N-Reg hire uk?

[D'vay]

Hello team,
I have just completed an FAA PPL and i'm off home on monday. Have any of you kind folks any information whatsoever regarding the hire of N-Reg aircraft in Great Britain and Europe respectively. Google appears to be unable to help me. Thanks in advance
D'Vay

[2Donkeys]

Just in case you're under the impression that an FAA PPL prevents you from hiring G-reg aircraft, you need have no fear.

Your FAA PPL is a licence "rendered valid" under the ANO and is good for G-reg hire too.

2D

[Johnm]

If you have a FAA IR then you need N to exercise the privileges, but otherwise you can fly G on an FAA PPL VFR only.

See

http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=137&pagetype=70&groupid=170&faqid=208

If you have an IR then there's a very nice BE36 at Fairoaks

[2Donkeys]

John M is quite right, there are some other restrictions too, but none relevant if as you say

I have just completed an FAA PPL

[Heliplane]

When I moved back to the UK (from the USA) in 1998, I flew extensively on my FAA licences in G registered aircraft. The only restriction that I understood applied to me was that I had to remain within the UK FIR and stay day VFR (not a problem as my local fields are not lit nor do they have approaches). I have since picked up a JAA PPL (relatively easy conversion) and an IMC which gives only a bit more flexibility (trips to France, etc) but not much more. In other words, as a recreational flyer, you can probably do all of the flying you want on your FAA licence.

I found that all aeroplane hire places were very happy to hire to me with an FAA only licence although the same cannot be said for helicopters - my local helicopter outfit wanted me to have a JAA licence before they would hire to me (again, the conversion was easy).

Before you take off, it would make a lot of sense to spend a couple of hours with an instructor or a very experienced PPL to learn about the local airspace, weather and notam dissemination, r/t phraseology (bit different to the USA) and general airfield operating practices. I generally picked this up as I went along but a bit help was very useful. The first several pages of the Pooley's guide gives some very useful practical information for UK flying.

Enjoy!

[2Donkeys]

The "DAY" only restriction is often recited around these parts, but has no basis in fact. Your FAA PPL will normally permit night flying privileges, and these privileges are valid in the UK provided that
FAA currency criteria are met.

The fact that night flight is conducted substantially under IFR in the UK has no bearing on this at all.

2D

[OVC002]

I thought that ICAO PPL's were rendered valid worldwide on G reg.

So no prob's with a trip to france either.

[2Donkeys]

They are, but only under a filed difference between ICAO practice and UK practice.

ICAO calls for such licences rendered valid to be "validated" with some official document issued by the National CAA. We validate ICAO licences using the ANO and issue no letters of validation.

That might occasionally cause a misunderstanding when travelling abroad, but it doesn't limit the geographical use that an ICAO PPL can make of a G-reg aircraft.

2D

[valenii]

2Donkeys..

Although a different question, I was always under the impression that a JAR licence holder, flying an N-Reg plane was limited to the country of registration of the aircraft, say the UK in the case of most people I know.

Yet a friend of mine recently met a CAA bod at a party that told him that on a standard JAR PPL, if you fly an N-Reg aircraft, you could fly it outside UK airspace (e.g. go to France) under a reciprocal agreement of some sort, without any additional FAA paperwork.

Is this right?

Ian

[2Donkeys]

He is wrong, and the governing law is the FARs in this instance. (The governing law for who may use an aircraft is the law of the aircraft's registry).

The FARs tell us that in order to fly an N-registered aircraft you must EITHER:

Hold a valid FAA ticket; OR

Hold a ticket ISSUED in the country in which you wish to fly.

[This is contained in FAR 61.3(a)(1)]

The fly in the ointment is that whilst JAR is a common set of standards (in theory), a JAR licence is still issued by a specific state. Therefore whilst a UK-issued JAR licence is good for flying an N-reg in the UK, it is not valid for flying that aircraft in (say) France.

2D

[IO540]

Licensing issues aside, I'd bet that anyone who is renting out an N-reg in the UK is going to be a whole lot more fussy about who flies it than the average flying school. And I write with a bit of personal experience on this.

Unless somebody is keeping an N-reg as a "let people smash it on the runway and scrap it when it gets beyond repair" cash cow (the way most G-reg self fly hire / PPL training planes are kept) it is likely to be something in good condition, and most likely a "complex" and relatively well equipped aircraft.

So unless you are a high-hour pilot and completely familiar with the type and the particular avionics, expect more than one quick "checkout" flight.

[Whopity]

"Yet a friend of mine recently met a CAA bod at a party that told him that on a standard JAR PPL, if you fly an N-Reg aircraft, you could fly it outside UK airspace (e.g. go to France) under a reciprocal agreement of some sort, without any additional FAA paperwork."

