There is no political significance to this. It is a statement of fact. All that is required is for Westminster to pass a short piece of legislation bring legal control of licences etc onshore.

Simple as that - a complete non event.

But how many people have UK licences? - don't most have EASA licences which will evaporate? Does the CAA have the capacity to issue them all with UK licences in time? Or will there be an ORS "deeming" EASA licences to be UK licences, renewed from month to month with all the uncertainty that brings, until the CAA get their act together? Have they started hiring and training yet? Is the legislation they need already in the parliamentary timetable?

"…if you vote for something you do have to accept the risk that you might actually get it."

Yup, dead right. And all the folk who wanted out (Make Britain Great Again!) are now starting to realize what they are going to lose.

It ain't gonna be fun…

Mac

:cool:

So what's all the fuss about? Are people just bored and fancy a rant?

most often its a few steps rearward in the quest to advance far forward, as one who trained people with EASA licenses who were joining my former employer, the "standards" of competency were wide ranging from excellent to frightening, it made EASA look a bit of a farce really....so you Brits, grin and bear it, and go back to your excellent standard, and rise above the farce that is EASA..you'll be better off in the long run....this coming from an FAA license holder...

"Simple as that - a complete non event."
Hmmm. Does the CAA have the capability (staff / expertise / systems) to take over everything? If not, can it be built in a year?
Having worked on large scale organisational change projects throughout my working life, the nativity of many of you about the scale of change required (these are safety critical issues - do you expect other regulators to 'just trust us') is staggering. This would be a major project, and no one has so much as lifted a pen to start it yet.

I'm not sure. For instance you can be an Indian Citizen and working in Dubai yet still hold an EASA Licence - so why UK citizens working in the UK will not be able to continue to hold a Licence is rather unclear.

Just a quick reality check for those on here trying to turn this into a BREXIT bashing thread.

This is a perfect example of how and why it is so difficult to actually extricate yourself from the EU whether you want to or not. The EU just takes over so, so many parts of everyday life and everyday legislation - in this case huge chunks of Europe's aviation industry, both operators' and employees' ongoing ability ( and perhaps rights ) just to ' get on with it '.

If you like and / or agree with ever more centralised Government and one-size-fits-all legislation, then there's still the chance to avoid BREXIT and the possible difficulties that this particular change will bring to those of you based in the UK by taking yourself ( and family, perhaps ) to any number of non-UK operators who are screaming out for crew and engineers.

On the other hand, if you're a UK resident who feels optimistic about BREXIT, then just sit tight and wait for the probably massive increase in demand and resulting increase in T&Cs for suitably qualified crew if ( although I'm still sure doomsday won't happen ) the UK and EU agree to differ.

Really...It's that simple.

Sorry, but you're totally unrealistic. It's much more likely that Airlines will shift their AOC's to Europe and require European licences and maybe European passports. They will be able to operate in and out of the UK from Europe.
There remains doubt about Britain's right to open skies with the US after Brexit. Can you seriously imagine these questions will be answered before the end of this year? Forget it. Airlines will not remain British, except maybe charter operators.

"NOTICE TO STAKEHOLDERS - WITHDRAWAL OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND EU AVIATION SAFETY RULES"

Certificates issued before the withdrawal date by the competent authorities of EASA on the basis of the provisions of the Basic Regulation and its implementing rules will no longer be valid as of the UK'swithdrawal date from the EU.


Pussies that the UK are, sometimes, quid pro quo and all that....

Yes I’m sure BA and Virgin will make all their British pilots redundant, then Hire and retrain another 4/5 thousand pilots at great expense?

If this holds, then any aircraft containing any part designed or manufactured by any entity deriving its privileges from or through the UK CAA will be declared on brexit day to be not airworthy in EASA-land. Similarly, any licences depending wholly or in part on training carried out by or certified by any entity that derives its authority through the UK CAA will cease to be valid in EASA-land.

Look, I'm not pretending to be Liam Fox but this situation is very complicated and nothing is certain. Banks were a great investment in 2006.

IAG are shifting into Europe, a Norwegian takeover or reverse takeover would be a big part of that. Easyjet are doing the same. Virgin, we'll see?

Absolute nonesense. IAG buying Norwegian (apparently, maybe) has nothing to do with IAG somehow shifting the business and disposing of BA (their BY FAR most valuable asset).

Everyone will play hardball, and then realise where the UK lies, if EASA/Europe plays hardball with UK aviation, then AF/Lufty/KLM will suddenly find flying to the US takes an extra couple of hours.

There’s a huge shortage of (good) pilots in Europe. If in your world EASA suddenly say to fly a European aircraft you must have a European passport (as you imply) then Easy/Ryanair/Norwegian/Virgin/BA etc. Etc. Stop flying as most of their pilots are British.

Absolute nonsense. You're making a very foolish assumption that a single person is making decisions based on what is best case for Britain and the EU.

