Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Certified, Homebuilt or Ultralight? (merged)

Cobalt wrote:

Peter is right – the weather can be poor (departing Svolvaer to Tromso)

Aha! The supporting case for IFR.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Mooney_Driver wrote:

And as for flying abroad in their own plane, maybe they can’t be bothered to get special permits for their experimentals? Because withhout those the limit to fly in Scandinavia is quite obvious.

My points were:

  1. Scandinavia (or rather the Nordic countries) is a HUGE place, with greatly varied nature, weather, climate (summer and winter)
  2. Many people do indeed fly IFR here, in homebuilts, because of point 1 above, and (obviously) because it is allowed and completely problem free.
  3. Thus, IFR in a homebuilt offer the same advantage as IFR in a a certified. It would be the exact same thing. The only difference, an RV costs “75k €” and cruises at 175 knots, A SR22 costs 750k.

Why is this so hard to get? I mean really. We don’t build aircraft mainly to fly to some obscure place in the European mainland. We build them mainly to fly them here. To fly longer away places, you also need an abundance of another asset: time. As a nice dream, and occasional trip – yes, but all in all that would be maybe 1-10 % of the flying. Nevertheless, several has built themselves planes for the “sole” reason of flying it to Oshkosh (and around the USA after that). But then we are talking about people living their dream, accomplishing a huge goal they have set out for themselves. It’s not “flying as usual”.

What Peter is talking about is flying to Greece, eating fish. Nothing wrong with that, but it s purely a recreational thing. For me, just to get to Copenhagen is 500 NM. That’s a days “work” in a traditional SEP, and by then I haven’t even left Scandinavia, I have merely moved myself to the “Capital” (or one of them, not to hurt anyone’s feelings, Swedes in particular ) That is if I’m lucky with the weather over the mountains. I could easily be unlucky, and have to fly along the coast. Also perfectly doable, but that flight, 7-800 NM in bad weather VFR, would be (much) more than I would be comfortable doing in just one day. Hence, IFR. In an IFR RV that flight would be a piece of cake, but still sort of “enough” for a day on a recreational trip (holiday). No one is in a hurry to get to Greece eating fish, and Copenhagen has better restaurants than Greece.

You don’t need any special “permits” to fly homebuilts in Europe. They can be flown freely.

It seems to me “your” (some to many of you) arguments boils down to finding valid reasons to fly. It’s a fairly well known fact that one big problem with private GA is to come up with reasons to continue doing this, because there are very very few “good” (valuable in a practical money/time making/saving sense) reasons to do this activity. The modern world has since long now come up with much better transportation and communication technologies than private GA. This causes all kinds of poorly camouflaged substitutes to rise to the surface. And along follows all kinds of utter nonsense of what is needed to be able to “fly for real”. This is really what this pseudo discussion has ended into.

Myself, I don’t need a reason to fly. I don’t, it’s just that my life gets “empty” and lousy without it. And I’m sure most of you here actually feel the same way if you think deep enough. It’s about the spirit. I’m a long time member of the EAA, and the EAA say it all in these words (then you also understand that there is a place for the Evolution, no matter how ridiculous it is. Also (and I truly mean it), what a great site EGA is, it has the spirit, but needs to be reminded sometimes :

WHO WE ARE
How does one describe an EAA member? That question does not have a definitive answer.

EAA members represent every aspect of aviation and often have multiple interests. We fly them. We fix them. We even build them.

EAA members are what we like to call the “keepers of the flame.” Sure, we love airplanes. But it goes beyond that.

It’s about passion, camaraderie, that ol’ can-do spirit, and a grassroots way of sharing our love of aviation with others.

It’s the airplanes that bring us together. It’s the people who keep us coming back.

We are…
A community of passionate aviation enthusiasts that promotes and supports recreational flying.

Our vision…
A vibrant and growing aviation community.

Our mission…
To grow participation in aviation by promoting the “Spirit of Aviation.”

