if so, that doesn’t make sense in my opinion… as stated, all information is published in the underlying, (national) air laws and also, for France, within the VFR Manual – why not in the AIPs? Especially Germany names relevant, underlying air laws in GEN 1.6, but no reference to NCO.GEN.135
The purely theoretical view is – you actually need to know what the ICAO agreement requires you to carry, the AIP needs to notify differences to that only.
I suggest a search on required documents etc. Lots of previous threads.
I don’t know where to find EASA regs either, if looking for the latest one and any AMCs etc.
Peter, well, the point is not that I do not know where to find the relevant regulations… as said before, NCO.GEN.135 is clear on that, I wonder, why the AIP doesn’t name the relevant references, such as NCO.GEN or the national laws…
Cobalt wrote:
the AIP needs to notify differences to that only.
wouldn’t this mean, the other way round, that the whole content of the AIP is only there because there are differences to ICAO standards? But differences to ICAO standard are explicitly published in GEN 1.7 Differences from ICAO Standards, Recommended Practices and Procedures, aren’t they?
In some countries (Germany included) a lot of national regulations are full of contradictions to the relevant European ones. This may be due to the regulators not being able to change them in time when European law becomes effective (in most cases, there is merely a few years advance notice, so this is perfectly understandable) or it can be a futile attempt at maintaining or even expanding existing national gold-plating.
As far as documents to be carried on board are concerned: This is exhaustively regulated in NCO.GEN.135, so any other requirement in national rules is unenforceable, IMHO.
tschnell wrote:
a lot of national regulations are full of contradictions to the relevant European ones.
that being said it must be stated that it remains pilot’s judgement, which law he “decides” to follow.
In practice, while being ramp-checked:
do I really want to beginn a discussion with (foreign) competent authorities (that deliberately ignores European regulation (i.e. Germany with their FSAV and DME…) whether NCO.GEN.XXX or the “ARRETE DU 24 JUILLET 1991 MODIFIE RELATIF AUX CONDITIONS ARRETE DU 24 JUILLET
1991 MODIFIE RELATIF AUX CONDITIONS D’UTILISATION DES AERONEFS CIVILS EN
AVIATION GENERALE” is applicable?
Summarized: a pilot needs to know both regulations: the correct (European) one and the one published/recited within the AIP/national regulations.
Furthermore, he has to have detailed knowledge where European regulations beats national ones and where national regulators have/use some… let’s say… flexibility.
Personally: the most relevant (pdf-) document carried on board is EU VO 800/2013 (NCO) in the appropriate language…
You are right – it is a complete mess.
The real bottom line is that the last thing you want to be doing is arguing with a policeman whose language you cannot speak, in a country whose justice system gives the policeman enough authority to impose a spot fine or aircraft confiscation.
These issues are very rare – except possibly (according to frequent reports) at Biarritz where they have the training school for airport police 
I merged a number of journey log threads a while ago
Thread merged into existing “required document carriage” one.
Peter wrote:
I don’t know where to find EASA regs either, if looking for the latest one and any AMCs etc.
Probably the best (least worst) place is the Easy Access Rules which basically combines everything. Here’s a link to the Air Ops one.
This is also a useful page, where it is best to look for either the Consolidated Version or Easy Access.
https://www.easa.europa.eu/regulations
It’s still a dog’s dinner but there are the beginnings of order, you just need to polish your crystal ball.
TB_flyer wrote:
I wonder, why the AIP doesn’t name the relevant references, such as NCO.GEN or the national laws…
National rules not applicable to international traffic do not deserve a mention in the AIP.
A single point of reference, perhaps in the style of the AIP, detailing “differences” such as opt outs, exemptions, derogations, national definitions, etc, concerning EASA Regulations as adopted or applied in each of the member states would be extremely helpful.
Peter wrote:
I don’t know where to find EASA regs either, if looking for the latest one and any AMCs etc.
A sticky listing sources or a separate forum section dedicated to regulations may be useful.
@TB_flyer wrote:
tschnell wrote:
a lot of national regulations are full of contradictions to the relevant European ones.that being said it must be stated that it remains pilot’s judgement, which law he “decides” to follow.
In practice, while being ramp-checked:
do I really want to beginn a discussion with (foreign) competent authorities (that deliberately ignores European regulation (i.e. Germany with their FSAV and DME…) whether NCO.GEN.XXX or the “ARRETE DU 24 JUILLET 1991 MODIFIE RELATIF AUX CONDITIONS ARRETE DU 24 JUILLET
1991 MODIFIE RELATIF AUX CONDITIONS D’UTILISATION DES AERONEFS CIVILS EN
AVIATION GENERALE” is applicable?Summarized: a pilot needs to know both regulations: the correct (European) one and the one published/recited within the AIP/national regulations.
Furthermore, he has to have detailed knowledge where European regulations beats national ones and where national regulators have/use some… let’s say… flexibility.Personally: the most relevant (pdf-) document carried on board is EU VO 800/2013 (NCO) in the appropriate language…
I am a little bit surprised by the level of ignorance about regulations among the private pilot community. However, given the fact that the regulation is actually evolving all the time, that parts of the regulations are introduced in a staggered manner (delayed applicability), the possibility for MS to derogate from parts of the regulations, it is not surprising that there is some confusion. But it is less messy than some are trying to make it if you just take the time to read up a little bit.
But suggesting that we can all decide what regulations apply to us is just bizarre.
The real bottom line is that the last thing you want to be doing is arguing with a policeman whose language you cannot speak, in a country whose justice system gives the policeman enough authority to impose a spot fine or aircraft confiscation.
I wish I had not read that fear-mongering. It may not be intentional, but the result is the same. Just ignore it. The authorities are not that cruel. They may be ignorant, and they may overreact if they are met with attitude.
Cobalt wrote:
The purely theoretical view is – you actually need to know what the ICAO agreement requires you to carry, the AIP needs to notify differences to that only.
Yes, that is definitely one way to look at it. At least if you obey by the ICAO rules you are not very likely to get into trouble.
However European residents/pilots should know what regulation governs European aviation, whether that is rules of the air (SERA), licensing regulations (FCL) or operations (NCO/NCC)
So here are some simple facts about aviation regulations in Europe:
EASA
EU 216/2008 chapter 4 basically says that the Air Operations regulations apply to EASA-registered airplanes, except Annex II, and operations of other aircraft by operators that are residents of the European union. I am just paraphrasing because Euro-lex is down for maintenance and I cannot see the exact wording.
There are yet other paragraphs about applicability in the basic regulation that are worth reading.
France
Arrêté de 1991 relatif aux conditions d’utilisation des aéronefs civils en aviation générale articles 1 and 2 say that it applies to French-registered aircraft that are EASA Annex II (IOW not subject to EASA Part-NCC/NCO), and to French-registered EASA aircraft (non-Annex II) performing operations not covered by EASA Part-NCC/NCO, within the boundaries of France.
So the French regulations explicitly state that they only fill the void wherever EASA regulations do not apply.
I know nothing about the German regulations and how they define applicability, so I won’t comment, but I would be surprised if there weren’t some explicit restrictions on their applicability. Otherwise, just keep in mind that EU regulations prevail.
