Information on EASA FCL?
It's a fair comment, but as this is the 'private flying forum' it follows that most on here just fly for fun, and the ATPL exams just are not relevant or practical for someone who simply wants to be able to access the airways system in a single engine tourer. A more practical solution needs to be found in my opinion. The FAA system, regardless what some people here will tell you, does provide a good level of safety and knowledge for IFR flying in Europe - heck, even I managed to operate an N reg King Air and Turbo Commander in Europe using FAA tickets perfectly safely!
I for one have accepted that this route will inevitably close for European Pilots after 2012 and have started on the painful conversion process, but for a private pilot it's simply inpractical. If I were intending only flying for fun I'm pretty sure I'd probably knock it on the head after 2012 when EASA suck the life out of GA.
I for one have accepted that this route will inevitably close for European Pilots after 2012 and have started on the painful conversion process, but for a private pilot it's simply inpractical. If I were intending only flying for fun I'm pretty sure I'd probably knock it on the head after 2012 when EASA suck the life out of GA.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you just slightly worried about putting your expertise on the line? Who knows, as someone has already suggested, you might even learn something in the process.
I dont believe it has anything to do with putting your expertise on the line. If it did as an FAA IR holder you would take an EASA IR renewal (goodness knows what it will be called) and if you pass, job done. That is sufficient to prove you have maintained the ICAO standard.
In the alternative why dont we devise a system where the typical 10,000 hour ATPL should sit ten exams if he is told by his employer to fly to some tinpot republic, and another ten exams for the republic of Windover, and while we are at it a theory test and a driving test for every country you want to drive a car in.
It is not about proving you can fly to a standard but about jumping through hoops that prove nothing and line the authorities pockets. Many people find the cost of flying privately costly enough without having to fund the regulatory industry; most of the people who post on here fly for pleasure, they dont get paid to fly and it is not their business - which seems so often forgotten.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why don't you just bite the bullet and do your IR with the CAA and get a JAR licence?
I can answer that not as an FAA PPL IR but as a FAA ATP type rated and flying as a Captain on said aircraft for a living.
Firstly I have the licences required to fly what I do and that is FAA N reg jets.
What other licences do I actually require to fly N reg Jets? none of the EASA licences are relevant or have any legal place on a N reg Jet so obviously not EASA licences.
Will I be a better pilot for doing an EASA licence NO that is gained by flying my jet in all kinds of weather and destinations around Europe and the world (I have flown long distance ferries too as far away as the far East, south Africa and the USA)
But thats not the point my licences and experience count for almost nothing in this wonderful EASA land.
Sense would dictate at most a differences exam and flight test to convert.
The IR flight test would be fun and a piece of cake, (never failed a flight test yet!) but where does SENSE ever come into EASA land?
But in EASA land NO. 14 exams 6 months full time study and many thousands of £s to achieve what?
I dont want to fly for a European AOC and over 50 i cannot be asked to start again.
I am all for safety but frankly the latest satistics put FAA PART135 ops as safer than EASA AOC ops with FAA corporate Jets on the same safety level as Airlines with AOC a poor third. (check the figures)
So what is all this about and at what point do we in our industry say NO to this big brother organisation who regulate for the sake of regulating at everyone elses expense just to justify their own artificially constructed jobs.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 29th Sep 2010 at 23:28.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had to take myself to Kidlington and do a very expensive civilian IR in order to get my civilian licence.
If I could do that (as all of us had to) why do you guys think that you are so precious or so very special that you don't have to do what it takes?
Why do you spend so much time and effort trying to beat the system?
If I could do that (as all of us had to) why do you guys think that you are so precious or so very special that you don't have to do what it takes?
Why do you spend so much time and effort trying to beat the system?
You have got me agreeing with Fuji for once! On the one hand, you are right, if you have to do the JAA stuff, it's doable. But the issue many of us have is the sheer, dismal, sad pointlessness of European over-regulation as it impacts GA.
