Dan wrote:
Methinks aviation here is a reflection of the EU mess. Instead of a leaned-out political system, the EU ended up in creating hundreds of additional positions of political unimportance, each country being preoccupied of sustaining or increasing its perceived privileges. Politician bureaucrats at their best. The United States of Europe, what a missed, once in man’s history, opportunity!
What is so bad about flying in Europe? with EASA and SERA the rules for aviation are (or should) be unified. I don’t see anything getting in my way of getting in my plane when I want and as I want and fly anywhere in Europe (political Europe, we’ll leave the UK out of the equation atm).
Sure you need to file a flight plan, is that such a big deal? This is not a US vs EU debate in my opinion, I love Europe and think the cultural differences which you get to experience between countries make the flying experience more satisfying than remaining in 1 country. I think unless we all do our bit to actually promote flying (ie not just point out the negatives) but show how to do things, this whole GA dying will become a self fulfilling prophecy.
I agree; for the most part if works well enough (to get adequate value out of GA, if not the “utility value” which you get in the US) if you carefully pick your battles.
And this is largely why EuroGA was set up 
Peter wrote:
The US prob99 has a route for deaf pilots to fly.
Here is the FAA info on how its done if the individual wants to obtain a Private Certificate when he’s already deaf. The certificate then includes the limitation, “Not Valid for Flights Requiring the Use of Radio” (14 CFR section 61.13), but the pilot could fly almost anywhere in the US on that basis, or close enough, as per my two posts above.
Silvaire wrote:
Much more complex medical certification including EKGs for private pilots, no 3rd class or Basic Med or Sport Pilot analogy unless you fly non-certified ULMs only, with limited airport/airspace access.
No. The LAPL is a restricted license with more relaxed medical requirements (double time frame to expiry just to start with) Pretty close to the Sport Pilot I think.
EKG is also not done at every Class II, in my case due to my weight every 2nd year.
Silvaire wrote:
Flugleiters required in some areas, airports in many areas cannot be operated without ground staff, leading to issues with night operations.
Flugleiter only in Germany. Night ops is mostly not necessary an issue with staffing (outside Germany) but with NIMBY’s requiring the airfield to shut down after dark (They of course would like it to be shut down entirely).
Silvaire wrote:
Pilot operated lighting is a legal issue.
First time I hear of that. We have it on at least one airfield in Switzerland. Mostly, night ops, see above.
Silvaire wrote:
Flying from your own property is generally illegal without approval.
Hugely different depending on the country, but in most of them again the main obstacle is objections by neighbours.
Silvaire wrote:
Formal inspection and paperwork procedures required to run an engine or propeller past manufacturers recommended TBO.
Not according to EASA, which only requires a self-declaration. Some countries require inspections, which is in theory a violation of EASAs rulemaking.
Silvaire wrote:
Class D airspace around airports requires a transponder, and it’s generally Mode S, making those airports off limits to simple aircraft.
The FAA requires ADS-B for all controlled airspace, so what is the difference?
Silvaire wrote:
Periodic aircraft C of A expiration, more elaborate airworthiness renewal and paperwork procedures than a simple A&P Annual Inspection with logbook entry. Ludicrous CAMO complexity still required for some operations of privately owned light aircraft.
I am with a CAMO for several reasons, one of them is that the airplane is used by a flight school. Private ops does not require CAMO normally. Before I was with the CAMO under contract, they still can and do renew the ARC on the basis of a simple annual. CAMO for those who do not legally need it is a service, which helps with maintenance issues such as AD compliance and so on. I own my Mooney for 14 years now and had it inspected by the FOCA twice in that time. Everything else was done by my shop who do the annual, in cooperation with the in-house CAMO who renews the ARC.
Silvaire wrote:
8.33 radio airspace requirements
8.33 came along due to too high density of ATC frequencies. It was annoying indeed, but there are many low cost devices available and the functionality is included in many common devices such as the GNS series and similar.
Silvaire wrote:
Pop-up IFR considered punishable pilot error, not a valuable tactical tool.
Again that is mostly a German issue. And if you know what Germany can do in terms of bureaucracy and rulemaking even on the subject of playground opening times… But Germany, despite some people thinking so, is NOT Europe.
These things keep changing and quite a few of the issues you rise have changed or at least EASA are trying to change them.
You also conveniently forget things which are allowed in Europe but not by the FAA, such as cost sharing e.t.c.
The Elephant in the room is the fact that you are dealing with dozens of nation states where each piss on common rules while at the foreground proclaiming European Unity. Add to that that EASA, as opposed to the FAA, only controls the major part of Aviation but not all of it, hence there is a maze of rules outside that: Experimentals, ULM’s e.t.c. as the main exponents. If those were put under EASA regulation, a FAA like treatment of them and much better integration into existing licensing would be possible.
Clearly there are things which we are jelous of, such as lower gas prices and the infrastructure principle in use in the US. But we also have to reckognize what has indeed improved in recent years and that in man cases the masks was torn off when EASA had to step on their feet in order to implement GA roadmap items against the national CAA:
Outpricing and tactics to chase away GA from major airports exist everywhere in the world, again however it is not in EASA’s power to change this. If the FAA can do this, then they are in an advantage, but seeing that the FAA was unable to prevent airport closures by bulldozer like Meighs, they have the same issues.
