More of the EASA mess, confusion and ineptitude!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HD
I for one hope we vote ourselves out of Europe before 2017 and that we revert to a common market not all the centralised and bureaucratic and expensive nonsense that no one in the UK ever voted for
Pace
I for one hope we vote ourselves out of Europe before 2017 and that we revert to a common market not all the centralised and bureaucratic and expensive nonsense that no one in the UK ever voted for
Pace
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,439
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I seek asylum then ?
OTOH, I always though of the British bureaucracy of being in the top league of being inflated. The APD is a good example IMO.
OTOH, I always though of the British bureaucracy of being in the top league of being inflated. The APD is a good example IMO.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To all those who defend the actions of EASA on what they are doing I would like to ask what they see in the EASA regulations which has made aviation easier, more cost effective, more streamlined, less costly to the end user and more safe?
What has EASA done to expand aviation in Europe to make aviation in Europe more attractive to companies who are thinking of using aircraft or even to the AOC operators who have to sell to those companies and individuals?
Surely N reg in Europe has been there for longer than the EU or even the common market. Many have tried and failed to legally stop N reg was that not the remit given to the EASA lawyers? to find a way?
The best way would have been the way of the market place to offer something more attractive so no one would want to operate N reg?
I don't know of any aircraft based in the USA where the owners are on a European reg because its more attractive that way.
i say again and again that EASA had a clean sheet to really build a set of regulations which pulled the world together! Maybe taking the tried and tested FAA system improving on it adjusting it to suit European specific requirements and above all uniting all the regulatory systems into a common framework. Instead we have this expensive complicated and ridiculous mess to deal with. Even the poor old CAA are at a loss of what to do
Pace
What has EASA done to expand aviation in Europe to make aviation in Europe more attractive to companies who are thinking of using aircraft or even to the AOC operators who have to sell to those companies and individuals?
Surely N reg in Europe has been there for longer than the EU or even the common market. Many have tried and failed to legally stop N reg was that not the remit given to the EASA lawyers? to find a way?
The best way would have been the way of the market place to offer something more attractive so no one would want to operate N reg?
I don't know of any aircraft based in the USA where the owners are on a European reg because its more attractive that way.
i say again and again that EASA had a clean sheet to really build a set of regulations which pulled the world together! Maybe taking the tried and tested FAA system improving on it adjusting it to suit European specific requirements and above all uniting all the regulatory systems into a common framework. Instead we have this expensive complicated and ridiculous mess to deal with. Even the poor old CAA are at a loss of what to do
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The irony is that some of these defending EASA on here were posting not so long ago that they wanted an N reg job in Europe when they only had FAA certs. It was good enough and safe enough for you then. But back to the 'oversight' bit any operational and flight crew licence changes would have to be driven by the non EU State of Registry and not EASA for obvious reasons. Rightly so I cannot see the FAA agreeing to this. Funny though that very few pilots working for AOC ops seem happy with their lot, cut to the bone costs in their operation, poor pay, poor training and lack of morale to name but a few of the issues, but there are way more serious problems than those aren't they ?
Yeah, great idea eh ? bring in a whole load of duff legislation to make private ops more like AOC, not exactly something to look forward to. All of this coupled with the low cost Airline churn out 200 hour A320 co pilots debacle makes flying in Europe less attractive and less safe every year.
Yeah, great idea eh ? bring in a whole load of duff legislation to make private ops more like AOC, not exactly something to look forward to. All of this coupled with the low cost Airline churn out 200 hour A320 co pilots debacle makes flying in Europe less attractive and less safe every year.
To all those who defend the actions of EASA on what they are doing I would like to ask what they see in the EASA regulations which has made aviation easier, more cost effective, more streamlined, less costly to the end user and more safe?
What has EASA done to expand aviation in Europe to make aviation in Europe more attractive to companies who are thinking of using aircraft or even to the AOC operators who have to sell to those companies and individuals?
Surely N reg in Europe has been there for longer than the EU or even the common market. Many have tried and failed to legally stop N reg was that not the remit given to the EASA lawyers? to find a way?
The best way would have been the way of the market place to offer something more attractive so no one would want to operate N reg?
I don't know of any aircraft based in the USA where the owners are on a European reg because its more attractive that way.
i say again and again that EASA had a clean sheet to really build a set of regulations which pulled the world together! Maybe taking the tried and tested FAA system improving on it adjusting it to suit European specific requirements and above all uniting all the regulatory systems into a common framework. Instead we have this expensive complicated and ridiculous mess to deal with. Even the poor old CAA are at a loss of what to do
Pace
What has EASA done to expand aviation in Europe to make aviation in Europe more attractive to companies who are thinking of using aircraft or even to the AOC operators who have to sell to those companies and individuals?
