IAOPA-Europe enews July 2013 - Welcome to the IAOPA Europe enews which goes to 23,000 aircraft owners and pilots in 27 countries across the continent

‘Change is on the way’, Europe promises GA

European Commission and EASA officials were given a rough ride by general aviation owners and pilots in front of MEPs at a unique seminar staged by International AOPA under the auspices of the Liberal Democrat group in the European Parliament in Brussels in June.
Matthew Baldwin, the EC’s Director of Aviation, Filip Cornelis, Head of Aviation Safety at the Commission, and Jules Kneepkens, EASA’s Head of Rulemaking, were among those who were made to feel uncomfortable as the finger of blame was pointed at them for the parlous and declining state of the GA industry in Europe.
The seminar, called ‘Connecting Europe through General Aviation’, was facilitated by ALDE, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in Europe, and was chaired by German MEP Gessine Meissner. Italian MEP Giommaria Uggias was also instrumental in setting up the meeting and made some positive opening remarks, primarily concerning his work on access to regional airports. IAOPA wishes to place on record its thanks to ALDE, Frau Meissner and Signor Uggias for facilitating the seminar, which had to be moved to a larger room in the Parliament to allow for the number of people who registered to attend. Also in attendance were Slovenian MEP Jelko Kacin and Italian Member Antonio Cancian, and we were joined later by German MEPs Silvana Koch-Mehrin and Holger Krahmer.
Both Gessine Meissner and IAOPA Senior Vice President Martin Robinson stressed that the purpose of the seminar was not to attack EASA or the European Commission, and while the frustration of the industry was evident, the discussion was never allowed to get personal. The senior EU officials present promised that ‘change is on the way’. Whether it will be profound enough, or will come quickly enough, to save general aviation as we know it remains to be seen.

What GA could do for Europe, if only…

The question of why general aviation was such an economic and social powerhouse in the USA while barely being able to survive in Europe was explored at the Brussels seminar, with the major part of the blame being laid at the door of European over-regulation. On occasion, the EC and EASA officials ducked behind the magic shield of ‘safety’, but it was pointed out that American GA is safer than European GA, and that EASA’s belief that it cared more about pilots’ safety than the pilots themselves was misplaced. “The crux of the whole problem is that EASA confuses regulation with safety,” one delegate said.
Craig Spence, Secretary General of IAOPA, set out the situation in the United States, where the general aviation industry serves more than 5,000 airports, compared with some 500 used by airlines, turns over $150 billion, employs 1.2 million people, many of them in highly technical jobs, and carries some 170 million people a year, often between places that are relatively inaccessible. Of the 320,000 GA aircraft in the world, 231,000 are in the USA. “General aviation is an economic powerhouse in America, and a key component of the transport ecosystem,” he said. The primary difference between the US and Europe, he said, was the regulatory system.
AOPA UK’s Pat Malone, moderating the session, compared this with data from the UK, which has one-fifth of America’s population but one-hundredth of its GA industry in terms of turnover and employment. Despite the mountains of so-called ‘safety’ regulation in Europe, accident rates here are similar to the US, and in some cases worse. While GA is growing rapidly in Asia, China, Brazil and elsewhere, in Europe it continues to shrink, fewer hours are being flown, and GA companies are going out of business. “Imagine how much potential there is in the general aviation industry, for jobs, for wealth creation, for tax revenue, for facilitating the free movement of people, if only we can lift the regulatory boot a little way off the industry’s windpipe,” he said.
Jacques Callies, President of AOPA France, gave some indication of the scale of the over-regulation problem when he announced the results of a survey in France which showed that 60 percent of the time spent on maintenance of a GA aircraft was filling in forms and paperwork, and the cost of this was 30 percent of the total cost of maintenance. Bureaucratic complexity and its associated cost had become a major safety issue, he added.

