[Kharon]

PL – “To put it succinctly, the problem is whether you introduce all of the changes at once or piece by piece.”

To put it in a nutshell – or nut sell – it has always been thus.  The problem existed 25 – or 30 years ago when they started; this, as has every thing else remains unchanged.  The endless make work – bring a new regulation, then spend the next decade ‘tweaking’ the original flawed work.

PL – “[It is] fair to say that all of the participants from industry were sceptical’. Etc.

It’s a race to the bottom – the new broom of cleanliness cannot beat the rot of reduced participation and investment in the industry.  

Brave Peter, three stultifying days, in the belly of the beast.  Well done – but did you come away with a positive feeling that the dreadful maintenance rules are being changed; or, that the untenable Part 61 is going to make sense in our life times; or, that Part 135 is a bloody good thing for GA.  Perhaps there is a move to de-criminalise, any good news on that?  Did you hear anything about drafting regulations in a less complicated manner?  Did you get the good word that regulations were to be made less complex, less subjective, less prescriptive and less open to abuse by officers ‘on a mission’.

No Sir, you did not – or you would have said so, to be greeted by the cheers of industry.  

Thanks for the update Peter, I’ll be smiling all day now. So very happy that the regulations are being attended to and that the Forsyth review for an overhaul of the outfit that created the regulatory debacle has been shuffled off to the pencil cupboard.   The first call was and remains the government supported Forsyth recommendation for a REFORM OF THE REGULATOR – first and foremost.  

The problem lays within the belly of the beast, not the rules which govern industry life.  Aleck being one of the main causes of discomfort to the beast.

Selah.