You may have been happy doing your IR as a pro, but for GA, the European IR is an irrelevance. There are probably 100,000 non-commercial IR holders in the US. How many people have knuckled down to the JAA PPL/IR? I suspect it's in the order of 1000 across all of Europe in the entire history of JAR-FCL.
Is JAA private operation any safer than the US? No. Is Europe difficult and more special? No. I believe the US has greater extremes of terrain and weather and manages a mix of GA and CAT traffic in super-busy TMAs and airports which is inconceivable in Europe. Does American safety suffer or European safety benefit? No.
The people who suffer aren't just the European (potential) pilots denied reasonable access to 'mainstream' (ie. non- light/sport) GA. The US earns billions of dollars in GA exports and sustains (?) 100,000 jobs through GA. What do we have in the UK below the level of Airbus and military hardware? Our centre of GA manufacturing I guess is the Isle of Wight, making a few Islanders a year and assembling Cirrus kits. It's not just manufacturing. Look around many provincial airports. The GA maintenance and ancilliary industries are often in a few rusting hangars amongst the airport property converted to warehouses and call centres and whatnot. Go to an equivalent US airport and you'll find FBOs and specialist GA companies employing hundreds of people in decent quality jobs.
We manage a "playing field" for CAT which enables a pretty efficient and competitive airline sector. Our lowco model seems comparable to the US - we do not seem short of airlines with funny names flying between obscure provincial towns in Europe. That's a good thing for the industry and for pax. Why can't we have a proportionate regulatory environment for GA? It's beyond me.
I've been writing on this thread to explain the EASA process and rules as best I can. Doesn't mean I like it.
(BTW, although I'm an N-reg man, I've done my JAA IR conversion and IRI. All good fun stuff and great people. But the instructors, examiners and what I learned would have been the same without the overlay of JAA cost and paperwork and approvals and other nonsense. It doesn't take £1000 of 'approved' manuals to learn the theory compared to $20 US books or the excellent handbooks the FAA publish for free. The list is endless.)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think JW411 is completely correct.
The evidence overwhelmingly shows N-reg pilots flying trivial missions, mostly in aircraft so poorly maintained they cannot even cross the British Channel, while British-reg pilots fly the really heavy stuff. No wonder N-reg pilots are afraid of having to submit themselves to the proper and correct morally and intellectually superior European standards. Most of them can't even fly as far as Earls Colne, Wolverhampton, Wycombe, or Biggin.
I think it should be harder still, however. The 14 ATPL exams cannot possibly cover the depth of knowledge required of a pilot choosing to take up residence on British soil.
I give up.
That picture, BTW, is played out all over Europe. That is what is driving the regulation.
The evidence overwhelmingly shows N-reg pilots flying trivial missions, mostly in aircraft so poorly maintained they cannot even cross the British Channel, while British-reg pilots fly the really heavy stuff. No wonder N-reg pilots are afraid of having to submit themselves to the proper and correct morally and intellectually superior European standards. Most of them can't even fly as far as Earls Colne, Wolverhampton, Wycombe, or Biggin.
I think it should be harder still, however. The 14 ATPL exams cannot possibly cover the depth of knowledge required of a pilot choosing to take up residence on British soil.
I give up.
That picture, BTW, is played out all over Europe. That is what is driving the regulation.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
421C
Actually I think you will find we have agreed twice on this thread alone! 
I am not sure whether we still disagree on the EIR, I cant remember where that debate ended.
You have got me agreeing with Fuji for once!
I am not sure whether we still disagree on the EIR, I cant remember where that debate ended.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I wanted to fly a G registered 747 then I would indeed convert my FAA CPL/IR and add an EASA Type Rating.
However all I want to be able to do is fly my N registered Rockwell Commander to France in the cloud when I feel like it. It would be a bit rich to say the least if an American could fly his RC from England to France in the cloud, yet me being a brit couldn't.
Actually I would anyway, I have JAA PPL+IMC which may become an EIR so I think I have covered myself quite well.
