The best way to resist is to fly…. to land to take of… and fly again.
I m found of Greece since a very long time and I will return there this summer. as says Kyp, flying in Greece is a maze between lake of AVGAS, FF (fucking Fraport) schedules (tavernas are open all the day but airports are not tavernas) port of entry (in Schengen)
But I m always happy to renew my AOPA subscription because they fight….
Being active is the only way…
This period we saw a lot of aero bashing… we must be present. Not agressive, gentlemen as we are but determinated as is a pilot…. what ever is our horse UL, certified, glider, gyro or balloon…
Silvaire wrote:
I know people who have flown a 65 HP aircraft with hand held radios (only) across the US, and back… multiple times
I did it in a Cessna 140 with 85hp, but I had the luxury of both a starter motor and a decent radio affixed to the panel!
I said “Most of Europe”, not “All Europe”.
I recall sitting here in France looking at FR24 showing Europe.
It was patently obvious which countries allowed all GA and which didnt.
It is still eerie to see as much GA as CAT on FR24 if its VFR, showing just how much CAT ops has been affected this last year.
skydriller wrote:
I think that this last year has shown us exactly what most of Europe thinks about GA.
I’m not so sure – a lot of our GA was flying internationally – the C172s to sweden and finland, DA62 and SR22 made multiple trips to Italy and Switzerland. And at least in scandinavia/baltics the “flight crew certificate” is good enough to put you under the crew exemptions..
I think that this last year has shown us exactly what most of Europe thinks about GA.
It is seen as leisure – not business or personal transportation, in the eyes of most European governments and was shut down.
Even many pilots were pathetically harping on about “can we fly or not, what are the rules?” in the UK with the inevitable regulation brought in.
Divide and conquer is definitely an issue.
I know people who have flown a 65 HP aircraft with hand held radios (only) across the US, and back… multiple times 
I think some of the Rotax powered fleet are excellent cross country planes.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
ULM’s are by definition 2 seater with limited range and only VFR.
Funnily enough I happen to know a few people who regularly use their inferior (in your words) airplane to fly to from Malaga or Seville to business meetings in Madrid or Barcelona.
Ibra wrote:
I had the impression it’s Germany (short of being US), Germans will think it’s Sweden, people in Sweden think it’s UK, the grass is always greener nearby
No one who has ever visited this forum would suggest UK 
172driver wrote:
Actually, in southern Europe a ULM makes perfect sense. You rarely need IFR capabilities, there are many, many more airfields to choose from and at the upper end these airplanes are faster than most certified GA planes. There simply is no need to deal with all the hassle of certified ownership.
Actually, you define the problem in this very short paragraph. Us vs They. UL vs certified. IMHO this is a target by the anti GA lobby who wishes to eradicate GA step by step using the old Roman banter “divide and conquer”.
ULM’s are by definition 2 seater with limited range and only VFR. That is what many anti GA folks think is “tolerable”, mainly because it totally negates those who wish to really travel and it will ground a great lot of people due to family or weight restraints or both.
What has happened with ULM’s is that a parallel society has been formed, with few or no contacts to the world of ICAO aviation. Those flying there are blissfully unaware or simply ignore the constant increase of restriction and red tape their colleagues who have more interest than short range VFR aviation alone (most of those contraptions don’t even legally carry two) and with very limited access to airports.
The goal behind this is clear: With the division the anti GA lobby gets rid of a load of pilots who take the currently “easier” way and fly ULMs. They also rid themselfs of unwanted traffic on their larger airports and have more and more reason to proclaim that certified GA is a privilege so few ultra rich class enemies use and therefore something best eliminated, as it does not serve the general population.
Only what do you imagine will happen, once certified GA is dead? ULM’s to be left alone? I think that is naive to the max. Noise groups and other anti GA folks will not simply stop and go away, they will then attack ULMs with gusto and have plenty of arguments for elimination: most of ULM’s are never or very rarely flown legally for weight reasons alone, their accident rates is not exactly stellar and they make the same or even more agressive noise than their certified relatives.So let’s get rid of them too.
IMHO, this division and the fact that most ULM airfields are strictly ULM and denied access to certified airplanes, with often better performance, is fatal for GA. ULM’s should not be treated differently at all, rather certified traffic should be cut the same slack (at least NCO). The division between ULM and certified does not help the general direction GA is going, it is clearly a means to an end. And aviation should not be stupid enough to accept that.
-
Peter wrote:
Maybe @Nuccio has a closer view of what’s happening?
Sorry Peter, I cannot share a closer view of the situation here in Italy as I very rarely use GA airports simply beacuse I do not need them.
I have been flying an ULM for 25 year and my choice was dictated by low costs, simpler rules and lot of private airfields. I am still happy with that choice that has allowed me to fly abroad as well. Just a little bit of complication to explain to CAA’s what kind of animal is an ULM but at the end, getting the permissions has been part of the fun…
