PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - From CAA re Bilateral agreement with FAA
View Single Post
Old 7th Aug 2011, 10:50
  #14 (permalink)  
IO540
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EASAs own stance is that their much preferred option is to achieve a bi lateral agreement on pilot licencing hence their extension to 2014 to give time to achieve that.
As bi lateral agreement is in place allowing scope for FCL.
My guess is it wont be sorted by 2014 and hence will get another extension to 2016 but it has to happen for other reasons.
I have no inside knowledge with which to disagree but I cannot believe EASA will just throw away decades of job creation, not to mention countless millions of euros spent on mega lucrative rulemaking jobs creating all the FCL garbage we now see coming our way, by signing a BASA with the USA.

Look at a "small" detail. EASA is not even interested in accepting AML STCs. Why? OBVIOUSLY because they would create job losses at EASA and Part 21 companies in Europe (who pay fees to EASA). There is no safety case.

So the whole "anything is possible with a BASA" stance pushed by Seebohm and others absolutely does not square up with a) their obvious business creation incentive and b) their actual present and historical stance.

For that reason I am sure that the constant reference by EASA to a BASA solving all these hot potatoes is nothing more than a diversion tactic, to make everybody think that a solution is just around the corner, so they can push their proposed rules through without too much resistance.

It also makes EASA look all warm and fluffy because "bilateralism" is such a lovely equitable concept which nobody will ever criticise, and 99% of Euro MPs haven't got a clue what they are voting on but they can understand these "high level European ideas". It is such ideas which partly drive people to work in the EU federal government system (the other being the expense-loaded lifestyle, of course).

I agree that nobody is actually going to shut down the N-reg (and related foreign reg) community, and that last-minute fudges will keep coming along, because this potato is much too big to eat in one go.

Evidently I am not the only one thinking this because ICAO IR to JAA IR conversion business in European FTOs is running at a miniscule level.

Nevertheless I have decided to have a go at it myself, just in case there is some sort of regulatory ambiguity which would compromise one's insurance. Also the 15hr IR conversion route currently looks like it will disappear in April 2012.
IO540 is offline