Sleep walking towards April 2014

[bestman]

My understanding is that, further to legislation adopted in 2011, pilots require both the relevant FAA and EASA licences to fly private, N registered, Europe based aircraft.

Most European countries exercised a derogation that effectively postponed this to April 2014.

Apparently this has already taken effect where commercial operations are concerned, so my question is why are people behaving as if this isn’t going to happen?

Is there a chance of a last minute ‘deal’ to keep all the N registered bizjets flying?

Does migrating onto the IOM register, or any other, improve the outlook?

Is there a belief that the rule is not going to be enforced? Where does that leave you with regard to insurance?

Are all the N reg Cirrus pilots without EASA IRs going to be limited to VFR overnight?

If you have a type rating on the FAA licence do you require it on the EASA licence?

Any thoughts much appreciated.

[ksjc]

An NBAA article from 2012 explains it, still relevant unless things have changed since then...

“Chicago Convention Article 33 explains that ICAO contracting states have to accept pilot certificates from other countries so long as each state’s pilot certificates meet the minimum standard set by ICAO,”

Here's the story...

Changes in EU Aviation Licensing Should Have Little Impact on NBAA Members | NBAA - National Business Aviation Association (http://www.nbaa.org/ops/intl/eur/20120416-changes-in-eu-aviation-licensing-should-have-little-impact-on-nbaa-members.php)

[Mike Echo]

I don't think it as simple as EASA accepting the Chicago convention which they tend to ignore as EASA is not a contracting state. They make the individual countries do the dirty work.

The CAA website has a FAQ section;
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2330/h-FAQs%20May%202012.pdf
Item 26 which states;
"Under EU regulations a validation will be required for such a pilot to fly an aircraft registered outside the EU if the operator of the aircraft is based in the EU. For Example, if the Operator of an N-Registered aircraft is based in the UK, the holder of an FAA licence will have to hold a validation issued under EU regulations by the CAA to fly an N-registered aircraft in Europe"

I have not kept track of the latest developments (if any) as it does not affect me directly. The NBAA website is only focussed on N reg aircraft visiting the EU it does not answer the case of a EU based company with N reg aircraft.

Mike Echo

[Pace]

Most European countries exercised a derogation that effectively postponed this to April 2014.

Actually very few did do that so most are flying as if post 2014 and nothing has happened.
EASA have been completing the PPL side of things and are supposed to make an announcement soon on a bilateral converting one to the other soon.
One document I saw which I promised not to reveal and had a slip up of information looks quite hopeful.
The show is not over till the fat lady sings :)

Pace

[deefer dog]

I think "sleepwalking" is an understatement. Many non EU licenced pilots are already flying Third Country Registered aircraft illegally in Europe because not all States applied for the derogations as far forward to April 2014.

However its fair to say that many don't really understand the FCL aspects of the "Basic Regulation" (EU216/2008) and even the UK CAA's advise on the matter, as per the above link, is lacking in material content.

My understanding is that, further to legislation adopted in 2011, pilots require both the relevant FAA and EASA licences to fly private, N registered, Europe based aircraft.
The legislation came into effect in April 2012. In respect of FCL it has nothing whatsoever to do with where an aircraft is "based," and the term "based" is not even mentioned in the legislative text. (Quite why the UK CAA refer to an aircraft's "base" is a mystery to me).

Most European countries exercised a derogation that effectively postponed this to April 2014.Certainly not the case. Some did postpone some parts of the legislation by applying for derogations, but one would need to check carefully which derogartions apply and which specific parts (Parts) of the legislation they relate to. Part FCL is only a fraction of it.

Is there a chance of a last minute ‘deal’ to keep all the N registered bizjets flying? Only if the legislation is repealed. It is already the law. It came into force on 8th April 2012.

Does migrating onto the IOM register, or any other, improve the outlook?For whom? I presume you refer to Part FCL and mean crew members who do not possess EU licences, but wish to fly M (or any other non European State registered) aircraft. Possibly, but the text of the legislation is quite clear, and it depends where the operator of the aircraft is resident. If the operator of a Third Country Registered aircraft, be it M, N or any other non EU register, is resident outside of the EU, then there is no requirement for the crew to have EU licences. It has nothing whatsoever to do with where the crew members reside, or even come from. N registered aircraft operated in the USA and flown by FAA licenced crew members will be unaffected, so too will M registered aircraft provided that the operator is not resident in the EU.

Is there a belief that the rule is not going to be enforced? Where does that leave you with regard to insurance?I think a lot of operators should be asking themselves the same question

[B200Drvr]

Deefer Dog, How is M reg not European? and IOM validations are completely acceptable for EU resident private operations.