However all I want to be able to do is fly my N registered Rockwell Commander to France in the cloud when I feel like it. It would be a bit rich to say the least if an American could fly his RC from England to France in the cloud, yet me being a brit couldn't.
Actually I would anyway, I have JAA PPL+IMC which may become an EIR so I think I have covered myself quite well.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually I would anyway, I have JAA PPL+IMC which may become an EIR so I think I have covered myself quite well.
When I didn't see it there, I assumed that it had been dropped?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The committee charged with the "new EASA IR" as well as the EIR has not quite finished yet, AIUI.
Various bits about the "IR" have come out, like a big reduction in the mandatory dual time, and a small reduction in the exam content, and no change on the medical front.
But the EIR remains a mystery (to me) as to how it will fit in with existing ATC practices and expectations. Somebody told me it would always involve a Z (VFR - IFR - VFR) flight plan, in which case I can kind-of understand it, but others close to the job did not mention that.
Various bits about the "IR" have come out, like a big reduction in the mandatory dual time, and a small reduction in the exam content, and no change on the medical front.
But the EIR remains a mystery (to me) as to how it will fit in with existing ATC practices and expectations. Somebody told me it would always involve a Z (VFR - IFR - VFR) flight plan, in which case I can kind-of understand it, but others close to the job did not mention that.
I'm sorry chaps if I have offended some of you. As usual, I have failed to convey exactly what I mean so let me try again.
Absolutely no one in the flying game (unless they are completely deranged) enjoys spending money and being examined.
What I was trying to explain was that we all end up having to do whatever it takes to get the job done. I did not enjoy spending a lot of money when I came out of the RAF getting an IR which did not really improve upon the skills that I had already been using for 18 years.
BUT IT HAD TO BE DONE.
Without the CAA ATPL I was not going to get a job.
A bit later in my life I was offered a job flying DC-10s in the USA (Part 121) but I had to get an FAA ATR. I did not particularly enjoy the experience.
BUT IT HAD TO BE DONE.
When I came back to flying in Europe, JARs came along and my company insisted that I had to take out a JAR ATPL. You have already guessed what is coming next.
IT HAD TO BE DONE.
I certainly do not wish to decry anyone's license or ability. The CAA license is without doubt the most difficult to get and the process undoubtedly contains more bullsh*t than any of the others (does anyone else remember the lighting requirements of an airship moored at its mast at night with the rudder disabled?).
On the other hand, the FAA license was an absolute breeze. The bullsh*t factor was a lot lower and the FAA attitude towards flying was much more practical.
However, all I was trying to say was that there are a lot of things in life that we have to do to tick the necessary boxes. Let us look at this from a private flyer's position in the UK.
You need to ask yourself a very basic question. Do I need (really need) to have an IR? Perhaps an IMC rating would do? Perhaps I don't really need either?
If an IR is absolutely essential to you and you want to use it on a G-registered aeroplane, then perhaps you should invest in a CAA IR. I know it costs money but that takes me back to the original question "do I really need an IR"?
PERHAPS IT HAS TO BE DONE
The bullsh*t factor might be quite high but I would really not worry about the examiners. I only ever met one CAFU examiner that got up my nose in a major way and I only had to put up with him for one week in the "Tony Angel HS125 simulator" when I was on the IRE course.
The rest of them have been absolutely fine and supportive. (I can even remember one chap telling me not to worry about temporarily busting a limit "I can always choose when to be looking in any particular direction").
So, having parted with a fair amount of dosh, you will have your CAA IR in your hand and it is highly unlikely that you will ever have to fly with a CAFU chap ever again.
Alternatively, you could decide that it would be easier (and cheaper) to do a simpler FAA IR course and then look forward to:
1. Re-registering your machine on to a foreign register.
2. Organising a maintenance organisation to look after your aircraft on the new register.
3. Finding a foreign-qualified IR examiner to do your IR renewal every year.
4. Finding an AME who can issue FAA medicals as well as CAA ones (Mine does).
5. Face the possibility of explaining to a ramp-checker in Albania whose English is somewhat limited that your aircraft is not actually yours but is owned by a trust in Delaware.
