Umm. No, that is not what it says. It says it is an area where there could be, at some undefined point in the future, a possibility to recognize licenses. Once the UK CAA has a proven track record of being a fully fledged regulator and authority. Usually that takes a few years.

Could agree in the future.

To say that EASA states do not recognise U.K. CAA as a competent authority under this ruling is simply laughable.

I think one needs to read the full text before passing learned comment

Dannyboy39

The problem is not the status quo. Of course the UKCAA is mirroring EASA rules at the moment. However in the future it will divert from the alignment and therefore it will have to be treated the same way as EASA is dealing with the FAA for example. It was the choice of the British government to leave EASA. In fact you don’t even have to be a EU member state to be part of EASA.

Sure, and as per the above we need to wait for the full text. It is a completely needless thing to do for the U.K. to leave EASA but I guess if it had EU in the name, the Brexiteers in Chief would’ve been crying foul. EASA being the most rigorous safety authority in the world.

I just think it’s laughable that despite the U.K. having some of the finest certifying staff in the world, a CAA Form 1 for example is not acceptable for a French MRO for instance, or now an aircraft would need to be exported from UK to EASA state and the whole airworthiness review programme started from scratch. Bureaucracy for bureaucracy sake.

I guess there may be instances (flight time directives) that the U.K. may want to divert from, but can you really imagine a Tory government doing something which helps the workers?

Don't think you can be EASA without being tied to ECJ.......Ergo.... off we trot to ensure UK aviation suffers and pays the price financially and administratively at every level with delays that will prevent businesses from even beginning the process as CAA will not have enough staff, experience or leadership to help UK aviation prosper.... I'm not trying to diss the CAA but after 30 years of flying, I really hope they can change their monika from 'Campaign Against Aviation' to 'Concerted Aviation Accelerator' ... We will see, but - again as others have said... The devil is in the detail and we will have to wait to interpret the exact text to see how it affects us.

European Court of Justice jurisdiction 34.The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ultimate jurisdiction over EASA rulings. In the case of third country member states, ECJ jurisdiction operates indirectly through arbitration committees. If the ECJ decided that a EASA ruling was inapplicable or had to be modified, EASA would abide by the ECJ’s decision, and a third country member state would have to accept EASA’s modified rules.

Miles Magister

Indeed.

Though I suspect that there won't turn out to be much difference from the fairly dire predictions that were being made as long ago as 2017, and most recently earlier this year:

Civil Aviation Regulation - What Future after Brexit?

Civil Aerospace Aviation and Space Post Transition Period.

I ask again. With Eastern European ACMIs still allowed to provide ultra cheap services to UK airlines using their own European equipment and staff, are British employees at an even greater risk of never finding employment again? Brits will not be able to work for those ACMI providers without a visa. In theory, a UK airline can outsource 50% of its operation out to a company that doesn't need to hire Brits for those jobs. Why am I the only one getting angry about this? There is no protection for the British workforce in any of this.

Can anyone explain any other reason than the ECJ why Britain made the decision to leave EASA? The RAeS papers certainly don’t seem to support it. In the short term U.K. license holders are disadvantaged if I have understood correctly, while my EASA license is OK in the UK. Looks like there will be some jobs going at the CAA but otherwise I don’t get it. Could not the UK for example have remained an EASA member with the option to review this at some later date?

Dhl air is mainly point to point inside EU
as is west altlantic

goign to hit the freighters pretty hard by the look of it, the only guys in aviation that still have a job/no pay cuts or redundancies get hit via the back door....

lederhosen

Page 7 of the PDF contains the answer:

https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan

Big D thanks for replying but when I click on the link it opens a document without page numbers and which does not obviously mention EASA. There is a link in it to another document with page numbers that at least on my browser do not correspond to the actual number of pages. In short can you just cut and paste the relevant text.

Full text published by the EU this morning.

Pages 221-225 apply.

https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/re...X-1-PART-1.PDF

Bojo, all spin and slogans but no substance. Reading the tabloids today you would think that this deal is the best thing since sliced bread. I think we will soon find out that people are being sold a pup!

Theoretically, yes.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....79f0e62c6.jpeg

DHLAir will be fine, thanks

Just a thought, there will be 2 contracts to be considered, right? The withdrawal agreement from start of 2020 and the Trade Agreement from end of 2020. I think one needs to read both of them in conjunction. Missing a regulation in one doesn't mean it's forgotten.

Sorry, English is not my native language, but I thought the term double drop refers to usually a charter flight, where airline sells tickets to two destinations on the same aircraft, so it flies from A to B, then C and then back to A, dropping and picking passengers at both B and C, but ultimately everyone travels between A and B, and A and C, and there is nobody who just takes the short local flight?

Aviation is covered in pages 224-249: Articles AIRTRN 1-26 (Air Transport) and AVSAF 1-15 (Aviation Safety).