EASA N reg and AOPA Latest

[iwrbf]

Hi,

FYI - german magazine PilotundFlugzeug (Plane and Pilot) with an IMHO very interesting essay/letter:

Pilot und Flugzeug - Aktuelles - The European Regulators dismal safety-record on General Aviation, and why EASA doesn't do a thing about it

Kind regards,
Peter

[Turban]

Absolutely

[ITFC1]

Well on the medical front, last year i had heart surgery, and can't get my FAA Medical back, but i got my JAA Class One back very quickly.

So from my experience i dont see how flying on the FAA medical is more of a safety issue.

[RVR800]

Excellent

Though the German article was spot on: very "evidence-based" and about focussing on action to achieve the aim of regulation which is not about protectionism but should be about saving life;

Unfortunately these guys have forgotten that

[deefer dog]

latest news from AOPA

Dear Fellow Pilot,

As you might already be aware, EASA is acting against foreign licensed pilots operating third country aircraft based in the European Union.

On 14th October, the EASA proposal that would have dramatically hurt the N- Reg community and the whole of European General Aviation was rejected by the European Commission.

This is a great battle that we fought, but this attack has raised the need to organize our community in Europe, and more especially to gather our forces for the next battle in December.

This is why several associations will be created for this urgent short-term action, in partnership with the AOPA :

[Pace]

This has been shelved for the time being which will at least allow time to create a better defense of N reg in Europe rather than as said EASA trying to slip this in on the sly.

One thing that is apparent is that regulating for regulatings sake does not equal improved safety which should be the basis of all aviation regulations.
It is not just N reg which is threatened by EASA but anyone in European aviation who are having to pay for this self indulgent group.

If it aint broke dont fix it but if EASA do not create something to fix how do they justify their own employment and there lies the problem we all end up paying for their expensive meddling N reg and JAA aviation.

Pace

[HS125]

I think the comments above are very perceptive, The key point is that this is simply shelved and has not in any way gone away.

We all need to keep up the pressure on the issue between now and it's review in December.

[proudprivate]

Well on the medical front, last year i had heart surgery, and can't get my FAA Medical back, but i got my JAA Class One back very quickly.

So from my experience i dont see how flying on the FAA medical is more of a safety issue.

"The medical" is a very controversial issue in Europe. I think JAA experts such as Prof Bagshaw had a genuine interest to go over all possible pathologies and condititions and relate them to aviation. So far so good.

Then the legal drafters came into action, turning almost any condition that "can affect flight safety" into a disqualifying paragraph. The reason for this modus operandi is a well known phenomenon : when you ask a committee about a policy stance, the strictest possible interpretation emerges as a concensus. This has occured in aviation medicine, but it works just as well in evironmental safety procedures, competition law, wherever. These committees have no incentive to be reasonable. On the contrary, a medical committee can only be found fault if they omit or neglect to consider a disqualifying condition. In addition, a lot of CAA's are very anti-GA, (ab-)using the medical as a restriction device, which is why there is nothing foreseen like a third class medical. Add to that the Airlines' lobby to "keep their airspace free", with little organised counterweight from private pilot organisations.

This was then turned into law, leaving very little discretion to the medical boards of the individual civil aviation authorities, and no generalised system of individual case revision as we they have in the United States. Instead, disqualified candidates are facing costly and lenghty appeals.

Overall, I believe the FAA system is more lenient than the JAR as regards medical certification (exceptions like the one stated above notwithstanding). I think we need a third class medical in Europe that allows the excercise of PPL privileges commensurate with the risks involved. I also believe that whatever the class medical we are talking about, grounds for disqualification should be motivated by proper statistical evidence and backed up by a proper appeals procedure, including "in flight" examinations or "statements of demonstrated ability".

I know at least 3 pilots who continue to fly N reg, as EU citizens, on FAA simply because they cant get their medical renewed in EU...

so no safety issues then??

Indeed, no safety issues, simply because certain disqualifications under EASA have NO STATISTICAL BACKING WHATSOEVER. Indeed, if an FAA medical were doubtful, Europe should immediately blacklist all American Airline Companies from flying into EU airspace.

[BigGrecian]

If it were cheaper to run a JAA registered aircraft in the USA and operaters started doing so, the Americans would never put up with it.

Why should we?

[Thomascl605]

Big Grecian Cr*p

To Big Grecian,

Your posting is utter rubbish !

I don't think that the Yanks would care less if there were a few biz jets operating under JAA and registered in a JAA state, but being based in the US.

Oh, wait a minute, it's already happening ! There are a few that I know of already which are based in the US, and have been for some time.

Not a problem for them, so why is it an issue in Europe ?

You would have to be brain dead to make an issue out of non EU reg Aircraft being based in Europe. It hasn't caused any problems (safety, or otherwise) for the last 20 years or so at least.

[Thomascl605]

Rubbish !

EASA have basically stated that they don't believe that a non EU licence /IR etc is as safe as their JAA counterpart. They are of course talking complete tosh, and as we all know they have ZERO evidence to back up their futile claims.

If you are talking about abiding by the local Country laws then I really don't see your point.

Are you really saying that in order to utilise your flying qualifications in any other Country than the one that you train in, therefore you have to start training from scratch in the Country that you wish to work in ???
Oh, and I guess that also rules out a validation too ?

If that was the case then if Pilot Blogs wishes to take his FAA / JAA licence and work for Emirates for example, then he / she has to start over and pass the local UAE Instrument Rating and ATPL from scratch. Somehow this wouldn't work would it ? Are we really becoming this stupid ?

If we're talking about flags of convenience etc, I really couldn't care less. Do you have any idea for example, how many billions of $,£,Euros etc are salted away by Companies in say the Cayman Islands etc ? It makes your point look miniscule by comparison. Oh, and by the way these people don't just own N reg, or non EU reg jets, many of these people / companies that salt away billions have jets on the EU register too. Many also own yachts, some also on 'flags of convenience' as you put it.

So what, big deal, I couldn't care less. I just FLY, and if I'm being told that my non EU IR isn't allowed any more in Europe, just because of domicile then my view is that the people proposing this nonsense can GET STUFFED !

Either that or they would need to ban every Pilot that flies into and out of Europe with non EU licences on a daily basis.

That's not going to happen.

[stephenwilliams40]

Has anyone seen or drafted a template letter containing the facts and basis for protest against this proposed EASA regulation in a format that can be sent to ones local Member of European Parliament? If so then please paste up a link to enable us all to use our MEP to peruse the matter and such a template would save me some time in drafting.

[Thomascl605]

EU Aircraft based in the US

And another thing So Cal App, I'll give one example of an EU registered Aircraft (737) that was based in the US with no problems for 11 YEARS ! It was on the Irish EI reg. I'll dig out the reg details and post it later if anyone's interested.

A futher example would be the Dash 8 Aircraft that flew for US Express (EI-CHP) etc, based in the US operating domestic routes, eg IAD-LGA.

I don't recall any bunches of whinging beaurocrats from Stateside complaining about so called 'safety' issues when that happened. And why should they ? And why should EASA complain when the opposite is happening here ? Sadly, because the EU is becoming a Stalin like Dictatorship

[Thomascl605]

Socal,

No, actually the evidence I have states that the EI reg 737 was from an Irish company, piloted by EU licenced crews in the US. Not that different I would imagine than from a while back when EU licenced crews flew EU licenced jets in Canada on a recipricol agreement.

Bit of a difference you say, no I say, the principle is EXACTLY the same. No problem for the US (and Canada) why is it now a problem for the EU ?

Your tax trivia has been torn apart by solid knowledge from postings for the same titled thread as this on the Private forum. You may want to read upon it.

You spew out almost the same posting as before with your comments about cheap IR's ?

Are you saying that cheap is inferior then ? Where is your evidence for this as the stats say otherwise.

On that issue if a Pilot undertakes study for the "Cheapest" JAA IR in Europe, by your logic you believe that this is almost certainly inferior to a big school churning out JAA IR's in Europe at double the price ?

You obviously glossed over my earlier comments regarding flags of convenience etc, I really couldn't care less. Do you have any idea for example, how many billions of $,£,Euros etc are salted away by Companies in say the Cayman Islands etc ? It makes your point look miniscule by comparison. Oh, and by the way these people don't just own N reg, or non EU reg jets, many of these people / companies that salt away billions have jets on the EU register too. Many also own yachts, some also on 'flags of convenience' as you put it.

Of course there are ways and means of getting around this guff if it's voted in. It's all pretty pathetic really, it's a pity the Aviation community can't spend a bit more time supporting one another, regardless of Country of licence issue.

[Thomascl605]

Dear Socal, our Aircraft has a large 'N' on the tail. Perhaps you know something I don't but unless law has changed today, then an 'N' registered Bizjet requires FAA licences in order to fly it.

It's really not a question of can't be bothered to do 14 exams. It's more a question of what I have seen of them in extracts, and the utter waste of time (according to many JAA licenced Pilots) that they are.

It's also a time constraint in as much as a Bizjet Pilot couldn't take 6 months off to study for the exams. It would mean immediate loss of job. If I did somehow manage this, then at the end of it and having passed them, I would still be flying the same Jet with an 'N' on the tail. I wouldn't be handling or operating it any differently of course. With me taking these exams would this give you some satisfaction. Would you sleep better in the knowledge that I've done this ?

Your quote of "Any other industry and having the local required country qualifications would be required" Is surely misleading. I refer to my prior postings. What about the thousands of JAA/FAA etc Pilots that go and work for example in the middle east or far east. They choose to "domicile" themselves there, and fly on a validation from the CAA of the local Country in question. Why can't we in europe do the same ?

They don't have to go back to the start and virtually study a licence from scratch in say the UAE to fly for Emirates etc etc.

Also, I have heard much about the theoretical exams for the JAA being abused. For example, I know that much of the study material in G***** ends up in the exam halls in some form or another.

I've also heard rumours (apt on this forum) that some newly introduced JAA member states licencing dept takes cash bungs for JAA tickets.

Actually I wasn't told to remove my posting to "Mad Jock" They're deleting loads on the Private forum at the moment.

[Thomascl605]

Thanks, but to embrace a system to pass 14 exams that I don't need at massive cost, to fly the same 'N' reg aircraft that I already fly on my FAA licence. Oh, and the almost certain chance of losing my job through taking 6 months off to do it. When, as you so rightly agree, other Countries validate JAA/FAA licences etc, without all of this sh*t,

Err, no I'll give it a miss thanks !

[NuName]

There are clearly a multitude of different reasons why some "Euroland" residents have found themselves flying foreign registered aircraft that are based in Europe, its not always as simple as some would like to believe.
I was married and living outside the EU. I had a UK PPL and was offered a very attractive entry level flying job on condition I got myself a FAA CPL/IR with a minimum of 500 hours. I jumped at the chance and found myself in the USA, CPL/IR, CFII and instructing to gain the hours required. On returning home that country decided not to grant me permission to work as a pilot and then my personal situation changed and I returned to the UK. I then embarked on the enormously expensive conversion to the UK CPL which I eventualy gained with the required sign off for the IR check ride. Weather precluded my test and whilst waiting was offerd a job flying N reg aircraft resulting in a command on a Citation. This led on to more and more interesting positions and the UK CPL gathered dust and was largely forgotten. I am now no "spring chicken" and finding it more and more difficult to find work, do I want to spend a fortune at my stage to obtain the EASA ATPL, of course not.
My point is that for whatever reason an aircraft is LEGALY on a non EU registration, it still needs a suitably qualified pilot to fly it. If the owner has chosen to have his aircraft LEGALY on that registration, he should have that freedom of choice. Shopping around for the most cost effective way of doing ones business is an accepted practice in any industry.
This entire issue is only about training, i.e. who would choose to train in Europe when the cost is so much less in the USA? Europe's only answer is to not accept the FAA licence to force the issue and protect the European flight training organisations at the expense of the individuals who need training. They wish to curb our freedom of choice in the name of protectionism with no consideration of safety whatsoever. I only intended to address the case for the pilot here, not the case for the decision to have the aircraft on a foreign reg in the first place, that is another discussion that also has a multitude of different reasons.

[Thomascl605]

Thanks, but still no thanks. Tax loophole ? er no, you get no advantages as a Pilot in terms of tax if you study for FAA licences. I say again, an "N" reg Aircraft is crewed by Pilots with FAA licences. This is the Law.

[Thomascl605]

Aeroncaman, old China,

Your tax reasons US Company theory is way off, also totally irrelevant. This tax subject has been done to death in the Private forum, and has been dissected and ultimately seen for what it is (a load of old balls)

As for your comment "stubborn refusal to acknowledge changing circumstances may not be the way forward"

Well, you haven't really read my postings on my own circumstances. This isn't a one shoe fits all change. People will lose jobs over this, many EU Citizens, and not only myself. Your response regarding somehow fitting in 14 exams around flying is humorous. As we all know the subject matter isn't exactly well written, and the vast majority not relevant. Also, the time taken to study runs into months as you well know. The end result ? Oh, I'm still flying my "N" reg jet in the same way as for years before. Does this give you some satisfaction ?

So, I'll say this. I'm an EU Citizen with rights to continue flying an "N" reg aircraft as I see fit.

Your last sentence of "Unfortunately the world does not bat on a level playing field." Is pretty much schoolboy stuff.

Many "N" reg, EU reg, other non EU reg are seen being based in different countries, sometimes for years. Especially in the Middle East and even EI reg in the USA. There are many more examples of these based Aircraft that I can give, as well as the examples given already on previous postings.

As you well know a JAA licenced pilot is no safer than an FAA or other non EU licenced Pilot.

[Thomascl605]

Yes, all of what you listed, and with good reason.

Thank you for your supportive words though.