6. Constantly trying to stay one step ahead of the inevitable outcome of EASA banning foreign registered aircraft.
To me, such an option is ridiculous and has absolutely no future for you will never beat the system in the final analysis.
SOMETIMES IT HAS TO BE DONE
I bit the bullet and got every license (and several validations) that I needed. I didn't like it but it had to be done. I am sure that it was the cheaper option in the end.
Was it Confucius who said "if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it"!
Absolutely no one in the flying game (unless they are completely deranged) enjoys spending money and being examined.
What I was trying to explain was that we all end up having to do whatever it takes to get the job done. I did not enjoy spending a lot of money when I came out of the RAF getting an IR which did not really improve upon the skills that I had already been using for 18 years.
BUT IT HAD TO BE DONE.
Without the CAA ATPL I was not going to get a job.
A bit later in my life I was offered a job flying DC-10s in the USA (Part 121) but I had to get an FAA ATR. I did not particularly enjoy the experience.
BUT IT HAD TO BE DONE.
When I came back to flying in Europe, JARs came along and my company insisted that I had to take out a JAR ATPL. You have already guessed what is coming next.
IT HAD TO BE DONE.
I certainly do not wish to decry anyone's license or ability. The CAA license is without doubt the most difficult to get and the process undoubtedly contains more bullsh*t than any of the others (does anyone else remember the lighting requirements of an airship moored at its mast at night with the rudder disabled?).
On the other hand, the FAA license was an absolute breeze. The bullsh*t factor was a lot lower and the FAA attitude towards flying was much more practical.
However, all I was trying to say was that there are a lot of things in life that we have to do to tick the necessary boxes. Let us look at this from a private flyer's position in the UK.
You need to ask yourself a very basic question. Do I need (really need) to have an IR? Perhaps an IMC rating would do? Perhaps I don't really need either?
If an IR is absolutely essential to you and you want to use it on a G-registered aeroplane, then perhaps you should invest in a CAA IR. I know it costs money but that takes me back to the original question "do I really need an IR"?
PERHAPS IT HAS TO BE DONE
The bullsh*t factor might be quite high but I would really not worry about the examiners. I only ever met one CAFU examiner that got up my nose in a major way and I only had to put up with him for one week in the "Tony Angel HS125 simulator" when I was on the IRE course.
The rest of them have been absolutely fine and supportive. (I can even remember one chap telling me not to worry about temporarily busting a limit "I can always choose when to be looking in any particular direction").
So, having parted with a fair amount of dosh, you will have your CAA IR in your hand and it is highly unlikely that you will ever have to fly with a CAFU chap ever again.
Alternatively, you could decide that it would be easier (and cheaper) to do a simpler FAA IR course and then look forward to:
1. Re-registering your machine on to a foreign register.
2. Organising a maintenance organisation to look after your aircraft on the new register.
3. Finding a foreign-qualified IR examiner to do your IR renewal every year.
4. Finding an AME who can issue FAA medicals as well as CAA ones (Mine does).
5. Face the possibility of explaining to a ramp-checker in Albania whose English is somewhat limited that your aircraft is not actually yours but is owned by a trust in Delaware.
6. Constantly trying to stay one step ahead of the inevitable outcome of EASA banning foreign registered aircraft.
To me, such an option is ridiculous and has absolutely no future for you will never beat the system in the final analysis.
SOMETIMES IT HAS TO BE DONE
I bit the bullet and got every license (and several validations) that I needed. I didn't like it but it had to be done. I am sure that it was the cheaper option in the end.
Was it Confucius who said "if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it"!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, yes, right now there are very few reasons for doing the FAA IR unless you already own an N-reg plane.
But then you have powerful reasons for staying with it:
A transfer to G is going to cost between £5000 and £10000 and that is if nothing goes wrong.
