Aye carumba, I went offline to compose my answer to slim_slag and sneak it into my last post
, and there's loads more here!
bluskis, you got it, and yes they do. Criteria is "interested in flight under IFR in Europe" - no rating requirement.
Slim_slag (your comments in quote marks else it gets too disjointed)
"Should not the regulators be proactive here and find out what the regulated think? Who works for who anyway?"
That's not the way things work. Never has been. Individuals/groups lobby the policy-makers to change things they don't like - which is what I thought this was leading to
Funnily enough, lobbying is an "artform" in the US as well
The regulator/policy-maker has to be autonomous to the user. Ultimately the CAA are responsible to Government.
"You see it's all attitude."
Isn't everything in aviation
"I think it's obvious what the interested PPL wants, take the FAA IR and introduce it into the UK."
Expedient, but not a realistic or pragmatic solution. It isn't going to happen, so energy wasted trying to achieve this could have been better spent moving towards a more realistic solution. One word: "Galileo".
"All this stuff about Australia is just muddying the water."
Disagree, I mentioned Australia (and others) because, for sake of this discussion, the only alternate model anyone ever mentions is the FAA one. Fortunately we don't live in a world where there's only one way to do things, and a little bit of research into this may actually unearth something better. (God forbid the FAA may not have thought of everything
)
My point about interaction between differing countries rules/regs wasn't very well put - bear with me, I'll try again
I don't know the numbers, but let's be generous and 'guess' that 85% of American-based FAA PPL/IR holders don't cross international borders in the majority of their IFR flights.
Now PPL/IR's from the UK must cross international boundaries in the majority of their IFR flights* so this is an additional requirement to be covered in the syallabus. (* were this not the case an IMC rating would suffice)
It's a moot point, but I thought I'd clarify my intent anyhow
"This is how the federal JAA should have worked, but national protectionism won out."
I think that's a little harsh. There are several initiatives underway to harmonise European aviation:
OpenSkies policy
Airspace Classification from 7 classes down to 3 classes down to 2 classes (eventually)
Euro-AIS
&tc
They're not going to happen instantly, but there's a lot going on...
"Isn't it a great shame that several people here have given up because they know they have lost before they have started?"
Made the same comment myself yesterday
FTR, I think if someone was motivated sufficiently to organise what's required something would be done. But, as I may have said (in relation to NOTAMs), bleating about it and doing something about it are two very different activities