How 'elf and safety has grounded a WWII workhorse.

I get the impression that this is another case of EU beurocrats with no knowledge of the subject they are dealing with making any decison so that they are seen to be doing something so as to justify their existence

1) How many of the moaners who post negatively on this subject have actually bought a ticket for a ride on the aircraft concerned (and how often), thereby lending active support for the operations concerned?

I have. I’ll never forget the view from the cockpit of G-AMPZ as we flew over the M4 suspension bridges on the Severn estuary in August 1999. I’ll also never forget the thrill of seeing the BBMF Lancaster flying on a similar heading, and height, off our starboard wing and just for a second having a tangible experience of the history that so interested me. I’ll never forget circling Warwick castle, or the look of terror on the face of the woman sitting across the aisle from me as we did so; I can’t imagine what she thought of the idiot grinning back at her.

2) Why are aircraft owners in Europe always just sitting around and waiting for things to happen, instead of actively influencing the process before things are finalized?

3) Why are aircraft owners in Europe incapable of organizing themselves in order to put up a concerted resistance towards such things?

Don’t know; I’m not an aircraft operator.

4) If everything is looking so gloomy why has Lufthansa’s Historic Flight just bought three Constellations with the object of getting one in the air in two years time?

Presumably they appreciate the advertising value of these aircraft and appreciate that a market for this type of service exists or have a greater respect for history than other operators (plus a bigger bank balance). Or maybe they’re just going to ignore the rules…

…kidding! 😀

5) As regards the question as to who appointed the responsible “EU Quangos”: We did.

Either by voting for the wrong people or not participating in the EU Parliament elections.

You know, it is possible to vote for the ‘right’ people and still end up being governed by Quangos. 🙂

Perhaps there should be a new forum, called the soapbox, to provide an outlet for all those who seem to take delight principally in wingeing about the EU and authority in general.

Such a forum exists; it’s called the ‘General Discussion’ forum. I’ve posted there and if you take the trouble to read any of my posts I think you’d find that I don’t post there “principally to whinge about the EU and authority in general”.

If so, at least it might distract them away from the Historic Aviation forum and leave it to those who are interested in the history of aviation rather than just having an axe to grind.

This issue concerns ‘historic aviation’ so I posted here. If you have doubts about my interest in historic aviation perhaps you’d do me the courtesy of reading a few of my posts before you pass judgement; I’m pretty sure this is the only one that mentions the EU. Which, by the way, when it concerns this issue, is my government so don’t I have the right to whinge?

I am sure that those to whom these comments apply will be able to recognise themselves. To them I say – au revoir (j’espére)!

I take it you were talking about me? Do you care to respond?

So…Is it Health & Safety’s fault? Or the EU Quango’s fault?

Because the EU don’t have no HSE… so it can’t be both!

Adrian

Perhaps there should be a new forum, called the soapbox, to provide an outlet for all those who seem to take delight principally in wingeing about the EU and authority in general. If so, at least it might distract them away from the Historic Aviation forum and leave it to those who are interested in the history of aviation rather than just having an axe to grind. With the notable exceptions of the positive contributors to this thread, I am sure that those to whom these comments apply will be able to recognise themselves. To them I say – au revoir (j’espére)!

Some random thoughts on this subject:

1) How many of the moaners who post negatively on this subject have actually bought a ticket for a ride on the aircraft concerned (and how often), thereby lending active support for the operations concerned?

2) Why are aircraft owners in Europe always just sitting around and waiting for things to happen, instead of actively influencing the process before things are finalized (all the draft JARs were published before being decided on).

3) Why are aircraft owners in Europe incapable of organizing themselves in order to put up a concerted resistance towards such things? There must be close to a dozen, if not more, operators in Europe affected by this. What is the Dutch Dakota Association, for example, doing? European efforts (if you can call it that…) positively pale against what the EAA and AOPA USA achieves.

4) If everything is looking so gloomy why has Lufthansa’s Historic Flight just bought three Constellations with the object of getting one in the air in two years time?

5) As regards the question as to who appointed the responsible “EU Quangos”:

We did.

Either by voting for the wrong people or not participating in the EU Parliament elections. Did you cast your vote for the latest elections?

Is this going to put an end to the Rapide pleasure flight operations too…..??

In a nutshell:
To modify a DC-3 to meet the rules will cost a very large wad of £s – so much that it makes it an uneconomic proposition to continue carrying fare-paying passengers.
Other, smaller, aircraft (including the Rapides) require far less mods which will require less £s – so (as far as Air Atlantique are concerned) they will continue carrying fare-paying passengers.

