The UK CAA have published a summary of things they’ve done and plan to do for GA: here
Some v interesting things coming up:
There are also some excellent things in there for the experimental and microlight communities (IFR and night flight!).
Somebody there clearly reads a couple of forums – the mythbusters section is hilarious!
[dead link updated]
I wonder if the insurance industry will pick up this:
There is no cross wind limit (demonstrated is not a limit). Correct; but operating outside the ‘demonstrated cross-wind capability’, is reckless.
thereby making the demonstrated crosswind capability a de-facto limit. “Reckless” is a legally loaded word.
Reduced PPL QB in June
What is QB ?
excellent things in there for the experimental and microlight communities (IFR and night flight!).
For the microlights too??? That is very hard to imagine. If it is really true, it opens up a wholly new landscape.
What is QB ?
Question bank.
There is a lot of good progress there.
“Reckless” is a legally loaded word.
Yes, and there is no historical evidence that the insurance business looks at it that way. My guess is that this is somebody speaking off the cuff.
The detail in the following will be most interesting:
During April 2014 we will provide approval for the Light Aircraft Association (LAA) to commence its night / IFR (instrument flight rules) certification programme
This has been talked about for as many years as anybody can remember. I would imagine they can do it for all-metal aircraft, with IFR avionics, and with a difference to ICAO filed, and it would be UK airspace only.
By October 2014 we intend to publish a simplified policy and application process for instrument approach procedures (IAPs) at smaller aerodromes.
The only possible progress on this, in the UK (where ATC is not going to be re-nationalised) will be approaches without needing an ATCO to sequence aircraft. A lot of people are not going to like that: ATCOs, and airfields that already have ATC and need ATC for other reasons but will lose business to non-ATC airfields with IAPs..
In the same timeframe we also intend to permit the use of pilot-controlled lighting at licensed aerodromes.
The funny part of that is that they are finally admitting that PCL is legal at non-licensed aerodromes! I don’t think this has ever been thus stated. It was worked out by various people reading between the lines of the ANO.
Relaxed rules in cost sharing (similar to the German model?)
The German model became EU law following a massive intervention last year. If I had to name all positive things that Germany brought to EASA and would think very hard, this would be the only thing on my list.
PCL sounds great. And relaxation of experimental allowing IFR for them would be terrific. I gotta say, as of late, EASA harmonisation has done a lot more good than bad. Like with the new IR and EIR stuff. It’s going the right way.
When you look through the list it really contains very little meaningful substance. Apart from clearing up some of their own mess, they have barely done anything to compensate for the excessive additional beaurocracy that has been introduced over the last 2 years. Sounds like someone with no musical ability blowing their own trumpet. Two more of their own Examiners resigned in the past week!
We simplified our template for use by Registered Training Facilities (RTFs) to become Approved Training Organisations (ATOs)
Then why is it still published as Version 1 dated October 2013? The original one they gave to RTFs at the November Seminar! Nothing has been simplified or modified!
What would be really great would be the removal of the 150hr check.
They could do it only for private use aircraft, for example.
It imposes a big cost on many syndicates and is pointless in engineering terms.
