FAA IR in private turboprop airplane

[winguru]

Hey guys lets see if i can get any reliable info on this, so i can work a way around.

Lets say a validated faa private, wants to get a ir rating in the plane he just bought wich happens to be a turboprop single engine, 6 seats, complex, high performance.

He completed bfr, got a complex and high performance endorsment, and wants to hire a instructor who is a airline pilot and faa examiner, never flew the airplane but its not a problem, he can fly it with no problem.

Now this would be done in FAA land, this means you need a visa and a tsa.

Is this possible at all, the guy has a student visa for a flight school, but no tsa, yet.

Will it be possible to get a TSA on a turboprop, do the ir rating with the school instructor/faa examiner (so you are linked to the student visa).

And be able to do all this without a instruction insurance, i dont think anyone will insure the instructor, because he doesnt have any hours on type.
The plane will have all documents, i just dont know if the faa asks it to be insured for instruction also.

Thank you

[youngskywalker]

So who would be insured?! The student won't have any hours on type either! Sounds a bit dodgy to me!

[S-Works]

When you say a 'validated' rating do you mean a 61.75 certificate?

If you have a 61.75 certificate based on a JAA licence, and you want to fly a type that requires a type rating (all turboprops require a TR under JAR) then you will need the type on the underlying licence as well.

[winguru]

not a jar ppl

and the intention is to get a standalone faa ir in turboprop

If no insurance is required then uninsured shall it be, my life is worth more.
Im not aware of insurance in usa, in another country, its in the owner name, either he is a pilot or not, he his responsable for the acft, and determines who flys it. For example if he has freelance pilots, they wont have a chance of havin insurance, for his acft.

FAA im not aware

[S-Works]

and the intention is to get a standalone faa ir in turboprop

You will need a standalone private certificate as well. You cant fly an aircraft that requires a type rating on the underlying licence on a 61.75 certificate.

Do you have a 61.75 certificate based on an ICAO licence? If so what is the underlying ICAO licence?

[IO540]

I cannot see why one could not do a standalone FAA PPL/IR in a turboprop.

Under 12500lb, no Type Rating is required under FAA rules unless specifically required (any such cases?) or it is a turboJET which this isn't.

The practicalities will be something else. One would start flying on a U.S. Student Pilot Certificate and one's solo flights would be done on that. Legalities aside, I would do some serious "due diligence" before going down this route because one could find not many instructors / schools are willing to do this.

However, in the USA, one can do one's PPL/IR (or even an ATP) totally with freelance instructors and examiners, and that would probably be the preferred route in this case. OTOH that isn't going to be so easy to arrange for a European going to the USA, where he starts off knowing exactly nobody...

Here in the UK, I looked into (for no particular reason) the possibility of doing a PPL in a TB20 (a "complex" piston single!) and no school would touch it with a bargepole. OTOH there are schools elsewhere in the world which teach the PPL in TB20s, and there is nothing difficult about it.

Practically, there is going to be a helluva learning curve compared to doing it in a Cessna 150 :)

[172driver]

Other than the issue of underlying TR, there is an outfit in Switzerland and France who do exactly what you want, if I understand your Q correctly. It was mentioned in a different thread here recently, check this (http://www.orbifly.com/index.php?lang=ENG) out.

[mm_flynn]

I don't believe (but haven't recently checked) there is any mandatory insurance requirement in the USA for private aircraft operation. HOWEVER, the USA is the litigation capital of the world, so operating an uninsured expensive aircraft would be madness. Also anyone who has an interest in the aircraft (i.e. the trust company, lender, etc.) will certainly demand insurance.

The insurance company will almost certainly demand a high minimum PIC time, a type specific course (i.e. FlightSafety type course) and a certain minimum number of hours supervised by a pilot (could be instructor or 'just' an ATPL with significant time on type). This is one of the reasons a type rating is less important in the US - you wind up with nearly the same training due to the insurance requirements!

