EASA FCL Notice of Proposed Amendment

[Contacttower]

http://easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/r_npa.php

Not sure if this has been done yet here but the latest GA press seem to be discussing it a lot.

[IO540]

Yes, this is the one which strips all European residents of foreign license privileges when in European airspace (p159).



There is another one due mid September which addresses airframes.

[Mike Echo]

Slightly Off FCL

Another must read is NPA 2008-15 "Essential Requirements for Civil Aviation Enviromental Protection"
I'm not great at understanding a lot of these NPA's but this (for them) is a fairly short document. I'm still in the process of trying to understand the implications but I feel, and hope I'm wrong, that it contains significant cost and legislation aspects for all aviation.
It might already be being discussed within GA?
Mike Echo

[Whopity]

And yet more proposed costs here from the dear old UK Government as well!
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/aip/ Tax on aeronautical and maritime communications.

[Contacttower]

Not sure what to think of the 'Basic Leisure Pilot's Licence'. 20hrs instruction and you can fly (although not further than 50km and with not more than one passenger) a Group A aircraft without any instructor supervision. Interesting to see whether people would gain it on its own or whether it would just become an intermediate point in doing the full Leisure Pilot's Licence.

[BEagle]

The entire 'Leisure Pilot Licence' is an utter crock.

My response to the EASA consultation is that the whole MDM032 proposals should be scrapped. There is utterly no point in a EASA-harmonised sub-ICAO pilot licence; those Member States who wish to have sub-ICAO pilot licences should be free to do so in their own airspace without EASA and its €urocratic intervention.

EASA was supposed to 'deregulate'. It has done nothing of the sort.

[IO540]

20hrs instruction and you can fly (although not further than 50km and with not more than one passenger) a Group A aircraft without any instructor supervision.

I have no view on this myself but it has been said that this is actually not that different to somebody flying solo pre-PPL. You can do that in an unlimited manner, subject only to how much money you want to spend on .... flying! And you can go much further than 50km.

I think the EASA LPL is a waste of time, now that any IFR add-on route has been excluded. But what does everybody here think has been the driver behind this product? There is an "industry" driver behind most regulation - even if not obvious. The UK NPPL was driven by flying schools who wanted a lower cost product on their price list, but actually it ended up failing that because most of the takeup is existing PPL holders who fail their Class 2 medicals. IMHO, the industry driver behind the LPL is the huge European "plastic ultralight/sports" industry. Surely, they have what they wanted??

[chrisN]

Mike Echo wrote: “Another must read is NPA 2008-15 "Essential Requirements for Civil Aviation Enviromental Protection"
I'm not great at understanding a lot of these NPA's but this (for them) is a fairly short document. I'm still in the process of trying to understand the implications but I feel, and hope I'm wrong, that it contains significant cost and legislation aspects for all aviation. It might already be being discussed within GA?”

Yes, it is. I am working on a paper/response for GAAC, and others are looking at it in various other GA organisations.

Feel free to let me know if you have any views on it.

Chris N.

[flybymike]

Wot Beagle says.

EASA are strangling the lifeblood out of GA by unnecessary over regulation.

I never thought I would say it but bring back the good old CAA we all used to love to hate. At least we knew where we were, before these europeans decided to remove our lifetime licenses, national ratings, impose retesting on qualified experienced pilots, interfere with foreign instructor qualifications and aircraft use, and I havent even started on the old JAA malarky of 90 day rules , biennial instructor flights, increased hours currency requirements, annual MEP tests etc, all shown by the CAA safety review to have been completely unnecessary and a prime case of jobs for the boys....

[jxk]

flybymike
Totally agree with your last post. But, how can we apply some sort of leverage to stop this headlong race into the abyss? It's no use talking to politicians as they're not able to comprehend the situation and I don't think many of them fly.
The CAA just seem to want to capitulate and implement all these interminable rules which keep coming out of Brussels. Bring back Maggie, at least she had a bit of common-sense when it came to the European harmonisation catastrophe.

[EGBKFLYER]

Heh. Licencing will not matter, because EASA will have succeeded in grounding most of the GA fleet with the new Part M regulations anyway by that stage...

[MartinCh]

Yes, this is the one which strips all European residents of foreign license privileges when in European airspace (p159).

First time I read this about NPA.
That's

So when I have FAA PPL A or H or other ICAO PPL and don't have non-EU passport or some residence visa card/sticker in passport to show I'm not EU resident (anymore or at all), I can't use the privileges, ie fly VFR legally?
I don't even go deeper regarding crossing borders, IFR etc.
Not even in the UK if they don't push through some exception (prob not..)?
So getting European PPL or LPL or whatever, paperwork would be mandatory? Hmm.

OK, curtailing use of N reg bizjets, whatever. That's about companies that have cash to sort out paperwork should they be forced to. But screwing over individual on their way into industry or enjoying themselves SFHing? AAAH.

[Contacttower]

Perhaps we should all just emigrate.....

[IO540]

OK, curtailing use of N reg bizjets, whatever. That's about companies that have cash to sort out paperwork should they be forced to. But screwing over individual on their way into industry or enjoying themselves SFHing? AAAH.

Anybody who thinks the above needs to get out more.