Pace & Englishal
My case for not treating this carelessly is as I wrote above.
Sure the FAA papers will be good for an N-reg under ICAO.
Sure the EASA papers will be
invalid for an N-reg under ICAO (because they do not comply with FAR 61.3, once you leave UK airspace, etc).
But that doesn't prevent the EU forcing each of its member states to implement a
national airspace requirement for the pilot(s) to have EASA papers in addition to the ICAO-mandated FAA ones.
In exactly the same way that if you fly to the airspace of the Republic of Upper Volta, they may have an airspace requirement for you to carry a dead goat in the back of the plane.
ICAO does allow this, because every signatory retains (obviously, otherwise nobody would have signed the treaty) a total sovereignity over its own airspace.
An example closer to home is the UK ADF+DME requirement for IFR in CAS, widely flouted by many planes we know about. Those planes comply with State of Registry requirements, but they fail to comply with airspace requirements.
That this is not enforced is a comfort, of course, and any prosecution would be a bit of a farce anyway once you pulled out a lawyer who has more than 2 braincells and who knows what a DME is, and who would much enjoy having the CAA wrapped in knots explaining how a DME tells you a distance to a waypoint but somehow a GPS doesn't
The ANO requires "distance measuring equipment", not a "DME". I bet the CAA doesn't even dream of having these sleeping dogs tested in court because it would show what a charade this stuff is, and anyway they love reading the endless pprune debates on it
Half the CAA is on pprune, at the office, and the other half is on Flyer.
But the fact is that if you do not meet the airspace requirement, you are not legal, and an insurer
can just tell you to go and p1ss in the wind. The insurance policy does require you to be
legal. You then have to sue him.
The fact that a law is meaningless (e.g. the "residence" test) doesn't help a whole lot. It will probably just mean that it will have to go to the High Court, which is 5 figures just to get started. Gosh, you can even get a JAA CPL/IR for that
There is a lovely laid back fishing village in Greece...
The correct way is to fight these proposals, and given the way EASA is set up (in a bunker, etc) this involves informing MEPs etc.
Democracy is EASA's achilles heel; they absolutely hate it. The whole thing is set up to use disinformation and lies, publishing massive tomes which almost nobody can decipher, and relies absolutely on the vast majority of stakeholders not knowing what is going on. Pre-internet, they would have pulled this off without anybody knowing.
If the proposals become law as currently written, we can have a fun debate on how to work with or around them. But remember that CAA, DfT and EASA people (including the top people in those organisations) are right here reading these forums.