Malibuflyer wrote:
this much closer to Continental Europe than the US.
I don’t really see why this is of much relevance at all. Other than presumably Europe would see it more of a threat because it’s closer geographically to them.
Much as I would like to see a similar FAA style system with more sensible IRs and more encouragement for people to get on and enjoy flying without interference. I’m not sure the government has promised this.
It would also depend on whether Brussels bans G-reg long term parking.
Currently only Denmark and Norway do this, for N-regs (and presumably VP- etc).
IMHO it would be a very unlikely move since the UK may still be “ECAC” (as in the homebuilt privileges discussions)?
Malibuflyer wrote:
It only takes the UK gouvernment to live up to its promises…
Ah, well, yea :) .. I knew there was something…
Peter wrote:
IMHO it would be a very unlikely move since the UK may still be “ECAC” (as in the homebuilt privileges discussions)?
Automatically? I suppose that is also one part of the ongoing haggle. And seeing that the EU is likely to do everything to prove the UK wrong….. and to keep others from following that example…
Is Serbia classed as ECAC in that context?
Actually the homebuilt regs are going in the purely national direction anyway; see UK and France.
I find it strange that so many (on this board) didn’t see this coming.
From another perspective. This is a truly fundamental blow for EASA, not so much for the UK IMO. This means ECAC will be strengthened again, and whatever other pan European organisations. Thus the reason for Switzerland and Norway to stay inside EASA will be weakened, and their leverage within EASA will be strengthened. It will be interesting to see what actually will happen. The UK in completely ruin is also an alternative of course, but a likely alternative? I wouldn’t think so, but who knows 
LeSving wrote:
I find it strange that so many (on this board) didn’t see this coming.
Wishfull thinking I guess…
I find it strange that so many (on this board) didn’t see this coming.
In the UK, the views are polarised roughly 50/50 (the original referendum was 52/48 to Leave i.e. very close) and on mainland Europe there is a strong anti-UK sentiment due to the UK rocking the boat so much.
The “intellectuals” on social media are heavily Remain.
Then you have the GA pilot population being not all that representative of the populations.
And finally you have social media in general being overwhelmingly for Remain (and now that we are clearly not going to get that) for a “screw the UK because it deserves it” solution. This has become the standard “virtue signalling” position here.
And in these negotiations it has always been the case that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” so nobody actually knows anything until the very end – with just a very few exceptions like e.g. the deal Spain did with the UK early on to avoid their respective economies being hit by a load of Brits departing back home
The end result will no doubt be something unexpected…
Also UK pilots are not all that affected, compared to some mainland countries. The G-reg scene works fine on UK issued papers, and practically nobody went say D-reg for whatever reason (especially “debatable” stuff like avoiding spar inspections). Homebuilts are nearly all on the G-reg LAA regime, and much of that flies on the NPPL. ULs likewise. The more serious pilots are G-reg, with most of the IFR community being N-reg so basically unaffected by anything other than the EASA FCL attack that’s been brewing since 2012.
The UK CAA will generally look after UK based G-reg pilots, but it has no reason to look after mainland based G-reg pilots. Eventually the latter may want to look at moving the reg and their FCL papers to their local registry.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Wishfull thinking I guess…
Quite the opposite, I was being pessimistic that we would be stuck in.
The end result will no doubt be something unexpected…
Adoption of FAA regs lock, stock and barrel comes to mind.
Yeah, right… Especially for ATC.
