LST,
you may be right, but I sincerely fear that a smoking hole and fatality list will likely cause even more problems, with resulting half arsed regulations that skirt round the problem or even address a completely different aspect.
What we have to bear in mind is that a catastrophic event will result in the overseeing authorities covering asses. What they invariably do is pushing politics, not tin.
Look at the way EASA functions, dysfunctional as it is. An accident will be investigated by the authorising authority, likely with the involvement of the manufacturer's country of authority involved...
Any recommendation found from the resultant findings will likely be adopted by the authorising authority and it would be up to EASA to ratify that recommendation between member states...
It would perhaps take a fatal accident in turn under each of the regulatory authorities for something to be adopted EU wide.
Aside form that, EASA is in the position where it can say 'we're a safety oversight board harmonising the regulations between member states, its down to the individual countries authorities themselves, not us'.
Look at post Colgan, the FAA has been reducing FTL's and what has EASA done !
Look at FR, MOL has been pushing this ploy of single pilot ops, which creates a wider narrative that perhaps with automation only pilot is needed. In effect, with low time pilots going on the flight line that is pretty much the case is some situations. Automation is there to reduce the ever increasing workload on the flight crew, NOT replace them.
The other side to that is the buck can be succinctly passed on responsibility. How can it be determined that P2F et al. was the cause of the accident?
It'll be the pilots, probably dead, who will be blamed for their actions, or deficiencies noted in the carriers operations and recommendations made; They were of course in accordance with the regulations at the time and Lessons will be learned no doubt.
In current circumstances, we are unfortuntely living and working in the 'wild west'. What we and each member states need is perhaps an effective minister for aviation. Not under trade and industry, not under work and pensions, not under defence, not under general transport, but one dedicated to the huge industry that aviation is. Or maybe some kind of amalgamation of associations, These bodies then need to interact with each other separate from other influences to ensure a cohesive EU interaction.
I am at a loss as to if the operators should be involved as invariably they are being run by 'accountants' and look only year to year trying to shave down costs on the year before. they simply cannot nor do not think in 3 or 5 year strategic terms.
Or we get Bob Crowe on board (much as i dislike him, he's just the firebrand the industry needs)
I dont have the answers, only looking for them, but right here, we can look for ways forward and act cohesively as a professional body to achieve those aims, rather than thinking of there here and now, but of our careers and our futures.
Last edited by stuckgear; 25th Sep 2012 at 08:06.