UK New Occurrence Reporting System - Replaces SRG1601/2/3

[Scotflieger]

I recently learned from Resource Group reviewing my FRCs for my brother's flight assessment that the previous CAA Occurrence Reporting system using the SRG1601 has been superceded by an online European-wide system called the 'European Aviation Reporting Portal'.

This was announced in Information Notice IN-2016/031 which I missed (https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/InformationNotice2016031.pdf). It applies to all aviation users including all Unmanned Aircraft Operators.

 

[The Editor]

I recently learned from Resource Group reviewing my FRCs for my brother's flight assessment that the previous CAA Occurrence Reporting system using the SRG1601 has been superceded by an online European-wide system called the 'European Aviation Reporting Portal'.

This was announced in Information Notice IN-2016/031 which I missed (https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/InformationNotice2016031.pdf). It applies to all aviation users including all Unmanned Aircraft Operators.

Something of course all of us hope we never have to use!
Interesting as I have just (last week) sent in my renewal and in theory I suppose they should throw it out as my MORS section still notes the use of SRG1601's.
I bet they don't read the Ops manuals though!

 

[Michael Morris]

Something of course all of us hope we never have to use!
Interesting as I have just (last week) sent in my renewal and in theory I suppose they should throw it out as my MORS section still notes the use of SRG1601's.
I bet they don't read the Ops manuals though!

Well my Ops manual went through without touching the sides with the `'`old`` MORS. I guess they have been diverted by their constant need to sharpen pencils as opposed to a focus on attention to detail.

 

[Michael Morris]

What I actually don't understand is the logic of the CAA being the party that issues the Permissions. After all, they outsource to NQE's all training and pilot competence to ensure applicants meet the standards and requirement of CAP 722. Would it also not be logical if the NQE's could issue the Permissions on behalf of the CAA as an additional step? Alternatively, the participation of the CAA in the Permissions process could be reduced to a simple administrative role and shouldn't take more than, say 5 working days. After all the NQE's are obliged to vet all the requirements of a PFAW application to ensure that it meets the CAP 722 anyway. Or perhaps, I am missing something - the need to continue with a redundant archaic practise that employs government staff and keeps the pencil manufacturers in business?