Its interesting in that to to some extent none of this really matters to the average private pilot (over even small commerical operator) at the moment. It is quite clear that there is some much confusion you doubt any authority would bring a prosecution, and, if they did, you would doubt how successful they would be.

The real rub I guess for many is that (God forbid) if anything were to go wrong its whether or not the insurance company would have grounds for refusing the claim (and there in are the real dire consquences for most). I wonder if an an insurance company if asked the question (lets say in the circumstances peterh337 outlines) what their answer would be. I know their answer in one specific case but ultimately it is a matter between each owner and their insurance company.Were I in the situation I know I would want to ask the question and make certain I receive a written answer.

This is all quite confusing in light of the recent AOPA announcement that the French had been asked (by EASA) to take a fresh look at GA regulation, from the ground up.

http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...anges-air.html

Why would they (EASA) ask the French to take a clean-sheet approach to this when, to all intents in purposes, the guillotine is on the way down already?

Is it really likely that, given all the apparent chaos and confusion, that in a year or so time, EASA will turn round and say "hey guys, we got it wrong, forget everything we've told you, we're using a new system [X] which is, (for the sake of argument) identical to the FAA system?

My gut feeling is that Part FCL will be adopted in its entirety in a couple of years or so and from there on, it will be pretty difficult to unwind the whole thing, even if the French, the Germans, the Irish, and every other member, all agrees (as do the board who have commissioned this report) that system X is the way ahead?

I would expect the list to appear here within a couple of weeks.

I would be astonished if there are any states that do not apply the horizontal derogation (i.e. everything) in the 30th March amending regulation.

There are a lot of things that you would expect. Lets see if they happen and then we can be astonished or just flabbergasted....

Personally I would think that if they have not bothered yet then they may not bother. The UK CAA were ready....

Hmmm, I have to say Bookie is usually correct, but time will indeed tell.

What a complete mess - which I did pint out some moons ago, to be told by certain forumites that I was wrong and EASA are entirely fit for purpose, open and transparent. I wonder if you still think so 421C?

As a Brit living and flying the US I follow all this with horror. If one day I do decide to return to Europe I think it will be time to hang up my headset for good or maybe buy an LSA or an Extra but certainly give up the concept of flying for the purpose of going somewhere.

It's interesting hat the EU member states seem to be getting generally fed up with the incomprehensible bureaucratic mess that Brussels has become. In a completely different field my wife is very actively involved in some new EU initiatives and the member state attitude seems to be "do what you want, we'll just make sure that whatever you do it doesn't apply to MY country".

There is no doubt that EASA as a whole is a joke.

The only question is how will this mess be sorted out.

Having just phoned them, so do I and it is what I expected in the present situation where determining one's legality is pretty difficult.

That's very true but in practice it tends to be only the "old" southern Europe that actually sticks a finger up to Brussels. Northern Europe (UK, Germany, etc, all the the north of there, and to a lesser extent France) implement all the EU crap with relative enthusiasm, as do the younger EU members (e.g. Czech Rep, Slovakia, Slovenia) which brown-nose every EU official they come across in the Brussels corridors. I am Czech personally and while I can see that they have to always be aware which side their bread is buttered and bend with the prevailing wind, it makes me a bit sick. Watching some of the small country MEPs on the EU parliament videos is like watching the sycophants at a Hitler rally.

Do they have to notify EASA?

One problem with this stuff is that I don't think much of Europe has actually read these regs :ugh:

Inside each national CAA, there are probably only just 1 or 2 people who can understand them as a whole.

Many pilots I know of have phoned their national CAA, only to be told that nobody there knows what to do or what it means, and sent the pilot off to ask EASA. But that is bizzare because EASA "only" drew up the rules; they are not any kind of legal interpreter of them. Only a court can definitively interpret a law which is on the books.

Yes, but the whole thing was an eleventh hour comitology kludge tacked on to the cover reg for Part-CC/ORA/ARA. It was only published on 5 April and so in principle doesn't take effect until 25 April!

I've heard a timescale of a couple of months mentioned for notifying derogations, but I haven't seen chapter and verse.

I contacted my regulator today.....response "we are not sure. We'll get back to you."

I think I'll try my insurance company now...perhaps they have a definition of "operator," or will name the states within which we may fly, or not fly, (ie., those who have applied for derogation, and those who have not) when using FAA licenced crew in our TCO registered aircraft, which may, or not be, operated (depending on the definition) by a "management company" based inside the EU or elsewhere.