Sennheiser Banner

When regulation works against safety

For the European Commission, Matthew Baldwin made some conciliatory remarks, saying everyone agreed on the fundamental importance of the GA sector to Europe. “We recognise there is a perception problem,” he said. “Collectively the GA industry feels that we in the EU are like a huge, insatiable regulatory white shark feeding on the industry…”
He was interrupted by cries of: “That’s exactly what you are!”
But he went on: “Safety is paramount. That’s not to mischaracterise your position – we are in agreement. And because of the economic downturn, the EASA system needs to be properly balanced. We need risk-based regulation, and we need to analyse accidents and incidents better, and learn from them.” Mr Baldwin referred to the EASA Board of Management’s endorsement of the paper produced by the French DGAC-led group which demanded a completely new GA strategy from EASA. “We intend to apply a risk-based approach to replace the rule thrown out for every conceivable risk,” he said. “Prescriptive regulations have their limits. When pilots feel they are nonsensical or oppressive, they will be disregarded. Change is on the way, and we need you to participate with us.”
Members of the audience were keen to question Mr Baldwin about some of his assertions – what safety issues were addressed by Part M, for instance, or by the ATO requirements? But questions were discouraged until the end of the session, by which time Mr Baldwin had left for another engagement.
The Commission’s aviation safety head Filip Cornelis is clearly concerned at the level of mistrust and deprecation of EASA. “A lot of it has landed on my desk since I took over the job last December,” he said. “You make it clear to us that there is a strong sense of frustration in the industry. Now, the time has come to refine EASA’s work, and this is in progress. We can’t do it overnight, but there will be a number of clear principles, and a list of actions which will be updated every six months.”
A new approach was being taken, he said. “In the new draft texts, certain things will be removed from the definition of ‘commercial’ – cost-sharing will be allowed, parachute-dropping and introductory flights will be moved into the non-commercial sector. Maintenance programmes are under review, and there are new proposals for flight in IMC, with more proportionate requirements for GA. We are also beginning, at the technical level, to review the Basic Regulation.”
He added: “I have to say, the messages we get from GA are not consistent – I have one organisation asking me precisely the opposite of what the others want.”
This more than anything else should provide a clue to the fact that EASA’s one-size-fits-all approach is a mistake; in particular, the Basic Regulation’s requirement for a ‘high uniform level of safety’, which expects a two-seater operating from a grass field to attain the same performance as a corporate Gulfstream G IV, is misconceived. GA is a broad church which cannot be covered by a single safety blanket. Mr Cornelis took questions from the audience, many of which were expressions of frustration and bewilderment. One German pilot said: “Three times Mr Baldwin mentioned safety and security, yet what fears are they addressing? What risk has been identified?”
Given the nature of the criticism of EASA, the response of the Agency’s Head of Rulemaking Jules Kneepkens, who say in the audience, seemed rather lame. “Would you rather have 27 regulators or one?” he asked. The answers were vociferous. One regulator that kills the industry is no improvement over 27 that allowed GA to survive – if EASA continues the way it’s going there will be no GA left to regulate.
While Mr Kneepkens promised improved performance and asked general aviation to “talk to us”, it was pointed out that the GA industry has talked to EASA incessantly for the best part of ten years and the Agency had taken no notice. One of the seminar speakers invited by IAOPA, Flyer magazine publisher Ian Seager, was roundly applauded when he detailed some of the regulatory disasters EASA had been forewarned about, yet had persisted with. “Whomever was responsible for the Part M maintenance requirements should hang his head in shame,” Mr Seager said to loud acclaim.

Towards a sustainable future?

Martin Robinson, Senior Vice President of IAOPA, warned that the regulatory burden is killing GA as we know it, and the collateral damage was severe. “Every time a pilot stops flying because of the increased burden of bureaucracy, someone in the supply chain loses a job – whether it be the man who services the aircraft, the flying instructor whose school goes bankrupt, or the lady who serves the tea in the canteen,” he said.
“We’re not here to kick the EC and EASA,” he said. “There have been some success stories in aviation. At the Commercial Air Transport level, EASA is a success. For general aviation, however, it is not a success.”
In 2009 the European Parliament’s transport committee had brought forward 34 resolutions supporting the EC's ‘sustainable future for general aviation’ agenda. “Five years on, we have none of the things the Parliament called for,” Martin said. “Proportionality is still a pipe dream. There have never been any segmented impact assessments to show how regulations are working in practice. The Parliament’s call for the gathering of adequate data on GA has not been answered. And its request that the EC report back on progress by the end of 2009 was simply ignored. “This seems to be the measure of their interest,” Martin said. “They are asked to report back by our democratically elected representatives, and they simply ignore the request.
“The system for promulgating regulations is undemocratic and flawed. The Commission and EASA do not use risk assessments comprehensively and consistently, so resources are not always targeted properly. There isn’t enough trend analysis to allow risks to be determined. Once a trend has been established, the regulator should first look at what industry best practices are available before considering hard law. If it is considered that a new rule is required, then there should be a requirement for a cost-benefit study. The Agency should examine all the options available and present the options to industry as part of the process.
“The system today is one in which the Commission develops and implements a regulation, unsupported by regulatory impact assessments. I doubt very much that the Commission is aware of the impact that their regulations have on small and medium-sized enterprises in Europe. I am particularly concerned about the impact of the proposed regulations covering Approved Training Organisations. I have never seen a risk assessment to support the changes that are proposed, I have simply heard an EASA policy officer say that ‘flying clubs have the ability to impact safety’. Our Registered Facilities have been conducting flight training safely, efficiently and to the very highest standards for decades. Yet the new ATO requirements represent somebody’s idea of how to improve safety, without any evidence, any data, or any consideration for the ability of the regulated organisations to conform to the new demands upon them.
“As a pilot, I know that my safety is down to my desire to get home to see my family at the end of the flight. EASA’s apparent belief that they have a greater regard for my safety than I do is misplaced. When they over-regulate, they damage and destroy people’s livelihoods. The cost must be proportionate to the benefits, at every level.”

