Hmmm, American ATC would be just fine. I like their pragmatic attitude. However, one would need to translate US ATC phraseology into legible English 
Well, the infamous/ill-fated GA Red Tape Challenge local copy was very much the current Secretary of State’s baby. It promised much but achieved little, not least because ”an increasing amount of the regulation which impacts on GA ultimately derives from EASA”.
Specifically, the CAA promised ”two guiding ambitions and principles: deregulation and delegation to remove the bulk of GA from the current regulatory oversight of the CAA. Naturally we would prefer to deregulate wherever possible. But in some areas, delegation may be more appropriate to ensure the UK complies with its international and European obligations. Crucial to the success of both options will be the risk appetite of the CAA, other parts of Government and the sector itself”. CAA response local copy
Perhaps we need to read that again: deregulation to remove the bulk of GA from the current regulatory oversight of the CAA
So now’s the time to see if they meant it, or if we need to hold their feet to the fire.
Peter wrote:
one would need to translate US ATC phraseology into legible English
Or vice versa
Jacko wrote:
So now’s the time to see if they meant it, or if we need to hold their feet to the fire.
This is actually what a lot of CAA’s did under the original EASA ruling which almost wiped out GA, blamed EASA for their own red-taping and gold-plating. Only after the regime change and GA roadmap, part NCO e.t.c. did it come to light which CAA’s clung onto their pet restrictions until hammered onto by EASA and who not. Switzerland, Germany, UK and several others found themselves in the defensive all of a sudden when e.g. on condition ops became standard or with the CBIR e.t.c. where Germany dragged their feet e.t.c. If one sees the fact that the UK CAA recently got reprimanded over SERA, I’d take this with a big bucket of salt.
Incidently there was a lot of that and there is a lot of the same going on with certain governments blaming their own unpopular decisions on the the EU and often enough it is darn difficult to find out if they are lying or not. Add to that the EU’s overly complex legal frame which is hardly verifyable for common people, it is left to politicians interpretation. The result is quite often predictable and I guess we shall see within the forseeable future how many of the problems, perceived or real, which led to Brexit approval by the population will actually go away post Brexit.
The very same thing applies to leaving EASA. Monty Python’s Life of Brian comes to mind and the challenge facing the UK CAA will be to live up to quite dramatic expectations. Interesting times to say the least.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
UK CAA recently got reprimanded over SERA
for what?
Cobalt wrote:
for what?
It was in the interview with Minister Shapps.
Shapps said EASA has initiated infraction proceedings against the UK over its decision not to enact SERA (Standardized European Rules of the Air) visibility and distance from cloud minima in Class D airspace.
Ah, for being less restrictive than EASA. Quite the opposite of what you imply.
The UK CAA had to dial back their gold plating in maintenance a bit (although the net effect of Part-M etc. was probably an increase in regulation), but part FCL and part SERA were hugely more restrictive for GA than what was in place before.
@Cobalt, can you explain how Part FCL and Part SERA are much more restrictive than before?. If I remember correctly EASA pretty much follows Chicago Convention and ICAO Norms. Nearly all the derogations have been agreed by a majority within EASA as being more suitable for Europe.
I know the UK likes to go its own way and I accept that. But in reading another thread you seem to have difficulty with access to Class D airspace and even ATZ’s. This is not the case here. The concept of being refused access to or being able to cross an ATZ, I have never heard of. Here it is the pilot’s decision not an AFISO.
As for transit class D, I have never been refused transit but I know that it does happen occasionally in areas like Toulouse where you can be told to steer clear of controlled airspace.The UK doesn’t even seem to follow the EASA rule that if you are flying a route along the adjoining border of Class D and Class G airspace that the regulations applying to the lower class Class G apply.
So what freedoms did you have before EASA that you don’t have now, and you expect or want to get back after the UK leaves EASA?
gallois wrote:
So what freedoms did you have before EASA that you don’t have now, and you expect or want to get back after the UK leaves EASA?
My impression is that the whole Brexit campaign was primarily driven by the lack of British self-determination, not by anything being inherently wrong with the EU legislation. That’s fine of course, as long as you are aware of the drawbacks and not only the benefits. I expect the same sentiment in the case of aviation rules.
Emir wrote:
Peter wrote:He is a GA owner-pilot so knows how it works, and how it doesn’t work.Now I remember you wrote that in some other thread, However, I tend to have bad opinion about any person who was president/member of any youth organisation with nationalist/religious sign.
My offer is still on the table GA in the UK will be the same with EASA or without it. Looking at airspace busting thread, I can see that practically only UK CAA punishes pilots for infringements.
