On 2006-03-07, Jay Honeck wrote:
Despite the more liberal US flight environment regarding safety
regulation, GA in the United States has a better safety record. (Trying
to get the CAA to accept this is an impossibility of course).

Wow -- that's an amazing little tid-bit.

What's your take on that, Dylan? What's going on here?

More regulation does not equate to more safety - when you get beyond a
certain point in GA regulation, more regulation tends to have the
unintended consequence of making things *less* safe. More regulation
tends to make things more expensive. So instead of, say, fitting a
second AI in your plane, you don't because of the stupendous amount of
paperwork you'd have to fill out (and pay handsomely for). Or instead of
replacing an old component, a bunch of pointless paperwork has used up
that money so you have to soldier on with a lashed-up repair instead.
The FAA does the same thing, the CAA is worse.

The good news is that EASA (the new EU-wide authority) is making
encouraging noises like saying "we need to reduce regulatory burden" and
"we need GA to be more vibrant", so hopefully they will kick the CAA
into touch (the CAA's nickname in these parts is the Campaign Against
Aviation).

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net