Latest EASA PPL IR looking good especially for FAA IR holders
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Israel
Age: 78
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read your message and the ones below, and I am truly stunned. No one has expressed the thought that the entire regulatory scheme is unreasonable and should be rejected. (For an example of a well-reasoned rejection, see EU parliamentarians' letter from 2010 at https://www.pilotundflugzeug.de/arti..._Safety_Record.) The bureaucrats first raised an outrageous proposal of regressive laws, you objected - and they revised it downward to something that is only half as outrageous. And now you all seem appeased.
The entire scheme should be rejected, but it's gone so far that it seems impossible. There is no need for these laws. They cause inconvenience and extra expense for all GA pilots in Europe, and basically make it impossible for the US pilot to live in Europe with an N-reg aircraft. The simple question: WHY? and again, WHY? Read the 4 MEPs' letter at the URL above: petty bureaucracy is the reason, and these laws should be repealed. It's time (maybe past time) for a "redress of grievances".
Or are you all happy now with the 50%-outrageous proposal?
EXCERPTS FROM THE 2010 LETTER BY 4 MEPs RE EASA PROPOSALS:
The common european JAR-system of licenses, in place now for 10 years, has failed to even come close to the US-system in terms of safety delivered for General Aviation.
The main reasons for Europe’s dismal safety-record are not higher costs or ineptness of the actors, but mostly bureaucratic barriers to advanced pilot qualifications and continuative training.
EASA is now proposing to fight this very problem with yet more bureaucracy. We do not believe this to be successful….
In the interest of safety we therefor call on EASA to:
1. Short-Term: Immediately lower the administrative barriers for private pilot instrument qualification …
o Permitting training – at least for the instrument rating – in any properly certified aircraft, irrespective of where it’s registered or owned.
The entire scheme should be rejected, but it's gone so far that it seems impossible. There is no need for these laws. They cause inconvenience and extra expense for all GA pilots in Europe, and basically make it impossible for the US pilot to live in Europe with an N-reg aircraft. The simple question: WHY? and again, WHY? Read the 4 MEPs' letter at the URL above: petty bureaucracy is the reason, and these laws should be repealed. It's time (maybe past time) for a "redress of grievances".
Or are you all happy now with the 50%-outrageous proposal?
EXCERPTS FROM THE 2010 LETTER BY 4 MEPs RE EASA PROPOSALS:
The common european JAR-system of licenses, in place now for 10 years, has failed to even come close to the US-system in terms of safety delivered for General Aviation.
The main reasons for Europe’s dismal safety-record are not higher costs or ineptness of the actors, but mostly bureaucratic barriers to advanced pilot qualifications and continuative training.
EASA is now proposing to fight this very problem with yet more bureaucracy. We do not believe this to be successful….
In the interest of safety we therefor call on EASA to:
1. Short-Term: Immediately lower the administrative barriers for private pilot instrument qualification …
o Permitting training – at least for the instrument rating – in any properly certified aircraft, irrespective of where it’s registered or owned.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reliability of TAF's
Umm! so if the Met Office get it wrong (which they do) people who hold an EIR are meant to die or break the law. Bit of a Hobson's Choice if you ask me.