Especially if it is a "nice" plane, and the majority of N-reg planes are indeed "nice" (which probably doesn't help the politics of envy angle...).
And EASA is not currently proposing kicking out N-reg airframes (it would be extremely hard to do, as others have found before) which is yet another reason why continued N-reg operation is worth examining closely.
We shall see what happens.
Whenever I have acted out of fear, I always lost money
But then you have powerful reasons for staying with it:
A transfer to G is going to cost between £5000 and £10000 and that is if nothing goes wrong.
Especially if it is a "nice" plane, and the majority of N-reg planes are indeed "nice" (which probably doesn't help the politics of envy angle...).
And EASA is not currently proposing kicking out N-reg airframes (it would be extremely hard to do, as others have found before) which is yet another reason why continued N-reg operation is worth examining closely.
We shall see what happens.
Whenever I have acted out of fear, I always lost money
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whenever I have acted out of fear, I always lost money
The tricky bit is working out what are your instincts and what are your fears"
JW11
"if rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it"!
Pace
IO540:
But your aeroplane was already on the G-register!
I agree that getting it back on to the G-register would not be cheap for several waves (if not a sunami) will undoubtedly be made by the CAA about the time that it has been off the G-register.
I know of one chap who found his aeroplane quite worthless when he tried to revert and he could not prove that every single mod had been done, not just when it had been N-registered, but before that when it was on the CAA register.
Thus, it could be that you will have to fly the Atlantic in Tin Tac to flog it in the US of A one day but don't expect the local FAA guy to accept as "sight unseen" either.
I wish I could offer an alternative policy but, at the end of the day, you and I are going to be stuck with whatever the European Authorities decide.
"Whenever I have acted out of fear, I always LOST money".
Is this all about money Peter? I doubt it. You should have courage in your own ability for you are surely no idiot in my opinion. I know you to be a good planner and your plans usually work out well.
If you were ever to ask for my advice, I would say go for a CAA IR. I know you will have to bite your tongue on occasion but I have little doubt that you would hack it and then you would be qualified on both sides of the fence.
In the end, it would be the cheaper option.
But your aeroplane was already on the G-register!
I agree that getting it back on to the G-register would not be cheap for several waves (if not a sunami) will undoubtedly be made by the CAA about the time that it has been off the G-register.
I know of one chap who found his aeroplane quite worthless when he tried to revert and he could not prove that every single mod had been done, not just when it had been N-registered, but before that when it was on the CAA register.
Thus, it could be that you will have to fly the Atlantic in Tin Tac to flog it in the US of A one day but don't expect the local FAA guy to accept as "sight unseen" either.
I wish I could offer an alternative policy but, at the end of the day, you and I are going to be stuck with whatever the European Authorities decide.
"Whenever I have acted out of fear, I always LOST money".
Is this all about money Peter? I doubt it. You should have courage in your own ability for you are surely no idiot in my opinion. I know you to be a good planner and your plans usually work out well.
If you were ever to ask for my advice, I would say go for a CAA IR. I know you will have to bite your tongue on occasion but I have little doubt that you would hack it and then you would be qualified on both sides of the fence.
In the end, it would be the cheaper option.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Re-registering your machine on to a foreign register.
2. Organising a maintenance organisation to look after your aircraft on the new register.
3. Finding a foreign-qualified IR examiner to do your IR renewal every year.
4. Finding an AME who can issue FAA medicals as well as CAA ones (Mine does).
5. Face the possibility of explaining to a ramp-checker in Albania whose English is somewhat limited that your aircraft is not actually yours but is owned by a trust in Delaware.
6. Constantly trying to stay one step ahead of the inevitable outcome of EASA banning foreign registered aircraft.
2. Organising a maintenance organisation to look after your aircraft on the new register.
3. Finding a foreign-qualified IR examiner to do your IR renewal every year.
4. Finding an AME who can issue FAA medicals as well as CAA ones (Mine does).
5. Face the possibility of explaining to a ramp-checker in Albania whose English is somewhat limited that your aircraft is not actually yours but is owned by a trust in Delaware.
