From here
Hi, how does all this “general PPR” as specified in Bulgaria AIP GEN 1.2 and 2.1 tie in with ICAO art 5 that we base most of our international GA operations on?
ICAO wrote:
Each contracting State agrees that all aircraft of the other
contracting States, being aircraft not engaged in scheduled
international air services shall have the right, subject to the
observance of the terms of this Convention, to make flights
into or in transit non-stop across its territory and to make stops
for non-traffic purposes without the necessity of obtaining prior
permission, and subject to the right of the State flown over to
require landing.
I don’t think it’s specific to Bulgaria, lot of countries require permits and permissions to overfly and land?
Art5 refers to “Tech-Stop” right without marchandise & passengers, I think lot of countries allow this for non-scheduled flights including Bulgaria, the caveat is they can always force you to “land & exit”, so you are back to permission and permits territory 
I tried few GA tech stops, on rare occasions I was forced “to come and see us, what you are afraid of?” but the majority of cases it worked fine: some were fuel, some were swapping crew seats, some were stretching legs & pee…in all cases, I sent PN with flight & pob details
That is an interesting point: first of all art 5 is not limited to tech stops (there is an “and” before “tech stops” or “non-traffic purpose”) . By the way, as long as there are no pax or cargo (frequently the case with our long-distance GA ops) , it always fulfils the intent of “non-traffic purpose” under the ICAO definition, so not just a “pure-tech-stop”.
Countries are entitled to have differences on this and other matters vs ICAO regs, but they must communicate those to ICAO and publish them on their AIP as a difference vs ICAO rules (in AIP GEN 1.7, but obviusly not the case with Bulgaria)
Unfortunately, as @Peter sais, it is a frequent practice that airports, customs and authorities counter the ICAO convention with a blanket requirement for PPR. This is in any case mandatory for non-ICAO compliant aircraft (ie permit flights, microlights, amateur-built etc) which by definition are not covered under article 5 since it applies to aircraft subject to the observance of the terms of this Convention
A few businesses dedicated to managing overflight permits have thrived based on this and using them is of course the practical resolution. Not ideal but perhaps also not the biggest problem in international GA.
Nonetheless I see this as an infringement of ICAO . Other than the current practice (a bit like the lack of entry airport requirements for immigration purposes in Schengen) is there some loophole I am not aware of that authorities and airports are using to allow the blanket PPR in Bulgaria (and a lot of other countries)?
ICAO was invented, amongst other matters, to allow reasonably seamless international flight when commercial transport is not involved…as GA, we should not let those rights be easily forgotten.By the way, as long as there are no pax or cargo (frequently the case with our long-distance GA ops) , it always fulfils the intent of “non-traffic purpose” under the ICAO definition
Indeed, no one can deny transits rights, worst case they will ask to “fly away”
In practice, they may refuse:
- filing flight plan
- entry in airspace
- landing in airports
That is where things gets interesting…
This is similar to “staying airside” in airport while transit without visa, in theory, all countries have to implement this in their big air travel airport hubs (to facilitate transfers), however, many companies & countries will refuse aircraft boarding without additional papers…
no one can deny transits rights
In practice, they may refuse:
- entry in airspace
??
Most of the 3rd World (= most of the earth’s surface, that is not covered by water) does exactly that.
People who have flown say UK to Cape Town (many; many writeups on the web) have got one of the overflight agents to book the whole lot, country by country. I vaguely recall “French East Africa” (Morocco, Senegal…) does not need this, which is why European PPLs, especially from France, tend to head down there (but no further).
Airlines have this pre-agreed and a 747 flying across Africa makes 1 or 2 radio calls to each country and the airline gets an invoice.
Yes @aeroplus amongst many others surely knows a thing or two about this and may chime in…
Is this yet another case of GA rights being insidiously and progressively removed?
A lot of good people fought hard for these rights during a bloody world war because they thought it worthwhile enough amidst the apparently more pressing matters of the times. We should not simply let it go.Peter wrote:
Airlines have this pre-agreed and a 747 flying across Africa makes 1 or 2 radio calls to each country and the airline gets an invoice.
Yes, it is a completely different arrangement: ICAO Art 6 makes it explicit that
ICAO wrote:
No scheduled international air service may be operated over
or into the territory of a contracting State, except with the
special permission or other authorization of that State, and in
accordance with the terms of such permission or authorization.
There used to be a very well known GA pilot (got out of it ~ 10 years ago but AFAIK is still alive) who wrote about his African ferry experiences, with and without permits. It involved making radio calls like “read you 1, please say again” and if you were doing 200kt, by the time anybody might get funny about it, you were into the next country
Seriously, IMHO it is not a breach of ICAO to require an overflying private pilot to get a permit because ICAO explicitly allows each country to have total sovereignity within its airspace. Otherwise, nobody would have signed the treaty, and remember that the majority of the ~200 UN-recognised countries are not run by nice people; they are run by dictators, warlords, criminals, crooks, murderers, cannibals, etc
To be fair, I dont think we can do much in the short term about that majority. It is the Bulgarias and Turkeys of the world, supposedly run by nice-r people (part of ECAC too) I am more worried about.
Also, the unofficial “blanket PPR” at a large number of French airports is half a step down from being in breach of the same concept.
