@freehugs posts merged into a previous thread of an exactly identical topic.
Unfortunately, the OP is nowhere near Norway or Sweden.
This stuff is totally country-dependent.
He appears to have found some firm which, for a fee, offers to deal with the NL CAA. That has come up before here; some people offered a “letter box” service because NL wanted a NL postal address. That was also contradicted in a thread from 2016, so why the €300 charge?
This is worth checking out with regard to NL reg.
And as stated the other key thing to check out is whether Romania is OK with it. I suspect nobody based there will be asking that question 
In France Experimental is specific and short term.
We have different categories to cover each area of what the USA and Norway (only source, reading on euroga.)
Experimental here can be anything that flies but does not existing plans or kits etc.
Eg There would be nothing to stop you or a group of people getting hold of the plans Concorde (intellectual copyright permitting) and building your own scaled down all flying model.
A dossier would need to be created during the building process plus it would need a test pilot to explore the envelope at the end of it and all that would go into both a flight manual and a maintenance manual. OSAC (part of the DGAC) would be involved (at agreed stages) and the aircraft will be registered F-W . Once ot has flown for a certain number of hours it will be reregistered as F-P and will have a certificate of airworthiness type CDNA certificate of navigation contstruction amateur. All the maintenance can be done by you or your group or in conjunction with a professional maintenance outfit. You can fly VFR DAY all over France and into other countries which either have an agreement with France or by special permission. For instance the scaled down De Havilland Mosquito we had/have in bits here often popped over to the UK for airshows (no added permission needed due to bilateral agreement). It also attended airshows in many other European countries but I was not involved in the flight planning and don’t know whether or not they needed to contact NAAs for individual permits or whether there was a blanket agreement.
A similar situation and process happens when you build from plans and also kit builds like RVs
Although in the case of kit builts you end with a registration F-P but your certificate of airworthiness is CDNK (I may have got the acronym slightly wrong but can’t look it up at the moment) It stands certificate of navigation, construction kit.
There is also a category for aircraft with significant aviation interest which gets a CDN in the collectors category (again can’t remember the acronym). They are still F-P of IIRC. I believe the DC3 comes under this category.
All can be owner maintained and all need CDN renewals either every year or every 3 years. This is quite a simple process and can either be carried out by an RSA inspector or by OSAC.
The costs differ by how far the inspector has to travel. Eg We used an OSAC office because there is one 20km away. The details of what one needs can be found on the DGAC website. I don’t remember it being that expensive, IIRC around €300. Registration itself and re registration was free but I have noticed that the DGAC have started charging for some things. Eg all my licences in the past have been free but I did have to pay for the ULM licence I received last year. I don’t think it was a lot but my club account statement only goes back to the beginning of the year.
OSAC are really more interested in the paperwork especially when it comes to any additions or changes you have made to the aircraft since your last CDNR ( resticted certificate of airworthiness which all in these categories are + orphelins)
Buying a ready built kit or plans built aircraft already on the French register eg a Piel Super Emeraude and reregistering it in your name on the French register is simple and involves sending a bill of sale and a couple of other things to the DGAC. Provided you have the appropriate documentation "maintenance manual, build manual etc. you can do all the maintenance as if you built it yourself.
The problem with something like a RV6 brought in ready built from a builder in USA on the N register is: 1/ As @Peter has written a lot. You are only supposed to keep a foreign registered aircraft in France for a very short time. (I do know of many people who have ignored this).
2/ If you want to transfer it to the F-P you need to have all the build documentation etc in the right format to be accepted. Don’t ask me what that format is but I do know it involves a lot of bureaucracy. Some find it easier to tear the aircraft apart and rebuild it making their own documentation..it is then presented as a kit built in France and is flown and maintained under the same conditions as any other F-P.
This is going on so long as to be very boring so I’ll stop now except say ULMs only need the first CDN after that its like car ownership except no periodic MOTs/controle techniques.
There are some regulations which can be got round with lateral thinking and/or perserverence.
That’s France for you.
Peter wrote:
This stuff is totally country-dependent.
Yes, that was my point. Even Norway and Sweden which end up having the same end result in terms of airplane and operations of them, achieve this in completely different manners, different regimes.
