate UK maintenance when a local pilot crashes in a a locally based aircraft, but on G-Reg. I think I shared the story over a beer with you at Tannkosh, but remember I had comments like my licence wasn’t valid in Germany because the UK do not do the full ICAO syllabus and also that my medical isn’t valid because the UK standards are not as high as German ones. Admittedly these were from flying clubs who probably didn’t want “Johnny Foreigner” on their books; but experiences do lead to perceptions.
Thankfully at the end of that I ended up in a fairly good club, and have some enjoyable flying in Germany. I will never forget the dogfight, with 20 other aircraft, over Tannkosh – that was superb and up there with one of my best experiences
Does anyone know if the above GA Challenge Panel report (from 2014) lead to anything?
It would appear to me nothing has changed.
Same old, same old