I feel like someone has stood me in a barrel and told me to piss in the corner = confused!

bookworm
 

These EASA documents are uninteligable to the ordinary mortal, we are not lawyers. We need the information in plain English. Because of this EASA mess, many people are now probably flying unlicenced and therefore uninsured.

cessnapete - Hear Hear Like :D :ugh:

Perhaps in future there will be a legal requirement for all pilots to carry not just a map but a huge tome with all the EASA regulations.

Don't give them ideas, jxk, just don't....:=

Believe me, you're preaching to the converted. It took me three attempts just to find the text permitting the horizontal derogation.

I think that quite unlikely. Though if you're an N-reg operator and resident in a state other than the UK or Germany, it would certainly make sense to find out what your state's arrangements for transition are.

Germany seems to have gone for a 1 year derogation; that's a translation of that German site by a German pilot. I have no more details e.g. which of the two derogations they have gone for.
The real Q is who decides you are illegal. In these circumstances it can only be a court interpreting the regs (during a prosecution) which are so vague they can be argued about for ages.

If one is talking about prosecutions i.e. a criminal offence then all the pub lawyers thinking they know how an "operator resident in the EU" is defined are not worth anything.

I would suggest contacting your insurer is much more relevant. I did that, and the reply was that in the present circumstances (where even the CAAs don't know what the regs mean) they would not regard the flight as illegal, especially if the paper issue is not relevant to the incident (which it almost never is anyway). It thus appears to me that insurers are not going to try interpreting the EASA regs for themselves, keep their decision quiet, and then refuse to pay out if you have a prang.

As I have written here countless times, I did the JAA IR not because I was worried about illegality (because the EASA FCL reg is a load of vague self evident crap which nobody will know how to police for ages, if ever) but because of the insurance angle.

What I did not expect, and nobody else did either by the looks of it, is that the situation would become 10x more vague by most of the EU ignoring the regs totally as if they never read them (which most probably haven't). This makes the insurance angle pretty vague also.

The other reason I did the JAA IR (conversion) is because I was concerned for the lifetime of the very valuable 15hr conversion route. It now appears that since nobody knows what to do, the present route looks like it is just carrying on. I gather the UK CAA is happy to approve the "abbreviated approved course" if it is still 15hrs like at present, with maybe a bit of flexibility. But almost nobody is doing the JAA IR conversion anyway..............

Watch this extract from the EU:


Then watch the response from the boss of EASA reply: (it starts 1 min into video)

EASA Nonsense 2.wmv - YouTube

We are all talking nonsense - that's official from the boss of EASA

You seem to be mixing up EU regulation and exact science. ;)

The real Q is who decides you are illegal. In these circumstances it can only be a court interpreting the regs (during a prosecution) which are so vague they can be argued about for ages.

I think this is the hub. If our regulator, CAA, can't give any definitive angle or interpretation, and Insurance companies have no clue, like the rest of us, then it can be easily argued that pilots/operators who have covered the angles, and have remained as current and licenced as possible, then frankly, I do not feel there is much to worry about, re illegality/prosecution issues.

The chance of your insurer giving a written note to that effect is probably zero however. Has the CAA offered anyone written confirmation of their own personal status, when asked by telephone????

I have tried to wade through most of the pages of this thread, but I'm afraid my brain has gone numb.
As this is a Private Flying forum, I would like to ask a simple question to which I hope there is a simple answer.
I very recently obtained a UK CAA JAA PPL(H) - it says it was "issued in accordance with ICAO and JAR-FCL standards".
I 'own' (through a US trust) an N-registered helicopter, and fly purely privately wholly in the UK.
Am I currently legal to do this?

It sounds like you are.
You can go back to the article that started the thread here PPL/IR Europe - EASA Part FCL and Foreign-Registered Aircraft (FRA)
It provides a one-page summary of the situation for UK residents and the CAA source.
brgds
421C

421c i am pleased to see you have joined the debate and forgive me repeating but i told you so. I dont say that with any pleasure but more in the hope that you do at least now agree!

The state of registry (the USA i.e. the FAA for an N-reg aircraft) determines whether any particular pilot papers are valid for its aircraft.

In this case, FAR 61.3 is what you need to look up.

If you have a PPL(H) issued by the UK, you can fly in UK airspace.

If you have a PPL(H) issued by say France, you can fly in French airspace.

I don't see this privilege disappearing under the EASA FCL anti-N-reg proposals because it is nothing to do with that (you already have an EASA pilot license) and there is no (known/planned) proposal to impose long term parking limits on foreign reg aircraft.

Only the FAA could stop this, by amending FAR 61.3 to disallow the use of foreign pilot papers. But the USA rarely changes its regs substantively.

I have some notes here.

