EASA Doom and Gloom – Annex II Engineers Please Read!!!!

FB, did you get the e-mail regarding meeting this week at Duxford? If not PM me!!

I’m afraid I didnt get the email, but I’m tied up with the AAIB tomorrow and am delivering a customers airframe back at the end of this week whcih is almost finished so I might have to bow out gracefully at this late stage.

FB

To be honest the whole lot is a farce, I hold both licences, whilst one can see the sense in “streamlining the system” the if it is not broken, do not fix it comes to mind……….

The whole system fell at the first hurdle, EASA was supposed to have been all encompassing, to embrace all…….. I still cannot see why Aircraft were farmed off into Annex 2, the whole lot over Europe should have gone into the single licence, and not the current situation where you have to then hold two separate licences, It did simply squat, it produced a Quango to stand separate from all legislative bodies, where what should have happened was all bodies such as the CAA etc should have been absorbed and all of been part of EASA…..

Companies that operated several DC3’s in the UK…. (you should be able to figure that out), had to convert the company and all the engineers, paperwork, approvals over to EASA, to find a year later the Aircraft were removed from the EASA system and put back on the CAA one……so had to start yet again redoing everything…. and now it will change for them again………. Even today I still do not know fully what is on my licences as the licence bears no resemblance to what is actually printed on it… FARCE as I said. one thing it did do was produce uncertainty and reduced safety………. EASA got rid of a lot of inspections the CAA used to deem as airworthy requirements and brought in a set that seemed to be based on the lowest countries standards………. I suppose it is easier to dumb down the better systems than to improve the poor ones….. 🙁

http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1350&pagetype=90&pageid=11683

Consultation has just opened on the following proposal for BCAR Section A which completly changes the paperwork and maintenance inputs for Annex II aircraft in the UK. Essentially paralleling the EASA system we’re all just recovering from but with National ARCs not European ones.

1000% more hassle for little or no improvement – please those that are in the engineering business, form your responses…

FB

Better still. Get in touch with the Historic Aircraft Association, who are, as we speak in dialogue with both CAA and EASA on this and many other matters.

FB, did you get the e-mail regarding meeting this week at Duxford? If not PM me!!

Simply put this is a CAA proposal to have Annex II types looked after the same way as Part M. Nothing to do with EASA, who are too busy trying to re-invent & regulate everything and anything else they can think of, having already dis-owned these types. This just means yet another approval to to the CAAs job for them, and pay them for doing it (just like Part M) but nothing to do with LAA/CAA Permit to Fly stuff.

Latest EASA proposals suggest FAA licenced pilots are downright dangerous & must be re-tested in full before they can fly in Europe.

By Erradicating All Silly Aeroplanes, we will have a 100% safety record.

Ok, well to put it a little more simpler! A lot of our old historic types, and even the more mundane classics (Super Cub/Chippie/Tigers etc etc) need maintaining under a M3 or M5 workshop approval. This proposed change looks to hike the requirements to hold this approval and dramatically increase the costs of that approval and each type on it.

As far as I see it, although we’ve just about got through the Part M and Part F on EASA types, this is only going to increase costs for operators and maintenance organisations alike for a fleet that is already costly to operate and can struggle to easily find servicable spares.

Honnestly, it may not seem it – but this is a BIG thing for the continuing maintenance of the old types we all love to see flying.

FB

Tongue tied and twisted ,just an earthbound ………..with apologies to Pink Floyd !

Engineers responses don’t get better than that!

Wow…………….thats deep man………..:o