Draft Airspace Modernisation Strategy

I do not believe that Government is best placed to set the policy objectives in that it is not sufficiently closely connected to all the relevant stakeholders, instead relying on advice from bodies like the CAA and consultancies such as York Aviation. As such there is the potential to miss the crucially important voices of the GA community and the population at large. The APPG on GA needs rot be included in the policy framework setting in a more formal capacity, as does AOPA.

The fundamental piece missing from policy is the integration of communities to utilise a commonly owned airspace. At the present time too much emphasis is placed on commercial traffic. Whilst it is acknowledged that UK airspace is cramped and the country is highly reliant on a sensible growth strategy for commercial aviation, more needs to be done to allow integration of charter and GA activity within that airspace. The secondary issue is that primacy is afforded to the military when setting up Restricted and Danger areas, but the volume of that airspace is disproportionate to the size of our military. More needs to be done to manage Danger area activation by specific requirement rather than by default. And more needs to be done to promulgate the status of airspace to all users.

Previous comment refers.

The fundamental missing piece is that the interests of users under 5700kg are largely ignored or else overridden. There seems to be no formal acceptance that GA users (including flight schools and charter) are part of the same ecosystem as large commercial and that the stifling of one area has caused and is causing significant problems in staffing across all of the aviation sector (military and civil) in both aircrew and engineering / technical sectors. The link to education and STEM is now better recognised but the strategy around joining up these interests to build a common picture is still very limited. The Apprenticeship tax (levy) is also now operating against the best interests of the aerospace sector.

Yes, but with a caveat. There are not enough stakeholders at the table. Indeed I am living proof of that fact.

The field is too narrow and too narrowly focussed. At the very least we need a "small aeroplanes directorate" equivalent in the UK, or preferably still a new regulator that sits between the LAA and CAA (dubbed by me the GAA), taking care of all interests above that of the LAA and below 5700Kg. The GAA would sit outside EASA but would seek reciprocity with EASA and the FAA. The GAA should be a member of the Governance structure.