Please read this very important and not a joke!
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
From: UK
Please read this very important and not a joke!
Guys and Gals,
Sorry if this has been posted before.
Forwarded this by HCGB. Seems that Jeremy has located yet another potential expensive change that unified Euro rules are suggesting.
I have been lazy and pasted his email. Please note the cut off date for any replies if you wish to raise an objection.
Mods any chance you coudl keep this as a 'sticky' till after 17th?
EU - Charging to fly
We have until Sept 17 to object - please respond
Under the European Single Skies Policy to which the UK signed up earlier this year, all aircraft, regardless of whether they are IFR or VFR, and with no minimum weight cut off, could be required to pay for use of 'services' provided, such as air traffic control, NOTAMS and weather information, search and rescue etc.
whether used or not. No exemptions are offered in the draft proposals even for gliders, microlights or balloons. The proposals seem to have been drafted without any thought of the impact on General Aviation (GA).
Costs are to be apportioned on a total, not marginal, cost basis so that VFR aircraft will, for example, bear the cost of a VOR if it provides a service in uncontrolled airspace. This will be regardless of whether the aircraft actually uses the VOR.
Nothing in the draft proposals suggests that even a light aircraft flying non radio, from one private strip in uncontrolled airspace to another will escape being charged. The proposals apply to all civil air traffic. It will be up to the governments of individual states to decide how the payments are levied. The actual draft proposals are attached, and more details may be found at http://www.eurocontrol.int/enprm/
UK Government is sympathetic to GA and wants to exclude us from charges, as at present, but the proposals do not permit that unless the Government pays the costs thereof to the Air Navigation Service Providers - and it won't.
Eurocontrol is undertaking a consultation on the charges and we have until 17 September i.e next Friday, to respond. Not only has Eurocontrol imposed this outrageously short deadline, but responses must be made on its official form, a copy of which is attached.
I don't think that I need spell out what this proposal could do to European GA. Unless we protest we could end up paying for airspace every time we fly, even if we talk to no one. Remember mode S can track you.
The more INDIVIDUALS (in addition to organisations) who respond to the proposals the better. Closure date is 17 SEP and comments MUST be on the attached form or they will be ignored.
I attach:-
The proposals
The Blank Response Form
The HCGB response
It is essential that all members respond to all or some of the points - as usual it is the number of responses that matter.
The key issue it to urge Eurocontrol to exempt all aircraft that weigh less than 2000kg from the proposals, as is the case at present. See Article 6 (3) and 6 (4).
Sorry this is rather late - I've been consolodating the response from other GA organisations.
If anyone thinks of an extra arguements which should be included, please let me know.
Jeremy James
Hon. Sec
HCGB
Sorry if this has been posted before.
Forwarded this by HCGB. Seems that Jeremy has located yet another potential expensive change that unified Euro rules are suggesting.
I have been lazy and pasted his email. Please note the cut off date for any replies if you wish to raise an objection.
Mods any chance you coudl keep this as a 'sticky' till after 17th?
EU - Charging to fly
We have until Sept 17 to object - please respond
Under the European Single Skies Policy to which the UK signed up earlier this year, all aircraft, regardless of whether they are IFR or VFR, and with no minimum weight cut off, could be required to pay for use of 'services' provided, such as air traffic control, NOTAMS and weather information, search and rescue etc.
whether used or not. No exemptions are offered in the draft proposals even for gliders, microlights or balloons. The proposals seem to have been drafted without any thought of the impact on General Aviation (GA).
Costs are to be apportioned on a total, not marginal, cost basis so that VFR aircraft will, for example, bear the cost of a VOR if it provides a service in uncontrolled airspace. This will be regardless of whether the aircraft actually uses the VOR.
Nothing in the draft proposals suggests that even a light aircraft flying non radio, from one private strip in uncontrolled airspace to another will escape being charged. The proposals apply to all civil air traffic. It will be up to the governments of individual states to decide how the payments are levied. The actual draft proposals are attached, and more details may be found at http://www.eurocontrol.int/enprm/
UK Government is sympathetic to GA and wants to exclude us from charges, as at present, but the proposals do not permit that unless the Government pays the costs thereof to the Air Navigation Service Providers - and it won't.
Eurocontrol is undertaking a consultation on the charges and we have until 17 September i.e next Friday, to respond. Not only has Eurocontrol imposed this outrageously short deadline, but responses must be made on its official form, a copy of which is attached.
I don't think that I need spell out what this proposal could do to European GA. Unless we protest we could end up paying for airspace every time we fly, even if we talk to no one. Remember mode S can track you.
The more INDIVIDUALS (in addition to organisations) who respond to the proposals the better. Closure date is 17 SEP and comments MUST be on the attached form or they will be ignored.
I attach:-
The proposals
The Blank Response Form
The HCGB response
It is essential that all members respond to all or some of the points - as usual it is the number of responses that matter.
The key issue it to urge Eurocontrol to exempt all aircraft that weigh less than 2000kg from the proposals, as is the case at present. See Article 6 (3) and 6 (4).
Sorry this is rather late - I've been consolodating the response from other GA organisations.
If anyone thinks of an extra arguements which should be included, please let me know.
Jeremy James
Hon. Sec
HCGB
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
From: Northampton UK
