good on Jim Thorpe for being so far sighted. it must of take some balls to fork a lot of cash out for that sim before this becomes law
Apart from the cash, it's taken a lot of sweat to get it through the CAA approval process. AIUI they still haven't approved it for use in ME mode because the rudder pedals don't have force feedback.
The ATO approval process has also been very painful. As I see it, there is a tranche of old-style reactionaries at the mid-level in the CAA who are determined to do things their own awkward way, regardless of how the people at the top want to change. We've seen this with screens, and we see it with stuff like getting the ATO ops manual signed off.
For example, despite me and Jim both being based at Gloucestershire, we had to do our training at Bournemouth (where the umbrella FTO is based) because CAA rules insist that you only fly from home base (it's slightly more complicated than that, but that's the effective result). Jim has been trying to push at these restrictions, but it has proved to be a slow and painful process.
because CAA rules insist that you only fly from home base
I wonder why that is.
Is the CAA concerned that if they allowed non based flights they would lose control of the "FTO" principle where you have an organisational approval for Premises X (on which the CAA fees are assessed)?
And if another FTO sets up 100m down the road, the CAA gets a second lot of fees from them.
If the CAA allowed non based flights, it would be easy for multiple training operators to be "affiliated" with one "registered premises" and they could operate all over the country or even abroad, and reduce the CAA income.