The bureaucratic nightmare


Jacques Callies, President of AOPA France and publisher of the magazine Aviation et Pilote, told the seminar of a French survey which had produced some interesting results. “GA in France flies more hours than the national airline and turns over €4.5 billion,” he said. “But GA has been subjected to a one-size-fits-all attitude where airline rules have been imposed on GA. The negative impact of the paperwork has been staggering. Airlines can afford to hire people to handle all the new form-filling and box-ticking but the small and medium enterprises in the general aviation sector cannot, nor can they pass the costs on to paying customers – they must find the money themselves. Part M, for instance, may have provided useful safety guidance to airlines, but for GA there was no benefit whatsoever. The cost of filling in the paperwork is now 30 percent of the cost of maintenance, and more than half of the maintenance organisation’s time is taken up with paperwork and record-keeping.
“None of this has anything to do with safety. We know this because it is our lives that are on the line. We need pragmatic rules, and there is no need to continually re-invent the wheel. We must simplify the bureaucratic nightmare that is slowly killing GA. We must address the fact that GA is effectively being excluded from regional airports by pricing devices. At Bordeaux, for instance, the GA pilot is charged €75 for a compulsory ride of 25 metres in a minibus. Elsewhere, landing fees have been increased by a factor of 15, and it is not unusual for a GA aircraft to be held for 30 minutes when they have a CAT movement arriving. Elsewhere in the world these things do not happen. Why do we in Europe have to do things in such a radically different way?”

GA – doing the business

While GA accounts for only five percent of the aviation industry’s turnover, it serves more than 3,000 European airfields compared to only 420 which have an airline service, Dr Michael Erb, Managing Director of AOPA Germany, told the seminar.
“In Europe we have a similar geographical area to the United States, and we have a similar population with a broadly similar standard of living,” he said. “We have the potential to build a general aviation industry which generates as much wealth and serves the transport needs of the people of Europe as well as GA does in America.
“We are not in the business of competing with the airlines. We are not about to fill up 200 Cessnas and fly them from Frankfurt to Paris to take business away from Lufthansa and Air France. But there is great potential for growth in the peripheral countries of Europe, where investment is most needed.
“The central part of Europe, from London through Paris and Frankfurt, is very well served by the airline industry and as a result, that’s where investment is concentrated. But flying from one remote area to another in Europe is a completely different matter. Accessibility is economically vital, and only general aviation can make those remote places accessible, and encourage the investment they need.”
Dr Erb mentioned also some of the problems that are unique to German GA. For instance, an airfield may be forced to close if there is no controller in the tower. This is like closing a motorway junction because there is no traffic policeman available. At Egelsbach airfield, where AOPA Germany is based, aircraft are subjected to noise restrictions which apply to no other traffic – a pilot may ride up on a moped or a Harley Davidson making as much noise as he pleases, but if he makes the same noise in his aeroplane, he is breaking the law.
Current restrictions, and the cost of complying with them, have become a safety issue, Dr Erb said. “Safety is a matter of proficiency, and that means flying needs to be more affordable. We could also make flying safer with new, more reliable engines or traffic alert systems, but we cannot afford the certification costs for new GA equipment, or to buy them if they are certified. The safety needs of GA have been completely ignored in planning for SESAR, despite all our efforts. Instead, we are bound up with endless bureaucratic constructs like ‘non-complex, non-commercial operations’. That’s like describing a woman as ‘non-male, other than a girl’. It may suit a bureaucracy, but in the real world it’s just silly.”