Peter wrote:
He appears to have found some firm which, for a fee, offers to deal with the NL CAA
Those Gouda eating Dutchmen always find some way to make money The Dutch association is called NVAV, This is highly relevant:
Many European builders are confronted with limited possibilities to build an aircraft in their home country due to stringent or absent regulation.
Many of those will therefore explore the possibilities of building their aircraft according the Dutch regulation. This is not impossible and you are welcome to become member of our association and register your project with us and receive technical advice along the way.
It is however very important to be well aware of the risks and limitations that comes with this option. Before becoming a member and registering your project, take good note of the following:
NVAV is not the Certifying Authority for Dutch Homebuilts. According to the current regulation, there is no prohibition for registering an aircraft that is built outside of The Netherlands. There is no guarantee however this will remain like this. There can always be changes in the regulation or a change of its interpretation. This is beyond control of NVAV. The risk of registering your build in the Netherlands is fully your responsibility. If problems arise with Dutch or local authorities NVAV cannot be claimed for this.
You will need a local agent in The Netherlands to handle all the paperwork on your behalf. There are several agents outside NVAV that provides this as a paid service.
Some countries impose a 28 days per year limit for foreign aircrafts staying in their country.
Enforcement of the 51% rule has following implications:
1. The builder must prove being the original builder of the airplane by invoices and a build log.
2. In some cases, a builder buys an unfinished project from another builder. It is imperative that the builder is able to show that at least 51% of the aircraft is built by an amateur
3. Aircrafts with a previous registration (already completed aircrafts) in another country cannot be registered in the Netherlands.
Your project needs to be registered with NVAV at the start of the project. In order to ensure quality, the builder will invite an NVAV inspector during the build at critical stages, such as final closure of the wings, elevator, etc. Usually, two visits suffice but more are encouraged. NVAV technical advisors and inspectors are volunteers.
For projects outside of The Netherlands all expenses and compensation need to be paid by the builder. The NVAV official and project owner will agree on this before the start of the assignment.
For the yearly renewal of the Certificate of Airworthiness (CoA, sBVL in Dutch) an inspector with Ducth certification needs to check the maintenance records and is free to inspect some samples. In particular application of SB’s and ADs are investigated. The mandatory instrument calibrations (new and every two years) as well as weighing and weight and balance calculations may be carried out by a local EASA certified party.
I said some bad things about medical doctors and women earlier. This proves the opposite (about women that is, not medical doctors )
The best for a homebuilt/experimental aircraft to register would be the dutch caa.
For these type of aircraft there is not much rules and only a yearly BvL is required every year, next to the maintenance which you may do yourself.
Furthermore the above information regarding NVAV, the NVAV is a really good site for information regarding homebuilt/experimental aircraft.
The BvL is a yearly check which need to be signed of by a CAA licensed mechanic from the Netherlands.
If anybody is in need of any help with or information regarding registering an aircraft in the Netherlands or needs a mechanic for maintenance or yearly checks. Contact me as I am have a company and maintenance license to sign and extend the BvL.
Some websites for information (some may be double)
NVAV
Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport
Peters Aviation Maintenance
KNVVL
Justinn wrote:
The best for a homebuilt/experimental aircraft to register would be the dutch caa.
Now, that is certainly not true, and I’m sure no one from Norway, Sweden, Finland, Italy, France etc would agree with the above statement What is true here is that the NVAV is, well Dutch and sees opportunities in increasing it’s number of members. The Netherland is well suited, in the middle of Europe. With increasing number of countries starting to enforce time limits on foreign homebuilt aircraft, it’s also risky business to some extent.
The idea of having the Netherlands (for instance) as a kind of hub for all European homebuilt activity, is not without merit (for builders and owners of homebuilt aircraft). On the other hand, I cannot imagine any national CAA would think this as a good idea at all however
LeSving wrote:
I cannot imagine any national CAA would think this as a good idea at all however
why? Foreign reg planes are good. You are not responsible for them, you don’t have to do anything- it’s almost like they don’t exist..
ivark wrote:
why?
If for nothing else, then because each CAA means that they are going to do this their way, or no way at all
why? Foreign reg planes are good.
Well, the Swiss NAA certainly doesn’t think so… They are the power, and being desk pushers, have the top priority in holding to their nice job
