As was known (e.g. see here – that article needs updating) some countries never did the derogation.
I would assume most of those don’t have anybody who can read through the EASA regs.
See the table in the post below.
The tick means the derogation was applied for. So you can fly there without EASA papers and medical.
The “will not apply” means derogation was not applied for.
The blank ones did not reply 
So, most N-reg pilots will go to jail if they fly to Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Spain, and some other “less important” places.
In Croatia or Italy they “might” go to jail…
Welcome to the European “Union”.
There will be a new table soon because the April 2016 date is moving to April 2017.
This is in one of the spreadsheets at the above URL
Good thing I have EASA papers, then. Just completed my first annual revalidtion today.
The big unanswered Q is whether this EASA FCL attack applies according to the airspace traversed, or according to the country where the pilot (or operator 
) is based.
This question did a few GB of forum bandwidth when this crappy regulation came out years ago.
One opinion I recall (from an EASA insider, IIRC) was the latter.
If that is so, a UK based pilot (for example) can fly anywhere – because UK applied for the derogation.
FAA PPL here. Got my EASA license last week. I would like an instrument rating though and the demands look daunting.
Peter wrote:
I would assume most of those don’t have anybody who can read through the EASA regs.
I wouldn’t think so. I remember Czech CAA insisting that private pilots can’t use electronic logbooks, because the relevant AMC mentioned only commercial operators (they can keep the logs on behalf of pilots). I had to laugh. However, if you’re patient and polite, they are capable of changing their opinion. I would think they either don’t care (nobody important has an N-reg and makes a fuss about it or there are not many N-regs in the country at all) or they want to make the life of N-reg owners more difficult.
Peter wrote:
The big unanswered Q is whether this EASA FCL attack applies according to the airspace traversed, or according to the country where the pilot (or operator ) is based.
I don’t think I understand the question. The operator has to be based in EU, AIUI, for it to be a problem (I’m too lazy right now to look for the precise wording). So a pilot flying for an US airline doesn’t need EASA papers to fly their hardware here. Nothing really should change for commercial operators as commercial work in N-regs should be unusual. It impacts private operators (they don’t need approvals, nobody can say no, you can’t use N-reg for this). Company based in the EU could have a jet registered outside EU and EASA wouldn’t be able to touch it or its crew. I would think that’s what they’re after. M-reg might be even juicier target. Not piston puddle jumpers. At least not primarily. And the requirement is for the entire EU, not just the country, where you’re based (if you’re UK based, you need EASA papers to fly in Germany, for example, derogations aside). How it works if the country where you’re based did apply a derogation and the country where you want to fly didn’t I don’t know. That’s AIUI.
Peter wrote:
If that is so, a UK based pilot (for example) can fly anywhere – because UK applied for the derogation.
I can imagine that’s the intent. Not sure the wording actually allows for it. Which means different countries could have different opinions on this (and a ramp check is probably not the best time to argue about it). Normally, it would depend on state of registry. But that doesn’t apply here. State of residence makes sense.
Normally Peter I would respect your opinion but your quote of ‘most N-reg pilots will go to jail if they fly to Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Spain, and some other “less important” places. In Croatia or Italy they “might” go to jail…’ is scaremongering b*llocks.
Quite clearly the regs state it is the address of whee the Operator is based and if based in a Country that has applied for the derogation then you can continue to legally fly in Europe. It doesn’t matter where the pilot lives !
The additional year for non EU licence holders flying in Europe has been approved to April 2017 and we have that directly from an insider in Brussels yesterday. This delay has specifically been worded that it is because of an impending deal with the FAA over reciprocal licence issue and recognition.
Phobos wrote:
Quite clearly the regs state it is the address of whee the Operator is based and if based in a Country that has applied for the derogation then you can continue to legally fly in Europe. It doesn’t matter where the pilot lives !
Agreed. I don’t know anywhere but here where this is seen as in dispute. If you are UK based and the UK applies for the derogation, you are OK.
your quote of ‘most N-reg pilots will go to jail if they fly to Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Spain, and some other “less important” places. In Croatia or Italy they “might” go to jail…’ is scaremongering b*llocks.
I was hoping it would be seen as a joke
Quite clearly the regs state it is the address of whee the Operator is based and if based in a Country that has applied for the derogation then you can continue to legally fly in Europe
The reference to the actual wording would be useful.
Ok Peter if it was a joke about the jail comment then fair enough, maybe you need to edit your post though.
Reference is here,
SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS
Article 4
Basic principles and applicability
1. Aircraft, including any installed product, part and appliance, which are:
(c) registered in a third country and used by an operator for which any Member State ensures oversight of operations by an operator established or residing in the community
The reference is purely for operator location and has nothing to do with pilot location.
