UK CAA Report on Bizjet Safety
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very interesting but from a brief read the CAA do not list nor take into account the NON UK registered Business jets that are based in or primarily operate in the UK. It's like doing a road traffic survey and counting every 3rd vehicle.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Tween Hurn&Filton
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To take gordon's brief analysis a bit further, the CAA report seems to be full of generalisations (due to "no statistical dataset") and highlights areas where improved training and awareness would apply to the whole aviation spectrum, not just business jets. Further it says that the "air-taxi" accident rate is 3.5/million hrs but the corporate jet rate is only 0.2/million hours which is comparable with the scheduled widebody operators. Mainly, it just seems like waffle, with little statistical data to substantiate the claim that the corporate bizjet sector is appreciably worse than scheduled ops.
I should have thought that the fact that we don't have performance departments, or route proving flights but operate to different airports as a major part of the job, only go to the sim once a year and are under high workloads of peripheral aviation management may have something to do with the "perceived" problem.
I should have thought that the fact that we don't have performance departments, or route proving flights but operate to different airports as a major part of the job, only go to the sim once a year and are under high workloads of peripheral aviation management may have something to do with the "perceived" problem.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Greece
Age: 67
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to print out all 56 pages thank God the ink ran out of 2 pages,
Another load of un readable b........t from Uk CAA . Wow one fatal accident involving UK registered Business aircraft since 2000 and the other a US registered Challenger within UK Airspace otherwise. F... ,,, to do with British CAA/Taxpayer !! As usual they stick there nose where it does not concern them - now with ASSI they have screwed up the Overseas territories registries - Long live Isle of Man they are the registration of the future (they even give you ops manuals !!) amd have nothing to fo with UK CAA
What did it cost to produce this rubbish ?
ATP
Another load of un readable b........t from Uk CAA . Wow one fatal accident involving UK registered Business aircraft since 2000 and the other a US registered Challenger within UK Airspace otherwise. F... ,,, to do with British CAA/Taxpayer !! As usual they stick there nose where it does not concern them - now with ASSI they have screwed up the Overseas territories registries - Long live Isle of Man they are the registration of the future (they even give you ops manuals !!) amd have nothing to fo with UK CAA
What did it cost to produce this rubbish ?
ATP
At first, I thought it was an early April fools joke, it's so poorly crafted. They seem to change their mind about what they're measuring against what, every three paragraphs!
What makes me laugh (or is it weep?) most is the suggestion that an exam on customer relations or somesuch might be useful, or needed. No, it isn't. What *is* needed is for the CAA to exercise its already considerable powers to stop illegal charter (and, let's face it, "private" flights that are anything but that), instead of hiding behind the shed and bleating that it's "too difficult to prove". Oh, and Inspectors not insisting on paperwork that is not required by OPS but that they think would be "a good idea" would be nice, too.
Interesting that they choose not to address the comments about unnecessary bureaucracy and competition for primacy amongst the regulators, innit?
This customer's feedback: 3/10. Do it again - and properly, this time.
What makes me laugh (or is it weep?) most is the suggestion that an exam on customer relations or somesuch might be useful, or needed. No, it isn't. What *is* needed is for the CAA to exercise its already considerable powers to stop illegal charter (and, let's face it, "private" flights that are anything but that), instead of hiding behind the shed and bleating that it's "too difficult to prove". Oh, and Inspectors not insisting on paperwork that is not required by OPS but that they think would be "a good idea" would be nice, too.
Interesting that they choose not to address the comments about unnecessary bureaucracy and competition for primacy amongst the regulators, innit?
This customer's feedback: 3/10. Do it again - and properly, this time.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you guys read the drafts on the EASA HP regarding the regulation of Commercial othe than air taxi? Which is all the coorperate traffic. Overboarding beaurocracy, near ops1, this is why they need surveys that suggest that legislation is overdue. Makes them more important at EASA.
Europe overegulating WITHOUT the need to again. M Reg won´t help, anyone not complying will be banned from EUR airspace - thats what they said on a conference I was told.
However the good times in aviation are over and they will never come again as long as the monkeys are running the show...
I wonder what kind of hell would brake loose if the same regs would apply to road or rail traffic. Lets not forget the hundreds of people killed in trains (spain) and the Metro (London) by terrorists. Result in security measures: null, nada, nothing.
No thread from coorperate aviation, result: security til no one wants to fly anymore.
Europe overegulating WITHOUT the need to again. M Reg won´t help, anyone not complying will be banned from EUR airspace - thats what they said on a conference I was told.
However the good times in aviation are over and they will never come again as long as the monkeys are running the show...
I wonder what kind of hell would brake loose if the same regs would apply to road or rail traffic. Lets not forget the hundreds of people killed in trains (spain) and the Metro (London) by terrorists. Result in security measures: null, nada, nothing.
No thread from coorperate aviation, result: security til no one wants to fly anymore.
