Brexit pushing UK out of EASA
 

I thought I'd seen a thread on this, but cannot now find it.

Is the UK about to fall off something of a regulatory cliff?

Sam - there is a LinkedIn thread running, started by Jonathan Smith from NATS/CAA, which you might find of use. Not sure if can post here, but you'll find with a search on LI.

There's a news item on the Flyer site with some discussion in the comments section:
https://www.flyer.co.uk/uk-must-leav...rexit-says-eu/

Fantastic news. Bring it on please.


*Uproarous round of applause from most pilots, engineers, ATCOs and other aviation professionals*

Be careful what you wish for!

Whilst I'd normally agree with your sentiment, quite literally nothing is worse than the catastrophic shambles that is EASA.

Really? How about the catastrophic shambles that is, erm, having nothing...? CAA estimate 5-10 years to create their own system.

Or, more likely, beg to stay with EASA but no longer with any voting rights...?

Thank you 'betterfromabove', will go take a look.

Exactly. A fully paid up club member with sod all voting rights is hardly an ideal solution

Uproarous round of applause from most pilots, engineers, ATCOs and other aviation professionals*

Not from this pilot and aircraft operator, while it is true the early days of EASA gold plated by U.K. CAA was painful things have radically improved in the last 5 years and are getting steadily better.

As the UK CAA is required to not only pay its own way but make a return on capital employed, the entire financial burden of re-creating a regulatory body to replace EASA would fall upon 'industry'. Don't expect the airlines or big airports (if we have any of either left when the likes of easyJet depart these shores) to pay for regulating GA, especially recreational flying. They used to - as an example Aerodrome Licensing where the likes of Heathrow and Gatwick used to subsidise small licensed grass airfields.

The UK has had a major input into EASA rulemaking and we're just seeing some stability returning to the industry. We need to be in a position to continue to influence and rein in the excesses of some of our partners.

TOO

Based on the CAA's past performance, anything they create will cost more, and work worse, than what we have now. Another "win" from Brexit.

Wait. The CAA has been performing better, offering an improved service and charging less thanks to EASA? Who knew?

First congrats to the forum for getting to a dozen or so posts w/o someone pitching in with a brexit rant (from either side of the fence). It would be nice to believe this could stay a grown-up discussion.

Two points

First, as I understand it (and I've done my homework to a degree). The vast majority of EU legislation and regulation (some 22000 items or more) is just going to be cut'n'paste straight into UK law (and so is EU case study, to assist in the legal interpretation of law). So the vast burden of all this is going to fall on a bunch of technocrats armed with little more than Microsoft Word and Adobe. Whatever happens after that to this "mountain of law" will depend on UK political culture in the next few dozen decades, but clearly, nothing much is happening "overnight" (where "overnight" equals most of our lifetimes). I've seen nothing to suggest that aviation would be a special case, and common sense - specifically the need to keep flying - suggests it would a strong contender for the default (change nothing) option.

Which brings me neatly to my second point...aviation has long been identified as the tip of the spear in this particular UK "adventure". Good ol Mr Ryanair has had a few rants of the subject. Whatever happens is gonna happen to aviation first so in many ways it will be the bellweather for events to come. That's why it is an interesting, pertinent topic and one hopes for an educated and fruitful discussion.

Exciting isn't it :)

It's like the rest of Brexit. If we put lots of effort in, are clever and very lucky, we'll only damage ourselves a bit. If we are careless or unlucky, we'll damage ourselves a lot. The current people running the show are neither clever nor lucky.

It's astounding to watch the British government, as a matter of policy, spend all its time on a venture designed to make us poorer, less influential and less open.

Paul

The "potential problems" are different for international passenger business vs everything else, from what I have read. Whilst non-international transport requires that UK develop its own regulatory regime, international transport has more of a problem.

Currently, airlines based in / authorised and regulated by a country that is a member of the Common Aviation Area (I can't bring myself to use CAA for that), namely EU Member States plus some neighboring countries like Morocco, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, may operate air routes between any airports located the Common Aviation Area. For the UK to remain a member of Common Aviation Area and therefore benefit from the European “Open Skies” requires that UK accepts the freedom of movement principle and acknowledges the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. See the problem?

Earlyin 2017 airlines were cautious about what the future might hold, but that has given way to “contingency planning” for a "no deal" scenario.

On 2 January 2018, Ryanair confirmed that its subsidiary, RyanairUK, had filed an application on December 21 for an air operating certificate (AOC) with the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority. If granted then Ryanair (the existing company) will not be able to fly routes between UK cities post Brexit, but Ryanair UK will, and so the affected slots and routes belonging to Ryanair will need to betransferred into Ryanair UK.

It is not just Ryanair: in October 2017, Wizz Air appliedfor a British AOC. Going the other way, in July 2017, the British airline EasyJet applied to Austro Control, the air navigation services provider controlling Austrian airspace, for an AOC and to Austria’s Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (bmvit)for an airline operating license. It will create a new airline, EasyJet Europe, headquartered in Vienna, that will operate flights both across Europe and domestically within European countries after Brexit. Currently those slots /routes all belong to EasyJet and these will need to be transferred or made available to EasyJetEurope.


Simples! (not really)

Indeed (and good post).

The elephant in room (well one of them anyway ;)) is the reaction/decision making of the good old paying public.

Do you book a holiday (involving flying) in the Easter of 2019 trusting politician and bureaucrats to sort all this out??? (see the not-so-dumb paying public may decide to give way to “contingency planning” for a "no deal" scenario, themselves.)

for me (Mr TightWad)

[ ] of course, where is the login for easyair.com
[x] Nae ****ing chance.

I would think the airlines contingency planning would include the potential for a significant (albeit probably short-lived) reduction in pax numbers.

But that's already the situation we're in. Commercial airports are all regulated by EASA, while all non-commercial licensed fields remain under CAP 168.

Without wanting to engage in all the political rubbish on both sides, it will indeed be interesting to see just exactly what happens to regulation post-EU membership (hate using the term "Brexit" - daft portmanteau made up by some clever-clogs trendy media type) and what happens to EASA.

Things have indeed stabilised, and some sanity has prevailed in recent years. In some cases. Others not.

My own opinion - and that's all it is, just an opinion, so feel free to disagree - is that the damage was done long ago when all this nonsense started with the JAA which grew into EASA. I'd rather be done with it to be honest.

If the CAA need to "start again", that's their problem to sort out. The CAPs would still exist and any existing EU legislation would be ported across to the CAA. Charges are still levied by and paid to the CAA so all that would happen would be no money going to EASA...

...but of course nobody really knows the truth. Happy to be corrected for anything I've said that's wrong.

The UK has little choice but to remain with EASA. The loss of voting rights is hardly helpful - I believe voting rights are proportional to the size of a country's industry, so Germany and France will rule the roost. That said, they already do to a large extent, with EASA's HQ in Cologne and a succession of French nationals running the Agency.

However, EASA has a dearth of expertise and the UK has been instrumental in sorting out a lot of the mess that the Agency has created, and I can't see them turning away our free expertise in future.

What is of greater concern is the bulk adoption of EU law into UK law. If the timing isn't right then it will mean that the UK will inherit a collection of current aviation laws that aren't fit for purpose, which EASA are currently looking to change at their usual glacial rate.

However, I believe that there are more differences filed with ICAO than there are standards, so plus ca change as we commence roll-out of a million Alternative Means of Compliance (AltMCs) to EASA diktats.