We serve the community by:

Inspiring new participants in aviation

Inviting the public to experience flight
Providing a compelling view of possibilities
Nurturing interest in aviation
Supporting clear pathways to participation
Enriching the participation experience

Protecting rights and the freedom to fly
Encouraging affordable flying in a local environment
Cultivating and providing knowledge, information, and resources
Embracing diverse interests, camaraderie, and fun
Supporting and promoting aviation events and activities
Last Edited by LeSving at 29 Oct 12:10
The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

What Peter is talking about is flying to Greece, eating fish

LeSving, please stop posting this crap over and over. It is beginning to sound just too denigrating. I realise that being in Norway you have a lot further to travel to get to the warmer parts of Europe but that is no reason to keep having swipes at those who have done it, and swipes particularly at me because (a) I fly a significant amount around Europe – and have written about it in detail in order to promote GA in Europe – and (b) I am a mod/admin here and therefore seen as a “legitimate target” for this kind of stuff.

You don’t need any special “permits” to fly homebuilts in Europe. They can be flown freely.

Between certain countries and flying certain categories, that is true. The rest of the time it is more bullsh1t, repeated over and over. Normally nobody would give a damn if this was posted on facebook etc but the problem with a widely read forum like EuroGA is that some people believe it when it comes up on google. For example I know a syndicate of four around one homebuilt who all thought they could indeed fly it anywhere freely, no permits needed. Then one is doing these newcomers a massive dis-service because they have paid the price of a good used TB20 (or whatever) in the belief that it will give them cheap flying and a really good travelling capability.

It would be the exact same thing. The only difference, an RV costs “75k €” and cruises at 175 knots, A SR22 costs 750k.

You are dreaming if you think they are the same.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

LeSving, it’s good to see that you are so happy in Scandinavia that you frankly don’t give a damn what happens outside it. Fine for me, but also totally irrelevant to anyone not residing in Scandinavia. You’ve been rubbing on the fact that Scandinavia allows IFR for homebuilts, fine for me but unless they convince EASA to allow it everywhere irrellevant for anyone outside Scandinavia, particularly if one does have the ambition to fly outside one’s own countries borders.

EASA nonwithstanding, we are a long way from same rules everywhere in Europe. But distances here are such that any airplane should be able to be operated under the same conditions everywhere. And you may turn it each way you want it, that is not the case for non-certified airplanes. Whether you and I like that is beyond the point.

If it was for me, the difference between certified and non-certified would not exist. Either an airplane is safe to fly or it’s not. Either instruments on board do the job and pass a safety and functional check or they do not. Under which TSO/EASA rule they are certified will in the end not make any difference, either they do the job or not. And while certain standards are needed to make sure that airplanes flying IFR do not hit each other because of inferior instrumentation, the current standards set by all the certification bodies are way over the top for privately flown airplanes.

As to for reason to continue flying, they are highly individual. I totally respect that a large part of PPL’s do not ever want to leave their home turf, but I expect of that large part to respect that there are people who wish to use their planes to travel further than they can see on a good day. For myself, I fly for the particular reason that I wish to exploit the freedom a good touring plane gives me to travel from my homebase to any destination I wish within Europe and maybe one day beyond that without having to justify the airworthiness of my airplane to every single country I pass and clearly IFR. Currently, NO experimental will do this for me in Central Europe.

If I lived in Scandinavia or the USA my perspective would be different. But I live where I live and have to either accept the restrictions these places impose on me or either give up or move. I don’t want to do either, so my framework for flying is EASA Part NCO and FCL and any local laws I have to obey to still be allowed to do what I can. And if those rules and regs say I can’t do what I want to do with such planes, that is it. I could not care less if it works somewhere else.

LeSving wrote:

The only difference, an RV costs “75k €” and cruises at 175 knots, A SR22 costs 750k.

That, I am afraid, is total garbage. Alone the avionic to fly legal IFR in Europe costs more than that.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 29 Oct 13:19
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

Peter wrote:

Between certain countries and flying certain categories, that is true. The rest of the time it is more bullsh1t, repeated over and over.

Here is the status for homebuilt, and here is the status for microlight. People can study that and make up their own minds if this is OK or not for their plans.

Peter wrote:

You are dreaming if you think they are the same.

I didn’t say that

Mooney_Driver wrote:

You’ve been rubbing on the fact that Scandinavia allows IFR for homebuilts, fine for me but unless they convince EASA to allow it everywhere irrellevant for anyone outside Scandinavia, particularly if one does have the ambition to fly outside one’s own countries borders.

