I have no dog in this fight but IMHO this thread encapsulates everything that’s wrong with Europe. Instead of working towards achieving a common level playing field, it’s a willy-waving contest of national interests. If even pilots, who, by definition, should be able to look beyond the horizon, display breathtaking parochialism, how is anything going to advance on that continent? I have to concur with M. Macron in his recent warnings about Europe being doomed.
This comes as no surprise to anyone doing business across Europe 
Lots of very different cultures, for a start.
We have to thank ICAO for providing a framework allowing us to fly around the place.
this thread encapsulates everything that’s wrong with Europe. Instead of working towards achieving a common level playing field, it’s a willy-waving contest of national interests. If even pilots, who, by definition, should be able to look beyond the horizon, display breathtaking parochialism, how is anything going to advance on that continent?
Same view here. And the tones given by some of the posters here fully reflect the antiquated and desperate situation the old continent is in, a dangerous blockade really, not only in aviation, but on all fronts.
We have had this a few times before, people don’t learn, history only repeats itself and will continue to do so…
172driver wrote:
Instead of working towards achieving a common level playing field, it’s a willy-waving contest of national interests
It really is not. Looking at the map I can fly with my “overweight” (in French terms) Savannah all the way from my home field to the southernmost tip of Italy without a single “PPR”. The route has to go east of France/Switzerland/Austria (as of today), but still very doable, and not really that much diversion. It would take some 25h of flying though, each way
That’s 8 countries, all with their own sets of national regulations. It is very possible, and strangely enough, Hungary is one of those.
Peter wrote:
We have to thank ICAO for providing a framework allowing us to fly around the place.
Not exactly. EASA LSA with a LAPL (both sub ICAO) is all that is needed, in EASA land at least.
172driver wrote:
I have to concur with M. Macron in his recent warnings about Europe being doomed.
Ha. Just read an article about Stoltenberg and his meeting with Georgina Meloni, prime minister of Italy from the very, very far right. A lady which is the very incarnation in flesh and blood of the “dangers” that threaten Europe according to Macron. According to Stoltenberg, who happen to be politically very much in the same camp as Macron by the way, Meloni is one of the most trustworthy and standfast partners against what is the real danger in Europe right now : Russia and support to Ukraine. All the time Macron is trying desperately to stay relevant at home. The article mentions the problem Stoltenberg has with Meloni vs the social-democratic left. It’s not Meloni that is the problem. It’s rather people like Macron (all over NATO/Europe) not doing what is needed to support Ukraine. It’s only talk, while Meloni, who Macron et co look at as the devil himself, also walk the walk.
Anyway, way out of context here Back to topic:
gallois wrote:
So a French pilot not only has to learn English s/he has to take an exam to prove it. At a cost of more than €50.
The UL scene here is self declaration which relies on your honour in saying you can speak English, as the PPL was up until about 20 years ago.
I’m no fan of the ELP for sure It’s something only EASA (or was it ICAO?) could come up with. But it’s there and is part of the ATC thing, and it’s world wide AFAIK. But, we are comparing apples and oranges. RT and ELP has it’s benefits, it’s a standard aviation requirement that opens up possibilities. Not going 600 kg is exclusively a French thing for French people living in France. It has zero benefits elsewhere. The whole “not going 600 kg” may result in quirky benefits, as in France, but to say that the same thing automatically would happen elsewhere is not realistic. This is a development tied to the social environment. The €50 and PPR for 600 kg ULs is just nonsense, void of benefits for anyone.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Of course except for the P2010 none of these are IFR tourers.
And all of them are European if I am not mistaken. The big problem for certification/product liability and so on is in the US. But so far, that is where the majority of certified aviation was produced.
On the other hand, you also see endless certification processes going on here, such as the Panthera. But I think there are different issues at play there than e.g. the effort of certifying a white sheet design in the US. Of course, any European design will also want to get the US certificate, as that is where the volume is, even today.
LeSving wrote:
What it that supposed to achieve? I
Prevent people registering elsewhere and flying in France?
172driver wrote:
I have no dog in this fight but IMHO this thread encapsulates everything that’s wrong with Europe. Instead of working towards achieving a common level playing field, it’s a willy-waving contest of national interests. If even pilots, who, by definition, should be able to look beyond the horizon, display breathtaking parochialism, how is anything going to advance on that continent? I have to concur with M. Macron in his recent warnings about Europe being doomed.
Fact is that much of the UL community not only in France but elsewhere are content to fly within their own country as long as they are in a deregulated environment and forego the benefits of international travel to keep it that way.
Obviously medical and maintenance concerns are the driving factor. So if in France you can fly ULs without any medical at all, there will be LOADS of pilots totally refusing to go anywhere where a medical is again required. I can absolutely understand that, as many pilots who have given up flying in my country do so because they are hassled by their medical providers on a regular basis or denied the medical. So for them, flying without a medical is the paramount issue, they simply don’t care what benefits they might get at the price of having to get a medical again.
This of course also has to do with the aging pilot population, who in Europe very often are grounded by medicals, rather than insurances as in the US.
So once again, if we were instead aiming to achieve a general regulation for GA which does away with medicals for airplanes up to say 2T/6seats in non commercial operation (or do Self-Declaration), if we were aiming at deregulating maintenance and equipment requirements to the level where the pilot / owner alone is responsible for it as with UL’s in France, if there was a European perspective of achieving a deregulated GA operation, then those concerns might end. But as that is extremely unlikely to happen, obviously every UL community in their own country wishes to keep their privileges at all cost, even if that means significant restrictions to what they do.
Apart, I think most of the UL people out there are not really interested in travel, but mostly in joyriding in the close vicinity or within the borders of their own country. And as in Germany and France they have enough space to do that, why bother with anything else. If on the other hand you live in a country which is barely bigger than the larger Paris area, things may be looked at from a different perspective.
As for Europe being doomed, that I fear is a real concern. There are groups and parties in most EU countries which dream of an *Exit of their own country, not least in Germany where their right wing exponents actually are eying getting friendly with Russia instead. Same in Bulgaria, where a party openly wishes to sever all ties with the EU and go back into the folds of Russia. This is so absurd that it simply shows once again that rational thinking as very few space within politics, if any. Nationalism and protectionism is growing in most places at an alarming rate. And while the EU is partly to blame for that, it is very often national rules which are blamed on the EU instead. Very similar as in “EASA sais we must” when it is in fact the national CAA who is trying to defend some absurd rules they made up, as they know darn well that not a lot of people are legally savvy enough to call their bluff. This kind of fact spinning has greatly influenced the Brexit decision and with that done, the example is set for others to follow the same path.
The liability issue is mostly fiction.
It has come up before many times. I usually ask for a set of accounts showing 99% of revenue going on product liability insurance The usual figure is more like 5%
But it is awfully handy when nobody is buying your product so you need to scale down production without losing face
Mooney_Driver wrote:
And all of them are European if I am not mistaken. The big problem for certification/product liability and so on is in the US. But so far, that is where the majority of certified aviation was produced.
Is FAA certification really that much more difficult? I thought EASA rules were based on FAA rules…
