2D

There must have been a time limit, e.g. if you were resident for 5 1/2 months, then away for the remainder of the year, you could have come back for another 5 1/2 months?

You are quite correct IO540 - but to the extent that no wording ever got to the point of being published in France, it remains a matter of speculation quite what criterea would have been used to establish the residency status of an aircraft

2D

FAA/CAA One stage further
 

OK, here we are discussing rumours about what might happen, lets discuss a FACT. In recent weeks the CAA have GROUNDED a pall off mine. He was informed in WRITING that he was no longer allowed to fly in the UK using his FAA PPL. He has been using his FAA PPL to fly his N reg aircraft(several) in this country for many years. Years ago he had a medical problem and as such, then failed his PPL CAA medical. He has not accepted this ORDER lightly , I am watching this space. Any views on this?

So the CAA is entitled to do this.

TOT

Let me get this right. Your friend has held an FAA PPL, with FAA medicals, for all that time, and been operating N-reg planes, which the CAA ordinarily would not even know were in the UK.

But your friend also kept a UK or JAR PPL and he failed the medical for that. Did he keep that so he could fly G-reg planes outside the UK? He could have flown G-reg within the UK on his FAA license. Maybe he had an IMC Rating. Then when he failed his CAA medical, his AME (who else, unless he told somebody who doesn't like him) told the CAA "this man is continuing to fly on his FAA license"? But it took the CAA a few years to discover it / get around to it?

Depending on exactly why your friend failed, this could have interesting implications. It could be used to ground every N-reg who at some time failed his CAA medical. However you can legitimately fail your CAA medical and still fly on the NPPL.

Or it could be irrelevant to this debate, if e.g. he failed his CAA medical on something which he was required to notify the FAA doctor of.

There is an article about this very subject in this month's FLYER mag which may help.

And not forgetting that the JAR class 2 medical EXCEEDS ICAO standards by the CAA's own admission. Seems hardly fair if someone were to fail on an item that would not be a fail according to ICAO standards....but I don't know the facts and anyway, we've done this one before...

I'm wondering whether its worth me keeping my JAA PPL going, and the implications it'd have IF I were to ever fail a medical (not thats its likely, but you never know). At least if you don't fail a medical exam, you can't be grounded on medical grounds?

It would be very hard for the CAA to not recognize FAA licences, I suppose in theory they could say that they don't recognize FAA PPL's, but they couldn't possibly fail to recognize an FAA CPL, or else the implications would be far greater, and would bring with it a world of cr*p......

EA

Now, who wrote that?

;)

tKF

2 Donkeys
I have not watered down my understanding of what may be happening, perhaps I have just expressed it badly.

Englishal
Yes, Bermuda is an Overseas Territory of the UK and regulation of aviation is carried out by under a UK statutory instrument. However, the CAA is not the regulator, it is the Governor of Bermuda (or an official acting on his behalf). This arrangement appears to have its problems and the Department for Transport appears to be paying the CAA oodles to help put it right. http://www.caa.co.uk/airsafety/default.asp?page=1802

Re you later point I can see no impediment on the UK refusing to recognise FAA licences (PPL or CPLs) held by UK citizens on domestic flights in the UK. Can you elaborate. I agree that it would be difficult on international flights.

Gruntos
Regarding your point that "Chicago Conference allowing foreign planes to operate in other countries airspace and as long as there are FAA licensed engineers to do the inspections and remedial work as necessary. So to alter this, doesn't this need a changed by both parties?" I think that someone has given you a rather liberal interpretation of the Convention. Article 5 of the Convention states "Each contracting State agrees that all aircraft of the other contracting States, being aircraft not engaged in scheduled international air services shall have the right, subject to the observance of the terms of this Convention, to make flights into or in transit non-stop across its territory and to make stops for non-traffic purposes without the necessity of obtaining prior permission........." The Convention does not cover domestic flights. Indeed, under section 2 of Danish Air Navigation Act foreign registered aircraft may not make a domestic flight within Denmark unless there is a agreement with the State of Registry which permits such flights or permission of the Minister of Transport is obtained. http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/d...gation_Act.pdf

Read THE very interesting article in Flyer today about the N reg option. Article was clear, concise and expresed both sides eloquently.

Did you write it, Kentish Fledgling?


Stik

I understand that EASA has been established within the EU to take eventual control and responsibility for regulating all a/c and personnel licensing for all EU member states and that the National Aviation Authorities will simply become the regional 'policemen' for EASA.

If this is the case then we should not be concerned about what the CAA, or any other EU NAA for that matter, is rumoured to be doing but what is EASA planning to do regarding EU resident N reg a/c being flown by EU resident FAA certificated personnel.

Phil

Which part precisely do you mean? Paragraph 2 in Chapter 1? I don't think you can construe "aviation within Danish territory" to apply only to domestic flights. The Chicago Convention would seem to be the focus of 2(b), that requires an "agreement with the state of registry".

All in all, it doesn't look substantially different from Art 3 of the UK's ANO.

I also think you go too far in suggesting that the Chicago Convention does not apply to domestic flights. It does where the stops are for non-traffic purposes. I don't believe the phrasing used was intended to prevent other than cabotage -- i.e. remunerated domestic flights. You need to read it in the context of the remainder of Art 5 and Art 7.

