Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: "Greg" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 23:04:03 +0100
"Peter" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rt5vb2t4o9pgq3b3s05o4e0uhp6dppp78e@xxxxxxxxxx
I don't think the CAA is against GA; I think they genuinely do support
it but they are just inept. And powerless to tell the flight training
business what to do.
Obviously I don't have personal experience of them, I can only go by what I
read and unfortunately I see nothing positive about their attitude to GA.
They seem to be puppets of the airlines, piling the costs onto GA to the
point that it is in terminal decline just so the airlines can save what to
them is chicken feed. They seem to prosecute GA pilots for sport, using all
their financial power to force a defendant to plead guilty what ever the
truth. They even fight against safety improvements like GPS and ballistic
chutes that other authorities are embracing, they're morons so the only
reason I can think of is to show who is boss!, they're a power mad qango.
But the final straw for me was not the CAA directly, it was the reports that
aviation insurers are now refusing to pay out on third party claims if they
can argue that the pilot failed to follow just one guideline, even if it's
connection with the claim is tenuous at best. This means my family could
lose everything because of a single mistake I make, and that's not an
acceptable risk. They should be made to pay regardless just as they are for
motor policies, but where's the incentive to change the law?, after all that
would encourage GA 8-(.
EASA has made encouraging noises about deregulating VFR flight in
Europe. What I do wonder is what meat will have to be thrown to the
dog to get that agreed; they might well screw the private IFR scene.
I seriously hope the dog gets put down, or at least becomes nothing more
than a puppet, and encouragingly that's happened in the case of other
British qangos.
If you want to do some *relatively* low cost flying, have a look at
the PFA scene.
It's not so much the cost, though it's obviously a factor, and yes I've seri
ously considered building a kit plane as I love constructing things and have
a fair range of engineering skills. It's notable, however, that the PFA seem
to have become the CAA's most bitter critic lately.
Personally I would not do the NPPL (because you can't
go abroad with it) but the cost of PFA ownership and operation is a
lot less than the usual metal that you see flying.
Yes I'd already ruled out the NPPL unless I had a problem with the medical
which I don't envisage. From everything I've read it seems a fairly
pointless exercise, mainly designed to give the CAA some independence from
Europe and justification for it's existance.
The cost of renting
a 30 year old Cessna/Piper will never go down in any significant way,
even if every regulatory body in Europe was shut down today.
No but it might not go up as fast 8-), apparently the number of hours being
flown is falling rapidly so it seems inevitable that clubs will have to
increase their charges as their aircraft are less utilised, a vicious
circle.
Anyway, sorry to be so pessimistic but I've seen one of my big ambitions in
life go out of the window for the foreseeable future, and I'm not getting
any younger!.
Greg
.
- References:
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: NOSPAM
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: Greg
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: NOSPAM
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: Greg
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: NOSPAM
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- From: Greg
- Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- Prev by Date: Re: sunderland airshow
- Next by Date: Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- Previous by thread: Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- Next by thread: Re: North Yorkshire now require GAR under the Prevention of Terrorism Act
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|