IAOPA (Europe) News Dec 2010
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IAOPA (Europe) News Dec 2010
Latest issue of the IAOPA (Europe) newsletter now available here.
Subjects include United front on the N-register, Rethink on environmental regulations, FAA proposes photo-licences, Linate targets GA, Fürsti case in January, AOPA Ireland opens dialogue with IAA, Irish airfield threats, Foreign flights for LSAs, Survival after ditching, Fighting for access to Tel Aviv, Destination China?
Subjects include United front on the N-register, Rethink on environmental regulations, FAA proposes photo-licences, Linate targets GA, Fürsti case in January, AOPA Ireland opens dialogue with IAA, Irish airfield threats, Foreign flights for LSAs, Survival after ditching, Fighting for access to Tel Aviv, Destination China?
I'm a little confused by the "joint letter", mentioned in "United front on the N-register".
"It suggests that the issue of third-country licences cannot be settled satisfactorily by EASA’s 2013 deadline and should instead be dealt with through bilateral agreements between states.
...
They add that bilateral aviation safety agreements (BASAs) will provide an appropriate mechanism with which to tackle validation and acceptance of third country licenses in future. BASAs are currently being negotiated with the USA and Canada, and the group says licensing annexes should be added. Europe’s deadline for implementation should be put back in order to achieve a proper solution through negotiation."
Isn't the BASA the route that EASA and the Commission has been pressing for?
Anybody got the text of the letter?
"It suggests that the issue of third-country licences cannot be settled satisfactorily by EASA’s 2013 deadline and should instead be dealt with through bilateral agreements between states.
...
They add that bilateral aviation safety agreements (BASAs) will provide an appropriate mechanism with which to tackle validation and acceptance of third country licenses in future. BASAs are currently being negotiated with the USA and Canada, and the group says licensing annexes should be added. Europe’s deadline for implementation should be put back in order to achieve a proper solution through negotiation."
Isn't the BASA the route that EASA and the Commission has been pressing for?
Anybody got the text of the letter?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
United front on the N-register
Three of the strongest general aviation advocacy groups in Europe have joined forces to oppose EASA’s plans to make it illegal to fly in Europe on a third-country licence for more than a year. IAOPA Europe, the European Business Aviation Association and the General Aviation Manufacturers Association have signed a joint letter to the EASA Comitology Committee which will deliberate on EASA’s proposal, voicing general aviation’s concerns and warning that the proposal will harm the industry.
The joint letter, signed by IAOPA Senior Vice President Martin Robinson, EBAA President and CEO Brian Humphries and GAMA President and CEO Peter Bunce, says the proposal will adversely affect thousands of European pilots, reduce safety levels and cost jobs. It suggests that the issue of third-country licences cannot be settled satisfactorily by EASA’s 2013 deadline and should instead be dealt with through bilateral agreements between states.
EASA’s stated intention is to “get the N-register out of Europe” and it originally intended to do so by ensuring there were no advantages to being on the American register. However, EASA regulation has remorselessly increased the advantages of flying under an American flag, so the Agency has effectively resorted to a “big stick” ban. There is no suggestion of a safety imperative; the move is purely political.
The joint letter points out that holders of the Instrument Rating would have to undergo the entire theoretical and flying skills testing process, incurring costs greater than €10,000 each, in order to continue doing what they’ve been doing safely, sometimes for decades. Many say this is not economically viable, given their age and number of flying years left, and they would be lost to the industry. The joint groups propose a validation process which “grandfathers” existing license holders, which they say would deliver what EASA requires in terms of oversight.
They add that bilateral aviation safety agreements (BASAs) will provide an appropriate mechanism with which to tackle validation and acceptance of third country licenses in future. BASAs are currently being negotiated with the USA and Canada, and the group says licensing annexes should be added. Europe’s deadline for implementation should be put back in order to achieve a proper solution through negotiation.
The Comitology Committee is made up of representatives of member states, and it must support EASA’s proposed regulations before they can go further. The issue of third country licences comes before the Committee again on December 7th.
Three of the strongest general aviation advocacy groups in Europe have joined forces to oppose EASA’s plans to make it illegal to fly in Europe on a third-country licence for more than a year. IAOPA Europe, the European Business Aviation Association and the General Aviation Manufacturers Association have signed a joint letter to the EASA Comitology Committee which will deliberate on EASA’s proposal, voicing general aviation’s concerns and warning that the proposal will harm the industry.
The joint letter, signed by IAOPA Senior Vice President Martin Robinson, EBAA President and CEO Brian Humphries and GAMA President and CEO Peter Bunce, says the proposal will adversely affect thousands of European pilots, reduce safety levels and cost jobs. It suggests that the issue of third-country licences cannot be settled satisfactorily by EASA’s 2013 deadline and should instead be dealt with through bilateral agreements between states.
EASA’s stated intention is to “get the N-register out of Europe” and it originally intended to do so by ensuring there were no advantages to being on the American register. However, EASA regulation has remorselessly increased the advantages of flying under an American flag, so the Agency has effectively resorted to a “big stick” ban. There is no suggestion of a safety imperative; the move is purely political.
The joint letter points out that holders of the Instrument Rating would have to undergo the entire theoretical and flying skills testing process, incurring costs greater than €10,000 each, in order to continue doing what they’ve been doing safely, sometimes for decades. Many say this is not economically viable, given their age and number of flying years left, and they would be lost to the industry. The joint groups propose a validation process which “grandfathers” existing license holders, which they say would deliver what EASA requires in terms of oversight.
They add that bilateral aviation safety agreements (BASAs) will provide an appropriate mechanism with which to tackle validation and acceptance of third country licenses in future. BASAs are currently being negotiated with the USA and Canada, and the group says licensing annexes should be added. Europe’s deadline for implementation should be put back in order to achieve a proper solution through negotiation.
The Comitology Committee is made up of representatives of member states, and it must support EASA’s proposed regulations before they can go further. The issue of third country licences comes before the Committee again on December 7th.
Isn't the BASA the route that EASA and the Commission has been pressing for?
Whether thats a case of "its not our fault we have been forced into this" ?
But until all parties are locked in a room and the key thrown away until a signed agreement comes out who knows?
Claim counter claim to cover the real reasons while we all pay!
What I presume the group are suggesting here are ongoing validations for existing licence holders in Europe which would indeed give EASA control.
Those validations would be renewed annually by merit not by right ie EASA would be able to add its own requirements and conditions which pilots would have to meet to get their annual validations? But far far less than presently proposed.
Ie found guilty of Illegal charter on N reg and you dont get validated etc?
That would be ongoing until proper BAs are sorted.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 1st Dec 2010 at 13:38.