[englishal]

Under 12500lb
Under 12501 lbs ;)

You could probably do most of the training for the PPL & IR in the TP but I don't reckon you'd be able to do the solo elements. I guess you could insure your ATPL mate as PIC and he could carry out the dual training no problem. As pointed out though you are restricted to the JAA (or other ICAO) license privileges if using an FAA "based on" as the basis and if the other place requires a type rating, then I assume you'd need one too.

I'd just do the FAA PPL flight test first in say a PA28/ Cirrus or something, then once you have that you can fly the SET as PIC and do the IR.

INsurance...hmm...tricky. You'd probably get it if doing a certain amount dual in the aeroplane, or a Factory FITS Training course , but it may cost a lot. what is this Turbo Prop?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Winguru. If the owner has enough money to buy a personal T-Prop, than he or she has enough money to do the training properly. As I understand from your first post the owner allready has an FAA PPL and wants to do the IR and type training. All the insurance issues go away if you send the high time guy you want to do the instruction to SIMCOM or FS to do the Type course, pay for 10 hours or so of LOE for him with a instructor with lots of time on type and then he can start the training of the PPL. For this catagory of aircraft proper type training, including simulator training, is not optional, if you are to truely understand the aircraft and how to properly fly it.

[winguru]

Hi,

Its possible, the plane doesnt need a type, you just need a complex and high performance endorsment.

Pilot is low time, faa ppl, and just wants to get the ir in a TP.

The plane is not going to be flying in US, its being taken to a foreign country, and being flown there with a PP/IR in FAA registry until its passed to national.

Contacted flightschoool, main issue is insurance for training. I think that if a instructor is insurance aprooved, wich they are, why the pilot in training should also need to have a insurance. The instructor is the person responsible.

Has the plane is not bought yet, probably we can get a insurance in the instructor name, that allows him to fly it in USA and that allows him to instruct.

So now we would have a pilot(the instructor) that is able to ferry while in USA and instruct, and who is student doesnt matter.

After the instrument rating, "student" his ready to ferry it, the owner coming along, outside of US land, no insurance needed.

Now to get insurance with foreign country is another deal.

[mm_flynn]

Lets see if we have the facts straight

The aircraft is going to be purchased in the US
It is going to be purchased by - A US Citizen? A Trust? A US Corp?
The pilot is a low time FAA PPL (and is also the 'owner')
The aircraft will be moved to another country (and then eventually re-registered) after the owner/'pilot' gets his IR
The training organisation requires the aircraft to be insured?
The insurance company has agreed to insure the instructor as pilot and to use the aircraft for training of others

Overall this seems like a bad idea from an owner/pilot with more money than sense.

Get an IR in a 'simple' complex aircraft (ie. injected, retractable gear, variable pitch) so you are going slow, not spending too much money while learning the art of instrument flying. Then go to FlightSafety or SimCom and learn how to fly the turbine and get used to the issues of icing, FL250 descents, higher speeds, the value of Beta, maybe even pressurisation.

[winguru]

Forgot to mention, found a "executive" flighschool, wich has flight instructor, that is insured for meridian, so should be good for insurance, for visas (that require the instrument rating to be in the school, where your current i20 is) and for TSA

2 - Purchase by foreign

The foreing pilot knows how to fly instrument, doesnt have a rating though,
The instructor has alot of hours in meridians.

Idea is to combine both.
Giving experience hours in the airplane, a instrument rating, and all the diferences training (pressurization, icing)

FS and SIMCom very good, but not the only way to learn

Also its not that much diference to do the instrument in the private TP airplane than a cirrus, and the cirrus wont make you ready to fly the TP.

Seems fine for me.

Might consider going to FS or SIMCOM before the IR training. For diferences training. If instructor feels its better to do so.

[mm_flynn]

I think you biggest problem is going to be buying the aircraft! I am pretty sure it is not possible for a non-resident foreigner to own directly an N-reg aircraft.

