I think the planning and flying part has become massively easier. GPS and products like ForeFlight (or Skydemon in Europe) have made the planning and execution of the flight a breeze. Nothing compared to the paper charts and VOR triangulations we all used 20+ years ago. So VFR travel has become much easier.
What has changed in Europe is access to the infrastructure. I remember flying VFR from Denham to LOWW (Vienna International) or Bremen to Malaga with en-route stops at big CAT airports. I also had friends whose Cessnas were based in Milan Linate and we would go flying from there. Those days, sadly, are gone, but that has nothing to do with VFR or IFR it’s simply the way GA is evolving – or rather: forced to evolve – in Europe.
boscomantico wrote:
Both not entirely irrelevant, but not big factors either. Nobody has ever been busted for one or the other.
What about CVFR, then? A Swedish pilot would not understand why you would need a special rating to fly controlled VFR in a TMA. But maybe no one who tried ever got busted for that either.
Exactly. If that Seedish pilot had crossed a German TMA when the CVFR rating was still a thing, nobody would ever have noticed he didn‘t have one.
That why I ditinguish between relevant national differences, and those that merely harmonized what is written somewhere in some regs.
My feeling is that over last years, a lot of those rules that don‘t really make a differences have been harmonized, whilst a lot of „things“ remain.
I would guess that most German pilots have never really read Part-NCO and SERA. They just fly as they did before… and it works… until they come across national borders and something strange comes at them.
Airborne_Again wrote:
What about CVFR, then? A Swedish pilot would not understand why you would need a special rating to fly controlled VFR in a TMA.
If I remember history correctly (CVFR-rating has been gone for many years now) you did not need a CVFR rating to fly in TMAs. At the time the CFVR rating has been there it was mainly required to fly in airspace charly. That was – at that time – an airspace where even as an VFR pilot you could get a clearance “intercept XXX radial yyy” or “fly direct XXX”.
At these days it was, however, simply not part of the PPL training to fly according to radio navigation aids. You could not expect every PPL pilot to be able to correctly intercept a radial.
Obviously with GPS and the fancy avionics every pilot is able to do these things – and hence the CVFR rating is no longer necessary.
@Peter To what timespan do you refer to?
I am into the flying world since I am born, and as a youngster did some cross-European flight preparations (and flights of course) with my father.
Can you imagine doing that on wallpaper charts, like 3 meters tall, looking for interesting airspaces you’ve never seen, and telephone or fax being the only option to gather information? (Besides books of course)
No google :-)
Let aside weather forecast quality and availability of today.
Well no. I don’t understand the question. Flying VFR today is way easier.
Malibuflyer wrote:
At these days it was, however, simply not part of the PPL training to fly according to radio navigation aids. You could not expect every PPL pilot to be able to correctly intercept a radial.
National difference… In Sweden radio navigation was part of the training.
And in France.
I vaguely recall France allowed VFR without sight of surface, while JAA (and most countries including the UK) banned it – until SERA came along c. 2011. France required a VOR receiver to do it, or something like that.
Actually this is a big thing which changed in recent years. Long distance VFR is ridiculous below cloud all the way. One gets the wx carefully at the far end, and accepts cruising above a solid overcast enroute. It works best (and most safely) with coastal airports 
I did all my long VFR flights with long VMC on top sections, but I was legal because the IMC Rating removed the sight-of-surface requirement, and that removal was not restricted to UK airspace (very few people knew that). The IMCR also reduced the 3km min VFR vis (ex JAA) to 1.5km, also worldwide.
Maybe from time to time one should look at the mission.
e.g. my main flights I do (or did and will again) are things like Zurich – Salzburg, Ticino, Egelsbach, and similar, as they are the ones where GA really shines for time saving of the trip vs car or let alone train. Where there are airline flights, often even there a simple 150 kt plane will win.
During the time I used to go to Langen quite a lot, I frequently used the Mooney to reach Egelsbach in approximately one hour, hop on the train for one stop and there I was, about 2 hours door to door. With the train? 5-6 hours. Car about similar.
Salzburg: I travel there regularly to meet folks. With GA I can do it in a day, fly there in the morning, have lunch and fly back in the early evening. 1:20 each way. With the car? 4 hours one way.
Even within Switzerland: Lausanne with its great airfield (with direct bus connection) is about 50 minutes away, so are Neuchatel, La Chaux de Fons and Yverdon (which I use for Payerne at times, as Payerne is not open to civil traffic.
In the end, these are the flights which WILL happen quite regularly, as opposed to long planned pipe dreams of long haul vaccations to Greece. And that is where the plane is really really useful. I can reach Corfu cheaper and faster by airline without aggravation, but I can not reach either of the above destinations easily or faster. Even Langen: Obviously there are flights to FRA galore, but then you need a taxi (expensive) or a long way from Rhein-Main to Langen…
Mission. Mission. Mission. All of the above can be done VFR about 70% of the time. The Ticino or generally cross the alps about 40% of the time. Yea, ZRH-Locarno is a 40 minutes flight as opposed 3 hours by car, ZRH Samedan ditto.
Frankly, that is what keeps me going rather than long trips which never materialize. All of the above can be done short notice and as daytrips either by plane if the weather allows or backup car. But they are darn nice to be done by plane. And as easy as it gets.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
During the time I used to go to Langen quite a lot, I frequently used the Mooney to reach Egelsbach in approximately one hour, hop on the train for one stop and there I was, about 2 hours door to door. With the train? 5-6 hours. Car about similar.5-6 hours to Langen from Zürich by car? That is extremely slow. I do it in 3-4 hours via Basel, depending on the daytime and average speed on the highway. I doubt that GA is much faster. First, you need to go to the airfield. Second, you need to prepare your flight and check your plane. Third, at your destination, you need to park your plane properly and go by taxi or public transport to your destination.