6. Constantly trying to stay one step ahead of the inevitable outcome of EASA banning foreign registered aircraft.
2. no problem - see above
3. not applicable - rolling currency, plenty of CFIIs around
4. no problem - He does my JAR one and charges me £20 for the FAA class 2
5. not an issue if the paperwork is in order
6. that is the only problem, for no good reason.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6. that is the only problem, for no good reason.
Just wondered what the "official" spin is on this?
Pace
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace
In some ways the official spin is easy - we expect to have legislative control over our own people - in other words if you live here, then, rightly, you should be subject to our laws, not those of a country the other side of the globe.
That is not unreasonable.
However given the current status quo it is unreasonable that those already operating in the existing legislative climate do not have a realstic mechanism for converting their existing licences.
(I appreciate that if they did it still would sound the death knell for new pilots obtaining a private EASA IR unless the requirements are relaxed, but that is yet another matter)
In some ways the official spin is easy - we expect to have legislative control over our own people - in other words if you live here, then, rightly, you should be subject to our laws, not those of a country the other side of the globe.
That is not unreasonable.
However given the current status quo it is unreasonable that those already operating in the existing legislative climate do not have a realstic mechanism for converting their existing licences.
(I appreciate that if they did it still would sound the death knell for new pilots obtaining a private EASA IR unless the requirements are relaxed, but that is yet another matter)
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we expect to have legislative control over our own people
If you hold an EASA ATP you cannot legally earn an income flying an N reg Jet if you as the Captain crash that N reg Jet its the FAA licences which will be checked not your EASA licences, its the FAA who will have control over their aircraft not EASA.
Yes EASA may have the power to legislate that you must hold a marine boat handling certificate to fly N reg aircraft and it might as well be a marine boat handlling cetificate but that has no bearing on flying the aircraft The EASA licences have NO bearing whatsoever. If something goes wrong the buck stops with the FAA.
So really this has no meaning other than a back door attempt at a legal move to try and curb the use of foreign reg aircraft based in Europe.
It is a loophole EASA hope they have found but gives them NO control in that sense.
If so what EASA licences do i need to fly a Business jet which in FAA land can be flown on a PPL IR? I cannot accept money using an EASA licence so in law that licence would have no meaning. Just think it through!
Various European countries have tried to stop N reg in the past and failed so I presume some clever legal Eagle has suggested this! Whether it would stand up to legal scrutiny would be up to the courts to decide.
My gut instincts are that as in the past It is flawed in a number of areas and there is a legal battle to be had if someone takes it on?
but that is the BIG question will someone take it on or have the money time and motivation to do so ?
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 30th Sep 2010 at 21:05.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But forcing European residents does not give legislative control as those licences have no bearing to an FAA aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but it would. Caught in the cockpit of a N reg without an EASA license and EASA would be able to prosecute
Based on the fact that purely on your colour or creed that you are not allowed to fly this aircraft! Unless you hold licences which have no relevance and are not themselves legal to use to fly an FAA reg jet. Other pilots of other nations are not expected to comply hence discrimination.
Your Honour purely based on this guys race we demand he holds a Marine boat handling licence to fly a N reg jet which he holds full licences to fly and is approved to fly by the controlling country. Our licences are totally illegal used on this aircraft and have no bearing to that aircraft but we expect him to have them anyway although they dont mean a thing on N reg and might as well be Marine boat handling licences for what they are worth! But we consider our licences to be superior although we have to admit that statistics dont back that up. Infact private op FAA corporate jet aircraft have a better safety record than our own controlled AOC aircraft
I am not as convinced as some of us that this latest attempt isnt as legally flawed as previous attempts but if it ever hits the light of day it needs to be challenged but preferably before it hits the light of day.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 30th Sep 2010 at 22:06.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignoring the issue of insurance, which of course is a big issue, what is the penalty for flying an aircraft without the correct easa licence. Frequently the enforcement action is suspension of your licence.