Jump to content

Utter insanity


Bulletguy

Recommended Posts

The sooner Cummings/Johnson and their cronies are sectioned, the better. *-)

 

UK will leave EU aviation safety regulator at end of 2020

 

ADS - which represents more than 1,100 UK businesses in the aerospace, defence, security and space sectors - told the BBC the decision could potentially mean products and designs would need to be certified more than once. When the UK ends its membership of EASA, it may need to certify aircraft separately itself.

 

ADS has estimated that it would take 10 years and cost up to £40m annually to create a UK safety authority with all the expertise of EASA, against a current contribution to the European agency of £1m to £4m a year.

 

So yet more money being spaffed up a wall. *-)

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51783580

 

In short that means CoA's for every UK registered aircraft along with pilots licences, not to mention the billions of nuts and bolts, get revoked on the dot for flying in EU airspace until it's all gone through again by a "British" company (CAA won't be able to do it) and re-accredited worldwide.

 

And thats before aircrew's "blue passports" for every flight to the EU with paperwork for every landing. *-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are just rejecting everything. "British negotiators rejected participation in the 'safety and security zone' despite accepting it would significantly increase border delays"

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/03/08/truckers-face-paperwork-mountain-britain-opts-against-fast-track/

 

There seems little point in negotiating anything as its clear now that their plan is no deal. I suppose they will try and go through the motions in some effort to blame the EU but there is little doubt now they intend to cut all ties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barryd999 - 2020-03-09 9:25 AM

 

They are just rejecting everything. "British negotiators rejected participation in the 'safety and security zone' despite accepting it would significantly increase border delays"

 

There seems little point in negotiating anything as its clear now that their plan is no deal. I suppose they will try and go through the motions in some effort to blame the EU but there is little doubt now they intend to cut all ties.

Totally. The cultists want their bonfire a bit like Trumps petulant obsession with ripping up everything the Obama admin brought in purely because of jealousy and hatred.

 

With costs estimated at ten times per annum the current annual UK contribution to EASA, shows the utter insanity of the lengths they are prepared to go to to rip up air safety 'regs' just to have our own.....which then have to be re-accredited. As if trashing what bit was left of our automotive industry wasn't enough, they're now hell bent on trashing the aviation industry as nonsense like this won't help Airbus and it's 10,000+ employees at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

colin - 2020-03-09 7:47 PM

 

EASA took many years to integrate into UK, and has only relatively recently been enacted, aside from the cost it is perfectly feasible to go back to the old system, but a stupid idea.

According to ADS "UK played an important role in the development of EASA, since its establishment in 2002" which implies we've been there from it's formation. If we then shilly-shallied and dragged our feet over enacting and cherry picking as we always did, then we've nobody but ourselves to blame for that.

 

On the positive side we could still remain with full membership of EASA enabling access to all current benefits of being part of the EU civil aviation basic regulation system, including:

 

1) Common standards and practices;

 

2) Automatic recognition of product certificates and organisational approvals in EU countries and streamlines achievement of certificates in USA, Canada and Brazil;

 

3) Access to a globally recognised, dynamic rule set with the ability to influence its development; and

 

4) Access to ‘big data’ safety data project, and EU safety research outcomes, to support improve the level of aviation safety.

 

Additionally, the UK would be able to take advantage of current EU bilateral agreements, and those currently being negotiated, when supported by tailored UK bilaterals with the relevant countries.

 

The Basic Regulation expressly allows non-EU Member States to be full members of EASA up to and including the Management Board, Committee and Technical Working Groups [and the revised Basic Regulation will do likewise, assuming it successfully passes through the legislative process]. The UK would have to negotiate and agree terms, and pay into the EASA budget, based on UK share of ICAO contributions. Fees may be increased.

 

To me this is by far the most sensible and logical path to go down as it's already in place and not going to cost £40 million a year to create our own safety rules 'n regs' which in turn would still need to meet compliance with EASA.

 

But then this country is currently being led by a bunch of donkeys where logic and commonsense flew out the window long ago. Can they get any more bonkers? You bet they can....and will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Birdbrain - 2020-03-10 6:22 AM

 

Experts at work

 

As someone who has worked in aerospace for decades I've got a fair idea, I have to work under EASA regulations, I can see no benefits of leaving it to start up our own system again.

p.s. this is all about operating N reg aircraft in UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

colin - 2020-03-10 8:56 AM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-03-10 6:22 AM

 

Experts at work

 

As someone who has worked in aerospace for decades I've got a fair idea, I have to work under EASA regulations, I can see no benefits of leaving it to start up our own system again.

p.s. this is all about operating N reg aircraft in UK.

 

The entire Con is being laid bare now. They are hell bent on leaving and having no access to anything from security to aviation to the Single Market all of which in 2016 we were told we would retain access to by many of the Brexit leaders. This is why so many remainers fought against it for four years. Nothing to do with being sore losers, we saw this coming. I wonder what the result would have been in 2016 if people had known they would deliberately head down the no deal path led by a con man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Birdbrain - 2020-03-09 6:53 PM

 

The haters are now experts on aviation safety regulations etc etc etc ... On top of everything else they are experts on

 

Is that the best you can do?

Same old ad hominem

I thought you might have learned another trick by now *-)

 

Why aren't you telling them where they have got it wrong?

Is it because they have got it right?

Is it because you don't know what you are talking about?

Is it because you are incapable of reasoned argument?

Or is it all three :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, sorry have been a little slow to engage my brain about this. It is obvious that BoJo wants to set the UK up as a maintenance hub for N reg aircraft in Europe, for those that don't know this is mainly Biz Jets.

Now this might be seen by some as a complete opposite from the commitment to reduce vehicle emissions, as we are banning the sale of petrol and diesel engine cars in a few years time but will be encouraging all Europe's N reg aircraft to fly here for maintenance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

colin - 2020-03-10 8:56 AM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-03-10 6:22 AM

 

Experts at work

 

As someone who has worked in aerospace for decades I've got a fair idea, I have to work under EASA regulations, I can see no benefits of leaving it to start up our own system again.

p.s. this is all about operating N reg aircraft in UK.

Neither could i. It seems utter madness given whatever system they come up with only to then need EASA compliance all over again....and the CAA have already said it cannot be done in the timeframe or the manpower they have.

 

With regard to your last comment, how does the FAA compare with EASA as given the atrocious manner in which Boeing and the FAA handled the 737 Max issues, people have good reason to be alarmed at UK governments crass decision to withdraw from EASA which the DfT say, being a member of EASA "is not compatible with the UK having genuine economic and political independence".

 

I never thought i'd read or hear anything quite so insane as playing around with peoples lives for the sake of "independence" but there it is in black and white from a government department.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51809808

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Birdbrain - 2020-03-10 6:22 AM

Experts at work

Translation: I voted for the Conservatives, so everything they do is automatically sanctified. Dangerous mindset, whichever party is in favour/office. Few MPs are expert at/on anything other than politics, which makes them dubious decision makers, and the wiser ones know that so rely on advice from external experts to help them. So, instead of being a lemming, how about a reasoned contribution? Do you think this was a good idea? After all, anyone can play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...