You, as I, do not know the reasons why there is now so much involvement between BA and Norwegian but it is reasonable to speculate that with only a year to go to Brexit and no final transition deal in place, certainly with regard to Aerospace, that IAG/BA need to to find a clear path to maintain access to their open skies deal with the U.S. That access is not currently guaranteed. You can wishful think but the various managements cannot.

We're not talking about access to Airspace, so your second paragraph is .....
irrelevant, let's say.

The final deal will come as a result of a lot of legalities, regarding what you are allowed to do when you're not in the EU, with a lot of additional input from vested interests such as KLM and Lufthansa. Those vested interests will not have the best interests of BA or Virgin at heart and if BA remains a non-EU company then those interests will have a lot to say about BA's future.

Your final paragraph; I understood that the result of the Brexit referendum was in large part about stopping freedom of movement. If I understand you correctly, there will not be freedom of movement from the EU to the UK but British Pilots will continue to enjoy the privileges that they currently enjoy. Well that's excellent news.

1. I think it is certain it will not be a requirement to have a EU passport to hold an EASA licence, and that's not the objective anyway. Right to work in a EU base is a separate issue, but loss of right to work in the EU is extremely unlikely, as that would be reciprocated by loss of EU citizens right to work in the UK (and they have far too much to lose in that scenario).
2. For the first two of those airlines, Brits are not in the majority, and Im guessing, likewise for norwegian.

"and they have far too much to lose in that scenario"

yeah - they can go to the other 27 countries and we can go............. home

EU passport holders will not be sent home as they will have right to maintain there current residential status, as will UK passport holders residing in Europe. A UK passport holder the who maintains his residence in Italy (for example) would not then have the right to operate a flight between Spain and Germany. Where an EU passport holder based in the UK would remain unrestricted in Europe. Obviously this is all to be negotiated and probably Britain will remain in the customs union, single market and freedom of movement remains. Fingers crossed eh?

The point is though that there will be no new rights for the British to base themselves in the EU. Those who are currently based in the EU but maintain their British residence will be sent home. New IAG bases will need to be crewed with pilots who have the right to work in that location. I think that this is where we stand right now.

so we ground the worldwide Airbus fleet.... somehow I dont see that happening

Is it? - if UK issued EASA licences are no longer valid and not recognized how are the European airlines going to be able to fly to the US from their home countries through airspace controlled, by what will be to them, unlicensed ATC's?. The Insurance implications will prevent that if nothing else.

Why could UK not be a member of EASA after Brexit? Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Croatia are, and are not EU members.

Storm in a tea cup.
Britain can remain in EASA in the same way as several other non-EU nations.

This is just EASA telling the UK to get on with the negotiations and get it sorted, the politicians have neglected the task in favour of talking about other things such a trade and they needed a reminder.

Why do people keep saying that Croatia isn't a member? It has been for 5 years.:ugh:

All the others are members of the EEA - something else that the UK government has ruled out.

:eek: Well, there is only 622 people controlling the Brexit process on behalf of the UK Govt for the whole of the UK and all of its component parts, and I for one would like to know the credentials of the people whose task it is to sort out aviation? FOI anyone??

"Licenses? I don't need no stinking licenses"

I do have a PPL signed off in 1976 and a whole bunch of time expired CAA ATPLs including signatures of nice people who are now mostly dead. I figure I will just keep flying after Brexit and await some form of license in the post.

As pointed out by the poster you quoted, Switzerland is a member of EASA. It is not a member of either the EU or the EEA (rejected by a referendum with even smaller margin than the Brexit one).

Why is it people keep saying Switzerland is a member (of EU or EEA) ? - it never has been. :ugh:

The pettiness embodied in your post echoes that of the EU towards anyone who doesn't share the Utopian dream. As a major European market, try not to forget that mainland European businesses also have a lot to lose by your "no nogociating (sic) or concessions" sabre rattling.

No its not, but Switzerland has their own agreements with the EU and it took them about 8 years to negotiate and have them in force.

The UK can do the same and rejoin EASA in, lets say 2026 or 2027.

Think of it as the price for not having uncontrolled mass migration(as determined by a leader of another country) of certain people who create unacceptable conditions in your own country. Certainly you must have figured that out by now. Ask all the relatives and injured victims of their experiences and then compare to this minor issue.

So get on with it and it’s minor inconveniences to life. After all... life for some is a minor side benefit of all this.

Moral - be careful what you wish for.

The Swiss do however have a lot more practice with referendums (moreover they are legally binding, plus they send out the voting papers to overseas voters a lot earlier than the UK did), so the result there is much more meaningful. They also have voted to keep various EU relationships alive, even without outright joining the EU.

But perhaps more importantly, the Swiss have a lot more practice at diplomacy, and judging by the fact that they are part of the free movement area AND various further EU related organisations, they seem to be aware that having a close relationship with the EU can lead to significant economic benefits (even if they don't want to be a 100% member). Whereas, judging by current politics and news, the UK is doing its best to shut itself off to and alienate itself from the rest of Europe. Insulting and misleading your negotiating partners is an easy way to make the process last at least twice as long as negotiating with Switzerland ever took.

