@Shorrick_Mk2 that sounds easy. Would my original FAA Bill of Sale count as proof of ownership? And where do I get the Petición de Franquicia de Importación and stamp?
@boscomantico thanks for clarifying. I do want to fly to Germany often so I’ll dig into this. Would my pilot’s logbook count as a journey log?
@Alexis I’ve been playing with Autorouter and it does seem quite easy. I’ll look into the Telegram interface, sounds cool!
Nickmatic wrote:
Would my pilot’s logbook count as a journey log?
No, it needs to be aircraft specific. But since most of that data is the same (only I fly the plane), I use two Excel sheets where the journey log is linked to the pilot logbook part.
I use the one here which I ordered from the USA.
If you have a mover taking care of your move it is part of the forms they’ll fill up for you.
If not I think there is a standard form on the Aduanas website. You will need to get the form stamped by the Spanish Customs at your port of entry.
If you had a car to register (or if you wanted to put the plane on spanish reg) you’d then send a copy to the registration authorities. If you keep the plane on N-reg you just keep a copy with you and the original in a safe place.
Yes the FAA Bill of Sale is definitely appropriate.
Make sure your insurer covers you in Europe.
boscomantico wrote:
Re noise certificates: usually, nobody really checks it. It’s just that you get lower landing fees if you have one.
You have to be kidding. There is not one German airport that did not require that I show it to them. Sometimes more than once. Well perhaps one that did not ask EDNX.
Its all because of money. Make one up like all N reg owners have to do because we dont have such nonsense in the US. If you dont they will put you into the highest Cat. I remember being charged 50 Euros once after I submitted or showed my Noise Certif it was down to 20 Euros. Thanks to Achim.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Make one up like all N reg owners have to do because we dont have such nonsense in the US.
A noise certificate is not nonsense but an ICAO standard. The self-declared N-reg noise certificates are not fabricated but it is your authority under FARs to fill out the standard form yourself with correct data.
Airport noise is a hot topic in the US, too — in the densely populated urban areas. Airports in Germany and other countries charge based on the noise certificate as a response to noise complaints. This way they demonstrate to the concerned public that they actively discourage loud aircraft. Whether a given aircraft is loud or not is not the question, it is mainly a political thing. Personal freedom ends where it limits other people’s personal freedom. As aviators we should respect the desire of others to not have to endure aircraft noise.
I used to have my office in Santa Clara, California. The noise from the departing MD-11 cargo airplanes was deafening and the reason I left it for another office. You will not find MD-11 airplanes over here because the airport fees are extremely high. Same for Tupolev passenger airplanes, it’s all about the noise. As an example, the noise surcharge at airport Stuttgart with the highest for Tupolev.
C210_Flyer wrote:
…because we dont have such nonsense in the US…
Achim was quicker, but just for completeness, noise abatement is just as much an issue in the “no-nonsense US” then elsewhere. Only that in the US the tables published by the aircraft manufacturers are taken as basis for the noise figures (see here: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/22942) as opposed to actual measurements like e.g. in Germany. As a matter of fact, the actual measurements are usually “better” than the numbers supplied by the manufacturer, especially if noise reduction measures (like different propellers or exhausts) have been applied to the aircraft.
And additionally, but slightly off topic, I would like to draw the attention once again to Concorde which was “killed” by US noise regulations – arbitrarily invented on purpose to protect their domestic aircraft manufacturers.
The only noise related issue I’ve confronted flying into urban, suburban and rural areas in the US is measurements at one or two airports that I’m told generate a nasty letter if you exceed whatever limit they’ve laid down. I’ve never received such a letter, but I’ve heard of it happening. Otherwise I’m based at an airport with roughly 600 daily movements of piston and jet aircraft, conducted entirely over houses and businesses. There is a group that fusses about noise as a hobby, and that once resulted in the pattern altitude going up 200 feet, (now reversed) but the group has had no other measurable effect in decades.
Nobody here flying their own piston-engined plane would know what a ‘noise certificate’ means, and most people in the area seem to like the idea of having an airport nearby with some cool privately owned planes coming and going – I’m thinking of for instance the Yak formations etc peeling off overhead that make a fair bit of noise.
Its nonsense period. Its all about money. Just how does the noise certificate (other than costing me money) change the behavior of the pilot? Are you not going to fly because a SE prop makes noise? The fact that you are flying a 79 DB airplane as opposed to a 78 DB one will cost an additional 5 Euro will that stop you from using the airport? Does that 1 DB make a difference on the ground? Am I going to sell my plane only to have a motor glider with no comparable utility?
Off course if the fees are high enough you wont land at all ,as in the case of airport Handling Charges.
All these exclusionary rules dependent on monetary penalties only enforce the fact that it divides the population into classes of wealthy and less than wealthy causing more and more jealousy of ones neighbor and internal discord. Yeah look at the rich bastard playing over my head let me call the complaint hotline.
Instead the question should be raised what moron would build a house at the end of a runway when the airport was there first. And if it is so then dont complain. No need to bring that topic up its just infuriating.
Eugene, you miss the point here. The noise dependent landing fees are not to make money (no airfield here makes money), it is to demonstrate to the public that the airport encourages silent aircraft. The airport has to regularly present a plan and measures how it addresses the neighbors’ desire to enjoy a calm day.
The higher fee is just one thing — many airfields in Germany/Switzerland ban aircraft from landing on Sundays and during lunch breaks unless they fall into the best noise category, demonstrated by the worldwide ICAO standard “noise certificate”. It’s a political thing and given your frequent rants about politics, I think you are familiar with the concept of “something has to be done about it” (no matter what “something” is)…
Just because you do not care about noise does not mean that the majority of the population doesn’t care either.
NB: The USA are an ICAO member and therefore N-reg certified aircraft have noise certificates.
