I am not sure how much of this has already been posted here in various threads. This arrived in the last IAOPA newsletter:
The approach ban being 550m is probably the most useful, because ATC monitor this and are required to report pilots going past the FAF/1000ft point if RVR is below whatever.
Peter wrote:
I am not sure how much of this has already been posted here in various threads.
I think we have discussed all of it but quite some time ago as the time from proposal to law is several years in the EU.
I wonder how usable or restrictive the legal gap between EASA & CAA regarding AMC/GM for NCO private operations? say one is flying G-reg or F-reg between UK & France?
Personally, I don’t see the issue if a private operator elects to use whatever rule CAA or EASA: basic regulation and implementation rules are exactly the same, the slightest regulatory divergences are on AMC/GM, on these one can still pick and chose: there is no requirement for AMC approval and GM is merely guidance, the question has anyone tried?
Does anyone have clear views on this?
Examples:
- Can I fly in UK without DME using GPS overlay in F-reg? CAA says YES but EASA says NO
- Can I fly briefly bellow MDA on CDFA at Lydd in F-reg? EASA says YES but CAA says NO
- Can I fly approach with RVR >550m in UK if I notify CAA that such AMC exist in EASA?
One can come up with all possible examples…
This also comes up for N-reg and Part91 but it’s different setup with more caveats,
All the 3 regulatory frameworks allow safe aircraft operation with starking safety records, so the debates are mostly about legalities and which tray has the right paperwork: no one ever got hanged for these d’offenses, not even the famous guy who was flying zero-zero from grass in N-reg under Part91, he was told “to stop doing it here or relocate to the US 
If you’re looking for the AMC, you can find it here.
I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but I’m still disappointed that GPS substitution for DME isn’t allowed.
mainly as FAA rules don’t have an equivalent of implementation rules (IR) and unlike EASA or CAA it does not have leeway when it comes to AMC or GM mechanisms
That makes the FARs much more straightforward, except for a small number of areas where the Chief Counsel is sometimes asked to make a ruling. Whereas in Europe every country can differ. Also the FARs hardly ever get changed. Also almost nobody knows where EASA rules can be found. There are so many old versions of them online, which google digs up.
Which FAA rules are more strict than European rules, and are relevant to flying a plane? The only one I can think of is the common purpose rule for cost sharing.
For N-reg ‘domestic operation’, based operator will have local papers and they will operate on local rules, even if they violate Part91 !
Can you give a specific example? Is there a reference for “domestic operation”? Can you give an example of where “local rules” violate Part 91?
not even the famous guy who was flying zero-zero from grass in N-reg under Part91
Not legal in Europe for many years, so not relevant to N-reg or any other reg.
Peter wrote:
Which FAA rules are more strict than European rules, and are relevant to flying a plane?
Night Validity: FAA requires 3 landings to full stop as against ’touch & goes’ and requires this to have happened when it is darker than EASA/CAA requirements.
Night passenger carriage validity actually.
True. OTOH a European IR holder doesn’t need to do any of that, when within the country which issued his papers
I am sure someone could dig up a whole load of differences – in fact I recall seeing websites with such FAA-JAA summaries, over many years – but there is an important distinction: most of these are undetectable in their breach e.g. nobody can tell you flew too close to a cloud at night in Class X when below x000 feet and above 140kt, etc. The ones which are detectable are visible things like the approach ban (will ATC be ever told this has changed, or will some countries not implement it?), the night passenger carriage (only if you crash), and licensing medical and airworthiness matters. Oh and Wingly etc is probably illegal in an N-reg.
Can you give a specific example? Is there a reference for “domestic operation”? Can you give an example of where “local rules” violate Part 91?
Flying IFR/IMC without published procedure, NCO explicitly allows it and CAA & DGAC explicitly have zero problem with it (sure LBA will peel LBA pilots skin if they found them doing it in D-reg while in Germany but who cares)
I got an intepretation from NCYankee that DIY IAP is prohibited if you are obliged to operate under Part91 in N-reg (crossing borders or visitor without local papers), I take that restriction goes beyond US airspace…
“domestic operation” is for based operators, like your N-reg in UK, you have to fly it on CAA papers and operate under CAA rules, so you can fly DIY on CAA IR (actually disregard the whole Part91 in UK airspace, especially if you are UK based and you never had an FAA PPL !!!)
Yes the majority of differences can’t be enforced in courts (except between pilots in forums) but EASA & CAA differences on equipment carriage to fly a conventional approache is something that can be enforced
If you ask for NDB/DME without DME & ADF in the aircraft, you have to take some GoPro videos that shows your flight was done in VMC, otherwise, it’s not legal
I take that restriction goes beyond US airspace
“domestic operation” is for based operators, like your N-reg in UK, you have to fly it on CAA papers and operate under CAA rules
That is only a pilot paperwork acquisition regulation, not an aircraft operations regulation. It doesn’t even say you have to operate within the European paper privileges. It just says you need to possess those papers. It was a purely political move, intended to create more hardship for people and discourage foreign reg, and nothing to do with flying a plane.
but EASA & CAA differences on equipment carriage to fly a conventional approache is something that can be enforced
Can you enumerate the applicable differences?
If you ask for NDB/DME without DME & ADF in the aircraft, you have to take some GoPro videos that shows your flight was done in VMC, otherwise, it’s not legal
In the US, you can subst a GPS only for a part of the IAP, not all the way down to MDA. @ncyankee will know the latest.