And Switzerland has the strategic advantage of being in the middle of large road and rail traffic flows between Northern and Southern EU countries. That gives the EU good reason to be friendlier since Switzerland could easily cause major disruption, whereas the UK isn't really that significant.

28 different cultures, 28 different views and 28 interpretations of the process along with millions of industries relying on a good outcome.... from now on its poker!

Jetscream32
Well lets hope it is Poker as by judging by the endless gambling adverts seen on UK television it appears to be one of the UK few growth industries sad as it is.

Regards
Mr Mac

It all arises from the EU's arrogance and bullying. Negotiating transitional trade terms need not be slow. I was involved in putting together the complex of agreements that covered the move of the UK, Denmark and the Irish Republic from membership of EFTA to membership of the European Communities in 1972, this also involved creating an agreement between the enlarged ECs and the remnants of EFTA. All was completed by the time we signed the treaty of accession - less than two years. If the EU really put their economic interests first they would be doing something similar now. Rather they are trying to punish the UK for not wanting to be part of their grand project.

Rather than trying to punish the excited kingdom, they have decided not to facilitate the process of leaving the union. And this for obvious reasons.

You made your bed, etc.

It would be a lot simpler for everybody if the UK just decided not to leave....

I heard that the CAA at Gatwick closed their Brexit office at the end of last year. If they did, someone somewhere knew what the outcome is going to be. And that someone should have realised that being in EASA still means being beholding to the ECJ.

Additionally, so I read somewhere, there are some 65 Open Skies agreements to be renegotiated assuming we are leaving. That raises the questions of majority UK ownership of UK airlines which leaves some big names with big problems.

So, personally, I hope the KISS principal will be applied as regards aviation. The alternative is not appealing the way its going at the moment.

The disaster that is Brexit continues unabated and aviation is going to be no small part of it.

The UK aviation industry, which plays a major part in the economic success of the UK is posed to go one of two ways. Firstly, if the UK remains in EASA, albeit without the right to influence or vote on the ‘rules’ then it may well survive reasonably intact. However, in order for this to happen the UK Government and our aviation companies would be subject to the ECJ which is an anathema to the hard line, right wing Brexiteers as they want nothing to do with the ECJ.

If the UK aviation industry does not remain a member of EASA and is no longer a part of Open Skies, then any or all of the following could occur with unforeseen consequences for the industry.

• The UK retains sovereignty over its airspace and has no say in the EU’s airspace as is allowed now under EASA and open skies

• The UK would have very limited “freedoms” of the air

• Traffic rights would be given by bilateral agreements and not in line with open skies

• The EU and its members would protect their national airlines and aviation companies and limit/prohibit competition from the UK

• The EU would only allow the use of designated airports and not as occurs with open skies

• There could be single airline designation on certain routes from the UK

• There could be limited frequencies / capacity

• A requirement for double approval for fares between the UK and the EU

• A requirement for pooling agreements between airlines flying between the UK and the EU countries

• Prior to open skies most airlines were state-owned. It would be a tragedy if this ever returned.

None of the above would help the UK economy or consumer, including those who voted for Brexit.

It is no surprise that both easyJet and Thomas Cook are setting up headquarters in Europe. Other airlines are looking at ways of protecting themselves.

This notification is simply a statement of fact. The UK government plans a bill to retain EU law for the transition period. The ECJ retains authority over certain matters in the transition period and any transition from EU oversight takes place gradually after that.

BUT ... none of this has been agreed yet. Both the EU and the UK would lose out significantly unless these matters are settled. The assumption is they will be settled. After all, disruption on this scale is unthinkable to both parties.

BUT ... they aren't settled yet (or even remotely close to being settled) and we really need to get on with this to avoid chaos.

In my personal opinion it will be impossible to do anything other than accept EASA for now. Our pre-EASA bi-lateral agreements no longer apply. Bi-lateral negotiations, open skies agreements etc. will take a long time - there is nothing we can do about other countries parliamentary timescales - and that assumes the political will is there.

I think EASA in some shape or form with ECJ involvement in some shape or form is pretty much inevitable.

Brexit has been an ugly head rearing its head and not being thought through, certainly not presented to the voters in honesty of which problems could be arising.

The people loose out, employees, travellers alike.

To date there is:
NO guarantee UK passport holders can remain in and work in EU;
NO guarantee EU passport holders can remain in and work in UK;
NO guarantee existing arrangement for licences will be transferrable and or accepted;
NO guarantee of flying rights as per 101917 above
NO guarantee EU airlines will be able to have UK personnel;
NO guarantee UK airlines will be able to have UK personnel;
NO guarantee EU airlines will be able to operate out of UK as at present (eg Ryanair);

Brexit was a vote by the older generation to show their resent of never having had a vote prior to ever increasing integration. Unfortunately it not them that will live with the consequences of their choices.
Instead the younger generation which voted REMAIN in overwhelming numbers and is not aware of any other way sees the benefit of the EU, the freedoms of travel and employment it offers, suffers most, for longer and possibly irreversible to the current status quo.