Silvaire wrote:
which I guess is one of the non-specific generic terms used in Europe
As said earlier it’s EASA who has defined what constitutes an ultralight, microlight, UL, ULM or whatever you like to call it. It’s defined as (in general terms) max two seats, max 450 kg MTOW or up to 600 kg if decided by the national CAA. A max stall speed. The most important thing is that EASA has not defined any regulations of operation or licenses. That’s all up to the national CAA.
Many countries also have a completely de-regulated category of airplanes, much like the US ultralights. These are obviously ULs according to EASA, but not necessarily according to the national regulations. As far as the FAI goes (the only relevance in this circumstance), a microlight aircraft is any aircraft (except perhaps helicopters) with max 2 seats and max 600 kg MTOW and minimum speed at MTOW of 65 km/h (speed could possibly have been changed a bit in the last years?). An aircraft flown solo is max 400 kg (and minimum speed of 65 km/h at that weight).
A 6000kg ultralight, that’s an interesting concept.
In the US AIUI the Ultralight/microlight category can only be single seaters. Therefore it would need a special special permit/waiver to allow me to fly the Super Guépard across the USA on my ULM licence and medical.
Not that this is terribly relevant to the thread, but this paragraph conflates separate aircraft categories. Ultralights by the US definition are planes that weight under 254 lbs etc and are completely unregulated by FAA except for being limited by Part 103 of the FARs. No license or medical is required to fly them and they are not registered in any way. One could import a Part 103 compliant ‘ultralight vehicle’ from anywhere and fly it without any approval, and without any license, but an FAA Ultralight is not the same thing as a European ‘microlight’ aircraft (which I guess is one of the non-specific generic terms used in Europe) or a sub-ICAO FAA Light Sport Aircraft – which has up to two seats until Mosaic comes into effect.
Otherwise, foreign registry aircraft without internationally recognized airworthiness require an FAA process to operate in the US. The US has not entered into treaties that would allow US operation of foreign sub-ICAO aircraft, including foreign ULMs, Microlights, LSAs or whatever foreign regulatory definition may apply. As @Dan and others demonstrate this does not prohibit the entry of foreign sub-ICAO aircraft via a Special Flight Authorization. For Canadian aircraft specifically the FAA process is particularly streamlined, and for Canadian registry amateur-built aircraft it amounts to almost no process at all – just print out and carry a generic FAA form.
I believe a foreign sub-ICAO microlight license would not be valid in the US, in any plane, but I think anything including microlights under 12,500 lbs could be flown in the US on a foreign private license issued by the country of aircraft registration. The foreign microlight pilot certificate issue would be interesting to explore more fully if for example a World Microlight Championship event were to be held in the US. The FAA requirements for a US Sport Pilot (sub-ICAO FAA pilot certificate for FAA LSAs) to fly outside the US are clear, as per the link in Post 07 above: a Sport Pilot needs approval of the foreign airspace owner and then FAA regulations allow it. Any FAA Sport Pilot participating in a foreign airspace event would need that written permission for both pilot and FAA LSA plane in order to be compliant with FAA regulations.
The concept of having a ‘FAI World Championship’ event in which participants and their planes are nationally regulated without widespread international treaties being in effect is intrinsically challenging. That part is definitely relevant to the thread and if this is really the 18th repeat performance you’d think the organizers would have this figured out by now.
Peter wrote:
No law prohibiting → it is legal. That is how most civilised countries work.
Obviously never heard the difference between Great Britain, Italy, Germany and France.
In Great Britain, everything is allowed unless it’s forbidden….
In Italy, everything is allowed even if it’s forbidden….
In France, everything is forbidden unless it’s allowed….
In Germany, everything is forbidden even if it’s allowed……
MTOW is significant. 600kg MTOW is not a microlight in the UK just as it is not in France. IIUC UK is still 450kg. If it is not a microlight in that country you can not fly it on a microlight licence as microlight.
At 600kg is a non microlight in the UK must be flown under an NPPL or PPL or LAPL?
To fly it for this competition a waiver has therefore has to be agreed by the CAA or its representative body that for this event alone 600kg will be treated as a microlight.
I posted the relevant page from MLA Europe earlier in the thread.
I have heard of several French pilots who have received permission to attend through normal channels. French 450kg ULs were granted pretty quickly the 500kg ULs took a little more time and are only granted for the event.
Nothing to do with MTOW. Whatever it is, nobody seems to know quite for sure what type of “license” is acceptable for flying foreign-registered ultralights in the UK or not.
French ULs can and are operated worldwide but still need permits to fly in many/most countries and certain conditions have to be met.
The problem that Bosmantico refers may well be born out of the fact that some countries eg Germany have a higher MTOW than the UK. This problem also arose at Blois for the "World of ULM " or whatever it was called, event.
In the US AIUI the Ultralight/microlight category can only be single seaters. Therefore it would need a special special permit/waiver to allow me to fly the Super Guépard across the USA on my ULM licence and medical.
For a special event, this is usually possible as is the case for aerobatic and glider competition. And was also the case at Blois.
Inkognito wrote:
Italy. No questions were asked of him or any of the other competitors with similar modified planes and national airworthiness status.Sure, as long as nothing happens and you get away with it, it’s ok.
Actually I think it wasn’t legal because the Limitations of FAA Experimental Exhibition airworthiness on the modified competition plane required written permission from the airspace owner to be on board if outside of the US, even at a WAC event. My friend and presumably everybody else on the team who was flying an Experimental Category aircraft decided to go for anyway, and did indeed get away with it. At the time his major comment about competing in Italy was “the food and events were fantastic” 
This article has some references to the event. Apparently there was more to it than the food 
The regulatory issue here for the pilot/owner (whether it is microlights or any other plane with non-ICAO compliant airworthiness) is what a state of registry anywhere in the world requires, assuming that the airspace owner has no prohibition on the operation. The German microlight owner might not be worried about the UK CAA, but rightly or wrongly he might be worried about what the LBA thinks of him operating outside of territory where EASA UL definitions are applicable. In the case of some Italian microlight owners there apparently might be concern about what Italian regulators think of operations outside Italy. One would hope that the state of registry operating limitations applicable to worldwide operation of the particular plane would be clearly documented in the aircraft papers, and that if the airspace owner were OK with the operation they would also be willing to document it.
As per my example above (linked twice in Posts 07 and 12) the national (non-UK) operating imitations may only stipulate that permission of the airspace owner be obtained and kept on board in order to be legal. By providing that authorization the UK CAA may thereby be able to make UK airspace operation legal for a microlight aircraft on a non-UK registry. Link Number Three
Silvaire wrote:
I would assume that arrangements would need to recognize that many microlights are limited by their country of registration to operation within their country of registration unless otherwise authorized
There’s nothing the UK can do about that in any case. They can not authorize illegal use on behalf of someone else. What they can do is to allow ULs that are allowed to fly outside their country of registration to also fly in the UK. This basically means all of Europe, where 90% of ULS in the world are.
