Letter to MP on Mode S
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA in a hole and still digging !
It would seem that the CAA has dug it's self into a hole with mandating Mode S without understanding the results of it's actions on the light aviation industry . Of course the real reason for the mode S mandate is so that if an airliner hits a light aircraft in class G airspace the CAA can say that they have "done something" to avoid this happening.
Now the problem is saving face and it is trying to build a techonbabbel smoke screen to fool the MP's that the mode S mandate is a safety issue, if the CAA was interested in safety enhancment they would have put in TIS and WX radar data link with the mode S but that costs money and they would not want to spend any of that would they?
Ten years ago the CAA was refusing point blank to have anything to do with GPS approaches wile the rest of the world was introducing them, only now do we have the "face saving" GPS trial because the CAA can't keep its head in the sand any longer on the GPS approach issue.
It's high time the CAA got out of Aviation house once in a wile and had a look at the real world.
Now the problem is saving face and it is trying to build a techonbabbel smoke screen to fool the MP's that the mode S mandate is a safety issue, if the CAA was interested in safety enhancment they would have put in TIS and WX radar data link with the mode S but that costs money and they would not want to spend any of that would they?
Ten years ago the CAA was refusing point blank to have anything to do with GPS approaches wile the rest of the world was introducing them, only now do we have the "face saving" GPS trial because the CAA can't keep its head in the sand any longer on the GPS approach issue.
It's high time the CAA got out of Aviation house once in a wile and had a look at the real world.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Response from Minister of Aviation, missing the point
Hello, folks!
Well, as the weather's been so rubbish lately, there's been plenty of time to keep an eye on associated matters of aviation. I received the reply from Gillian Merron that others have recieved, via my MP.
Here is my response to my MP Jeremy Hunt regarding her letter, which rather misses the point, I thought:
"Jeremy,
Thank you very much for your reply.
I'm afraid, however, that Ms. Merron's letter glosses over the real point, which is that the CAA, as a regulatory body authorised by HM Government, has behaved in a very undemocratic and despotic way toward the aviation community on this matter. Ms. Merron's letter mentions that the CAA has been consulting on Mode S with the General Aviation Consultation Committee, but what she fails to mention is that that consultation has completely disregarded the input of the members of that committee.
This concerns me for several reasons:
1. The CAA's own paper demonstrates that this approach does not actually solve the problem of safe airspace use in the future, a matter on which no one in the Government seems able or willing to question the CAA.
2. The CAA seem able to operate with impunity and based only on their own incestuous opinions of safety and the good of aviation, but seem to be held to real account by no one in Government.
3. The CAA appear to our community to be interested only in protecting their position in light of EASA encroachment and not genuinely looking after our best interests. We, the governed, so to speak, do not feel our voices are being heard. The CAA arrogantly rejected the input of the community they regulate on this matter and their consultation has been a sham with no real intent of changing their opinions or actions. They are not accountable to their "constituents".
The real issue which needs to be addressed here is the CAA's approach and intent regarding how they exercise their authority, and how that authority is kept in check by the Government. That was the reason for the last paragraph in my letter, suggesting an open working group overseen by a third party to ensure a genuine consultation takes place, as no one in either the CAA or the Government seem interested in making sure that is the case.
The light aviation business sector is under threat from economic, social, and regulatory pressures. Only by working with the CAA can we ensure the country does not lose this £1.4 billion/annum industry by overburdening it with uneccesary regulation and cost. To lose it would not only risk the livelihoods of those earning the £1.4 billion, but would also reduce the pool of available pilots and support infrastructure upon which the nation's commercial air transport industry depends.
I would be interested to discuss with you further your thoughts on how the Government might better maintain oversight of a quango which has lost sight of it's real purpose. "
We'll see where this gets us, but I really think we've won nothing in the short or long term. Ms. Merron's letter gives me the impression that the CAA have not changed their position, they're just going to bide their time, and that no one that we've written to has really taken any notice and talked to anyone. That, to me, implies we're largely being ignored and pandered to with these letters.
Pitts2112
Well, as the weather's been so rubbish lately, there's been plenty of time to keep an eye on associated matters of aviation. I received the reply from Gillian Merron that others have recieved, via my MP.
Here is my response to my MP Jeremy Hunt regarding her letter, which rather misses the point, I thought:
"Jeremy,
Thank you very much for your reply.
I'm afraid, however, that Ms. Merron's letter glosses over the real point, which is that the CAA, as a regulatory body authorised by HM Government, has behaved in a very undemocratic and despotic way toward the aviation community on this matter. Ms. Merron's letter mentions that the CAA has been consulting on Mode S with the General Aviation Consultation Committee, but what she fails to mention is that that consultation has completely disregarded the input of the members of that committee.
This concerns me for several reasons:
1. The CAA's own paper demonstrates that this approach does not actually solve the problem of safe airspace use in the future, a matter on which no one in the Government seems able or willing to question the CAA.
2. The CAA seem able to operate with impunity and based only on their own incestuous opinions of safety and the good of aviation, but seem to be held to real account by no one in Government.
3. The CAA appear to our community to be interested only in protecting their position in light of EASA encroachment and not genuinely looking after our best interests. We, the governed, so to speak, do not feel our voices are being heard. The CAA arrogantly rejected the input of the community they regulate on this matter and their consultation has been a sham with no real intent of changing their opinions or actions. They are not accountable to their "constituents".
The real issue which needs to be addressed here is the CAA's approach and intent regarding how they exercise their authority, and how that authority is kept in check by the Government. That was the reason for the last paragraph in my letter, suggesting an open working group overseen by a third party to ensure a genuine consultation takes place, as no one in either the CAA or the Government seem interested in making sure that is the case.
The light aviation business sector is under threat from economic, social, and regulatory pressures. Only by working with the CAA can we ensure the country does not lose this £1.4 billion/annum industry by overburdening it with uneccesary regulation and cost. To lose it would not only risk the livelihoods of those earning the £1.4 billion, but would also reduce the pool of available pilots and support infrastructure upon which the nation's commercial air transport industry depends.
I would be interested to discuss with you further your thoughts on how the Government might better maintain oversight of a quango which has lost sight of it's real purpose. "
We'll see where this gets us, but I really think we've won nothing in the short or long term. Ms. Merron's letter gives me the impression that the CAA have not changed their position, they're just going to bide their time, and that no one that we've written to has really taken any notice and talked to anyone. That, to me, implies we're largely being ignored and pandered to with these letters.
Pitts2112