Clearly the CAA bod is not familiar with FARs but then you wouldn't really expect him to be.

As far as I am aware you cannot legaly hire a N reg aircraft in the UK. Federal rules again.

[vsukpadman]

"As far as I am aware you cannot legaly hire a N reg aircraft in the UK. Federal rules again."

Where exactly is this rule? I must confess to having never heard of it, and can see no logical reason why you WOUL D be prevented from hiring an N reg is you so wish....any info appreciated!

Bill P

[englishal]

gawd knows. There are some funny rules.

The way I understand it, you cannot "Rent" an N reg in the UK in the traditional sense, you can however "dry lease" one. Same thing really, you essentially rent the aircraft dry and pay for the fuel yourself. Not sure if you have to say beforehand "I'm going to lease this aircraft for 5 hours" or just take it away and bring it back when done.

Probably something to do with the DfT......

[IO540]

I've checked this out exhaustively, in the UK and in the USA, and (while I could still be wrong) everything indicates that "dry leasing" and generally not being able to rent an N-reg in the UK are all utterly bogus. I even spoke to the DfT who confirmed that dry lease is a redherring in the private flying context.

Nevertheless, the persistence of these fairy tales is quite amazing. It must rank alongside GPS being illegal, GPS being illegal for primary navigation, MP must not exceed RPM/100 with a VP prop... :O

There are things one cannot ever do in a rented N in UK airspace (the DfT will never give Art 115 permission for anything, not even a BFR - unless of course the CFI/CFII is doing it for free) but that's beside the point.

[2Donkeys]

I too can find nothing to substantiate the view that the rental of N-registered private aircraft is inappropriate or illegal.

I suspect that it comes from a mis-reading of the rules relating to the temporary rental by airlines of N-registered airliners for operation on an AOC.

2D

[vsukpadman]

I thought that was the case (that there is nothing wrong in "renting an N reg aircraft"
Mind you given some of the "grey " areas surrounding various N reg operations, I wouldnt be surprised if someone had misinterpreted the rules

cheers

Bill P

[IO540]

Can you give examples of "grey" areas, applying to N but not applying to G, when operated in the same manner?

[bookworm]

The fact that night flight is conducted substantially under IFR in the UK has no bearing on this at all.

What's your basis for this 2D?

You're quite adamant that 61.3(a)(1) must be read literally and that a licence issued by (rather than just "rendered valid by") the state of operation is required. Doesn't 61.3(e) require an IR to conduct a flight under IFR?

[2Donkeys]

Bookworm - you are presumably bothered by the requirement under FAR 61.3(e)(1) which obligates a pilot to hold (inter alia) an instrument rating in order to be able to fly under IFR, regardless of the met. conditions.

This used to bother me too until I spent an evening recently with one of the FAA's legal counsels. He pointed me to the word "appropriate" in that particular regulation.

His guidance was this. That if the pilot is operating the aircraft in accordance with a licence issued by a foreign country, and if he is operating the aircraft in that country in accordance with the privileges of that foreign issued licence, the the "appropriateness" clause of 61.3.(e)(1) was deemed to be met.

The same would apply to a pilot flying an N-reg in cloud in the UK on the strength of a UK IMC rating - all other aspects of his UK-issued licence being valid and appropriate.

You are obviously entitled to value this advice as you see fit.

2D

[IO540]

2D, I am very glad that you met that FAA lawyer, because below is a reply I had from the FAA on the very subject.

Q: Can one use the UK IMC Rating in a U.S. registered aircraft?

A: Response (FAA Expert) - 07/06/2005 10:27 AM
The U.K. IMC rating is the equivalent of a U.S. instrument rating


Of course, the above position is the exact opposite of what has been going around everywhere for the last few years, including authoritative articles in the aviation press.

Good to see it settled. It has caused quite a few people (IMCR holders) unnecessary grief, believing they are unable to fly IFR (which includes most night flight in the UK) in their N-reg between putting it on the N and finishing off their full IR.

[bookworm]

(e) Instrument rating. No person may act as pilot in command of a civil aircraft under IFR or in weather conditions less than the minimums prescribed for VFR flight unless that person holds:
(1) The appropriate aircraft category, class, type (if required), instrument rating on that person's pilot certificate for any airplane, helicopter, or powered-lift being flown;

Seems like a very odd way to interpret the sentence, 2D. There are different flavours of FAA IR, and it seems that "appropriate" refers to that. I can see that an IMC rating might be interpreted as "an appropriate instrument rating". I find it harder to believe that no instrument qualification at all might be interpreted as "an appropriate instrument rating"

Did the counsel express an opinion on the oddity of the wording in 61.3(a)(1) which requires a foreign licence to be issued by (rather than just "rendered valid by") the country in which the aircraft is operated? It strikes me that the latitude of interpretation of "appropriate" that you cite is no less than the latitude required to make 61.3(a)(1) at least consistent with foreign law like ANO Art 26(3)(b).