I am not. I just don’t agree with the notion that “IFR in homebuilt is useless in Europe”. Even a Brit can now fly his homebuilt IFR to anywhere in the Nordic countries, and fly all over the place – IFR. No special permits or procedures needed. Not sure about going the other way. You also got the whole premise wrong. EASA has no objections to homebuilts flying IFR, EASA couldn’t care less.

Mooney_Driver wrote:

Currently, NO experimental will do this for me in Central Europe.

Well, if that’s the case then central Europe truly sucks regarding GA, that is the only conclusion. Why would anyone elsewhere like to go to places that suck? The normal thing would be the try to change it though, not go along with it, defending it, pretending this is how things should be. Just saying.

Mooney_Driver wrote:

That, I am afraid, is total garbage. Alone the avionic to fly legal IFR in Europe costs more than that.

All you need is basic instruments. From a typical (N)-VFR aircraft you would install a Garmin GTX, and that’s it. This will cost 10-15 € at most for brand new top of the line equipment, but considerably less for used and lower spec equipment. In addition, I guess autopilot etc etc, but that could also be there from the start, and is not needed.

I got nothing against people flying long distances. If people fly circuits around the field, or around the globe, I really don’t care either way. Still, I’m all for the things ECAC (EFLEVA) and EMF are doing in this respect for experimentals and microlights.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Mooney_Driver wrote:

Alone the avionic to fly legal IFR in Europe costs more than that.

To be honest, with part-NCO there are no specific navigation equipment requirements for private ops IFR in Europe. You need the nav equipment necessary for your intended flight and some sort of backup that will allow you to complete the flight safely (not necessarily according to plan) in case of a single avionics failure. In central Europe you would need RNAV 5, so a single certified GPS, a single NAVCOM and a single mode S transponder would enough to be legal and that hardly costs €75k.

Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 29 Oct 15:07
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Even a Brit can now fly his homebuilt IFR to anywhere in the Nordic countries

He would have to fly VFR in all the airspaces until the destination.

It’s not terribly useful for visitors. Especially as most homebuilts in Europe have a VFR-only permit limitation so the moment you file an IFR flight plan or request an IFR clearance, your insurance has gone up in smoke.

People can study that and make up their own minds if this is OK or not for their plans.

Indeed Along with the many other threads on here, with more references to local regs. I fully understand many people find this satisfactory for their mission profile, but to claim otherwise is just going to mislead somebody, who is paying say 80-150k and thinks all those things are possible and legal.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Airborne_Again wrote:

To be honest, with part-NCO there are no specific navigation equipment requirements for private ops IFR in Europe.

True. Realistically, you’d need at least a IFR GPS, a 2nd NAV/COM, a mode S transponder and most probably a DME as a lot of approaches need it still.

If you build a new plane however, I would not think you’d stuff it full of old junk bought from e-bay but put up to date avionic. And if you add up the bill, it will get costly. A proper IFR cockpit with a dual GTN, DME, Autopilot and Mode S transponder plus some decent glass in front will easily cost more than the price indicated installed.

Granted, if people like Dynon now get IFR approval, this will cause a much needed price drop. But we are not quite there yet, so experimental or not, to fly IFR you need to stick to approved avionic.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 29 Oct 17:13
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

You do need an autopilot for IFR, in the normal meaning of “IFR”.

Also there isn’t (and probably never will be) a GPS suitable for that i.e. with the normal Jepp database, LPV, etc, unless you buy a certified unit. If Dynon etc manage to get Jepp to license them the data to use on a non TSO box, I will be amazed.

Take a look at some RV pricing.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Mooney_Driver wrote:

If you build a new plane however, I would not think you’d stuff it full of old junk bought from e-bay but put up to date avionic. And if you add up the bill, it will get costly. A proper IFR cockpit with a dual GTN, DME, Autopilot and Mode S transponder plus some decent glass in front will easily cost more than the price indicated installed.

The sky is the limit with those things. One thing is what you actually need. It’s another matter altogether how big your wallet is and how much panel real estate you have, and plan to use. An RV-10 tends to have more equipment, and more expensive equipment than a -7 and certainly a -4 and so on.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top