Originally Posted by
mad_jock
... But I doudt it because the yearly check is pretty enshrined in the way things are done in Europe. Just like doing a high content of theory.
And I think that is the nub of the issue. An important fraction of the European aviation community likes the 'high touch, high cost' approach to aviation in Europe and are not at all fussed that it results in a system with higher intrinsic cost, lower utility, and generally worse safety records. But, it has rigour!
I think that despite the protestations by many as to the lack of objective basis the European position, poor cost benefit, comparable alternative approaches, etc. Some aspects of this are so deeply entrenched in the regulatory mind set that it would be reasonable for an organisation such as IAOPA to conclude they can not be shifted for any feasible amount of money are effort. As such, you conclude that any attempt to achieve a bi-lateral agreement that exempts certain pilots based in Europe from one of these touchstones (the annual revalidation) is going to sink the greater project.
I am only an observer, but in all my time in Europe, I have seen almost no evidence of European organisations rolling back the level of cost/intrusion of regulation and as such, agree IAOPA's approach is pragmatic. The list of onerous regulations is long and an annual flight review is not that high up the list in my book.