I seriously doubt a low time PPL 'knows how to fly instruments' - unless you have forgotten to tell us that he has high time on his Air Force ticket and has just recently applied for his PPL.

However, if he does actually know how to fly instruments, that would imply he has some logged time and some instruction. If he is just knocking off the rating 15 hours instruction in a 172 and the test and its job done for maybe $2000. You may even be able to get by with only 3 hours (depending on the qualifications of the person who did the original instructing).

If your instructor is a high time Meridian pilot and an instructor, then there should be only a limited issue getting insurance. Sometimes people find it a hassle to get US insurance if they are not resident (and you typically will have to buy a years cover and then cancel it after 6 months). It may also be a bit of a challenge to get insurance to instruct for two non-resident pilots

[IO540]

I am pretty sure it is not possible for a non-resident foreigner to own directly an N-reg aircraft.

I am sure anyone can own an N-reg airframe.

He just can't fly it because the CofA is invalid :)

So, basically, he can sit in the cockpit, connect up external power, and play with the knobs :)

And any half decent turboprop will have more than a few knobs :)

[winguru]

Hum, let me understand something

You are saying that a foreign that buys a N aircraft for private use wont get a certificate of airworthiness (CofA)?

Enligten me please

[mm_flynn]

To register an aircraft on the American registry the aircraft owner must be either a US Citizen (natural person, body corporate, trust) or a Resident Alien (or technically a foreign controlled corporation if the aircraft spends 60% of its flight hours per year in the US and the foreign corporation lodges a declaration to that effect - but this is not relevant to you).

An un-registered aircraft is not legally airworthy.

Ergo, as IO said you can't legally operate (or as I said, you can't own it) depending on your perspective.

Which is why I asked who was buying it - on the assumption it was not going to be just some dodgy mates but a reasonably defined structure - that would not take unreasonable risks with their airplane - because as a foreigner operating on the US reg - it is not your airplane (you may be the beneficial owner but not the actual owner).

[englishal]

If the FAA PPL is a FULL PPL, i.e. not based on a foreign one, then no Type Rating required. If someone will insure you to fly it then it can be flown VFR by the low houred PPL (assuming complex, high performance and high altitude endorsements are signed off). If instructor instructing the owner in own aircraft, e.g. carry out IR training, conversion training, you name it, no problem. You don't need special "FBO" insurance to have an instructor train you in your own aeroplane - many insurance policies cover "instructors" anyway, mine does, so I can just pick up an FI and say "train me" and they are automatically covered. You could name them on the policy if you wanted too...

Would be a good way to train to do it on a ferry flight somewhere.

Do Piper do a factory training course? That might ease insurance

[winguru]

probably i made you think i was going to register it in USA, and then do IR rating

The picture is:

1 - Aircraft will be bought in USA with a N reg.
I dont see any problem with this.

EU citizens, that are not USA citizens, buy aircraft in USA and have them in Europe, and has CofA, insurance and everything.
_____________________________________________

2 - After being bought, pilot needs training on it, and FAA IR Rating. By this time will have FAA PPL standalone, in c172 for example. (flight test, and writen , medical needed, based on validation)

Then wants to combine both diference training with a FAA IR rating.
Already has IR experience, should make it in minimuns

And has JAA ATPL theory, and other foreign CPL/IR theory. Wich both are superior to FAA IR theory.
_____________________________________________

3 - Is finding as school with instructor that has meridian experience, that can foreign students, TSA aproval.

Insurance, will have to be in instructor name, foreign owner (non - pilot) and foreign pilot dont qualify.

After having time in the plane in the meridian, diferences training, and a IR rating, still wont meet US insurance requierements to fly in USA, due to low PIC time.

By this time is leaving USA dont need no more insurance for USA

Being capable of flying IFR, will fly it to foreign country, keep flying it there with N reg until it changes to national foreign.
Foreign insurance will insure aircraft, in national soil.

