Brexit Phase Two - Trade

Hello stupid.

The experts you cite were making predictions. The CAA, RAeS, FAA etc are making statements of legal fact. There is a slight difference,

The only variable is how long it will take to set up the local CAA infrastructure and people to the required legal standards. From their working experience. And they are the only people who have this are that it would take a minimum of 5 years.... being a Chartered Engineer myself I know there are things like requirements to have a minimum of X years appropreate fully mentored and signed off experience of X, y and Z to to the appropriate standards etc.

Now you could change that from X years to say half that. However the Rest of the World (not the EU) will not accept that. the US FAA certainly won't The International Civil Aviation Rules are not negotiable in that way.

So you have e legal, safety and engineering rules, none of this is political or negotiable. Also the bits that are negotiable we don't have a leg to stand on. It is not a case of the UK can do what it likes... that went with the British Empire. For International Aviation if we step out of EASA according to a senior CAA person I spoke to "the UK has as much clout as Uganda" I have no idea why Uganda but there it is.

Somethings can't be fudged. That is why everyone who knows anything about Civil Aviation (particularly all the UK based airlines) there is no plan B other than staying in EASA which required membership pf the ECJ.

The UK has no leverage in any of this.

So what do you suggest that the people who know what they are talking about haven't thought of. You can cite the relevant legal statutes.
So five years then. Of which three have already passed. Best crack on and we will settle for an aviation transition for the time being.

And I am a chartered engineer too, not that it's worth a candle in the getting-on-with-it regard
 
Why ten years?

Use all the established regulations and change only the arbitrating court.

Took me two minutes.
In respect of the CAA? Getting qualified people in place is the biggest issue.
 
So EASA has no bilatreal agreements with non EU states?
Yes, several states. It has obviously escaped your feeble mind that I keep saying that EASA has 30+ members when there are only 28 in the EU. The non EU members in EASA have to accept the ECJ this was explained some 500 pages and 10,00 messages ago and multiple times since. None of the other EASA members what to change that and in any case if there were a change it would not be London. At least 27 of the 30 odd members would veto that.

NON EU members of EASA have to accept the ECJ. They do as do the majority of the UK citizens.

EASA has Bilateral agreements with many other states. Not a problem.

That is what this whole discussion has been about. The other state has to have an Civil Air Regulator that conforms to the the International Aviation requirements. No problem.

It will take the UK CAA a MINIMUM of 5 years with a LOT ov very expensive investment to get to the level required International law. There has been no move to do this so far and the absolute minimum it could theoretically be done is by April 2023 though in reality it will be closer to 2028. Inthe time between levin the the ECJ and therefore EASA until some time between 2023-8 there would be no civil flights in the UK

During the time the US FAA has said to will sort pout the servicing of it's aircraft by effectivly taking over licensing of the UK Aerospace industry that services it's civil aircraft. So we come out of the EU (where we have a major say) and get told what to do by the USA whilst the UK airlines stop operating inthe UK
 
Meep meep - those legs are spinning.

Keep it up champ.
So no usurpation of Parliament then - glad we've cleared that up.

Have a hug.
 
I don't care really, keep the present arrangement. Doesn't matter which court arbitrates, it's all done according to law anyway.
It's TMPM, who used the ECJ as a convenient excuse for her failures as Home Secretary. They're still the ebil empire in her mind.
 
So five years then. Of which three have already passed. Best crack on and we will settle for an aviation transition for the time being.
Correct There years of inaction have already passed. Nothing bene done. So there are still 5 years of work to do. However the 5 years was predicated on a best case scenario. Since them many of the requirements for the best case are not going to happen so the re-assesment is 8-10 years.
 
Correct There years of inaction have already passed. Nothing bene done. So there are still 5 years of work to do. However the 5 years was predicated on a best case scenario. Since them many of the requirements for the best case are not going to happen so the re-assesment is 8-10 years.
But you must acknowledge that it is not Armageddon.
 
So no usurpation of Parliament then - glad we've cleared that up.

Have a hug.
‘Amendment 7’

I suspect that you're involved int he planning for Brexit.

wile-e-coyote-acme-products.jpg
 
Just to be clear, I suspect Parliament will collectively act in the national interest. The only unicorn to be seen will be this one:

1519582199054.png
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Bacongrills The NAAFI Bar 254
Good CO Brexit 349
ACAB The NAAFI Bar 470

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top