Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Certified, Homebuilt or Ultralight? (merged)

Peter wrote:

and always make sure the cloudbase is at least 2000ft above the rocks

Wishful thinking. The rocks on the shores around the fjords maybe, but not the rocks 6000’ up. You wouldn’t fly much with those constraints. What I meant is that in Norway, Sweden and Finland, an area (including connected water) larger than UK, France, Spain and Germany combined, we can fly as we wish. IFR in a homebuilt, no problem, for those who think that is cool (and some do). Flying in Norway is very much like flying in Alaska, only we also got real airports all along the coast. Then Sweden, probably the best GA/recreational country you can find outside the US and Canada. Finland, much the same, only with millions of lakes.

This is the best place, by far, to fly anywhere in Europe. Why would a go elsewhere? Where else can you land on a frozen lake, get picked up by a nice, old lady serving you moose burgers? Why would I fly to places where simple VFR is problematic due to bureaucratic nonsense, like those in a third world country? More importantly, why would I care about the critical and moralistic opinion of people in countries far (not that far, but still) away, where their activity would be vastly more constrained . Those opinions are of no value to me. They are of no value to anyone who likes flying anywhere in the world. I could wish for better weather, more light and warmer climate in the winter, but that time is also a good opportunity to build and maintain aircraft.

Yet, I feel I only have scratched the surface of the Nordic countries. There are much more places here I haven’t flown to, than places I have. Towing gliders in the mountain doesn’t actually get you anywhere, but it’s great fun, and so is mounting EFI on the engine of that plane. To me flying is fun. That’s why I do this. Fighting against bureaucracies flying VFR, or having to get an IFR rating and an old, slow and/or grossly overpriced ICAO compliant aircraft just to win over those bureaucracies, does’t strike me as fun. Sorry, it doesn’t. It sound more like unpaid work to me.

But that’s me. Maybe someday I get myself a TMG and cruise a summer month in Germany, Austria, France. That sound like fun too, but it’s not on the top of my list just yet.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

I’ve been to Norway many times (not by my plane yet but that is on the list) and while it is expensive, it is lovely. Finland likewise, have not managed to go to Sweden yet. You are right, it is a wonderful part of Europe and I don’t wonder why you are not even interested to fly further. Obviously also aviation is looked at much more favorably there than it is in central Europe, partially out of necessity but also menatlity.

That does not mean however that the issues we are discussing here are irrelevant. They may be for you, but none of us can just move to Scandinavia because we don’t like the way aviation is treated on our home turf, and even if we were willing to move, I suppose most of us would choose the US. Much bigger, everything from Carribbean to pretty much arctic landscape and all an aviation land of promise.

But not many of us can do that so we need to see how we get along here and how we can manage with what we can do and what we can possibly change for the better.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

That does not mean however that the issues we are discussing here are irrelevant. They may be for you, but none of us can just move to Scandinavia because we don’t like the way aviation is treated on our home turf

Fair enough. It’s just a bit annoying hearing over and over that this and that is not possible in “Europe”, when the fact is that in the largest areas of Europe it is.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

LeSving wrote:

Norway, Sweden and Finland, an area (including connected water) larger than UK, France, Spain and Germany combined,

Yes. This is something I think many people don’t fully appreciate. I live in the population centre of Sweden and if I want to fly towards central Europe, I have some 300 NM to go before I even leave Sweden. That’s about the same distance as London-Frankfurt…

Flying in Norway is very much like flying in Alaska, only we also got real airports all along the coast. Then Sweden, probably the best GA/recreational country you can find outside the US and Canada. Finland, much the same, only with millions of lakes.

This is the best place, by far, to fly anywhere in Europe. Why would a go elsewhere?

Clearly I agree with you about flying in Scandinavia :-) but your arguments hold only if your flying is an end in itself. Many of us also enjoy flying as a means of travelling — meaning you want to go outside Scandinavia.

Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 28 Oct 08:44
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Many of us also enjoy flying as a means of travelling — meaning you want to go outside Scandinavia.

I get that some like to go further south and all that. But that isn’t really the point here, because most don’t. Not unless they have at least a couple of weeks to spend, then it doesn’t matter what you fly, or are flying a buizjet or something.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

because most don’t.

They won’t be buying an Evo, or anything capable of going places, for that matter, because they don’t need it. And the rest won’t (mostly) be buying a kitplane, due to the issues with border crossings, etc. So I don’t see the supporting case for the ability to fly IFR, when there is nowhere to go except fly over vast areas of desolate terrain and so often in bad wx.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I think the difference between the US attitude and the European one can be summed up quite easily by what their regulators are called. The FAA is the Federal Aviation Administration but the CAA is the Civil Aviation Authority. The FAA is also charged with promoting aviation, where it seems like certain European regulators seem to be charged with restricting it.

Andreas IOM

And the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is charged with promoting those? Well, they seem to be doing an ever better job than the FAA then!

Peter wrote:

So I don’t see the supporting case for the ability to fly IFR, when there is nowhere to go except fly over vast areas of desolate terrain and so often in bad wx.

Are you referring to Scandinavia? The supporting case is — as usual — better dispatch rate in bad weather and easier flight management.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

LeSving wrote:

I get that some like to go further south and all that. But that isn’t really the point here, because most don’t.

Maybe they do not with their private planes but heavens if Norwegians don’t travel… I am always happy to see them wherever they go but it would be total news to me that the majority never leaves Scandinavia. And as for flying abroad in their own plane, maybe they can’t be bothered to get special permits for their experimentals? Because withhout those the limit to fly in Scandinavia is quite obvious.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top