So the only time it will be without insurance, is if the foreign insurance wont cover the ferry flight, depending on the owner it will have a meridian ferry pilot to meet ferry flight FAA insurance requirements

Correct me and some advice

EDIT: thats the idea, in the ferry flights in USA try go get most of diferences and IR training, (before picking up the airplane will have sim sessions, to review the aproaches, has part of ir syllabus), and , then just the remaining IR syllabus requirements in the flight school airport.

Owner might want to do some USA tourism flying, it can count towards the rating also, although im not shure if he wants to fly to canada or caribbean with will count has ir rating training

[IO540]

An N-reg has to be continuously owned by a US citizen.

[winguru]

I have seen lots of non US citizens owning N reg.
The aircraft are air worthy, insured, etc..

[Charley]

I have seen lots of non US citizens owning N reg.

Are you sure? Really sure?

Because I have to agree with IO and others; foreign nationals, unless resident, are not normally permitted ownership of an N-registered aircraft. Normally, they are owned by a US-registered Trust Company, of which the 'owner' that you see is a benefactor.

That's certainly how it works with the N-registered aircraft that I fly.

Previously, you also said that the aircraft is already N-registered and that you won't be re-registering it. Bear in mind that FAA Certificates of Registration are issued with the registrant's name and address. In other words, if you buy it, you must re-register it, even if you use the same tail number.

That's how I understand it. E&OE, of course.

[mm_flynn]

Winguru,

You are mistaken. There are lots of N-reg aircraft in Europe that Europeans have paid for. However, they don't own the aircraft. Most of these are owned by a US Citizen Trust - this is a legal entity that is in fact a US Citizen (however it is not a real single individual). The Trust has a person (or persons) who are the Trustees and these people own the aircraft for the benefit of someone else (the European who you think owns the N-reg at your local airport). It is a bit of an odd concept to not actually 'own' your aircraft, but it works.

The key thing from your perspective is there is a US Citizen real person who owns your aircraft (the Trustee) and if you kill someone he is going to be sued, so you can be sure he will require you to fully indemnify him against this exposure and will want you to have proper insurance. So there will be none of this 'I'll be dead so it doesn't matter if I have no insurance' logic.

I would strongly recommend you don't try and short cut the system. There is a well defined right way to do this.

[winguru]

Hum, that´s crazy.

I will ask a importer in the country where the plane is being taken.

Also there is only one other model of this airplane there, i will ask them.
They have been on a N reg for some months now, it takes long time for homologation/registry transfer to work in new models overthere.


Also will ask the aircraft seller to see what can be done in terms of insurance.


So from what i see now the problem is not getting a IR rating insurance, the problem is being able to insured with low hour FAA PPL IR after the rating and operate in the other country.

I will ask around, thank you for the info

[IO540]

as a NON US Citizen cannot purchase a N reg aircraft in your own name

AFAIK he can purchase one, and own it, but it cannot be flown.

[youngskywalker]

You would seriously struggle at simcom without an instrument rating and plenty recent experience. My last company sent me to simcom for the king air 200 type course, all the flying was on instruments and the hardest i've yet experienced. In fact i'm not even sure if simcom or flightsafety etc would accept a pilot without an IR.

[mm_flynn]

winguru,

A summary for you based on the following facts

You intend to purchase an N-registered aircraft and operate it for a period of time on the N-reg (both in the US and overseas
Your pilot does not have adequate time to be insurable in the US
Your pilot has a foregin PPL, some instrument instruction (if by an IR instructor this should count towards his 15 hours)
Has some instrument time (which also counts towarrds the 40 hours total)
You imply will have a based on licence (note - it is not that much more work to get a standalone and you can probably knock off some instrument time while doing it)
You have found a US school that will allow your chosen instructor to train for the IR and type checkout
Your chosen instructor is insurable in the US to operate and train in a Meridian