Don’t forget that AA’s DC-3s will be visiting an airport near you touring the UK up to the July 16th deadline. Take your chance for a flight while you can.

Roger Smith.

Who appointed these ridiculous EU Quangos? 😡

If all the ‘historic’ passenger-carrying aircraft in the EU simultaneously collided in mid-air the total death toll would be less than that for those killed riding horses in the EU each and every year.

A clause in this legislation to exempt historic types (DC3, Ju52/3m, etc.) would frankly not endanger anybody to a significant degree.

re

I take the Daily Mail with a pinch of salt, its only excuse is that its not as bad as The Sun.

Their “historic” articles look like they were written 50 years ago, for example the sort of flag waving rubbish that overlooks any grit or fact. Knights were “brave and fought with honour” and Paul Jonsons article of why we should be proud to be British made me feel embarassed. (apparantly we invented roads) He made no mention of our history in engineering, writing, instead he ranted about our battles and how great The British Empire was. None of their Bob articles mention the Commonwealth crews but of course the Americans get a look in.

They saw fit to employ Richard Littlejohn and previously Simon Heffer, both who think Bullying is “good for children”.

Madness……:(

Is this going to put an end to the Rapide pleasure flight operations too…..??

Whatever the story, I think we can reasonably state that the Daily Wail will put the worst possible gloss on it, and blame Europe for it.

Yes, it’s not good. But we’ve apparently been going to hell in a handcart since about 1930, so I think that puts their prophecies of doom in an appropriate light.

Adrian

How can it go for the BBMF?
For one they aren’t operating a commercial airline and secondly they are serving RAF aircraft so civil rules don’t apply.

This has already been covered It is a ban on carrying passengers not a grounding?

Oh sorry all did not see that only saw this in the daily mail today the bit I was shocked about was they are saying that Air Atlantique are to retire there DC-3 fleet. So if the DC-3 where up to date with the moden stuff would they still be aloud to fly passagers? :confused: Does this also go for the BBMF aswel?

James

I’ll be as rude about ridiculous elf’n’safety rules as anybody but it’s not them this time.
It’s part of EU wide commercial aircraft regulations (EU-OPS) which we now have no power to give exemptions to.

Must type faster…

JDK’s post on a thread a week ago explains:

This from Tom Everitt on PlaneTalk, for those of us not actually interested in rent-a-rants.

Quote:
Tom Everitt
All,

I think I can clarify the situation here a little.

On July 15th this year, JAR-OPS will be replaced by EU-OPS. At the same time, the CAA will loose it’s power to grant exemptions to JAR and will be required to “apply” to the EU for any future exemptions from EU-OPS. In doing so, they must be able to prove that “an equivalent level of safety” is present. As a consequence of this, all exemptions from JAR-OPS will cease to be valid on July 15th. I believe any remaining ANO AOC’s will also become void after this date but I am not 100% certain of that.

How does this effect operators of historic aircraft? As an example, Air Atlantique currently hold exemptions from JAR-OPS for the DC-3 for items such as Cockpit Voice recorders, TCAS, Lockable cockpit doors, Emergency Lighting, Emergency exit dimensions and height from exit sill to the ground to name but a few. The problem is probably becoming clear. Without exemptions for these items the DC-3 will not be able to operate public transport flights in their current state. I should stress that these new regulations in no way ground the DC-3, but make it difficult to continue flying passengers until modifications have been made.

It is my understanding that the CAA are working with operators to get some of the items mentioned covered by exemptions under EU-OPS and are fighting the corner of the operators, so I don’t think bashing them is justified in this instance.

EU-OPS has been hurried in ahead of another change to EASA-OPS in a few years time and in truth aircraft such as the DC-3 probably were never on their radar, there being but a handful of people operating them on public transport flights in Europe. It is very much written for the A320/737!

The smaller historic aircraft will also be effected by the introduction of EU-OPS, but not to the same extent as the DC-3. The number of seats the aircraft has is irrelevant in this case.

Hope this makes sense. The world of JAR-OPS/EU-OPS is a mysterious and murky one best left well alone unless absolutely necessary, trust me!

My only concern is that some smaller operators who have an AOC may not be aware of the full impact this change will have and may be caught out by it!

Tom.

http://forum.planetalk.net/viewtopic.php?t=5569
__________________

This has already been covered It is a ban on carrying passengers not a grounding?