Small and medium enterprises suffer

Publisher Ian Seager described for MEPs his business use of general aviation. “Mine is a small company – in fact, it’s at the small end of small, with 12 employees,” he said. “I have a single-engined aircraft, a Cessna 182, which I run because I need to get in front of as many of my customers as possible. But I am beset by silly rules which make operating an aircraft more difficult and more expensive than it need be. Whoever is responsible for Part M should hang their heads in shame and run away.”
Mr Seager said it was difficult to understand much of EASA’s regulations, which were written by lawyers and made poor safety reference material for pilots. “I shouldn’t have to read through 500 pages of dense legalese to find out what I am allowed to do,” he said. “Recently I asked some regulators to explain a regulation, and the reply was: ‘It will probably take a court case to establish what that means’. Regulations that have been written by EASA, supposedly for the safety guidance of pilots, are so opaque that a judge and jury will have to decide what they mean. Are we prepared to accept this?”
He echoed Jacques Callies’ concerns about airport access, saying: “We need equitable access to airports, not regulatory-inspired monopolies offering mandatory handling at usurious fees.” And he concluded: “Doing business with general aviation in the United States is 150 times easier, and their safety record is better.”

GA creates jobs, over-regulation destroys them

Matthias Albrecht runs a software company that operates two Piaggio Avanti aircraft in the east of Germany. “These planes are not rich boys toys, they are European aircraft creating jobs in Italy and they are used to drive business in Europe,” he said. “I have 350 employees producing software for banks, and half my employees are in Saxony (in the former East Germany). There is no useful infrastructure there so when I have to put my eastern employees in front of my western customers, I use these aircraft. More than 90 percent of the flights these aircraft make are taking my employees to my clients. If I did not have them, I would have to shut down an office and dump 150 employees.
“I am unable to do business efficiently in Berlin because of the difficulty of flying into the city in GA aircraft, Schoenefeld has only eight parking spaces for GA, all taken up by the locals, and the landing fee is €400. As a result, I have had to dump ten employees.
“I pay twice as much to fly as my competitors in the United States and I am prepared to do that because we can’t compete without it. There are fuel taxes and ATC charges in Germany that my American competitors do not pay, which puts me at a disadvantage. We have never had an accident in 15 years of operation, yet now EASA says it has to make my employees safe from me. They are introducing a whole series of pointless and costly new requirements that will affect my operations. How many employees will my company, and many others like it, have to dump to afford this?”

Is there hope?

Frau Meissner reiterated that the theme of the seminar should not be ‘let’s attack EASA’, but she recognised that enormous frustrations have built up in the GA industry and major change is necessary to keep it alive. She spoke revisiting the Basic Regulation – one of IAOPA’s most important goals – and a reduction of paperwork. “General aviation is very important to the internal market, and its regulation is clearly seen as too burdensome,” she said.
The European Committee of the Regions’ rapporteur on airports, Roland Werner, introducing the second session of the day, gave the general aviation industry every encouragement to keep the pressure on EASA and the EC for a change of attitude. However, he too seemed to regard ‘regulation’ as meaning ‘safety’ and conflated the two in his remarks. Where regulation works against safety, there seems to be little understanding.
Will it make any difference? Does the European Parliament have any meaningful control or influence over the EC and EASA? The Agency has become so used to paying lip service to the idea of consultation that it would be easy to imagine them treating the seminar as a safety valve to allow the industry to let off steam, while continuing to stack ever more bureaucracy on our creaking backs. But they cannot now say they were not aware of the scale of the problem they are creating. Whether they have the ability to change in such a way that general aviation as we know it can be given a future in Europe remains to be seen.