[GRP]

Given our previous interpretation of that sentence this new interpretation is tricky to come to terms with. Presumably the argument is that an IMC is an appropriate instrument rating if you are flying an N reg aircraft in a country that has such a rating.
There is an element of common sense to it though if you read it as meaning that you can do in your country what your country would normally allow you to do!

Academic at this stage for me!!

Editted to say that the statement from IO540 that the IMC rating is equivalent to an IR in the eyes of the FAA is a little further than I'd go!!!

[slim_slag]

I think the 'appropriate' is there to stop people with a multi rating, but only an IR on singles, flying IFR on multis. A FAA PP certificate will include night privileges if you have undergone the required training (as most but not all do). Perhaps you could say that makes it appropriate for night flying in the UK? If your certificate is restricted to day by the FAA, it is restricted to day in the UK too. IO540's 'FAA expert' got it wrong (and it's not relevent to this thread anyway)

[IO540]

GRP

The privileges of the IMCR are limited by the ANO anyway. It isn't necessary to add the usual qualifications "UK airspace, no Class A etc" because they are implicit. I actually listed these restrictions in my comms with the FAA.

It just means the IMCR privileges in an N-reg are what they would be in a G-reg. No big deal at all.

This does not contravene anything in the FARs; one cannot *categorically* argue that an

"Instrument Meteorological Conditions Rating"

is not an

"Instrument Rating"

when clearly it IS - you can takeoff, fly and land on instruments with it, albeit with the limitations we all know about.

This is one of those areas where one could play with words and read the regs between the lines for ever. An opinion from a regulatory agency is better than that, even if some don't like it.

I have also had a reply from a certain Euro country which specifically states that only the JAA IR is acceptable for IFR in its aircraft, and that the UK IMC Rating is not valid (even, of course, as one would be considering UK airspace). Now, that sort of statement is very different!

[slim_slag]

Sorry IO540, you have got it wrong - again.

Holders of the British IMC privilege are not qualified to receive a U.S. instrument rating because the IMC privilege is
not as high a level of qualification as the instrument rating, and it confers no privileges for flights requiring compliance with IFR.

I'll let you find the authoritative source :)

Two things can be deduced from this.

1) Your FAA Expert is wrong.
2) The FAA have a different view on what IFR means. It may be IFR in the UK speak, but it isn't in FAA speak. I think that is why you can fly at night in the UK using a vanilla FAA PP certificate, the FAA don't consider it IFR so FAR 61.3(e)(1) doesn't apply.

Why not put it to the test. It is clear you don't want to descend to the low quality N reg rental fleet with their strange knobs. So go take the foreign pilot instrument proficiency test and head to your nearest FSDO with your IMCR and demand an FAA IR. Wave your email in their face and tell the inspector he is talking nonsense. See how far you get.

[IO540]

A google on the exact phrase immediately turns up

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/examiners_inspectors/8700/volume2/media/2_029_00.pdf

which contains (on page 7 of the PDF file)

(4) The British CAA may issue an instrument
meteorological conditions (IMC) rating. Holders of
the British IMC privilege are not qualified to receive a
U.S. instrument rating because the IMC privilege is
not as high a level of qualification as the instrument
rating, and it confers no privileges for flights requiring
compliance with IFR. IMC privileges can be used
only within the U.K. Therefore, a holder of the IMC
privilege is not eligible to take the Instrument-Foreign
Pilot knowledge test or be issued a U.S. instrument
rating.

most of which is an obvious statement of fact!

The sentence "confers no privileges for flights requiring compliance with IFR" is a problem, but then they immediately contradict themselves by saying "IMC privileges can be used only within the U.K" which of course includes IFR.

The latter part could easily be taken to mean to include an N-reg plane. Everything not explicitly prohibited is permitted.

Anyway, what does one take? A guidance manual for issuing piggybacks dated 19/12/2003, or a more recent emailed reply from the FAA to a question whose context was precisely worded (as I always do when writing these questions; the one-liner Q posted above is the FAA's summary) and asked if the IMCR is valid for IFR in an N-reg in UK airspace?

I am sure that searching faa.gov/library for more phrases will turn up more stuff we could pick apart.....

This type of apparent discrepancy (if indeed it is that) is well known to American pilots too. The CAA does it too; if you dig deep enough you will find a CAA flyer saying that GPS is unauthorised.