EASA plans its change of direction
A series of meetings involving the European Commission, EASA and its
Board of Management is establishing exactly how EASA is going to
comply with the EC’s demand for a change of direction, and a
reversion to ICAO and JAR rules where it is desirable. Sources say
EASA will be instructed to put general aviation to the back of the
queue and concentrate on commercial air transport, and on known
safety issues which urgently need to be remedied.
EASA is overwhelmed with problems of its own making, having
rewritten huge numbers of aviation regulations and sought to
introduce new restrictions without any real reason for them. The
reaction to its recent Notice of Proposed Amendment on Operations
illustrates the problem; EASA has received 13,000 objections from
industry. Some 40 percent are from helicopter operators who would be
particularly hard-hit by EASA’s proposals, one of which, for
example, would require all helicopters flying over virtually any
water to be fitted with floats. This would be hugely costly for most
operators and impossible for many, and there is absolutely no
evidence of need; it would not address any known accident pattern.
Yet nobody can find out who in EASA proposed the requirement, how
much work was done on it, or why it was dreamed up in the first
place.
The EC’s patience with EASA is running out. Deputy DGTREN director
Zoltan Kazatsay wrote an impatient letter urging EASA to stop
reinventing the wheel and added: “The Commission believes the time
has come to take clear decisions to steer the Agency in a different
direction. In this respect it is essential to carefully consider the
alternative of going back to the original structure and wording
wherever possible of JARs and ICAO requirements, which should be
transposed into Community law.”
EASA’s ‘new direction’ is expected to be announced in the next two
months, and while a respite from unwarranted new demands will be
welcome, GA does not want to see the baby thrown out with the
bathwater. IAOPA-Europe’s Deputy Vice President Martin Robinson
says: “Some of EASA’s proposals would improve safety, and they
should not all be abandoned because of the Agency’s inefficiency.”
The achievable IR
One of the most important proposals is the establishment of a new
Instrument Rating with a vastly reduced nonsense quotient in the
theoretical knowledge; EASA must not drop this initiative now. The
JAA was working on the problem long before EASA took over, so it
must be seen as an existing JAA programme which should be
protected under the ‘reversion to ICAO and JARs’ guidance of the
EC.
The IR proposals may be safeguarded because they help to address
one of EASA’s basic objectives, which is to get third country
operations out of Europe – particularly those on the N-register.
The primary reason European aircraft are registered in America is
because while the flying skills required for the FAA IR are higher
than in Europe, the theoretical knowledge requirements are far
more sensible and make the rating achievable for private pilots.
More than 50 percent of American PPLs have an Instrument Rating,
compared to about one percent of PPLs in, for example, the United
Kingdom. EASA head Patrick Goudou told IAOPA in 2005 it was his
intention to ensure there were “no advantages” to being on the
N-register.
Airspace proposal resurrected
Eurocontrol is reopening the debate about airspace classifications
with a view to simplifying the airspace structure, something it
appeared to have abandoned only a year ago. When the subject was
last raised, it was clear that the aviation industry preferred to
stick with the ICAO classifications. As part of the Single
European Sky programme Eurocontrol proposed that Europe adopt only
two classifications of airspace, known and unknown; the industry
thought, however, that classifications should as far as possible
be global, and Eurocontrol quietly shelved the idea.
For reasons unknown, however, the proposal has been resurrected,
this time as a plan to reduce airspace classifications to three or
four in coming years, with the ultimate aim of having only two.
While Eurocontrol accepts the ICAO classifications are “part of
the toolbox” it is clear that they still want to rationalise them
further. IAOPA’s Martin Robinson says: “We thought this had gone
away but Eurocontrol has begun canvassing member states about it
again. The EC, and the Eurocontrol states which are not EU
members, wish to retain the eight ICAO classifications below
FL195, but the member states implement that airspace in different
ways. Largely because of the complexities of fitting traffic into
regional airports, it is desirable to retain the flexibility that
the ICAO classifications provide, and IAOPA-Europe is not
convinced that Eurocontrol’s proposals have merit.”
What price security?
The European Commission is consulting on a proposal to create
Europe-wide regulations on security costs at all airports, and
IAOPA-Europe is concerned to ensure that general aviation is not
caught up in the collateral damage. Transport Commissioner Antonio
Tajani says information on security-related charges is inadequate,
and a level playing field must be established across Europe for
the benefit of airlines and passengers. The EC proposes to
establish a special bureaucracy in every state to oversee airport
security charges.
While these proposals are aimed strictly at airlines, there is no
information on how general aviation terminals and their users will
be treated. IAOPA is seeking more details from national
governments and the EC and will respond to the consultation before
it ends on September 25th.
An unleaded future?
The Swedish government has asked its Transport Agency to look at
creating a new environmental class for unleaded avgas in order to
tax it at a lower rate. Unleaded avgas cannot conform to the legal
requirements of unleaded car fuel because of the special
conditions in which it is required to operate, but the Swedish
government recognises the environmental benefits of unleaded avgas
and is keen to promote its use with tax concessions.
Unleaded avgas in Sweden is provided by Hjelmco Oil, run by the
former head of AOPA Sweden, Lars Hjelmberg. It is also produced in
Poland and France. It is a tiny market, but the Swedes hope it can
be grown. The government’s statement says: “A Swedish
environmental class for unleaded aviation gasoline may serve as a
model to the aviation gasoline market and possibly expedite a
transition to unleaded aviation gasoline within the EU and the
rest of the world.” Sweden took over the presidency of the EU in
July and has announced its intention to use its term in office to
advance environmental causes.
Diary dates
Don’t forget – the 121st Regional Meeting of IAOPA-Europe will be
held in Barcelona from October 1st to October 4th. Book your
ticket now! Looking ahead, the 2010 IAOPA World Assembly will be
held in Tel Aviv from 6th June to 10th June next year. AOPA Israel
intends to publish a website containing details shortly.
This e-news is distributed directly by IAOPA-Europe. If you would
like to unsubscribe, please click on the unsubscribe
line at the foot of the page
If you have any comments on this newsletter or would like to have
information from your country included in it, please email iaopa@richmondaviation.co.uk.
If you would like anyone else to receive this e-news, please enter
their email address at the IAOPA Europe website http://www.iaopa.eu
(use the form at the top right corner)