We have enough issues in Europe, but it does not help keeping myths alive which have been addressed or issues which concern single countries.
FAA Sport Pilot requires no medical at all.
A self declaration even in those countries that actually follow EASA rules on engines and propellers is not the same as no procedure or paperwork at all, nor is it close. Same goes for pre-ordained Maintenance Plans.
FAA most definitely does not require ADS-B Out in all controlled airspace, or close. Nor does FAA require a transponder of any kind in Class D or E airspace unless it happens to be very close to Class B or C airspace, which is limited to a few airports, or above 10,000 ft.
Nobody, nowhere needs 2280 radio communication channels, 8.33 is purely a political issue with no practical basis, as are most of the issues I described.
The LAPL medical is very different to the US SP one, which is a self-certify system like the UK PMD. Stretching the same tests for 2 years against 1 year doesn’t actually help you if you have one of many conditions. The main difference between the US SP and the UK PMD is that in the latter case you can overtly fail the Class 2, have the AME report you to the CAA (he’s duty bound to do so; he is not your agent) and then you can still downgrade to the PMD, whereas in the FAA SP you must not actually fail the medical. And no other European country has a “PMD” – only France has the medical-free UL license.
PCL was illegal for decades in the UK, and still is at licensed airports. Actually it was always legal at unlicensed airports but nobody knew about it Rest of Europe, I don’t know.
The FAA requires ADS-B in txp-mandatory airspace.
8,33 is entirely the result of national CAA politics; mainly job safeguarding. The US doesn’t need it and Europe certainly would not either.
Cost sharing is indeed easier in Europe (no common purpose test) but I would argue that this dovetails with the poorer European GA scene, where so many pilots will not do a flight at all unless they can cost-share it. From my FAA CPL stuff, I reckon most of the FAA stuff in this area is to keep a lid on illegal charters, which has long been a dead business in Europe (below the bizjet/TP level).
Peter wrote:
in the FAA SP you must not actually fail the medical
That’s true, depending on what kind of medical you failed… but what’s done if you have marginal ability to pass a ‘no-EKG ever’ 3rd Class is to transition to Basic Med before you fail the 3rd Class, without much affect on your flying/aircraft options. There are no FAA medical records or AME submissions associated with Basic Med and if one doctor doesn’t pass you, it has no consequence and another doctor may pass you without issue. Then later when you sell your Bonanza or whatever you can fly SP in a more limited range of aircraft and give up on medicals entirely, regardless of how your last Basic Med exam went.
Peter wrote:
Cost sharing is indeed easier in Europe (no common purpose test) but I would argue that this dovetails with the poorer European GA scene, where so many pilots will not do a flight at all unless they can cost-share it.
Under FAA rules we typically fly multiple aircraft from and to the same places, each with one person on board buying the gas for his aircraft. Its a different kind of cost sharing
I’m guessing cost sharing may not be as common a practice in Europe, or as often an economic necessity, as is reported… but I have no basis for knowing. Certainly I’ve rarely heard anybody discussing dividing flying expenses here, maybe never. The guy who owns the plane buys the gas. However I can foresee that facilitating a P-51 ride (its now flying with new engine) may be assisted by proffering a credit car to the fuel truck driver.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Flugleiter only in GermanyDon’t forget to add Austria and the Netherlands on this required “Flugleiter” list.
Pilot-operated lighting is a legal issue.So far as I know, France has quite a few airfields, where pilots can operate lighting by themselves. And I tell you what: In Switzerland, some airfields have even public roads crossing the runway, where the pilot can operate the barriers and traffic lights remotely as well.
But Germany, despite some people thinking so, is NOT Europe.Not everything is so bad about Germany. The country has a pretty clean airspace, fuel availability for both Avgas and Mogas are brilliant, ATC is often quite cooperative, many nice restaurants at airfields and nice places for sightseeing. And yes, Germany is for sure (part of) Europe, but Europe is not Germany alone.
I love Europe and think the cultural differences which you get to experience between countries make the flying experience more satisfying than remaining in 1 country.Absoletly! I couldn´t have said it better myself. But even within Europe, many GA pilots are remaining in their own country.
Thanks for the clarification on pilot operated lighting – its not possible to capture every nuance when writing such a long list!
I would say the restaurants on the airfields were possibly the best part of German GA that I observed, in my limited experience
Mooney_Driver wrote:
EKG is also not done at every Class II, in my case due to my weight every 2nd year.
Actually not because of your weight but because your age. Every class II holder has to do an EKG every other year after 50.
8.33 came along due to too high density of ATC frequencies.
That’s actually not the case, although some would have you believe it. Silvaire is right that it was for political reasons. (Not for job safeguarding – I fail to see how 8.33 could safeguard any jobs.) The original 760 frequencies would be plenty if there was a Europe-wide frequency allocation scheme. But as it is every country allocates frequencies on their own and were unwilling to yield this privilege to the EU, Eurocontrol or any other supranational entity, leading to suboptimal frequency use. The USA does not have that problem as frequency allocation is a federal privilege.
Also, Central Europe would need ACCs/FIRs spanning several countries. As it is I believe Maastricht UACC is the only case.