The EU is going to completely clatter themselves with regards GA, they are being very greedy and very stupid with all the petty things they are bringing in, our aircraft is based in HK, we fly to Europe 5 times a year and yet had to pay an exorbitant "import" fee so that we could fly to Europe!! We should do the same in HK with the likes of Vistajet who operate illegal charters out of here, make all European reg aircraft pay an import fee. Watch how quickly the big boys get onto the policy makers!!!

[bestman]

Thanks very much for all your thoughts.

If, as it seems, the Operator's residence is the crux of the issue, rather than where the aircraft is based, how is this defined? After all, my understanding is that a US trust is required to operate a N reg aircraft, if not based in the US. Clutching at straws?

[deefer dog]

B200dvr:

Isle of Man is neither a Member State nor an associate member of the European Union. Neither is it an EASA member state. With regard to the Basic Regulation, Isle of Man is a "Third Country" as is the USA.

Isle of Man Validations are accepted by EU member States who are members of ICAO. (EASA is not an ICAO member, by the way). The validations are issued in accordance with standards and recommended practices agreed by all ICAO member states.

bestman:

If, as it seems, the Operator's residence is the crux of the issue, rather than where the aircraft is based, how is this defined? Enter EU216/2008 into a Google search and it will show at the top of the page. Atricles 4, 7, 8 and 9 are self explanatory.


After all, my understanding is that a US trust is required to operate a N reg aircraft, if not based in the US. Clutching at straws? A US based trust, US corporation or US citizen may "own" a US-registered aircraft. Aircraft "base" does not feature in the equation. Neither of the aforementioned has anything whatsoever to do with "operation" of an aircraft. Please understand that the registered owner and the operator of an aircraft may not necessarily be the same. In the case of the Cirrus that you mentioned, the owner and operator may be the same, but in the case of most private jets (for example), the owner and operator are highly likely to be two different individuals or entities.

[bestman]

So, are the pilots of 'european' aircraft, operating on the N register for convenience, toast without the equivalent EASA licence by April 2014?

[apruneuk]

As things stand it looks like the answer is Yes. The law has been passed and all member states will need to comply with it within the next year or so. Some pilots who are not dual-rated are holding out for an eleventh hour reprieve to avoid the mass grounding of Third Counrty aircraft. The reality is that it will be pretty easy for EASA licenced crew to dual rate and keep these aircraft flying but it will take considerably longer for Third Country crew to gain EASA licences. If I was flying an N-reg jet for an operator based in Europe I know what I'd be doing right now....

AP

[debiassi]

I guess there is an upside to this although sadly it looks like this is only for dual rated pilots.
My take is that there will be a major purge on anything N registered flying in the EU after April 2014, especially if the radio operator sounds like they could well be domiciled within the EU.
I personally know a number of BizJet owner/operators who fly non commercially throughout Europe.
They are in their twilight years and going back to school simply wouldnt be an option.
My take again will be they will either ignore the regulation until such a time as they are forced to account for themselves, and then probably employ the services of a dual rated pilot to sit in the left seat.

[Globalstream]

My take again will be they will either ignore the regulation until such a time as they are forced to account for themselves, and then probably employ the services of a dual rated pilot to sit in the left seat.-Debiassi

The ruling applies to all pilots domiciled within the EASA member states, regardless of seat position.

Whether EASA have the will and the teeth to enforce this ruling is another matter entirely. I would be surprised. So far, it seems they won`t and I`m sure foreign licensed pilots are quite safe insofar as license enforcement. The real issue is insurance. An insurance claim involving a non- EASA licensed crew and an EASA based aircraft... I wouldn`t want to be counting on that payout.

[moonym20]

... And what of those flying on SIC ratings? These will not be recognised by EASA.

What of professional FAA crews flying PIC in King Air's and any other TP aircraft below 12,500lbs.... TR required to fly these on EASA tickets.

Communicating with EASA and the CAA on some of the possible issues is a real nightmare at times.

:ouch:

[deefer dog]

The ruling applies to all pilots domiciled within the EASA member states, regardless of seat position. :=:ugh:

What a lot of tosh you write! Have you actually bothered to read the legislation - or even part FCL? Clearly you have not. It matters not one toss where any pilot, left or right seat, lives, is domiciled, resides or sleeps the night!!

The two pertinent aspects relate to where the "operator" of the aircraft resides, and the state of registry of the aircraft.

[Cobalt]

The law, while clearly worded, depends on the interpretation of "operator" where the aircraft is not operated under an AOC.

The aviation authorities interpret this in many ways, incorrectly including the "pilot" (Ireland, see here, point 13 (https://www.iaa.ie/pilots)), and they are the ones who will take you to court, unfortunately.

If they get it wrong, no wonder the pilot / owner / operator community get it wrong, I can't really blame them.

It becomes a bit more interesting with regard to Part OPS, where any "operator" of a twin turboprop or any jet effectively needs a mini-AOC. For anyone flying around in a privately owned Jet or King Air, a lot of money hinges on that, and I would expect "workarounds" such as special operator structures outside the EU to be created here because there is much more money at stake than for an individual pilot's licence, and they can pay for the legal advice needed.

[deefer dog]

Point well noted Cobalt. The wording of the text (in the English translation at least) is crystal clear, so it surprises me when authorities such as the Irish and UK CAA still publish misleading summaries.

Yes, definition of "operator" may cause some difficulties, but only for owner pilots of small aircraft. In the case of larger types the operator of the aircraft is required to hold "operating approvals" in order to operate, for example, in RVSM, MNPS airspace etc.

The holder of any such "operating approval" would have little difficulty, IMHO, proving that he/she/it is the operator of the aircraft, and where he/she/it resides.

[debiassi]

Ok I read the initial post and thought maybe its not specific enough.
I think its relating to FAA licence holders that are domiciled within the EU.
Now if this is the case, then im pretty sure that after 2014, legistlation will prevent them from exercising their priviliges unless they have an EASA. Equivalent licence/rating etc.
A good example would be for instance flying airways using the priviliges of an FAA IR without having the EASA equivalent.
This is the area that I think will be policed by some countries more than others but only time will tell.
There are a number of interesting conundrums im sure.

[deefer dog]

. I think its relating to FAA licence holders that are domiciled within the EU . :ugh::ugh:

Jesus, another one who has not read the legislation! It has NOTHING to do with where the crew reside.

[bestman]

Thanks for your thoughts so far.

In order help clarify the position, in some evidently muddy waters, maybe I could ask about a 'hypothetical' case...

N reg bizjet, operating under a flag of convenience, whose only presence outside Euroland is the required Delaware trust.

Captain, obviously type rated, FAA ATPL only. Copilot, SIC rating, FAA CPL/IR only. What does the post April 2014 future hold for these two?

[deefer dog]

In order help clarify the position, in some evidently muddy waters, maybe I could ask about a 'hypothetical' case...

N reg bizjet, operating under a flag of convenience, whose only presence outside Euroland is the required Delaware trust.

Captain, obviously type rated, FAA ATPL only. Copilot, SIC rating, FAA CPL/IR only. What does the post April 2014 future hold for these two? With the greatest of respect bestman, you can obviously write, so why not read the legislation and answer the question for yourself? Its written in plain, simple English!

What "flag of convenience" will an N registered aircraft be operating on? An N reg aircraft will be registered in the US. No aircraft may be placed on more than one register.

An N registered aircraft is, in respect of the legislation, a "Third Country Registration." It therefore depends, in the main, on where the "operator of the aircraft" is resident. If the operator is resident in the EU then the crew will need EU licences. By the sound of it you need to get one....do it soon!

[bestman]

Thanks again for your thoughts Deefer.

I was using the 'flag of convieniece' moniker to try to illustrate that there was no other reason for this particular aircraft to be on the N reg. In other words, no circumstances that might support the 'operator' being outside Euroland.

I have looked at the legislation, formed the same opinion as yourself, and am now, after much sweat and cash, a couple of weeks (fingers crossed) from a shiny new EASA CPL/IR.

The reason I'm canvassing views, is that there seems to be a significant body of informed opinion, that does not believe it's going to happen. Too many people, with serious vested interests, to confidently ignore.

[asdf1234]

I'm not going to paraphrase Annex 3 to the regulations, instead here is the text... I think residence is important...

A. VALIDATION OF LICENCES

General

1. A pilot licence issued in compliance with the requirements of ICAO Annex 1 by a third country may be validated by the competent authority of a Member State.
Pilots shall apply to the competent authority of the Member State where they reside or are established, or, if they are not residing in the territory of the Member States, where the operator for which they are flying or intend to fly has its principal place of business.
2. The period of validation of a licence shall not exceed 1 year, provided that the basic licence remains valid.



This period may only be extended once by the competent authority that issued the validation when, during the validation period, the pilot has applied, or is undergoing training, for the issuance of a licence in accordance with Part-FCL. This extension shall cover the period of time necessary for the licence to be issued in accordance with Part-FCL.

The holders of a licence accepted by a Member State shall exercise their privileges in accordance with the requirements stated in Part-FCL.


Pilot licences for commercial air transport and other commercial activities


3. In the case of pilot licences for commercial air transport and other commercial activities, the holder shall comply with the following requirements:
(a) complete, as a skill test, the type or class rating revalidation requirements of Part-FCL relevant to the privileges of the licence held;
(b) demonstrate that he/she has acquired knowledge of the relevant parts of Part-OPS and Part-FCL;
(c) demonstrate that he/she has acquired knowledge of English in accordance with FCL.055;
(d) hold a valid Class 1 medical certificate, issued in accordance with Part-Medical;



(e) in the case of aeroplanes, comply with the experience requirements set out in the following table: [see the actual regs, I haven't pasted the table]

[asdf1234]

Given the above in Annex 3 the only time an FAA license will be acceptable in Europe is:

1. Flying an N reg aircraft that is based outside of Europe, or
2. A non-resident FAA licensed pilot travelling to Europe to pilot a private N-REG aircraft based in Europe.

If the pilot is flying privately in an N-REG in Europe and the pilot is resident in Europe he will have to transfer his FAA license to an EASA license.

[bestman]

Thanks asdf123,

Any chance of a link?

I wonder wether the CAA will be handing out 'one year' validations to everyone that asks? And if so, will they then issue another one, if you sign up for some ground school - effectively postponing D day for another two years from April 2014?

[B222]

When this new requirement comes into force, can anybody explain to me how an EASA Authority can validate a third country licence for a third country registered aircraft. eg We have third country licenced pilots (US, Canadian) flying third country registered aircraft (Bermudan, Cayman,IOM). These pilots are currently validated by the country of register of the aircraft. As far as I am aware avalidation can only be issued by an authority for aircraft registered in their jurisdiction.

On this basis how can an EASA authority issue a validation for an aircraft that is not in their oversight>

Is there now a different type of validation being issued ??

[asdf1234]

EASA - Rulemaking Regulations (http://easa.europa.eu/regulations/regulations-structure.php)

All the various regs are here - choose the Aircrew link for PART-FCL.

ASDF

[JACQUOUILLE]

Lots of EU operators are going to lose A/C management with this " rubbish" EU law.

Most of EU based bizjet management companies are managing foreign aircraft companies ( Chinese,Russian,African, and few other countries...), employing few local pilots. If these pilots are threatened to lose their job in their own countries guess what will happen next...
This might put a lot of EASA licenced pilots to return to their own countries without a job( where there is no pilot jobs) and so EASA/EU will have create more dammage to them than protecting them... So EASA carry on stiring the ****!

[Pace]

The EASA regs are a mess and a legal mess at that! The commission and EASA are at loggerheads hence the change of leadership at EASA to help fix that conflict.

Anyway J the Third country pilot issues have been delayed by the Commission to April 2015 is likely to be delayed again and what will be on the plate then will without doubt not be what is on the plate now!

Pilot licences for commercial air transport and other commercial activities

Just as an example the red bit caused a lot of trouble and was unilaterally removed by the CAA with a new interpretation !!! Not a bad lot our CAA and wish they still regulated us independently from the EASA rubbish.

Pace

[Gulfstreamaviator]

Than when I read post1.


The general purpose of written regulations is to establish the frame work for operations.


These regulations are subject to interpretation by each member state, each operator, each owner and each crew member, as well as each poster here has their own version.
Compounded by the ability it is suggested to issue "Validations".


Just my little thought, but why not create a world aviation authority and call it JAA, or something similar.


Glf

[Pace]

Just my little thought, but why not create a world aviation authority and call it JAA, or something similar.

But then instead of EASA trying to invent the wheel at a cost of €100s of millions of EC taxpayers money they could have just copied the largest most tried and tested system of the lot called FAA and harmonised world aviation travel at the same time.

but no! high paid jobs for the boys, gold plated pension schemes and large expenses accounts at the wine bars of Brussels for the regulators and headaches and expense for the rest of us :ugh:

No wonder Europe is going down the plug hole :(

Pace

[HyFlyer]

Head of hammer brought down squarely on the nail......

[Pace]

I can advise that the commission voted for the 2015 extension, that there will very likely be a bi lateral agreement with the FAA which with their estimate will be in place within 12 months.

This is in a letter from the commission to our European Lawyers so either another extension or something very different on the plate by then!

Pace

[JACQUOUILLE]

Yes Pace ,I have the same info. They are working on a BASA "commercial licences" not sure what to expect , but hoping they will atleast reduce requirements for conversion for high time pilots .

Let's see ...

J

[Pace]

JAQ

Not sure where your info is from but mine is an official response from the Commission which I am reluctant to post here.
Reading between the lines the problem is with third country licence holders (broad brush not FAA) meeting certain standards if European based.
Two ways of achieving that which are to look at individuals which is not practical or an acceptance of certain standards through a blanket BASA with that country.
the FAA with its proven safety standards should not be a problem and as such the focus would be on differences i.e. Air law and a certain control over those aircraft based in Europe. Both which can be achieved without resort to dual licensing.
at a guess an Air law exam, maybe a flight test and some agreed legal control over naughty boys and girls flying N reg in Europe.
i most certainly did not get the impression of an expensive dual licence requirement or that a BASA was not expected later than 12 months hence.

Pace

[JACQUOUILLE]

My sources come from EASA , but are not official "yet".
Good news is P. Ky seems to be more open minded on how EU aviation has to change than Goudou ...
IAOPA relates the extension up to April 2015 in one of their latest news.

J