Surely N reg in Europe has been there for longer than the EU or even the common market. Many have tried and failed to legally stop N reg was that not the remit given to the EASA lawyers? to find a way?
The best way would have been the way of the market place to offer something more attractive so no one would want to operate N reg?
I don't know of any aircraft based in the USA where the owners are on a European reg because its more attractive that way.
i say again and again that EASA had a clean sheet to really build a set of regulations which pulled the world together! Maybe taking the tried and tested FAA system improving on it adjusting it to suit European specific requirements and above all uniting all the regulatory systems into a common framework. Instead we have this expensive complicated and ridiculous mess to deal with. Even the poor old CAA are at a loss of what to do
Pace
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beaver
Where I do not fully agree is that I do feel EASA should have some control over so many based N reg in Europe and some oversight of our operations is a good thing.
What I don't agree with is EASA regulating us to the extent that there is no point in having an N reg in Europe as we are expected to be like an AOC operation and to hold the same licences. That is dictatorship tactics and not free market competition.
We are being regulated out of existence rather than EASA making their system so attractive that who would want an N reg.
They have done this through false promises and frankly dishonest deceit.
I also agree with you that many of the previous JAA licence holder who were the most antagonistic towards FAA pilots were the very ones who got licence swops freely through places like Ireland when those loopholes were open.
Pace
Where I do not fully agree is that I do feel EASA should have some control over so many based N reg in Europe and some oversight of our operations is a good thing.
What I don't agree with is EASA regulating us to the extent that there is no point in having an N reg in Europe as we are expected to be like an AOC operation and to hold the same licences. That is dictatorship tactics and not free market competition.
We are being regulated out of existence rather than EASA making their system so attractive that who would want an N reg.
They have done this through false promises and frankly dishonest deceit.
I also agree with you that many of the previous JAA licence holder who were the most antagonistic towards FAA pilots were the very ones who got licence swops freely through places like Ireland when those loopholes were open.
Pace
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the oversight will be of any use but if it means that you can still fly N reg on FAA certs in Europe by way of an ops and sms manual, then I wish you luck in obtaining the right to continue to work.
I never knew that about the Irish straight swap FAA to JAA licence. Well, it would seem then that EASA should do the same for current non EU licenced pilots in Europe
I never knew that about the Irish straight swap FAA to JAA licence. Well, it would seem then that EASA should do the same for current non EU licenced pilots in Europe
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That loophole only lasted 12 months per pilot didn't it Pace? One year to get JAA'd - the exams and licensing.
I personally don't know of business pilots making use of it but it might well have been possible. Overwhemlingly utilised by an EI carrier during the years they flooded this site with adverts.
Rob
I personally don't know of business pilots making use of it but it might well have been possible. Overwhemlingly utilised by an EI carrier during the years they flooded this site with adverts.
Rob
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don`t panick
Any Captain Mainwarings out there "don`t panick.
I understand whilst implementing rules have all been published, but have the acceptable means of compliance (AMC) been agreed. Waste of time to implement the rules without the AMC.
I understand whilst implementing rules have all been published, but have the acceptable means of compliance (AMC) been agreed. Waste of time to implement the rules without the AMC.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only the right to work in Europe, Pace.
Are you not placing EASA AOC holders at a commercial disadvantage?
Are you not placing EASA AOC holders at a commercial disadvantage?
Sorry missed this! How can we be putting AOC holders at a commercial disadvantage?
We fly privately owned and operated jets which are not commercial operations
To do commercial operations in non commercial private jets is illegal?
That may have happened a few years ago but is getting less and less the case.
On the point of commercial disadvantage I am sure EASA will be streamlining the regulations, cutting away all the needless and expensive bureaucracy and reducing AOC costs dramatically thus expanding the attractiveness of business jet use to non owners?
Pigs might fly? as that is what they should be doing ? but are doing the opposite
Pace
In both years that represented 14% of all flights.
I'd suggest that most NS-CAT operations would like to see tighter regulation of NCC operations as that is a huge impact on the industry. Whilst I appreciate that your concern is for your personal situation, others are significantly affected.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just as a matter of interest.
If a company like WingX has sufficient proofs that 17000+ flights were illegal, that means truly illegal. ( selling a ticket for a trip whilst not having AOC, etc..)
Then it should be easy for the authorities to get this straight, after all 1 billion euro should pay some lawyers for a while ( or not
)
OR
these flights are not illegal, but are perceived as such.