I suppose they can do anything they want. But, say I'm a UK citizen and resident, working for an American firm, flying their aircraft for them in Europe. What happens now, do I just loose my job?

Say I work for an aircraft importer who imports aircraft from the US manufacturer and then delivers them on throughout Europe. Who flies these aircraft, assuming they haven't been re-registered?

Say I'm chartered by a US citizen and aircraft owner to fly their aircraft, while they reside in the UK?

EA

So we agree the CAA could clobber UK resident N-reg in various ways. The question is whether they will ever bother.

The biggest driver in the CAA is probably money (even if they understandably must dress up any regulations in more paletable terms). I am sure that N-reg in UK GA is only a tiny part of the UK N-reg scene, seen in the context of CofA revenue loss to the CAA. For any training or commercial work, it has to be a G-reg, so the great majority of the UK GA fleet will never go N-reg. The sole owner / syndicate fleet which could ever go N-reg is very small; private owners have the Private CofA option which negates most maintenance regime savings and a miniscule % of those have an IR. And very few syndicates have enough "IR" members to make N-reg worth doing.

As in the UK we have the IMC Rating, the real driver behind the FAA IR is European flying, and that pretty well means airways. The % of UK PPLs that have an IR (of any sort) is tiny and always will be very small, not least because most of the UK fleet is not airways legal.

I don't think it is easy to get a plane which is equipped well enough for this, for much under £100k, and the vast majority of the UK fleet is nowhere near that figure.

Also much of what the CAA could do would be ineffective unless the whole of the EU did the same. Otherwise, multi-aircraft N-reg operators could get around any residence restriction by rotating planes through the UK.

There are also higher political considerations. The UK is a friend of the USA so they won't do some sort of blatent "up yours" gesture which perhaps the French DGAC might be able to do.

So perhaps we are making a bigger meal of it than is called for - although discussing it is certainly a good idea. Those who need to go N-reg will do so anyway but they will always be very few in number.

tot
then failed his PPL CAA medical

not actually true he ["me" never failed a caa medical ]

pm me please which pal are you

IQ
"Or it could be irrelevant to this debate, if e.g. he failed his CAA medical on something which he was required to notify the FAA doctor of."
i informed the ame who also got the faa in ok to agree

more later when i can expain but watch this space

I was reading my new copy of GASIL today and I have a question.

If (as some here have said) N reg is a small proportion of UK GA and is usually flown by more skilled pilots (FAA/IR etc) why do N reg aircraft and training for FAA ratings feature in 50% of the fatal accidents last year?

(Source Gasil 1 of 2004 page 5)

Do you not think that the mercifully small sample size would blow a hole in that rather basic analysis?

2D

Leaving the N reg aside for a moment.

We are much more security consious now.

However, there is nothing stopping any person flying and basing any private aircraft from another ICAO country in the UK for an extended period without any system for the CAA or DFT being informed.

Better still from a security (or lack of it) point of view, any person can produce a piece of paper stating ICAO pilot licence from some far flung State to a flying club and hire one of their aircraft.

How many flying club CFIs can tell what a pilot licence issued by say Afghanistan looks like? The holder is entitled to fly G registered aircraft without having to ask the CAA!!

Of course being able to fly G registered aircraft on an Afganistan licence means that there is access to airside at all airports.

Hello?

I can't drive a car in the UK for more than 1 year without obtaining a UK driving licence (no test - simply provide foreign licence)..........so how is it that I can fly UK aeroplanes for ever on some dodgy piece of paper that the CFI has no way of knowing if I produced it on my computer at home or not?

Gaping security hole to me which I am sure the CAA and the DFT would like to close.

Regards,

DFC

But Special Branch or customs and Immigration have to be informed of incoming flights and passenger names and date of birth and country of residence given. Allright, dodgy or stolen passports can be obtained, but I would think the authorities can catch those out. Concession airfields make sure they know who is using the concession. OK the EU and the impending enlargement bring some far flung countries into the free movement of people category, but I would assume a check ride before any hire to an Afgan would be a requirement of any insurance policy.

It's a great debate, if you are concerned you should probably get better informed however:

1. Regardless of the rules and regs, if some government overling or political hack gets it into his head he wants to do something and has the right power or the ear of the right idiot it will come to pass unless there is a sufficient lobby or loss of votes in it. For instance. The Canadian government gave a monopoly which ended up with a foreign firm for the provision of electronic marine navigation maps using info supplied by the Cdn hydrographic department (and paid for by us taxpayers). The company is now jacking the the price of all such maps with a whacking great licence fee. The Liberal government is doing something about this because a) They are already in the doghouse, and b) we are approaching an election and 10 or 20 thousand votes might just be important. The question is will the N reg owners be enough disincentive to the UK government? Probably not. Can they bring other pressure to bear? Judging by the way the whole of UK (and for that matter Cdn) GA business is treated by their government I'd not hold out much hope.

2. Regrettably snese, regulations, justice, etc don't count for much when bureaucracy gets wind up their tail so it's probably not worth counting on them.