IAOPA wins FAA support on Part 61 licences

Following a concerted campaign by IAOPA on both sides of the Atlantic, the US Federal Aviation Administration has agreed to allow holders of FAA Part 61.75 licences to have their licences renewed by national aviation authorities in Europe rather than having to travel to the US to get the job done.
Part 61.75 licences are issued by the FAA to holders of comparable licences from other recognised aviation authorities, such as those in Europe, to allow holders to fly N-registered aircraft. No flight test is required as long as certain criteria are met, and the issuing process often takes only a few minutes.
Thousands of European pilots hold Part 61.75 licences, which carry the number of the pilot’s licence issued by the home authority of the pilot. But under the change to EASA FCL, all licence numbers will be altered to include the letters ‘FCL’, rendering the Part 61.75 licences invalid. Under normal circumstances, holders would have to travel to a Flight Standards District Office in the United States to have their licence reissued. However, the FAA has agreed this is too much to ask, and has informed EASA that it will allow national authorities in Europe to reissue existing Part 61.75 licences, providing that the holders can prove their identity.
National authorities need only provide the FAA with the pilot’s name, licence numbers (old and new), the FAA certificate number, the pilot’s mailing address, and a statement to confirm that the Part-FCL pilot licence is valid and is not suspended, revoked, or expired. The statement of positive identification will include an official photograph of the applicant and the applicant’s signature and residential address, if different from the mailing address.
Craig Spence, Secretary General of IAOPA, said: “Recognising the impact that this issue was having for general aviation in Europe, IAOPA Europe began working with AOPA US to take the actions that were necessary on both sides of the Atlantic. Between the actions of the two organisations a logical, easy, no-cost policy was developed that will allow pilots to keep their FAA validations without the burden and costs of reapplying. This again demonstrates the power of a strong international organisation, working together.”

AOPA active again in Belgium

AOPA Belgium, which has been dormant for some years, has become active once again under the Presidency of Ron Wullaert and has as its home base Zoersel airfield, EBZR. IAOPA Senior Vice President Martin Robinson says: “Ron is fully committed to building AOPA in Belgium and deserving of our support.” General aviation is coming under increasing pressure in Belgium, not least at Charleroi airport where it has been arbitrarily decided to exclude GA at certain times.

AOPA and French Aero Clubs plan tour

Each year, the French Federation of Aero clubs organises a rally around the French hexagon. The competitors are young pilots aged between 18 and 25. After a rigorous process of selection, the candidates participate in a rally around France and compete in various challenges testing their flying skills (airmanship, navigation, precision flying). This year, 40 young pilots will be competing. A vast caravan will fly around France from July 14th to July 28th. The "Tour aérien des jeunes pilotes"  will follow the route at right.
For the first time, AOPA USA, AOPA France and the French Federation of Aero Clubs have launched a partnership in order to welcome a young American pilot to compete in this event. After receiving 78 applications, AOPA US  selected Jennifer Guetterman to represent the young pilots of America in the tour. Jennifer will travel from Los Angeles to Paris, where she will be welcomed by AOPA France. While a few days have been deemed necessary for Jennifer to adapt to the time difference, AOPA France has arranged for an aircraft to be available to her, thanks to the Diamond Aircraft Distributor in France ATA. Pierre Pelletier, the CEO, has provided a DA40 free of charge in order to allow Jennifer to compete in the tour.
Jacques Callies, President of AOPA France, says: "AOPA USA and France are  thrilled at this unique opportunity to work with the French Federation of Aero Clubs. France is the country where aero clubs are the most active worldwide. There are more than 600 registered aero clubs that belong to the Federation in France and the country is comparable in size to Texas. All three organisations see this event as a unique opportunity to send a message to a wider audience. Flying is the stepping stone to a career in the aerospace industry.
"Welcoming Jennifer in France will be a great pleasure for us. We have a longstanding working relationship with the FFA and it is really nice to be able to organise jointly the participation of a young female pilot in this event. It shows that on both sides of the Atlantic, all pilot organisations and federations are able to work together to have a positive impact on general aviation and its future."

AOPA Israel plays host to French aviators

In June AOPA Israel hosted a friendship rally of 17 French single-engine aircraft organised by Rallye Aero France. The group of 46 pilots and spouses arrived at Haifa (LLHA) for a six-day tour of Israel, including a round  the country flight from Haifa to Masada (LLMZ), the lowest airstrip on the globe at 1240 ft below sea level. During the visit the guests visited holy places including the Sea of Galilee, Jerusalem and around the Dead Sea. AOPA Israel, through its delegate Yigal Merav, assisted the French group with aeronautical information, charts, refueling, special flight permissions, coordinating with local CAA and airport authorities, Israel Defence Force, ATC, security clearances, hotel bookings, transportation, guides, excursions and more…

The participants were welcomed by Minister of Tourism, who joined the group on its flight to Masada, the Mayor of Haifa, the French consul and the President of AOPA Israel, as well as Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. At a farewell dinner on the day before departure M Jean Michel Collineau, CEO of Rallye Aero France, expressed his thanks and gratitude for the very successful visit and hope for further mutual visits in the near future.

