Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Switzerland requires permit on all foreign ultralights (and other countries doing similar stuff)

I doubt it’s anything to do with Swiss/EU politics, Switzerland are sovereign on how they manage their airspace, my bet: it is noise & low flying complaints in calm countryside, Rotax UL have that well deserved reputation low & loud

The only time I got low flying & noise complaint in UK, I was ridge soaring in “yellow aeroplane” (Rotax TMG with engine was off) at 300ft agl in the middle of other “white gliders”, you don’t get into these tabloid news when flying “certified A to B aircraft” at FL160 the case was closed but I was advised by my gliding club CFI to be invisible next time…

Last Edited by Ibra at 13 Jan 09:25
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Ibra wrote:

I doubt it’s anything to do with Swiss/EU politics, Switzerland are sovereign on how they manage their airspace, my bet: it is noise & low flying complaints in calm countryside, Rotax UL have that well deserved reputation low & loud

I also don’t think it has anything to do with Swiss/EU politics but rather that there are lots of Swiss citizens and residents alike who go across the border to France to fly ULs as they are forbidden in Switzerland and then bring them home from time to time. Plus some who take their EU ULs into Switzerland with the said qualifications. It is a clear statement, the FOCA does not want this kind of flying in Switzerland and takes issue with several of the rules regarding ULs in surrounding countries.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

So it’s purely against UL based in nearby countries flown by Swiss pilots? is this tax related? or licensing/maintenance rules?

Last Edited by Ibra at 13 Jan 10:18
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

It’s definitely not tax-relevant. The Swiss CAA (FOCA) has nothing to do with the Swiss tax and/or customs department. Those are both separated government bodies. As long as you pay your import and VAT taxes, you’re all fine for customs. It is also legal to have foreign-registered aircraft in Switzerland, as long as it is a certified aircraft (including LSA) and you payed your taxes.

The issue is definitely more licensing, maintenance, certification and those kind of things.

Switzerland

Also, when discussing restrictions on international flying of ultralights in Europe, let’s not forget that there is now a much bigger elephant in the room then Switzterland…

Most ultralights going into service these days or of the 600 kg type (mostly D-reg, but also I, etc.). And: everybody be reminded that France has decided to only go up to 525 kgs on ultralights. Anything certified for higher MTOW is no longer considered an ultralight by France. Hence, all such ultralights can now no longer enter France by virtue of their ultralight concession regarding enty. These pilots will now need to get a dedicated permit from France, which is also not for free. Of course, this requirement will be more violated than complied with by the ultralight community. Partially due due to not knowing, partially because some will simply ignore it.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 13 Jan 12:03
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Peter wrote:

You just don’t get “ICAO protection”.

I honestly don’t know if UL’s would even be regarded as of ICAO’s responsibility in any way. Neither are they an ICAO declared class of airplanes nor are the national licenses in question to ICAO standard, let alone EASA.

I think this may well be one of the difficulties why UL’s are treated very differently on a national level. While some countries allow this kind of thing, others are against it.

Peter wrote:

Has there been a significant issue with French UL pilots with no medicals (legal in France) venturing into Switzerland?

apart from the fact that if they only carry a French UL license, I am not sure to start with if that license is valid in Switzerland (or anywhere else outside France for that matter.). So you’d end up flying without a valid license. I think this is the one issue the AIC ist talking about, the requirement to at least an LAPL, which is valid EASA wide, to operate in Switzerland.

I have no way of quickly check whether there have been accidents / incidents involving ULM’s in Switzerland in recent years right now, as they do not appear as a separate category in their stats (with the exception of Trikes and Rotary UL’s.) As of today, there are 2 reports concerning French registered Rotary UL’s.

Peter wrote:

We live in an increasingly nationalist Europe.