Pilots who are not mixing papers (e.g. flying a G-reg on a UK/JAA PPL) which is what most people do, do not need to understand this well, and indeed I am sure most don't. Certainly most pilots I meet haven't got a clue about this stuff, but then they don't need to - so long as they stick to the straightforward scenarios.

But pilots who are mixing papers do need to understand how this stuff works.

It's not particularly hard to understand, but one first needs to get away from the pub aviation barristers who come out with the "2 out of 3 rule" etc etc :)

Fuji - agree with what? 421C

421c my post #89

You should be careful with your 'I told you so's' Fuji because I told you this whole N reg situation was coming several years ago and you and Peter argued I was wrong.......

Harsh Peter, but not unexpected......:ok:

Peter alot of us have known this for years and told you it.

Also as well I don't think you realise how much negative feeling there is about the current N reg status Quo. Both in the industry and politically across europe.

And the political types and NAA's publicly getting there nose rubbed in the fact that N reg crowed say that there system is ****e just makes them more hard nosed.

Everytime I see a post saying the EU system is ****e (and I don't for one minute think its perfect just different philosophy which has lost its way) Compared to FAA or a public slagging off of the politicians involved all I think is bang another nail into the coffin. Any chance of a compromise is disappearing down the plug.

They don't care that people are going to loose thier jobs,
They don't care if flight safety is going to be reduced
They don't care that there will be less flying.
They don't care that revenue will be decreased.
They don't care if they are taken to court over it. But history shows pilots arn't very good at organising a coherent line of attack over issues.

All they care about is that the citizens and residents of thier countrys abide by the laws and philosophys of thier law makers.

Which is one of the reasons why I don't think there will ever be a easy swap for FAA tickets to EASA ones. Call it a fine for getting caught taking the piss with a loop hole.

The revamping will occur but only once the current N reg fleet has been much reduced to a fraction of what it was and the pilots have gone local again or are not flying in europe in protest.

Will he stand up in a German court for you (or your estate)?
I think it is very dangerous to place your faith in the opinion of one man. Your note at the bottom pretty much says that. Ask three FSDO's in the USA for an opinion and you will get at least three different answers.
On what does he base he opinion that you can fly as UK resident in EU for another 2 years on an FAA IR only? He can only speak for UK and UK airspace??

Only among full-time gravy train riders. Of which there are many, of course. On here, too. In most cases they are obvious (FTO owners, for example). Some are G-reg charter pilots who are bitter about illegal charters and think that N-reg is to blame for that (but actually anybody with a brain will do illegal charter work in a G-reg ;) ).

I also find that people who have done the whole JAA route tend to "go native". Maybe I will one day (I have no more papers that can be physically collected) but it doesn't look like it presently, does it? :)

But hey this is normal. I have a business in electronics. Been doing this since 1978 so have seen a few things pass by... more than most people actually. Almost nobody who started in business when I started is still working in it. Most have gone bust, or moved into Marketing ;) BS5750, ISO9000, ROHS, REACH. WEEE, the list is longer than my arm. Every year we get a feast closely followed by a famine (the two terms are exchanged according to whether you are a supplier or a consumer :E ) as the sales reps :yuk: go around spreading daaaark tales of impending shortages so they get people to over-order so they can collect their commissions and change jobs quickly.

Just now I have got an email with a 20 page questionnaire listing hundreds of substances which the Politburo in Brussels has banned and I must sign it to say our products don't contain any of them. It is an almost daily ritual now. Of course I will sign it; everybody does. Some arse covering idiot at the receiving end smiles and files it, and doesn't remove me from his approved supplier list :yuk: He is probably on £50k plus a car. He is one of the winners...... but if I did his job I could not go home and say to my lady and my kids that I am proud of my job.

Each one is a gravy train for somebody. For every loser there is a winner, and the winner doesn't give a flying XXXX for what happens to the loser. The winners rarely if ever work in electronics manufacturing (they sit on committees and work for e.g. consulting companies :yuk: ) just like the winners in aviation regulation are almost never pilots.

What do they expect? Do you seriously think that if p p r u n e was shut down, anything would change? I tell you what would change if internet forums vanished. With the sh****y PPL and IR training which is almost totally inadequate and irrelevant for the job, pilots would be much less clued-up than they are. I reckon 95% of tactical aviation expertise now comes from the internet, not from your instructor.

No they don't. They care about their well padded gravy trains. You need to get out more and meet some of the types behind this stuff.
That I agree with 100%. The "BASA around the corner" is a load of bull***t. But even if it wasn't it would never deliver a paper conversion route (along the lines of the old Irish FAA ATPL => JAA ATPL paper swap one for example).