Free legal cover for AOPA UK members

AOPA UK has signed a deal with Hayward Aviation Insurance to provide members with free legal expenses cover of up to £7,500 in the event of their having to appeal against legal action by the CAA, EASA or any European aviation authority.
The deal has been prompted by major changes at the UK CAA, which has been given legal powers to impose ‘Civil Sanctions’ on pilots deemed to have transgressed. The Civil Sanction will allow the CAA to impose fixed penalties without going to court, and will be introduced next year.
For British pilots, the insured sum of up to £7,500 means they will be able to afford to get proper legal representation should they wish to appeal against a Civil Sanction. If AOPA’s legal panel agrees that they have a case, they will be funded to pursue it up to the maximum figure, which should be enough to cover any eventuality. Even if a pilot faces a full court hearing, £7,500 will go a long way towards defraying costs. The deal applies only to European CAAs and EASA.

AOPA UK Chief Executive Martin Robinson signed the deal with Guy Holland-Bosworth of Hayward Aviation Insurance in mid-May. Martin said: “I’m very pleased that Haywards have been able to back us on this. They have an excellent track record not only as a specialist broker in the general aviation field, but as a company that really gets involved in GA, understands it and wants to support it.
“For our members, it means that as part of their membership fee, they know that if they are unfairly penalised by any aviation authority, they will be able to afford expert legal assistance to ensure that their voice is heard. With the Civil Sanction procedure being introduced this year, we believe that this will prove to be an attractive and helpful benefit of membership. Hopefully members won’t need, it but it provides a little bit more peace of mind.”
The insurance is available only to AOPA UK members who register with Haywards at www.haywards.net/aopa

AOPA active in Romania

AOPA Romania (www.aopa.ro), a proud member of IAOPA since 2006, was an official partner of the first private Air Trade Fair, held inside Bucharest’s Baneasa airport (LRBS) and visited by a record number of more than 10,000 people, AOPA Romania’s Vice President Andrei Zincenco reports. Continuing with its mission of supporting activities that ensure the long-term health of general aviation, AOPA Romania has partnered with two more organisations – the Romanian Aero Club for the traditional Children’s Day Air Show at Clinceni Airfield near Bucharest in July, and Romanian Air Services for the upcoming AeRomania Air Show at Tuzla airfield (LRTZ) near the Black Sea coast on July 13. The Clinceni event was a success for both the Aero Club and AOPA Romania, attracting a large crowd to a programme which included solo and formation aerobatics and a display by a Puma helicopter of the National Army. One of the founding member of AOPA Romania, Mr. Dragos Stoicescu, former national team aerobatic pilot, performed flawless aerobatics in an aircraft that he designed and build himself – the ‘Falcon’. You can see photographs of the Clinceni show here

Come to AOPA Sweden’s annual Fly-in

AOPA Sweden invites all AOPA members and others to the yearly Fly-in and Airshow at Ljungby/Feringe Airport (ESMG) in the southern part of Sweden (Smaland). The event takes place during the weekend August 3 and 4. On Saturday August 3 there will be seminars and flying-related activities. On the Sunday the Fly-in is open to the public and there will be an air show arranged by the local flying club, which is also celebrating its 50 th anniversary – see http://www.feringefk.se/. Bring your family and enjoy a really nice weekend in the heart of Sweden. If you are planning a Scandinavian tour, this will be the perfect time and place of entry. Any questions or requests? Send an e-mail to us – click here. We will be glad to assist! Of course everyone is welcome to join the fly-in, not only AOPA-members.

How can we do a better job of learning from each other?

General aviation is one of the very few recreational activities where you, as a trainee and amateur, freely mix with professionals and, ultimately, will be are expected (legally, procedurally, morally) to share many of the same standards as they. So, why does it not always work as well as it should? Why is the greatest killer and injurer of pilots (and their passengers) the pilot himself? Why are there fewer and fewer PPL’s each year? Why are new, keen, pilots often left to hang out and dry once they have the precious little booklet in their hands after their Skills Test? Why do fear and lack of motivation often cripple the trainee or newbie PPL? Read more here...