I understand the concerns of AOC holders about loss of revenue, and i believe that they do not like these "clubs" or else, but the market dictates, and EASA and their lobbyist ( big players that is , NJE and the like) WILL NEVER FIGHT FOR SMALL OPERATIONS, NEVER !!! All operators should fight against ANY MORE layer of regulation in Europe, not looking ONLY at their balance sheet ( or **** for that matter), but looking a bit forward to see their gloomy future IF more regulation are in place.
Nevertheless , I would love to have the "big data" about these flights, after all it is public interest to know this ? no ?
If a company like WingX has sufficient proofs that 17000+ flights were illegal, that means truly illegal. ( selling a ticket for a trip whilst not having AOC, etc..)
Then it should be easy for the authorities to get this straight, after all 1 billion euro should pay some lawyers for a while ( or not
)OR
these flights are not illegal, but are perceived as such.
I understand the concerns of AOC holders about loss of revenue, and i believe that they do not like these "clubs" or else, but the market dictates, and EASA and their lobbyist ( big players that is , NJE and the like) WILL NEVER FIGHT FOR SMALL OPERATIONS, NEVER !!! All operators should fight against ANY MORE layer of regulation in Europe, not looking ONLY at their balance sheet ( or **** for that matter), but looking a bit forward to see their gloomy future IF more regulation are in place.
Nevertheless , I would love to have the "big data" about these flights, after all it is public interest to know this ? no ?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Journey Man
Statistics can be used, manipulated and exaggerated to reinforce the argument desired!
Illegal charter itself is not black and white but different shades of grey and hence I would regard that description with caution especially when statistics are used to paint a picture!
There is obvious illegal charter where the owner of a jet advertises its use in the media, where Joe Bloggs gets a price to take him and his friends away for the day
The other end of the scale is a company with its own flight department, aircraft pilots etc who lease in a replacement aircraft for a couple of months while their aircraft has gone tech! Where all the paperwork is properly covered and the owner has no involvement for the period.
In between are shades of grey! I would be vey surprised if those statistics are accurate to what is truly illegal charter as I think more so today we are in a liability society, where insurance dictates and where the cost of a mistake can be huge
Most owners are very wealthy individuals or companies who would not Risk the implications of such cowboy antics of illegal charter in the true sense
Some AOC operations see private operations as a threat full stop and would like private jets to be operated through an AOC or not in existence at all so those companies who owned them would be buying their services instead? To them private jets are removing income that could potentially be theirs full stop illegal charter or otherwise or that is how they stupidly and blindly perceive things.
But yes i will agree that there will have been powerful lobby groups who will have banded those false statistics around and strongly influenced the course of part M and 3rd country licensing to level that playing field to such an extent that the use of private jets on a foreign registry becomes pointless and to drive them out that way.
Driving them out that way will do nothing to improve safety or the bank balances of AOC ops sadly.
EASA had a clean sheet to start with and had a Golden opportunity to have really furthered aviation in Europe for all. That opportunity has been thrown away to be replaced by a complicated and expensive mess for all
Pace
Statistics can be used, manipulated and exaggerated to reinforce the argument desired!
Illegal charter itself is not black and white but different shades of grey and hence I would regard that description with caution especially when statistics are used to paint a picture!
There is obvious illegal charter where the owner of a jet advertises its use in the media, where Joe Bloggs gets a price to take him and his friends away for the day
The other end of the scale is a company with its own flight department, aircraft pilots etc who lease in a replacement aircraft for a couple of months while their aircraft has gone tech! Where all the paperwork is properly covered and the owner has no involvement for the period.
In between are shades of grey! I would be vey surprised if those statistics are accurate to what is truly illegal charter as I think more so today we are in a liability society, where insurance dictates and where the cost of a mistake can be huge
Most owners are very wealthy individuals or companies who would not Risk the implications of such cowboy antics of illegal charter in the true sense
Some AOC operations see private operations as a threat full stop and would like private jets to be operated through an AOC or not in existence at all so those companies who owned them would be buying their services instead? To them private jets are removing income that could potentially be theirs full stop illegal charter or otherwise or that is how they stupidly and blindly perceive things.
But yes i will agree that there will have been powerful lobby groups who will have banded those false statistics around and strongly influenced the course of part M and 3rd country licensing to level that playing field to such an extent that the use of private jets on a foreign registry becomes pointless and to drive them out that way.
Driving them out that way will do nothing to improve safety or the bank balances of AOC ops sadly.
EASA had a clean sheet to start with and had a Golden opportunity to have really furthered aviation in Europe for all. That opportunity has been thrown away to be replaced by a complicated and expensive mess for all
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 25th Oct 2015 at 11:40.