That unfortunately is true and not unheard of in times of crisis or general dissatisfaction. It always has been a tendency to find outside blame for all sort of grievances, which are often actually home made. Nationalism is one consequence of this and I agree, at the moment it is one of the larger problems, not only within Europe but world wide and also one which has the largest potential for conflict, also in Europe.

In general, radicalization is a massive problem, not only in Europe, but in many countries, most notably in what we considered to be democracies.

Peter wrote:

The arrival of CV19 and the “vaccine business” in particular have dramatically highlighted European nationalism, often in a pretty distasteful “yes we know this stinks but we don’t care what anybody thinks” manner, and accelerated this process.

What the arrival of Covid has shown brutally is that the EU has no mechanisms in place to fight a pandemic in an orderly and unified fashion. Instead, it was left to each country to cook their own soup, which resulted in a total failure to fight this disease in any acceptable way. I believe this is one reason why there is growing dissatisfaction and refusal of measures as well as a general tiredness of reading up what is required for each country. If there ever had been a crisis which should have shown the EU acting as ONE, it was this one, yet it ended in a mess which proves that the EU is not willing nor capable to deal with crisis’ at all.

Nationalism however is not new and I’d say it has not increased with Covid, but for some isolated cases where nationalist groups tried to profit from the general dissatisfaction.

Peter wrote:

What this will do to the “200k €” ULs is an interesting debate.

Well, I do not actually think that nationalism is the reason behind this, but the fact that for UL’s there is no legal foundation which is agreed upon on a supranational level. For most of aviation, EASA provides this in Europe and ICAO world wide. Ul’s are not subject to either rulebooks, so every country treats them differently. Therefore it is not surprising that some dissent with what others do and want to keep them out. On the other hand, @boscomantico rightly brings up the fact that even the two most prominent countries where UL flying had it’s origin and is widely supported can not agree on a common way of dealing with them, so yes, there is an Elephant in the room which is much larger than the action Switzerland has now taken.

I can only repeat what I said before and @Malibuflyer has also stated: The UL market of today is fundamentally different from the original concept and idea, hence it is not really surprising that dissent about how to treat them has developed. IMHO, it is high time that UL’s and their certification or lack thereof and licensing has to be subject of a European wide discussion and if possible unilateral agreements on how to deal with them. The lack of such coordination results in exactly this kind of thing.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

boscomantico wrote:

Most ultralights going into service these days or of the 600 kg type (mostly D-reg, but also I, etc.).

Is really the case? My impression has been a little bit, that the 600kg class got less traction than some would have expected (also due to the fact that many figured out that this “they are already fine for higher MTOW”-myth was not exactly true and almost every design would need more or less significant changes).
But this impression could be outdated.

Mooney_Driver wrote:

it is high time that UL’s and their certification or lack thereof and licensing has to be subject of a European wide discussion and if possible unilateral agreements on how to deal with them.

That would be the end of UL/Microlights: Even in my wildest dreams I can not imagine that EU/EASA/etc. would even consider setting up another regulatory framework “below LAPL/SEP”. If there would be a strong need/pressure for EU wide harmonization of ULs, every politician would say: “Why bother with a new regulation while we already have a perfectly fine one…”

Last Edited by Malibuflyer at 13 Jan 14:33
Germany

boscomantico wrote:

Most ultralights going into service these days or of the 600 kg type (mostly D-reg, but also I, etc.). And: everybody be reminded that France has decided to only go up to 525 kgs on ultralights. Anything certified for higher MTOW is no longer considered an ultralight by France

Good point, are these flown by LAPL pilots? or some national licenses?

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Most ultralight pilots/owners in Germany „only“ have the German ultralight „license“. However some of them do have a LAPL, PPL or even higher, since some of them are former airplane pilots that have downgraded to UL.

Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Regardless of what normal people think of EU politics, this action was done by aviation officials, possibly under orders from above. The reasoning is the interesting bit – because it is a wider process which is happening elsewhere. There have been years of relaxing uncertified privileges and now they are being rolled back.

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

Back to Top