My point was that in the section above, they don’t speak about the operator’s base/residence at all. They speak about where the AIRCRAFT flown is based.
But I agree, they (EAS) probably don’t grasp these details and rephrased things improperly.
Is there such a thing as UK N reg?
What happens re N reg in the UK will be up to the UK. Nothing to do with EASA.
If a pilot resident in the UK and flying an N reg aircraft (providing the UK permit it) wants to fly it in France for up to 90 days in a 6 month period post the June deadline I don’t think this rule prevents that does it?
The UK did its own version of EASA anti-N-reg FCL.
If the operator is based in the UK, EASA FCL no longer operates and you can fly in the EU without needing EU papers.
It’s strange, because until now I’ve always seen this expressed in terms of the pilot’s principal residence, not the aircraft.
Is there even a definition of what it means for an aircraft to be based? I pay Cannes airport a princely sum to be able to park there are have unlimited landings without an extra fee. But that doesn’t mean the aircraft is permanently based there. For all anyone knows it could be spending most of its time in say Bosnia or indeed the UK.
Am I based at LFMD because I pay them a fee? But that would mean I could be based at two or more airports, so what would that mean?
As bosmantico suggests, probably the main reason is that nobody at EASA really knows either.
My point was that in the section above, they don’t speak about the operator’s base/residence at all. They speak about where the AIRCRAFT flown is based.
Yes; they obviously don’t understand it.
Is there even a definition of what it means for an aircraft to be based?
The wording is “where is the operator based” and no there is no definition.
gallois wrote:
Is there such a thing as UK N reg?
If aircraft stays 365 days in UK, I am pretty sure it’s UK N-reg 
gallois wrote:
If a pilot resident in the UK and flying an N reg aircraft (providing the UK permit it) wants to fly it in France for up to 90 days in a 6 month period post the June deadline I don’t think this rule prevents that does it?
Nothing but one needs to keep running that show forever?
PS: some people do the same for aircraft without VAT paid taking it outside customs union every 6 months !
If aircraft stays 365 days in UK, I am pretty sure it’s UK N-reg
No.
Nothing but one needs to keep running that show forever?
??
some people do the same for aircraft without VAT paid taking it outside customs union every 6 months !
Irrelevant.
As explained to Europe Air Sports by the European Commission and EASA this deadline will not be extended for another time.
However, and it is the same here in the UK, they have been saying exactly this since 2011. The EASA-FAA treaty doesn’t offer anything tangible. The only thing of significance is the ICAO IR to CB IR conversion route, where most FAA IR / N-reg pilots will be able to skip all Euro written exams and get a Euro IR with an oral + checkride.
Aren’t there 3 things at play here?
1/ How long can you base an N reg aircraft in one of the countries of EASA land?
As far as I know each country is different here?
Peter often quotes a limit for France I don’t have that to hand at the moment.
But if it is not an EU regulation ie because each country has a different rule it would suggest that the owner of a N reg based at Cannes could do a quick trip to Italy or Spain every now and again to meet this requirement.
2/Licencing. IIUC There is and will not be according to EASA any reason why someone cannot fly his N reg plane on his FAA licence, providing, if he is a resident or citizen of France that person also holds an EASA licence.
3/ A non resident of France or non EU citizen can not spend more than 90days in every 180day period in the EU.
Come on, anyone knows why CAA/UK was after Sala aircraft accident? why not DGAC/France or LBA/Germany? or CAAZ/Zimbabwe?
Surely, that was about a “UK N-reg PA46”? unless someone thinks the whole UK court thingy was a mistake and some mis-understanding
Ibra wrote:
Come on, anyone knows why CAA/UK was after Sala aircraft accident?
Because the Pilot has been a Brit and the operator has been a Brit as well.
The more important question is: Why is the FAA not prosecuting the case?
