I haven’t noticed negativity on the forum but then I try and see things half full! Our dear United Kingdom has been inflicted by populist and mendacious boosterism, something which fortunately doesn’t affect this forum.
Peter wrote:
What I focus on is the detail. I know a guy who bought a *fox (£80k or so) and when I told him he needs permits to fly it to much of Europe he was quite shocked. Actually it was a syndicate and none of the others knew either.
To which countries does this one you know intend to travel in his *fox? He doesn’t need a permit for Ireland, the channel islands, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria, Scandinavia, Germany…So probably, that limitation doesn’t affect him at all. For many countries, where a permission is needed (e. g. Spain) the application is a nobrainer (from what I hear).
No objections though to make it clear to every prospective owner of a non certified, that it’s national regulated. To be honest I was very aware of that before 
buying my Europa in the UK. That said, I’m very happy with it after the twelve years of ownership, since it perfectly fits for my personal mission profile (which also includes travelling abroad occasionally).
But to be fair it’s also true, that you’ve admittadly never claimed, that international travel in a non certified is not possible at all. Rather overemphasizing its limitations (seemingly I’m not the only one having this impression)
But on that occasion I also would like to thank you for creating and running this nice and I find not too negative forum. It’s much appreciated!
The point is, at least my point, is that GA is so much more than flying like an airline. We all know that to fly like an airline on autopilot, you need “airline capable” aircraft, and “airline capable” rating. This costs a whole lot of money and takes a whole lot of time. The main thing is that this is only remotely interesting for most GA pilots. Therefore this kind of GA is only a tiny fraction.
Most of GA by active pilots is done with simple ratings and simple planes. It is flown all over Europe, but no one makes a big deal out of that factor alone. it’s only a function of the total activity going on.
Needless to say, all GA requires that you know what you are doing. Buying a plane without knowing the capabilities and restrictions is in most cases rather stupid, but it could equally well be a boat, a house, a car. Stupid nonetheless.
Pilots can be divided into “pilots” and “aviators” 
I read about that ages ago in s magazine. People flying ULs and experimental, aerobatics and STOL are definitely “aviators”. People flying IFR on autopilot at 10k feet are definitely “pilots” according to the definition there. It’s more of a state of mind
that you’ve admittadly never claimed, that international travel in a non certified is not possible at all.
Thank you.
To be honest I was very aware of that before buying my Europa in the UK
And you are aware because you researched it (EuroGA etc) and it wasn’t the salesman or the seller who told you. It also probably wasn’t your domestic forum where you read it
I know that discussing “Annex 1 / UL” (etc) limitations is a sore point for many. I read other forums too occassionally and this is clear. Those communities want that discussion suppressed – partly because they see it as devaluing their aircraft (I got chucked out of the US socata owner group in 2008 largely because of posting critical stuff, which was especially hated by those who bought their planes with bank loans) and partly because they often ignore the requirements (many argue they have to… e.g. Spain used to never reply to the permit requests) so they don’t want to draw attention to it. This is OK if you are happy with the insurance risk (enforcement is minimal; only some reports of busts from German events). Anyway, many previous threads on this one, including the detailed ones with the matrixes of permit requirements.
Suppression is not what EuroGA is about. It is about presenting the information and discussing it. The prospective buyer has to decide whether the capability meets his desired flying profile.
People flying IFR on autopilot at 10k feet
Hilarious portrayal of what I do quite rarely. Actually covid took out much of that community.
LeSving wrote:
Pilots can be divided into “pilots” and “aviators” I read about that ages ago in s magazine. People flying ULs and experimental, aerobatics and STOL are definitely “aviators”. People flying IFR on autopilot at 10k feet are definitely “pilots” according to the definition there. It’s more of a state of mind
What if you like to do both?
Airborne_Again wrote:
What if you like to do both?
I do!!! The problem is all about this division in different segments of aviation – and every segment is the best- depending of the point of view
I abandoned the idea of a ‘centralized’ forum covering all of my flying perspectives. EuroGA represents only a ‘special’ view on certain things, which I welcome to some topics and avoid for others. Even further, I don’t want an ‘all-in-one’ approach, as on each aspect there are assholes in the wild wrecking specific topics to be unwritable in a broad environment, so I want to pick an environment where I can focus on the facts.
Yes, I second the opinion aviation has been split into too many pieces and also yes, we elected to live in a world in which any conspiracy theory has soil to grow and yes, allowing society to fragment aviation does generate wolf pack behaviour helping certain political and religious streams.
What if – airliner ‘button operators’, commercial and non-commercial ‘pilots’, aviator ‘airmen/airwomen/airdiver*in*es’ and ‘sport flyers’ and ‘the rest of the flying crowd’ stop fighting each others and unite and focus all power to form an alliance? As long as this does not happen, we will have inherent negativity built in the system.
But, even then there will be a number of fora, each building a fenced reservation for certain views on the world and that is fine. I don’t want the world to die in harmony, but develop and prosper in agreed dispute. For that it needs fences ;-).
I second the opinion aviation has been split into too many pieces
Sadly that is true in Europe, but not really in the US. You’ve got to wonder why.
Pilots can be divided into “pilots” and “aviators”
That is not a helpful division of the GA community, but is typical of how things are in Europe. People tend to stereotype into these
which is nothing like today’s GA.
EuroGA represents only a ‘special’ view on certain things, which I welcome to some topics and avoid for others
Which ones would you avoid?
The interesting observation is that obviously the posts you see are from people who want to write “something” (you don’t see the other 99% or so who read-only) and that will correlate with a certain level of “investment” in the activity. Well, some people who write are just trolls but we have very very few of those here.
every segment is the best- depending of the point of view
No; they are all equally good.
I’ve spent the last 30 years and 3000 Hrs long distance VFR touring in Europe and the US and instinctively turn to EuroGA for accurate and timely information whenever I need it. If that information is sometimes negative, then I need to know that. Nothing I’ve read here has ever put me off doing something (Except Russia perhaps!) and some of it has enabled me to make long distance hops whilst avoiding pitfalls that I’ve read about here.
If all of Europe is open to someone with a PA28 flying VFR with Skydemon, a cellphone and some time to spare, then there’s a lot more that’s positive about European GA than is negative. And it is open – you just have to know the wrinkles. EuroGA, thanks to Peter’s moderation, has a built in peer review facility similar to that in the scientific community where errors are weeded out politely, correctly and quickly. That makes it a unique resource not found anywhere else, including the US where pilot forums are rather more of the ‘red top’ variety.
What if you like to do both?
Lots of GA pilots like and do both. The majority of them earn money being “pilots” and use them in the spare time on “aviator” stuff
As I said, I don’t think there are much negativity here. But I can understand if someone think so. I also think Peter really should get an “ULM”
