CAA Review of GA

[sunday driver]

Ref the editorial in Sept Pilot

"The UK CAA has announced plans for a strategic review of GA in the UK to be carried out by a joint CAA / industry / Government review team. The joint team is expected to be in place by the end of August 2005, with a final report prepared by June 2006."

(full item is in the "Latest CAA News" part of the CAA web-site)

Questions (asked in a polite, but interested tone of voice)
Who's going to be the GA representatives ?
How are they chosen?
How will they consult with the rest of us?

(Have searched for other threads without result)

SD

[Genghis the Engineer]

Not absolutely certain, but I suspect that the (or at-least one) GA rep may be Mark Wilson, Chief Executive of BBGA (British Business and GA Association), formerly head of flight engineer of Britten-Norman, and a reasonably keen PPL. (Also, in my experience and opinion, a good egg).

That said, I'd guess you'll see the usual suspects closely involved as well, George Done from AOPA, Graham Newby from PFA, Chris Finnigan of BMAA, David Roberts of BGA. All keen PPLs employed (or in George's case, elected) to represent us and in my experience they do a pretty good job.

The big picture of course is that we get represented by the people appointed by our various association. If you want representing, join and become involved in whichever you feel represents your interests most closely. I'd venture that this is:-

Gliders - British Gliding Association (BGA)
Microlights - British Microlight Aircraft Association (BMAA)
Small vintage or homebuilt aeroplanes - Popular Flying Association (PFA)
Certified Light Aeroplanes - Aircraft Operators and Pilots Association (AOPA)
Aerospace Professionals in general - Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS)
Commercial GA Operators - British Business Aviation and General Aviation Association (BBGA)

G

[sunday driver]

Thanks, G.

Good to know we're in safe hands.

What are the chances of our diverse associations having a unified approach? (I ask this in genuine innocence, not cynicism).

SD

[Genghis the Engineer]

Unlikely to be 100% unified, but they're pretty good at talking to each other and ironing out most of their differences before going to CAA.

G

[David Roberts]

The first meeting of the CAA Strategic Review took place on 21 September. The ‘usual suspects’ from GA industry on the review tem are Roger Dunn (GASCo & PPL IR Europe), Charles Henry (GAAC), Roger Hopkinson (PFA & GA Alliance), Jeremy James (HCGB), David Roberts (BGA, RAeC, Europe Air Sports), Martin Robinson (AOPA), Mark Wilson (BBGA – David Antrobus deputising in Mark’s absence).

The GA team has been selected by the CAA, based on advice contained in the responses to the CAA chairman, and represent the cross section of the many GA organisations. GA seats were limited to 7. All of us are known to the CAA in our various capacities. Most GA members are volunteers, exceptions being Martin and Mark.

The first meeting focused on agreeing Terms of Reference and other procedural matters. As one of the GA representative members, I have suggested the GA group co-ordinates content and timing of publishing info on progress, as we aim to act as a team. We are also setting up the process of consultation with our constituencies.

[LookingForAJob]

So what's this (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/17/LAASG%20TOR.pdf) then?

[David Roberts]

The Light Aviation Airports Study Group is a separate consultation by the CAA and started before the CAA Reviews of GA were initated. I understand the LAASG is expected to report in December, and one possible outcome focuses on the need or otherwise for licenced airfields for GA training. The results of the LAASG work will form one of the inputs, I suspect, to the GA Reviews.

[sunday driver]

Thanks for the update, David.

I, for one, would appreciate hearing more, as the meetings progress.

While the untamed rabble that is Pprune isn't a constituency, it might be a good place to get some uninhibited feedback on the meetings (unless the meetings are not considered public . . . )

Revelations about our futures might encourage more to join one of the pilots' organisations.

SD

[David Roberts]

The CAA Reviews - Strategic and Regulatory - have a dedicated section on the CAA website (I can't locate my note of the specific address within the CAA website just now, it's late), and the procedings and news of progress will be posted there. The Reviews' reporting date is June 2006, so next 9 months will be busy......

[G-KEST]

The URL for the CAA website area on the reviews is at -
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=1&pagetype=90&pageid=5270

It will be worth watching although I am a little concerned that any input via the link might only be seen by the CAA and not necessarily passed to the non-CAA members of the group. It would be only too easy to delete any input not to the Authority's liking especially since they do not intend to make any response to the sender other than to acknowledge receipt.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:( :( :( :( :* :* :* :* :suspect: :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

[chrisN]

In response to queries about who is representing GA on the CAA review team, and what they are saying, the GAAC input will shortly be made available on the GAAC web site.

Meanwhile, if anyone wants to read several pages of input, covering not only our GA issues but some background on GAAC and the work it is doing, feel free to email me at [email protected] for a copy (not pm's, please) and I will forward the document to you.

Chris N.

[David Roberts]

At the 2nd Regulatory Review meeting this week (running parallel with the Strategic Review) arrangements for the CAA website page were discussed and agreed. The industry members of the Review team will have published contact email details and so external inputs can be sent appropriately.

The industry members are also in the process of establishing structured communcation channels with their 'parent' organisations to ensure consultation is as wide as practically possible on the key issues and workstreams.

It shouldn't be too long before the agreed TORs are published and details of workstreams. On that, we have tried to cover as much ground as possible but inevitably with the timescales involved and the volunteer nature of most industry members' participation, we cannot cover all topics. We have tried to focus on the big issues, and to deal with them at a sensible level and not too detailed.

Why do I get involved in all these things? I suppose because I care. BTW, what's flying like these days........?

[G-KEST]

David and Chris,

Positive news. Thank you for the progress report.

I wonder at times how I ever managed to find time to go to work. Retirement is supposed to mean more disposable time and less disposable cash. I find the latter is absolutely correct but the former seriously endangered over the past couple of years. This by the spate of proposals that endanger my passion for general aviation in so many areas. In addition I find myself a member of a number of unpaid working groups with the CAA as an "industry" representative and GA specialist. Truly a case of "time is money and time passes".

At least I do find time for some flying and that serves to keep matters in perspective. I hope you manage to do that as well from now on.

Cheers,

Trapper 69
:ok: