Members are encouraged to rewrite this wishlist in their own words, adding/editing content as they wish.
Use EASA's comment response document:
and email the document to EASA before October 16th 2006:
It is very important that we get as many unique comments to EASA as possible.
It is worth clarifying that the document posted by Keith has been drawn up by the NASRAv Committee in consultation with long term flight instructors and other contributors.
Before the summary list was drawn up, a delegtion under the auspices of the National Aero Club drawn from NASRAv, Microlights, Gliding, SAAC and Balloons were addressed by Graham Newby who is the Chief Executive (or Operating Officer) of the PFA and sits on the EASA working group. He interpreted the consultation document for us and answered many questions.
A lot of the wish list is enshrined in the consultation document as potential options. The understanding that we have been given is the more submissions that are made suggesting particular options, the more likely it is they will be given serious consideration (with the caveat that there are no guarantees that they will be put into effect).
We have no idea as to what the IAA's views are. However many of the issues in the EASA consultation doument are in fact similar to those the members asked us in NASRAv to take to the IAA for discussion.
This is YOUR opportunity to put your personal slant on what you want sport and recreational flying to look like in the future. The wish list from NASRAv reflects what appear to be the commonly held views of many in GA in Ireland and indeed the UK and further afield. Some might view the wishlist as Utopia.
However much of what is in there is either enshrined in the consultation document, is in operation within the UK NPPL or the FAA Sport Licence.
If you don't ask - you won't get!
Please download the reply document and customise or personalise YOUR response. If you wish to add or amend anything, that is your prerogative however we ask that members stick to the general thrust of document.
Needless to say if someone feels differently about anything in the wish list please share your thoughts with us either here or on the web at www.nasrav.org
http://www.easa.eu.int/doc/Rulemaking/N ... 0(15.08.06).pdf
Everyone needs to respond to this. I hope to get my JAR PPL(A) soon but in 20 or 30 years time, when costs have gone up or I can't make the medical requirements I will want to use a European RPPL. Many of you too will need this in the future.
Take action; be cynical if you want, but don't let your cynicism cause you to sit idly by while decisions are made for you.
and look for the document that says A concept for better regulation in General Aviation (Aircraft other than Complex Motor Powered Aircraft, used in Non-commercial activities)
NASRAv's guidelines for comments and the comment form are linked at the start of this thread. If you have any more questions ask here, nasrav.org or email email@example.com
Below is a sample comment with which members can use to guide their personal response:
Instructions:Comments should be sent in ?WORD?, using the following link: NPA@easa.europa.eu
This comment and the identity of the sender will be published in the Comment Response Document (CRD)
unless a specific justified objection is received by EASA.
1a. COMMENT TO (Specify clearly Part/Chapter Number):
D Attachment D RIA for Flight Crew Licensing
1b. AFFECTED PARAGRAPH (Specify clearly Paragraph Number):
Page 40 2. Options ? Option 1
2. PROPOSED TEXT/ COMMENT:
1. RPPL License should be issued for life. Currency requirements being 2 years with ?Competency Test? by Instructor to validate or revalidate currency. Revalidation being Currency has lapsed
2. EPPL license should emphasis practical (competence) training & light on academic theory. Knowledge should be directly related to skill to be acquired.
3. Link Human factors to European Meteorology to cover situational awareness, decision making and consequences.
4. Instructors no longer require a CPL rating to become Instructors. Probable route to becoming an Instructor would be CFI recommendation, min number of hours and successful completion of a recognized Instructors course.
1. Base the RPPL currency requirements and theory testing on the FAA PPL(A). Over 40 years of experience and hundreds of thousands of pilots trained safely ? why re-invent the wheel.
2. Prior to the implementation of JAR instructors were appointed at a Club level. This system worked very well. JAR CPL Instructors have proven themselves to be only interested in increasing their hours towards an airline seat. They have no interest in recreational aviation.
4. PERSON/ORGANISATION PROVIDING THE COMMENT:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests