arj1 wrote:
@Malibuflyer, for some people you cannot just drop the other citizenship, the others don’t even start it as it is complex process.
Absolutely: Some of the many exceptions are on countries where it is legally impossible to drop citizenship.
Just the fact that it is a lot of effort to do so, however, is not an acceptable legal excuse to not do it.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Absolutely: Some of the many exceptions are on countries where it is legally impossible to drop citizenship.Just the fact that it is a lot of effort to do so, however, is not an acceptable legal excuse to not do it.
So, perhaps, then there shouldn’t be any significant discrimination based simply on the citizenship that you can’t renounce.
Let’s say you are a dual national French/Russian journalist. As far as the French are concerned you are a French citizen. If you visit Russia you leave France on your French passport and must return on your French passport.
If you leave France on your Russian passport you must return on your Russian passport and will be treated as a Russian citizen at the border.
This isn’t necessarily the case across Europe.
Spain for instance do not allow dual nationality.
The case of Russian citizens flying in Europe does adversly affect Russians who are anti Putin, and of course that was not the intended goal. So IMO this will be sorted out in due course, but at the moment it is probably not the most pressing problem for EU politicians.
hanski wrote:
I would like to add that here in Finland a lot of Russian nationals have bought real estate everywhere around “interesting” places and even built helicopter fields in some of them.
My understanding was that these were purchased by non-Finnish nationals. The number of dual national Finnish/Russian citizens with pilot licences living in Finland must be tiny, and I don’t really understand what you think they could do. I thought the military was concerned about espionage, but in the current environment it would be easily possible to close all the airspace near sensitive sites, and I think this would be far more effective than banning the dual nationals from flying.
Ibra wrote:
You may want to try LeTouquet and get DGAC approval for overflight permission? try: ag.dsac-ceATaviation-civile.gouv.fr or bf.activites-temporaires-na.dsacoATaviation-civile.gouv.fr
Some good news and here, I tried to request permission from DGAC Ouest branch, and they responded with the following:
Nous avons reçu de Paris la réponse suivante pour ce qui concerne votre situation particulière :
« Dans la mesure où il s’agit d’un vol privé et que le propriétaire de l’aéronef n’est pas russe, il n’y a pas de lieu de solliciter une dérogation à la mesure d’interdiction des vols russes en application du règlement européen 2022/334. »
Or, in English:
We have received the following response from Paris regarding your particular situation:
“Since this is a private flight and the owner of the aircraft is not Russian, there is no need to request a waiver from the ban on Russian flights in application of European regulation 2022/334.”
Apparently, the way that the ban is phrased in EU 2022/334 is different than what it says in most of the NOTAMs. Specifically, instead of word “operated” it says “otherwise controlled by”. What this actually means is open to interpretation, but apparently French authorities don’t consider that renting an aircraft falls into this category. Unfortunately, not everyone might have the same opinion. I tried to also ask Dutch authorities (as a backup) if they’d allow a training flight, and here is what they said:
If the person with the Russian nationality is not the renter of the aircraft, he or she is allowed to fly in Dutch airspace.
He or she is not allowed to fly in Dutch airspace if he or she is the renter of the aircraft. As part of a flight crew he or she can fly within the Netherlands.
Hope this helps…..
Apparently, the way that the ban is phrased in EU 2022/334 is different than what it says in most of the NOTAMs
Interesting, one can always dig NOTAMS vs Law (SI, EU reg, Journal Official) to find a different text with lot of stuff being lost in translation or interpretation
Well you have the green light from DGAC, go for it !
There’s a Russian (RA) P210 parked at my FBO at Cannes – it has been there for a while. The FBO occasionally starts the engine and runs it for a while, to keep it in good shape. I’m told that the airport is not at all happy about even this.
johnh wrote:
The FBO occasionally starts the engine and runs it for a while, to keep it in good shape
It’s probably doing exactly the opposite – adding combustion products (water) to the oil but never getting the oil hot enough to evaporate them. During the first COVID lockdown, I tried running my plane for a good half hour on the ground in order to change the oil for what was expected to be a prolonged grounding – and the oil was barely warm even after all that time. By contrast, a 30 minute flight would have the oil nice and hot.
YakovD wrote:
it says “otherwise controlled by”. What this actually means is open to interpretation
It’s addressed in article 83 bis of the Chicago Convention. Quite a few Russian-controlled commercial aeroplanes are registered in British overseas territories.
YakovD wrote:
Unfortunately, not everyone might have the same opinion. I tried to also ask Dutch authorities…
Why is this unfortunate? The Dutch response looks favourable and consistent with Council Regulation (EU) 2022/334.