Assuming the above is correct, you

MUST purchase the aircraft with a proper structure (normally a Trust). THIS IS NOT AN OPTION, the aircraft is not legally registered if it is not owned by a US Citizen. All countries will prosecute you for operating an unregistered aircraft if you do not do this correctly.
You MUST comply with any underlying restriction in your PPL upon whcih you base your FAA PPL. In the case of the JAA PPLs this means (I believe) that you can not operate the Meridan without a type rating - and the fact you have a based on FAA PPL does not remove this restriction. Your FAA based on PPL does not give any additional privileges over your foreign PPL.
Subject to a legally registered aircraft, your instructor being a CFII, TSA, VISA, insurance as stated above, you can do the IR and type sepecific training together.
It is worth the owner considering the following - Pilots of this class of aircraft that have neither a type rating nor FS/SimCom type mandatory insurance training kill themselves at a disproportionate rate
Your experienced instructor (assuming he has ferry experience) shoud be able to be insured for the crossing so that should not be an issue

[BillieBob]

In the case of the JAA PPLs this means (I believe) that you can not operate the Meridan without a type ratingThis is correct. Whilst not all SET aeroplanes need a type rating under JARs, the PA46 does and there are not many JAA TRTOs that have an approved course on the type (only one in the UK AFAIK)

[flyingfemme]

Winguru - you said, "I'll ask around".

You have. There are plenty of people here who have done (and still do) what you are asking about. The advice you have been given is very good. Not to mention free.

At the moment neither you, nor your mate, have the knowledge necessary to do what you want to do. Engage a professional (get decent recommendations) or your mate may lose a serious amount of money.

1. You need a trust company to own (that is, register with the FAA) an N reg aircraft. Trust me - I do it.

2. Insurance is generally purchased in the area of aircraft residency. For you that would be Europe. No American insurer will touch you at any sensible price. An annual policy, for Europe, can be bought with a ferry/purchase add on.

3. Your mate needs an FAA standalone PPL with complex and high performance signoffs to fly a Meridian. Once he has that he can do the turbine and IR training - there are quite a few specialist "schools" in the US that can do that in his aircraft. Google is your friend and Piper should be able to help identify good ones. Don't discount sim training for the initial turbine stuff; it's cheaper and much better for emergency drills. Once you can manage the turbine then you can add the instruments. Or vice versa if he does an IR in a piston first.

4. Buying an N reg aircraft without the proper procedures will leave your mate with a very expensive metal statue and more expense to get it flying again. When a non-qualifying person/organisation buys an N reg aircraft the paperwork filed with the FAA for change of ownership will trigger an automatic de-registration. If it flies after that you are illegal and uninsured. Getting back on the register may not be cheap.

5. You need insurance. No school worth the name will instruct without adequate insurance and a trans-atlantic ferry flight needs specific insurance provisions. Not to mention EC785/2004 once you hit the EU boundary.

6. FAA flight training does not have to happen in the 48 contiguous. If you will be flying this side of the pond then some of your training needs to be here. Procedures are VERY different.

7. Don't forget the import. The letters on the side have no bearing on the VAT status of aircraft flying in Europe. You've missed the cutoff for the "cheap" Danish import route.

8. Changing the letter on the side of an aircraft can be a very long, and expensive, process. You need to have the maintenance organisation in place before you buy to make sure that you are not buying something stupid. See point 4 for possible outcome. Even if it goes well the aircraft will be grounded for the duration - are you sure that you need to change?

[S-Works]

This is correct. Whilst not all SET aeroplanes need a type rating under JARs, the PA46 does and there are not many JAA TRTOs that have an approved course on the type (only one in the UK AFAIK)

I am just in the process of adding the PA46 to our TRTO approval.

[RatherBeFlying]

Last year a Meridian in Canada lost control at high altitude and crashed. A number of others including the Malibu have suffered similar demises.

[IO540]

Last year a Meridian in Canada lost control at high altitude and crashed. A number of others including the Malibu have suffered similar demises.

Many 747s have crashed too.

[Charley]

Winguru -- if you're still checking this, there's a lot of good information here. Flyingfemme in particular has summarised things very well.

Although not relevant to operating the Meridian, if your friend ever decides to buy something else that will fly above 25,000ft, his pilot will need the 'pressurised aircraft' sign-off too, i.e. endorsements for FAR §61.31(e), (f) and (g). It's something that once caught out an old colleague of mine after he switched between variants of the same aircraft family -- his original one being certificated to 25,000 feet, and the newer one to 31,000.

Not applicable in your case {to the Meridian}, but thought I'd mention it for completeness for anyone who might bring up this thread in the future.

[DLT1939]

6. FAA flight training does not have to happen in the 48 contiguous. If you will be flying this side of the pond then some of your training needs to be here. Procedures are VERY different.


Just to add that if you are undertaking flying training in the UK in a foreign registered aircraft you will also need the permission of the Secretary of State for Transport under Article 225 Air Navigation Order 2009.

[IO540]

True, but only if the instructor is getting paid, and is getting paid for the flight, specifically getting paid for the portion of the flight which is logged as training within UK airspace.

[IO540]

and even if the N reg is overseas and the student is training towards an FAA/IR, he/she will still require TSA security clearance.

What determines the "towards" bit?

IMHO, this cannot ever be determined if the flight is some ad hoc flight which just happens to end up in the logbook whose content is later used towards the FAA IR.

Especially if done with an instructor who has no FAA instructor qualifications, or does have those but has non-FAA ones also.

[IO540]

They wish to receive flight training from an FAA-certificated facility, provider, or instructor that could lead to an FAA rating whether in the U.S. or abroad

IMHO that is meaningless. Take a dual-rated instructor (FAA CFII & JAA IRI, say) doing a training flight in a G-reg plane. No way is a TSA approval needed; there are many such instructors working every day, in the JAA scene. Nobody can control whether one of those flights ends up being used towards an FAA IR one day.

Before any FAA Examiner/DPE will conduct the Test, he/she will want to see TSA approval had been granted.

Not, IME, ever, on flights done in the variously distant past. He might well enquire regarding the 3 hours you did in the 60 days before the checkride... and I am referring to US based FAA examiners here only.

[IO540]

I disagree on the practicality of it, SoCal.

You may like to read my post again, but let me give you another example:

In 2003 I did a 250nm airways flight, in a G-reg plane, with a dual rated instructor. It is logged as a 250nm IFR flight, with 3 approaches (2 x T&G, 1 landing) and the approaches are all of different types.

In 2010 I go to the USA to do the FAA IR.

Are you saying the US based DPE is going to enquire the bona fides of that 2003 instructor? Especially given the G-XXXX tail number in my logbook?

[englishal]

In 2010 I go to the USA to do the FAA IR.
Ha, caught you, what is your name?!...Walter Mitty :ok:

In my very humble experience, TSA is about as much use as, and as efficient as a chocolate tea pot..........

[IO540]

but the FAA Instructor who signed off that you were in fact ready for the Flight Test and who would have required the 3 hours to be completed prior to that test would have required that a TSA clearance had been completed.That I agree with, for him - not least because the last few hours, done typically within weeks of the checkride and resulting in the FAA instructor's signoff, is rather obvious :)

But that is a world apart from

They wish to receive flight training from an FAA-certificated facility, provider, or instructor that could lead to an FAA rating whether in the U.S. or abroad.which, taken literally, is completely unworkable and must have been written by somebody without a clue about the way flight training works, and without a clue about the very generous FAA rules on acceptability of training in other ICAO countries.

