those that "use" aviation should meet the cost.
Fuji
While I agree with you that we should pay the costs of services which bring benefits to us the end users I cannot agree we should pay for Burocrats and quangos who are actually damaging our industry by loading it down and choking it with needless and expensive regulations to justify their own ends and existance.
EASA is supposed to be a safety organisation who should solely be regulating on matters of safety ie those matters are of benefit to us the end users.
It is wholly accepted that the latest FCL proposals on N reg have NO basis on safety whatsover.
The letter I had from the commission which was posted here confirmed that!
This was purely protectionism and political which is not in EASAs mandate.
We pay for a service. Someone guides us around the skies in ATC and we pay for it and you could argue that we should?
De regulation which made Bose jump doesnt mean NO regulations but stripping away the mass of useless regulation which is expensive and throttles our industry, keeping only the regulations which make our industry safer.
The CAA had a shock report which showed just that fact. Our AOC ops which are highly regulated and loaded with cost are less safe than the equivalent FAA part 135 which is not Burocracy and regulation loaded to such an extent.
The research to get those stats was to show how the European AOC OPS were safer but showed the opposite (own Goal)
Yes EASA has a budget of over 100 million Euros to produce what???
The stuff that has been churned out up to date?
I would be quite happy to copy the FAA system for a minute fraction of that!
57 Million Euros in salaries and god knows how many restaurant/wine bar charge accounts to boot.
Dont ask me to pay for that.
Pace