A the end of the day, it’s UL pilots who buy these things, if they wanted JetA turbine in front of 600kg, let it be 
@LeSving is the permission really €50? I fid not know that. For how long does the permission last?
@Ibra why do you think 500kg is sub 60knts?
IIRC the MCR01 is around 140kts IAS.
Even the Super Guepard is nearer 90knts. But I admit that at present I am not in it for the speed but I do enjoy a take off in between 80 meters and 150meters on grass at 35°C and a climb of over 1000 fpm. When I get back in the DA40 it really seems sluggish in the climb.
Its also helping me get rid of some bad habits such as getting lazy with my feet. It is also interesting just flying on the compass, slip ball, altimeter and vario. Sharpening up my limited panel skills. It is so nice as well pulling out from and returning the aircraft to the hangar after a quick evening flight. Its so light and easy to manouver compared to the DA40D.
For the moment I am finding it great fun and even now at €80 an hour, since fuel prices have risen itsbstillbgood value flying.🙂
why do you think 500kg is sub 60knts?
I was just exaggerating, sitting on 500kg vs 600kg can’t add more than 40% to their speeds
(Joking) some people do get offended when you mention that that deisgn speeds are proportional to root-square of wing loads, you can fly faster when you are overweight
I have not tried MCR yet but I found the VL3 to be a hell of beast, however, D112 (CNSK) & Guepard (ULM) is what I fly regularly near my place when I barely have 2h of free time and flying alone…
Airborne_Again wrote:
but I would rather think the pressure is from the pilot community to be able to take on a reasonable load without being overweight.
Yes. The pressure is definitely from the community. The thing is, only after things have changed will the results of those changes be visible, and they aren’t all in line with how the community envisioned it to be (before the changes). With MTOW 450 kg, the aircraft either have to be extraordinary well designed, or it has to be light and slow (like they were 40 years ago) to carry two people + fuel. 600 kg MTOW will enable two person + fuel on most aircraft. It is definitely a better match for what the intentions of these aircraft in the first place is.
But what has happened in Norway, and I guess lots of other places, is the CAA has said: OK, you can have more complex and heavier, faster aircraft, but then you have to step up the operation of them (in all meanings of the word) a few notches. A small price to pay right? Perhaps, but then the reality strikes back. While 600 kg allowing two persons and full fuel is nice. The utility value increases a whole lot (on paper at least), what most people did anyway most of the time was to take a short trip around the barn just to get some air in the hair, or test new settings on the carb etc. This was done alone. Now everyone has to take “LAPL grade” licenses to do the same thing in “CS-LSA grade” aircraft. This is certainly causing dissonance. What is happening next is in all likeliness a step back. An additional new category of ULs and a new UL regime is coming. This will be similar to the US UL regime (one seat, very light, simple stuff, not meant to go far and fast). This will probably be cool, but I have to wonder. The current regime is in all essence CS-LSA-style aircraft with LAPL-style licenses. What is the difference between this and “true” LSA and “true” LAPL license? There certainly are a few fundamental differences (maintenance for instance), but it all has a slightly bitter taste to it IMO, at least until a new lighter regime pops up.
I still think though (not entirely in agreement with myself here, but still) that the French community is wrong in the long run. I understand them 100%, but essentially stopping development, stopping most other ULs from other places, simply is not the right way to go. 600 kg is here, and people will use it for what it’s worth, especially those who do travel a lot. There are other ways of doing the “free as a bird” regime than total isolation.
Peter wrote:
The “homebuilt” and UL communities have always been flying unrestricted. Permits have always been needed in most places but half the countries never replied so people just went, or sent off the email and went. And they still do. No problem; just make sure you don’t use Mode S because otherwise all sorts of people “who might know the rules” will see you. If I was Annex 1 the first thing I would do is install a Mode C only box The man in the tower cannot tell if it is an RV, a UL, or a Part 23.
@Peter – You are completely mixing up homebuilts/Annex 1 with microlights. With homebuilts you can uswually just fly abroad on the base of mutual recognition. In some countries like Spain you have to apply and pilots report they get permission within 24 hrs free of charge. This “non-tpx-under-the-radar-claim” – well, I give up 
What indeed got enforced in the recent years in different european countries concerning foreign reg. homebuilts is their homebasing, which partly became difficult. OTOH it’s now sometimes possible to change registration to the country where the homebuilt is based (e. g. France and Germany) – which I just did this year
UL permit situation for international flight.
That even emphasises, what I’ve written…
Homebuilts and their pilots are more regulated than ULs in some countries.
You need a PPL perhaps LAPL will do and a class 2 medical to fly homebuilts.
Although you can do your own maintenance on a homebuilt you still need a control/ Airworthiness Certificate via OSAC or RSA every I can’t remember whether its every year or every three years.
With ULM you get a doctor (not necessarily AME) to confirm you are in good health initially (a class 2 would also do the job) after that its up to you to decide whether or not you are fit to fly.
The same goes for the aircraft. You can maintain a ULM yourself and after an initial check it is up to you to decide whether the aircraft is fit to take to the air or not.
At least that is the current situation in France AFAIK.
As to flying to other countries there is often a reciprocal agreement or one gets permission via email.
AIUI anyone can fly their UL to France as long as it meets French MTOW limits.
The difference between kit builds or experimentals and UL is that AFAIU there are no weight limits on the experimental and of course some countries (eg Switzerland) do not accept ULs in their airspace.
AIUI the Spanish and Italian don’t charge for permission for either homebuilds or ULs.
According to @LeSving France charge €50 for a UL of 600kg. I can not confirm this as I have never tried flying a 600kg in France.
I’m quite sure, this document was posted before in the context of travelling abroad with a permit/amateur built aircraft.