For starters, most UK instructors from a few years ago are not "around" because they got an airline job / moved away /etc. And even when you have traced him/her, verifying his then qualifications/approvals is next to impossible. Funnily enough, my main PPL instructor vanished without trace (honestly) following some "events" at the school he ran... :)

Like a lot of flight time logging, most logbook entries have to be taken on trust otherwise the system would be unworkable. Take some ATPL (JAA or FAA) candidate; is somebody going to go through his logbooks and check all 1500hrs against airport movement logs?

[DLT1939]

Just to add that if you are undertaking flying training in the UK in a foreign registered aircraft you will also need the permission of the Secretary of State for Transport under Article 225 Air Navigation Order 2009.

True, but only if the instructor is getting paid, and is getting paid for the flight, specifically getting paid for the portion of the flight which is logged as training within UK airspace

Also true, but Article 225 permission easily obtained. Applied to DfT for renewal of our permit by fax at 16.00 on Feb 18 and received it by fax at 09.30 the following day. Nice to be able to compliment a regulator on being efficient!

[englishal]

DLT, thanks for the info. Could you possibly give me details of who to contact please? Our aeroplane is going onto the N reg and the co-owner will be doing his IR in it. While the FAA CFII is a friend of mine and would do it for free (the flight portion anyway ;)) it wouldbe nice to have proper permission from the Dft to cover all bases....

Cheers

[IO540]

Yes, the DfT are very good with this. And it's free.

There are limits - from memory you have to be an owner or one of a max 4 owners, or (if ltd co owned) one of a max 4 Directors. But I have known of approvals being granted for more remote scenarios. For training purposes only, this is...

DfT Minster House (http://www.dft.gov.uk/contact)

These permits were ignored (and unenforced) before c. 2005 but since then they have seemingly been keeping tabs on the stuff.

[englishal]

Great, thanks :ok:

[DLT1939]

Here is the specific link. It refers to Article 140 ANO 2005 which is now Article 225 ANO 2009.
Aviation Permits - flying training using foreign registered aircraft in the UK (http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/aviation/aviationpermits/furtherinfo/foreignregaircrafttraining/)

[IO540]

225. An aircraft registered in a Contracting State other than the United Kingdom, or in a foreign country, must not fly over the United Kingdom for the purpose of aerial photography or aerial survey (whether or not valuable consideration is given or promised for the flight or the purpose of the flight) or for the purpose of any other form of aerial work unless—
(a) it has the permission of the Secretary of State granted under this article to the operator or the charterer of the aircraft; and
(b) it complies with any conditions to which that permission may be subject.

Am I right that the wording has been substantially changed since Art 140? The effect is the same though, because "aerial work" is still there.

[Islander2]

Am I right that the wording has been substantially changed since Art 140?
No, the meaning is unaltered with only minor wording changes to comply with the new Euro-legalese drafting standards.

[englishal]

Thanks for the links.....

[flybymike]

So an Englishman in a foreign registered aircraft may not take photographs, but a foreigner in a UK registered aircraft may do so.

That's fine then.

[IO540]

Yes, it's quite funny :)

I don't know whether the emphasis on photography is a consequence of the supposedly extensive "abuse" of the aerial work rules by people taking commissioned aerial pics on a PPL*, or a a wish to implement some ICAO clauses which allow overflight but not photography.

AFAIK it is still illegal to overfly say Germany and take photos :)

*most of which will be in a G-reg anyway...

[DLT1939]

Someone told me it dates back a long time...to the war years.

[IO540]

Well, yes, I think Germany would have got a bit funny about it if you popped over during the war years and started taking photos :)

[BillieBob]

Ah yes, the oldies but goodies:

Hotel Receptionist: Have you visited Hamburg before?

Potential Guest: Yes, in 1940, but we didn't stop.

[IO540]

I think the "more established" form of that one is a BA pilot who lands at Berlin and gets lost taxiing, and is asked "have you never been here before"; he replies along the lines of "yes, 1942, but didn't land" :)