Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Certified, Homebuilt or Ultralight? (merged)

mh wrote:

Roland, Peter has it right, the permanent approval in some cases does not eliminate the basic necessity of an approval.

Malte, I still contradict. It’s rather the other way around. Although every single country is entitled to regulate their (and in their terretory foreign) homebuilts (that indeed is a principle), they usually don’t in at least many cases in central Europe regarding a seperate entry permission. IFR is a different story, but VFR you are free to go legally without a seperate permission required with only some exemptions.

Last Edited by europaxs at 06 Sep 14:14
EDLE

VFR you are free to go legally without a seperate permission required with only some exemptions.

So to say “VFR you are free to go legally without a seperate permission required with only some exemptions.” is really stretching it.

But hey it doesn’t matter provided people know how this works and can evaluate the value they will get relative to their desired mission profile

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

europaxs wrote:

VFR you are free to go legally without a seperate permission required with only some exemptions.

The point is, that you’ll have to look it up. As I said, the permanent permission to cross certain borders doesn’t invalidate that there has to be a permission. If, for instance the general permission would be revoked, you’d have to comply and get one for your flight or don’t fly there. Other than with certified aircraft within the EU, where there is no such requirement, hence no permission, not even a general one.

Of course many states have bilateral treaties and that is a good thing, but that’s only on top of the rules, not replacing it.

mh
Aufwind GmbH
EKPB, Germany

Peter wrote:

So to say “VFR you are free to go legally without a seperate permission required with only some exemptions.” is really stretching it.

The truth lies between “useless” and “without any restrictions” I was referring to Central Europe…..

mh wrote:

The point is, that you’ll have to look it up.

I agree here, although you are normally “up to date” in this regard if you operate an Experimental as a matter of course.

EDLE

Peter wrote:

But hey it doesn’t matter provided people know how this works and can evaluate the value they will get relative to their desired mission profile

I also agree here – finally

EDLE

although you are normally “up to date” in this regard if you operate an Experimental as a matter of course.

I think that is exactly the point which is not the case. I happen to know, from personal contacts, that probably most people who have or are looking to get into the uncertified scene don’t know this. They are mostly aware of unusual handling characteristics but not the geographical stuff. And those who do know tend to disregard it – because nobody cares. Especially for Spain which according to reports takes months to process the permits.

As usual in these matters, there are two practical vulnerabilities:

  • insurance (especially if you overstay the time limit e.g. 6 months)
  • you p1ss somebody off

Pilot forums are poor for this kind of stuff because basically all of the European ones are populated by pilots who fly only locally.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter, from what version are those screenshots? Because the version linked on the previous page (which you said is newer) looks different. And there are more details further down the document. E.g. Czech AIP gives conditions under which ULs don’t need a permission.

mh wrote:

The point is, that you’ll have to look it up.

Well, you’re supposed to read the AIP anyway.

They were from the previous version by the looks of it. I probably did them before I updated it.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Pilot forums are poor for this kind of stuff.

It’s for each and every pilot to find out and decide how to fly his plane. It’s the law (or regulation). I think though, in this non-certified matters, you make it more gray than it actually is. This is listed in the AIP, and just because the LAA? has compiled a list, with very few references to the AIPs for some odd reason, does not mean this is a grey area.

The “official” version is here. From 2016 there also is a similar thing for vintage aircraft, that previously had ICAO CofA, but is now on Annex II (the exact meaning of “vintage” is in that link). There are 10k of those airplanes in Europe. As with homebuilt aircraft, this does not take effect before it’s in the AIP or AIC, or before someone ask the question with reference to the ECAC 2016 Recommendation and get a positive answer.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

No, LeSving, that URL is the ECAC recommendation which has been done to death here many times.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top