To Pace
Is it possible to base and operate a non N-registered aircraft in the USA? If so, under which regulation(s)?
That is dictatorship tactics and not free market competition.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Around FL380
Age: 38
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A read of the recently-released report on the G1V accident N823GA at Le Castellet in 2012 (thread active on this forum) might give some weight to the argument for more EASA oversight of third country operators in Europe. Part 91 one day, commercial part 135 the next in Europe without written permission, non-adherence to SOPs, CRM issues and ineffective oversight by the FAA. A sad story and an accident that could have been avoided.
AP
AP
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really don't think one accident is reflective of anything and you will also find equal accidents under AOC ops maybe they need oversight too!
There have also been some very shoddy AOC ops I worked with a company next to one which I won't name around the clock ) so don't presume all in the AOC world is golden
Pace
There have also been some very shoddy AOC ops I worked with a company next to one which I won't name around the clock ) so don't presume all in the AOC world is golden
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 26th Oct 2015 at 10:13.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A poor posting aprune , they weren't even based in Europe. By your reckoning then you want to ban all N reg including Airlines from ever entering Europe ?
Funny that not so long ago you were happy to post that you wanted to work on N reg corporate aircraft with just your FAA licence. It was good enough for you then
Funny that not so long ago you were happy to post that you wanted to work on N reg corporate aircraft with just your FAA licence. It was good enough for you then
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Jungle or Sand!!!!!!
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes! Yes! all these squeaky clean AOC establishments with enough acronyms behind them to scare the most persistent inspector off the trail.
I remember a Premier 1 into Samadan, using the private "field" to attempt to get in so as to allow him to do the charter thing the next day. Did not end so well.
There are mistakes and fatalities on both sides of the field and if we are going to squabble amongst each other who has the longest ................stick, this well may turn into a RW thread.
This has nothing to do with safety, if you believe this then leave the thread turn off your iPad and go enjoy a cocktail by the beach and dream of riches.
This is just the power of economics and lobbyism at play. For every Mom and Pop private owner and operation is one less the BIG boys have in there pocket. Seeing how competition is fierce in this sector with your top dogs controlling the majority of management, the morsels remaining, which us "die hard's" are, private operations are now the ultimate target. Seeing cost is not going to swing the vote of the director, as this in a accounting perspective proves the atrocious costing's of the management companies, the next step is the, "lets legislate them out of existence", with banners springing up all over PPrune of 130000 lobbyist for hire in Brussels, we stood no chance.
There are some private operations out there, and I been privy to some, that would put the top names (AOC and Management) to utter shame, this is not done to flaunt success and safety, but the sole fact that they fly and support there principle to the highest standard they know how.
What is happening now is the degrading of safety, now operators and management companies , are going to stretch the legal jargon of EASA Ops to the max. Soon you guys are going to be FDP'ing yourself into exhaustion, and because some very clever and cunning scheduling departments are going to know exactly how to milk the system.
My (angry) two cents worth, I am a small fish in this large pond and soon I will be eaten but I have the ability to voice my opinion, for now.
I remember a Premier 1 into Samadan, using the private "field" to attempt to get in so as to allow him to do the charter thing the next day. Did not end so well.
There are mistakes and fatalities on both sides of the field and if we are going to squabble amongst each other who has the longest ................stick, this well may turn into a RW thread.
This has nothing to do with safety, if you believe this then leave the thread turn off your iPad and go enjoy a cocktail by the beach and dream of riches.
This is just the power of economics and lobbyism at play. For every Mom and Pop private owner and operation is one less the BIG boys have in there pocket. Seeing how competition is fierce in this sector with your top dogs controlling the majority of management, the morsels remaining, which us "die hard's" are, private operations are now the ultimate target. Seeing cost is not going to swing the vote of the director, as this in a accounting perspective proves the atrocious costing's of the management companies, the next step is the, "lets legislate them out of existence", with banners springing up all over PPrune of 130000 lobbyist for hire in Brussels, we stood no chance.
There are some private operations out there, and I been privy to some, that would put the top names (AOC and Management) to utter shame, this is not done to flaunt success and safety, but the sole fact that they fly and support there principle to the highest standard they know how.
What is happening now is the degrading of safety, now operators and management companies , are going to stretch the legal jargon of EASA Ops to the max. Soon you guys are going to be FDP'ing yourself into exhaustion, and because some very clever and cunning scheduling departments are going to know exactly how to milk the system.
My (angry) two cents worth, I am a small fish in this large pond and soon I will be eaten but I have the ability to voice my opinion, for now.