That is why I did the JAA IR conversion (sorry to post that link again but many people email me saying how useful it is) because any conversion that might come is not likely to be significantly easier. Even if the exams shrink from the present 7 to say 2, all they need to do is remove the QB study option (which EASA clearly wants to do; refs in my writeup) and the study workload will be at/above the old system. And almost nobody will pass the JAA IRT without something like 15hrs' training. The "gravy tomorrow" talk is IMHO bollox. The option which is on the table now is close to the best possible future option (short of a total EU meltdown).

No nothing would happen if all the forums shut thier doors today. The damage has been done and the slow moving cogs have been put into motion. They will eventually reach thier destination.

I agree with the rest of it though.

And give you that it maybe gravy train iced with political morals (oxymoron that one) doesn't change the fact that N reg is humped in europe.

Time will tell, but I agree that the pros and cons are changing over time.

But they've been changing for a long time anyway. If you read the pros and cons here you can see they have always been pretty sharp tradeoffs, and this is just another negative to consider.

If the EU gave everybody with FAA papers the equivalent JAA papers, accepted FAA STCs and all other Approved Data, and some other stuff, the N-reg scene would dry up. I remember saying this to a JAA Director some years ago and he agreed. But this will never happen because the present "winners" would start a war. The EU is trying to crack a problem which is 100% their own fault for creating.

Prats like Weaver don't do your cause any good at all.

The engineering side of things may be sorted after the bulk of the N reg fleet is gone.

But I can't see the license stuff being sorted. And neither can I see us going to a rolling currency for the IR or MEP etc.

He could have done the same on a G-reg. The UK CAA does practically zero ramp checks.

Aviation is full of "character types" and the biggest ones I have come across were all G-reg commercial operators.
You have no way to know that :)
Of course not, in Europe. Here, everybody is assumed to be crooked and faking their logbook, hence the annual flight.

You wouldn't have a one eyed commercial pilot he wouldn't get a commercial medical here.

And to be honest Weaver is being talked about pretty much world wide. He is the face of N reg in alot of places.

Engineering wise,

I don't have anyway of knowing that but it wouldn't generate half as much fuss as doing the same with licenses. And you could set a start date and everything after that date would be deemed new and comply's with both and anything prior to that would have to go through the old system.

And they have already agreed in principle and the FAA is willing to reciprocate which is a huge tick in the box which licensing won't get. It helps having Airbus and Boeing having a common interest in that occuring.

In fact it might be quite a good way to encourage the retirement off alot of the old flying school junk out there.

To be honest the low powered single engine side of things I can't really get excited about it not being tested. The multi engined side of things you need to get regular practise single engine, the work load goes through the roof and it can bite your arse hard very quickly. I believe the high powered single can be a bit fiesty as well on the go around and you need a knack and practise for a nengine failure not to be a certain crash.

Come on MJ you are the biggest troll here after all.

The USA is full of one eyed pilots and they are all flying into LHR right now, and they are crashing on the ILS because with one eye you can turn onto the localiser only from one side and not the other.
I am going to give up commenting on your posts.

There not actually, all those boys/girls have class 1 medicals.

You can get a Class II and III with one eye though under FAA.

Its the reason why Weaver went FAA in the first place.

Didn't a ppruner go for a swim in the Tay because they were a bit fiesty?

And that wasn't even a particularly powerful one.

Bose

Ah, but that is like the Sun's reporting of what the Chancellor said about the cap on charitable doantions.

In fact we said it would be extraordinarily difficult to draft legislation that would achieve this objective (you will recall the last attempt with regards based aircraft). Sounds to me "I told you so" was more than appropriate! The N reg situation has always been coming and will probably always be "coming" unless they finally manage to "kill" it off - they just might, but that is another story.

On the other hand you will of course recall your predictions with regards the IMCr - whilst we await the final outcome, I ownder if you feel a slight tremor beneath your feet? ;)

421C I am glad to see the transparent process you previously referred to has taken some of the most experienced minds on this forum and others to find the relevant legislation and make sense of it. I do this sort of thing for a living and to be frank I have never seen such a cumbersome process. Personally it bothers me little, but that isnt the point. I dont know why but it bothers me a lot more than some people support the process. ;)

You can get an FAA Class 1 if you have monocular vision - all that is required is a Medical Flight Test with someone from the FAA.

You can also hold a JAA Class 1 medical if you are monocular.

Don't ask me how I know ..... I haven't hit anything yet.

I don't think you can any more. There was a period pre JAR when you could or if you held a Class 1 and had an accident and lost one you could continue.

So you can hold one if you have already got one but you can't get through an intial.