You may find it hard to compile a list Ugolin (there must be way more than 20 of these in France – more like 10x that) because some might well think you are the DGAC and they are compiling a list for enforcement
Most of these people are staying below the radar – same as G-reg homebuilts based outside the UK who are 100% legal but who the LAA (the UK governing body for that category) doesn’t like and tries to use various dodgy methods to stop getting their annual inspection and test. In comparison it is much easier to keep a PH-reg one outside the Netherlands.
Peter wrote:
In comparison it is much easier to keep a PH-reg one outside the Netherlands.
It’s a nobrainer in Germany. It’s so easy, that I’d be reluctant to change to D-reg., even if it’d be possible.
Peter wrote:
You may find it hard to compile a list Ugolin (there must be way more than 20 of these in France – more like 10x that) because some might well think you are the DGAC and they are compiling a list for enforcement
Peter, I didn’t imagine this option !!! The list of people I represent are friends or friends of friends. Of course I could be a spy !!! Anyway, I will never give any ID or reg of the people I represent before reaching a strong agreement with DGAC. In this story in front of DGAC i’m the only one to be in frontline.
Ugolin wrote:
France has canceled former bilateral agreements with UK, Belguim, Germany, Switzerland, NL, etc
Thunderstorm18 wrote:
Can you point us to the text where they write about cancellation ?
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/eli/arrete/2018/1/8/TRAA1728022A/jo/texte
Article 6 (in French) “Abrogé” means “canceled” or “revoked”
Thanks Ugolin,
Strange that they included Finland, the rest of the countries are bordering the French Airspace and confirms my theory,
“secret pact” to make life harder in buying Annex 2 and Amateur build aircraft and still keeping the AC on the original country registry.
Also is strange that they don’t mention ECAC where the list with countries who implemented the regulation it is much bigger.
It may be useful to organise a petition signed by owners of Annex 2 and Amateur build aircraft from outside France where they can protest against the decision, also may help if you contact the ECAC, (which anyway it is based in France), to find out the reason for this. Good luck and let us know the outcome.
What I find curious is why do this right now in this seemingly coordinated manner. The Annex 2 scene has been around since the Romans and the CAAs are not stupid; they know there is a lot of stuff going on below the radar as regards domestically based foreign regs. It has never been a significant safety issue.
The ECAC recommendation never went anywhere. We have had some very vocal “ECAC evangelists” here but no country actually implemented it. It was just a restaurant menu. Various countries just picked the bits they were OK with; some more than others.
Has there been some high profile accident which provoked a response?
EASA has jurisdiction over the use of EASA certified aircraft on non EASA licenses (well, I would debate that, but they feel they have, being an agency of the EU which “owns” its member countries) but EASA has no jurisdiction over where Annex 2 are based, foreign reg or not. So I think the reason behind this is something else.
Peter wrote:
The ECAC recommendation never went anywhere
Well if you go to the list I’m pointing above, 20 countries state that “ECAC recommendation entirely implemented”
The list was updated last in 2012 and I think now needs to be refreshed not at least with 8.33 requirement.
True that some of them have additional requirements but they are still reasonable in my opinion.
Peter wrote:
Has there been some high profile accident which provoked a response?
Peter wrote:
EASA has jurisdiction over the use of EASA certified aircraft on non EASA licenses
Hi Peter,
Sorry for late answer, but very busy at the moment with my job.
We had last Sat a Glasair/Lancair Flyin meeting in Beaune. Even if weather conditions didn’t allow everybody to come, we had discussed of course about the move to F-reg.
At first some people chose to apply for 6 month temporary permit to fly and some others not. Some people started the process with DGAC to apply for F-Reg. Please find attached the document issued by DGAC
At this stage, as far as i know, nobody has achieved the total process. As you can see for some owners (most of them are not the builders), some points could be very challenging (history of aircraft, bills, calculation report of the wing, etc)
Wait and see the next month what will happen regarding different kind of aircraft