Not at all. I still believe tha my prediction will be correct. The IMCr is history,grandfather rights probably. But pretty useless on Annex II and permit aircraft......

Unfortunatly.

Bose - strange, I dont recall your predicting grandfather rights? I am not sure I even recall your predicting anything other than an EASA IR in the bold new EASA world? ;)

It is possible.

I am not fighting with you over this Fuji, go back and look at what I have said in the past. I predicted the situation with the FAA and said that they would just pay lip service to you until the 11th hour and then roll you over. I have said the same thing with the IMCr, they will pay lip service and roll you over. An IMCr or whatever they choose to call it in an Annex II or permit aircraft is the ultimate chocolate teapot.

While I will admit to enjoying the torture of Peter over these subjects it does not mean I support the situation we find ourselves in. There is no safety case for the FAA clampdown and there is a very clear safety case for retaining the IMCr. But as EASA have demonstrated time and time again minor details like that do not bother them as long as we are all uniform. Remind you of something?

If I recall we had a discussion about the EASA rulemaking process. The Derogations that appear in the regs are decided outside that process in Brussels. Choosing to apply or not the derogations is a matter for individual states. What has that to do with the transparency of the EASA NPA rulemaking process?

Please point me to a specific exchange of posts you are claiming you were right/I was wrong?

There have been a number of comments along the lines of ...

I am clearly missing something. As I understand it, the rules have pretty much guaranteed the long term security of N (and similar reg) foreign based aircraft. We now have it documented that it is allowed under EASA/EU law, that all aircraft need to comply with the respective aspects of EU-OPS (which I think was broadly true before) and that the FAA maintenance regime is acceptable. The only issue remaining is in parts FCL/MED (and the slightly bizare need to have two licences and medicals to fly an N vs an EU aircraft).

This last element certainly removes a major driver for moving PA28 C172 type aircraft onto the N. However, for more complex aircraft the N still preserves

• your ability to operate globally (you can get maintained anywhere)
• prevents having to make expensive modifications to get onto the local reg - which then may need to be removed to sell the aircraft back into the global market
• the ability to install modern safety/functionality upgrades
• the ability to operate (at the turbine level) under a demonstrably safer regime.
• The ability to operate in an internally consistent and stable regulatory environment

For Joe Bloggs in a spam can, these reasons probably are not enough to spend £5k moving to N-reg. But they are probably enough to prevent moving back to EU reg. For turbine operators these are going to be way more significant than the short term hassle of retraining crew or hiring different crew.

I accept that a bunch of EU citizens being thrown out of work is a bad thing for the individuals, but I don't see it as a reason for the operators/owners to change registration.

So I can see this change stemming the tide of light piston aircraft moving off EU registers, but I certainly don't see this driving tide of turbines (or even Nreg pistons) onto the EU registers.

Absolutely correct..:ok::ok:

I though you would have to come under both systems for oversight now if perm based in EU.

Spot on
 

mm_flynn - That is exactly as I see it.

The proposals I have seen does not change the maintenance regimen for the small aircraft.

Provided it is what EASA calls non complex i.e. not ME turboprop, not over 18 seats, not over 5700kg, not a turbojet.

MJ will be disappointed :ugh:

So small then?

If you can ever buy a Cirrus Jet :rolleyes:

Not disappointed in the slightest Peter.

And thanks for clarifying the line.

Do not want to ruin the anti N reg party but I have heard information today which is very solid, reliable and detailed and which I cannot disclose ;)which wont get me hurrying to convert my Licences to EASA.

Pace

Looks like a pointless post Pace, or more like wishful thinking. Either way, why post such a tease? What you or I may not wish IS going to take place because it is already law. Maybe a reliable and solid mate of yours thinks he can circumnavigate it is one thing but the courts, not him, will decide that.

Sorry, but it's here, and it ain't goin away.

PS. I know something else, but sorry, it's top secret!

Which is exactly what I did. However, at the airports I frequent there has been a very noticeable renregistration trend (or disappearance of EU airframes). At the rate it was going, by the end of the decade there would have only been the AOC operators and PFA types left on the EU reg! The changes will have dramatically slowed that particular flow from EU to N reg airframes.

Chubby Chopper

What was EASAs publicly stated reason for the extension from 2012 to 2014? Was it so people like you had time to convert? Was it because the relevant bodies did not have time to instigate the regulations? Or was it something else ? If it was something else which most of us thought was a smoke screen I can confirm that that is far from the truth wait till after June and you may realise why I for one am not in any hurry to do a thing.
More than that I cannot say other than the information comes from a very very reliable source who is at the heart of what is going on. Infact part of what is going on.
Had he said Pace get converted I was considering it but I was told do nothing!
But Chubby Chopper its a free world you do what suits you.
I can assure you this thread is way off mark. More than that I really cannot say with breaking a confidance.

Pace

We will see; perhaps your confidant has the clout to change the legislation. One other significant point, the "delay" you mention applies only to those states who apply for it. Some states have applied for two years, some for one year only, and some it would appear have not made any appications for the required "derogations."

Depending on where you fly using your FAA ticket, and where the operator of your aircraft resides, YOU could be in breach of the legislation as I type NOW...the two years you speak of is not a granted right!

That said, I hope you are correct. It will make my job a lot easier.

As I said some time after June we will have a clearer picture of where this is all heading.
As for derogation I have yet to hear of a pilot who has had problems neither have I had a problem to date which could indicate that those countries are not that bothered or not very efficient? You would have thought they would be lined up waiting for every N reg aircraft on blast off day?

Pace

Hmm. Can't think of anything happening in June... ;)

I can't possibly imagine what Pace knows, or what his confidant knows, but I'm sure that the legislation is not going to change! Sadly I have to assume that the only thing likely to happen in June will be rain.

I'll bet money on both.