[SystemSafety] Off Topic

[Ross Hannan - Sigma]

Tom

Although nothing has been decided yet I very much suspect that Britain will
go down the EFTA route where they remain members of EASA although are a
non-EU state (like Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland). 

Ross 

-----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety
[mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of
Tom Ferrell
Sent: 24 June 2016 21:01
To: systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Off Topic

Just a quick note from across the pond.  I am stunned that voters in the UK
have taken this action, and I fear it is a precedent for what may happen in
our own election in the fall.

Food for thought:  In terms of our actual work as engineering designees for
the FAA and occasionally certification verification designees for European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), my partner and I spend a fair amount of our
time making sure we understand and maintain currency with the regulatory
regime on both sides of the Atlantic.  While we do not always agree with
their approach to various topics, we would tell you that EASA is pretty
clear about what they expect, transparent with draft and final guidance (via
their website), and responsive in answering questions via email and phone.
Having that one-stop shop is very helpful when working an avionics or flight
control systems, especially where new and novel technology is involved.
Prior to the creation of EASA, those of us doing this job had to work with
various state agencies such as the UK CAA or the French DGAC.  Even though
these agencies operated under a loose confederation known as the Joint
Airworthiness Authorit
 ies (JAA), final decisions for any given project had to be
coordinated/agreed to by individual state representatives.  Rules varied,
interpretations varied, responsiveness and cooperation varied.  If you
subscribe to the view (as I do) that variation is a major enemy to quality
(and dare I say safety), a return to this type environment, even for just
one of the former EASA partner states (and a home to many major aerospace
companies), we are very likely going in the wrong direction where the flying
public's safety is involved.  One more note: earlier this year (literally
about two and half months ago), agreements (in work for years) were finally
struck that setup FULL bilateral recognition of certification work done here
being accepted in Europe and vice versa.  One step forward and one big step
backward...    

-----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety
[mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of
Michael J. Pont
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 3:04 PM
To: systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Off Topic


Peter,

This is a very sad day for many of us in what is (at least at present) the
UK.

Some of us perhaps deserve your "factoid" (but not all of us do).

Many of us are suffering a sense of what feels like bereavement - where do
you go when your country leaves you? 

(Only after that do you start to consider what is going to happen to your
business, your pension, etc.)

All the best,

Michael.

-----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety
[mailto:systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de] On Behalf Of
Peter Bernard Ladkin
Sent: 24 June 2016 19:43
To: systemsafety at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Off Topic

On 2016-06-24 09:42 , Andreoli, Kevin (UK) wrote:
> "As ye sow, so shall ye reap"
> 
> Hollande, Merkel and their predecessors sowed intransigence and have
reaped yesterday's vote in the UK.

Intransigence in not being ready to change the founding documents, the
Treaties of Rome and Maasstricht, on the basis of a request from one member
out of 27 signatories? I would hope so.
That's the role which founding documents are supposed to play.

In any case, if it's true that their intransigence led to yesterday's vote,
then both of them should be celebrating wildly, because they no longer even
have to listen to the request.

But the champagne corks are not popping in Paris and Berlin.

The factoid making the rounds in Bielefeld today (in and out of academic
circles) is that UK Google searches for "Brexit" remained low until late
last night, and then spiked. The conclusion people draw is that Britons
voted, and when they got home they looked up what they had just done. That
does not bode well for the tenor of exit negotiations. Neither does the
sight of British football hooligans trashing Marseille (again), shouting
"f*** you, we're out" and two weeks later having that happen.

The other conclusion being drawn is something learnt in Germany 80 years
ago, and whose current constitution expressly forbids. Don't "decide" major
political issues by referendum. You can't plan for what you'll get, voters
often don't know what they are voting for, and you have to act on it right
away. Also, referenda enable power distortion. Farage can't get elected to
parliament. But he can get the Prime Minister to resign, change the course
of Britain's economic development for at least the next twenty years, and
(wait for it) break up the Union.

According to the stats, it would not be amiss to put the result down to
selfish old people who don't care a fig about the young.

It is amiss, though to put the result down to Tory "Little Englanders", as
Martin McGuinness did and Tim Farron hinted. 44% of McGuinness's populace
voted for Brexit and obviously none of them are Tory "Little Englanders".

PBL

Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Bielefeld, Germany MoreInCommon Je suis Charlie
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319  www.rvs-bi.de






_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE