Beyond Frustrated! Regulations in the EU
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania, USA
Age: 60
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beyond Frustrated! Regulations in the EU
Greetings all!
I have been trying to find any set of rules that can be applied to a large cabin (Gulfstream/Global/Falcon) part 91 (Private/Non commercial) US operation.
EU OPS-1 states it is applicable to Commercial Air Transportation by Aeroplane, thus (in my mind) is not applicable to the operation/aircraft mentioned above. EU NCC is not as thorough as EU OPS-1.
Typical problem - EFVS (EVS) operations in the EU. EU OPS-1 addresses it, however, EU NCC does not. Is a large Cabin Part 91 considered commercial transportation? Does each individual state (nation) have the right to write their own rules in addition to the ones published by EASA.
Increasingly, the Private operator in the EU is being asked for authorizations form the state of registry for things such as GNSS approaches, GNNS Approaches with LPV or LNAV/VNAV, or EFVS, etc. Part 91 operators in the US do not have these authorizations, and in some cases there is no vehicle available to the operator to get one.
Incredibly frustrating to find guidance on how to find guidance.
HELP!!!!!
Thank you in advance!
John
I have been trying to find any set of rules that can be applied to a large cabin (Gulfstream/Global/Falcon) part 91 (Private/Non commercial) US operation.
EU OPS-1 states it is applicable to Commercial Air Transportation by Aeroplane, thus (in my mind) is not applicable to the operation/aircraft mentioned above. EU NCC is not as thorough as EU OPS-1.
Typical problem - EFVS (EVS) operations in the EU. EU OPS-1 addresses it, however, EU NCC does not. Is a large Cabin Part 91 considered commercial transportation? Does each individual state (nation) have the right to write their own rules in addition to the ones published by EASA.
Increasingly, the Private operator in the EU is being asked for authorizations form the state of registry for things such as GNSS approaches, GNNS Approaches with LPV or LNAV/VNAV, or EFVS, etc. Part 91 operators in the US do not have these authorizations, and in some cases there is no vehicle available to the operator to get one.
Incredibly frustrating to find guidance on how to find guidance.
HELP!!!!!
Thank you in advance!
John
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 67
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welcome to EASA land!! What do you expect - simplicity, transparency, information, help or guidance from a knowledgeable source?
No chance of getting the same answer from any source over here mate, the left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing! Hardly surprising really as the rules were written by bureaucratic morons who are largely past their sell by date, and interpreted (differently) on a state by state basis due to their inability to understand (or translate) legislation written in twenty odd different languages!
No chance of getting the same answer from any source over here mate, the left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing! Hardly surprising really as the rules were written by bureaucratic morons who are largely past their sell by date, and interpreted (differently) on a state by state basis due to their inability to understand (or translate) legislation written in twenty odd different languages!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Well, in another two years (August 2016) the latest opt-out will expire and every country within EASAland will at least have one common set of rules according EASA Part NCC.
Until then, you will continue to fly within bubbles of legal void with EU-OPS/EASA-OPS dealing with commercial operations only and EASA NCL in some countries - more and more - and national regulations in others.
Regarding EVS: EASA part NCL deals with that partly.
Until then, you will continue to fly within bubbles of legal void with EU-OPS/EASA-OPS dealing with commercial operations only and EASA NCL in some countries - more and more - and national regulations in others.
Regarding EVS: EASA part NCL deals with that partly.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your LOA's and your International Operations Manual, along with your MMEL is sufficient as far as ramp check is concerned.
If your aircraft has a blanket authorization, you still need records of training, and your training provider had given you the appropriate certificate.
The only thing not to forget is you are "basing" a N registered A/C in Euroland, is that everything is going to change soon, better go M !!
If your aircraft has a blanket authorization, you still need records of training, and your training provider had given you the appropriate certificate.
The only thing not to forget is you are "basing" a N registered A/C in Euroland, is that everything is going to change soon, better go M !!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
along with your MMEL
and in some cases there is no vehicle available to the operator to get one.
Guidance ? From the authorities ? Sorry mate, not over here...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
...if you have an LOA that says your MMEL is your MEL!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA/Europe/Central Asia
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An LOA is an LOA, and it is a legal document, doesn't matter how the French or Spanish interpret it.
By the way we have been SAFA'd many times, and never have they had an issue with our MMEL/MEL when we show them our LOA.
We are also an IS-BAO part 91 operator, and IS-BAO also agrees with this.
By the way we have been SAFA'd many times, and never have they had an issue with our MMEL/MEL when we show them our LOA.
We are also an IS-BAO part 91 operator, and IS-BAO also agrees with this.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What ISBAO agrees to is irrelevant for EASAlalas.
(and I agree with you, and LOA should be an LOA)
And if Iīd were to be nitpicking, then I would say a MMEL with an LOA that says the MMEL is the MEL, is basically a MEL.
They have a tick box saying MEL and how you get there (tailored MEL or MMEL made the MEL by LOA) is/should be irrelevant.
BTW, 'MY' Authority made it absolutely clear that we need a tailerod one, there canīt be a MMEL on board if there is one item that could be on board or not (optional equipment).
(and I agree with you, and LOA should be an LOA)
By the way we have been SAFA'd many times, and never have they had an issue with our MMEL/MEL when we show them our LOA.
They have a tick box saying MEL and how you get there (tailored MEL or MMEL made the MEL by LOA) is/should be irrelevant.
BTW, 'MY' Authority made it absolutely clear that we need a tailerod one, there canīt be a MMEL on board if there is one item that could be on board or not (optional equipment).
