EASA to kill general aviation
 

With the recent changes in the rules that EASA have brought about with making Registered Training facilities redundant now, forcing all small schools to pay extortionate fees to become a ATO ultimately bankrupting all grass root level flying is this the nail in the coffin for General Aviation?

Actually its not EASA forcing anyone to pay extortionate fees, that's an own goal!

So " Who watches the Watchmen" ?
Presumably, to be a Competent Authority, certain standards of service and staffing must have been mandated (and must be demostrated to somebody) in order to justify the charges?
Where are these standards written?
If the service falls below these standards, who can we complain to - and do we still have to pay if they don't meet their targets?
If any FTO/ATO falls below acceptable levels with regard to staffing, timely responses, major errors etc etc it is deemed not fit for purpose and it is not allowed to continue. Are the same rules applied to the CAA?

NobodyNoNobodyNo

EASA is a typical EU sponsored organization, un democratic, unaccountable, unaffordable and run entirely for the benifit of those in EASA without any thought for those trying to make a living in GA.

Abother vote for UKIP here !

I disagree with the blanket criticism of EASA :oh:

There are elements of the plan which are positive.

I'll go hide behind a wall now...

Fly safe, Sam.

I'd vote for UKIP as well, if they had a branch open here in Germany... perhaps I should start my own.....:cool:

Which are ................................ ?:ooh:

The positive elements would be a more pragmatic approach to converting existing ICAO Pilot licences/certificates and ratings to their EASA equivalent, something it seems they are trying, but struggling to do, because the various CAAs around Europe have vested interests in making people spend money on compulsory theory training and examinations.
There are quite a few positive ideas kicking about, and quite a lot of the major screw ups are due to the various CAAs sticking their noses in and messing up the original EASA ideas.

You could try here!

The conversion route of itself, not to mention the huge unwieldy EASA structure is a huge solution looking for a problem. On the basis that Europe shoud be trusting its NAAs just as it is prepared to trust each other's judicial systems (somewhat misguidedly I think) then the simple solution would have been mutual recognition of national licences across Europe, perhaps subject to compliance with minimum requirements, just as aircraft on national registries are accepted internationally, thanks to ICAO. That in fact seems to be what EASA have been trying to do regarding recognition of FAA licences via a bilateral agreement. You don't need an involved and complex new licensing system to achieve that. Europe continually tries to reinvent the wheel at vast cost, then finding that the traditional round one we have lived with for decaades actually works well! While it does this it imposes huge costs on everyone associated with aviation, drives individuals out of the sport and businesses to the wall because their economic model becomes unviable.

That is a very amateurish looking website although I do recognise many of the complaints made.
All we need now is something similar for EASA.

There is nothing positive about EASA...

NOTHING..................!!!!!!

I don't know how many on this forum follow the AF447 thread over in R&N, but if anyone is under any illusion that EASA has anything to do with aviation safety, then you should read this post and the following four or five. Scary, to put it mildly :eek:

Sorry, I don't know how to link into another thread on Pprune. The link above brings up only one post, a statement in French, if you want to read an English synopsis and the follow-on posts, then click on the 'AF447 report out' link in the top right corner.

EASA is and always has been shite
 

I refer the honourable gentlemen to my thread from 2007:

http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/2989...we-europe.html

I rest my case.

EASA - A stick to beat ourselves with?
 

How are other EU states finding the EASA process? Good? Bad? Terrible? Indifferent? :confused:

Whatever the answer is I can't help but think we in the UK, or perhaps more accurately our CAA, are making much more of a meal of the EASA process and causing people a lot more pain and suffering than is going on in other European countries.

In short are we, to a certain extent, using EASA as a stick to beat ourselves with?

Is the CAA not making the mistake, as government bodies so often seem to do with European regulation in the country, of taking interpretation a bit too literally and getting knickers in a twist over minor details, I'm thinking in particular of the new rules for flight school regulation and perhaps also fare paying passengers on historic aircraft...

Could we actually take a more 'French' approach to things and just relax a bit?

Obviously issues like the retention of the IMC rating do make the British perspective different, that I don't dispute, but in terms of other areas on regulation are we actually making life harder for ourselves than it needs to be...?

The last time I was in France I bought a flying magazine and there was a very positive article about EASA and the new licences.

Just went on a day-trip to the European Parliament's visitors centre, which seemed about the funnest thing I could think of to do in Brussels. I am an European. It makes sense to me that, as a continent, we have some-form of union. What I saw that day wasn't it.

EASA Joy
 

I know of a recent importer of an Eastern European built glider that has to sell it again because - and get this - there is no EASA approved modification to install imperial instrumentation. Bonkers ? You betcha.....

European
Aviation
Shyster
Association.

Not an ICAO signatory
Not ICAO compliant, despite it being one of the EU objectives!
So, why doesn't ICAO cease to recognise EASA licences and only recognise those of ICAO Member States?
Problem solved.

A lot of people forget some of the benefits. Not only the commonality in licensing (does anyone remember what a hassle and how costly that used to be?). But there are tons of mainly Eastern European aircraft, happily flying in the UK, whose type certificate got grandfathered in. Types you could never ever have flown, owned or been able to use before. Yak's, Let's, Sukhoi's, Antonov's, PZL's, Aero's etc. But not only Eastern ones: Auster's, Miles's and all the old quirky British ones if you live somewhere else but the UK, as well.

A dream future would be that FAA and EASA give up licensing/certification to ICAO so that we have one type certification and one licensing body worldwide. Never gonna happen, but that would be the ideal solution.