Peter wrote:
I certainly can’t
Can’t, or refuses to ? 
Another digression. ECAC has just now announced a similar recommendation for homebuilt aircraft also for historical aircraft.
(I’m not sure if the link work, the link text looks awfully long)
For homebuilts its here and here.
These are recommendations, and needs to be implemented in the AIP, as is mostly done with homebuilts. It remains to be seen how this turns out with historical aircraft.
AF wrote:
1) As long as a homebuilt is certified within an ECAC country, it can be based in any other ECAC country that has reciprocation without any additional permit.
AF, is your homebuild aircraft issued with a “Certificate of Airworthiness” or a “Permit to Fly”? I’ll readily admit that I don’t know much about homebuilds, but I had thought that they were issued permits to fly rather than certified.
dublinpilot wrote:
a “Certificate of Airworthiness” or a “Permit to Fly”
Those are UK terms, non-existant in France. We were earlier told that the plane currently is on an F-Pxxx registration. The exact precise legal implications are beyond my knowledge, though.
Comment withdrawn, with apologies.
europaxs wrote:
BTW: if you plan to fly to Germany (which – regarding your travelling ambitions is likely) you should carry a noise certificate or you can expect rediculous landing fees at some airfields.
Working on it…
Would have to get one in France, as any other authority can’t certify it…
However, I’ll try to go around by going to the Austrian Homebuilders group, have them test it, and then produce some kind of document similar to what has been discussed in other threads…
Peter wrote:
Otherwise, for France, we have this (more background around here) and nobody has yet found something to the contrary.
The guy at AustroControl said that AC is trying to bring DGAC inline with their agreement. Technically, DGAC is breaking their unilateral ECAC agreement by doing such things…
So, all I know for now (you guys have taught me 80% of what I know up to date…) is that it should be reciprocal, and if everyone just starts pinging their authorities about this, it should help expedite change.
Although, I wouldn’t want to have to play reindeer games with France, what I do know now, is that if they started giving me hell, I’d just direct them to AustroControl… it is no longer my problem.
Peter wrote:
Germany, which is the most liberal known European country, with a 365 day limit and then you can re-apply for another 365 days, and so on.
Austria has exactly the same rules and time-frame as well, in case we’re listing… ;)
Peter wrote:
Does that mean that Germany requires no permit for an ECAC-reg homebuilt to fly there and land and be indefinitely based there?
According to what AustroControl told me today, that is correct. I don’t need anything other than my French reg to fly and be based in Austria. No special permissions whatsoever, and I don’t even need to notify them that I’m there. Of course I have to comply with French regs for maintenance, etc.
The key phrase the AC gent used on the phone today was “we share the same standards and requirements” which is why they’re going after the DGAC… because the DGAC is giving Austrian Experimental pilots trouble when they fly over there, but AustroControl doesn’t hassle anybody who has an aircraft registered within the ECAC members…
Peter wrote:
the Great Satan who brought us MacDonalds
I actually laughed out loud… thanks for that :)
Peter wrote:
I don’t think the OP is (right now) after IFR
This is a tough one Peter… Just talking with the AC guy on the phone today made it clear that composite aircraft are really difficult to certify by the European IFR standards… it isn’t just the equipment, it is the IMC “Survivability” standards… which means a direct hit by lightning. Fiberglass + lightning = fireworks show…
While we’re going off-topic, anyone see this… (looks interesting to me, as I just got a canard wing, and it flies like a dream…)
http://www.raptor-aircraft.com/design.html
dublinpilot wrote:
AF, is your homebuild aircraft issued with a “Certificate of Airworthiness” or a “Permit to Fly”?
Its all French to me at this point dublin… I’ll let you know when I find out. What I do know, is that it’s limited… whatever that means. That’s the only thing I know for sure :)
Jan_Olieslagers wrote:
The exact precise legal implications are beyond my knowledge, though
Ditto. But will try my best to find out…
Thanks guys.
For what it’s work, a ECAC home build can fly into Ireland without any specific permission, but can’t stay here for more than 30 days. That doesn’t quite line up with what Austrocontrol says.
dublinpilot wrote:
is your homebuild aircraft issued with a “Certificate of Airworthiness” or a “Permit to Fly”?
Update: I’m looking at the documents for the aircraft, and here’s what I’ve got:
“Certificat de Navigabilite’” = “Certificate of Airworthiness”
“This Certificate of Airworthiness is issued pursuant to the French Code of Civil Aviation in respect of the above-mentioned aircraft which is considered to be airworthy when maintained and operated in accordance with the foregoing and the pertinent operating limitations. This Certificate is only valid when associated with the following documents:”
… Dossier C.N.R.A. ####
And I have that document as well, which states the basic metrics for the aircraft…
So… yes. I have a Certificate of Airworthiness… in those exact terms.
Interesting. I wondered was there a confusion over the terms, with Austrocontrol saying that they’d recognise a certificate of airworthiness, but other countries issuing permits to fly.
Apparently not!
AustroControl statement about Overflight by Foreign Aircraft
src = https://www.austrocontrol.at/en/aviation_agency/licenses__permissions/flight_permissions/ultralight_18_lfg_
Foreign registered aircrafts with restricted flight authorisation generally require a permission to enter and operate in Austria according to LFG § 18.
The application has to be signed by the operator.
The application should be submitted at least five full working days prior to commencing the intended flight.
Exemptions:
Aircrafts registered in an EU country with restricted C of A granted according to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 Subpart H which comply with ICAO Annex 8 need no specific entry permit.
dublinpilot wrote:
Interesting. I wondered was there a confusion over the terms, with Austrocontrol saying that they’d recognise a certificate of airworthiness, but other countries issuing permits to fly.
The ECAC recommendation includes both, Permits and CofA. This or that doesn’t really matter, but a Permit is typically only valid for one year and needs to be renewed by some official person, while a CofA is valid indefinitely with routinely maintenance by a qualified person. Most countries issue CofA to homebuilts. A CofA is obviously better for the owner, because it can be maintained anywhere and can stay anywhere indefinitely. I would believe CofA is better for everybody, the officials included. The only thing a permit regime does, is to create yet another system with peculiar rules and regulations. It creates lots of them in fact, like it is for microlights where each country has their rules, regulations and even standards.
Maybe it would be better if EASA took care of all types of aircraft. But I fear peculiarities would win over common sense if that ever happened.
Peter wrote:
180 days or 365 days ?
It says in the permission “180 days in a year”, you can read it “days of operation” if you wish
Peter wrote:
Does that mean that Germany requires no permit for an ECAC-reg homebuilt to fly there and land and be indefinitely based there?
Exactly 
