I moved to France in 2017 with a N-reg aztec. I agree very much with @boscomantico’s post.
Flying wise, IFR is pretty much the same than what it is in the US other than you can’t file direct, but apps make filing a flight plan painless. As it was said before, VFR can look complicated on the ground but in my experience it clears up in the air, especially if you are willing to climb a bit it seems and if you use common sense with your routing. I did a few flights with a french instructor to get used to the phraseology and to learn the in & outs of the local area, that was time well spent.
A big surprise for me was the weather but I wasn’t an experienced IFR pilot in the first place.
Maintenance wise, you’ll always find a way to make it work, especially if you are willing to get involved (ordering parts, etc).
Getting a hangar was a gigantic pain, but the Bay Area was no better.
Our flying profile has evolved, we’re not firing up the old aztec for a local pleasure flight anymore but longer trips with a group of friends are very rewarding. We are looking forward to doing more of these in the future.
Enjoy your Atlantic crossing :)
mh wrote:
By the way speaking of money keeping your plane N reg will save you lots in maintenance bill.
Nah, that’s not really true however. You can save costs by maintaining the a/c yourself and that is possible on any EASA register, aswell.But since they are NReg and I assume they’re not going into an AOC, its eventually easier to keep them Nreg.
I disagree emphatically with that assertion. I’ll be specific. I walked into the maintenance hangar and saw a 210 in pieces.
Me; “Whats going on?”
A&P “Oh he has a service bulletin to comply with since he is D registered”.
Me: “What SB are your referring to?”
A&P “SB XXXXX”
Me “I would not do that its not necessary?”
A&P " He has no choice SBs are required to be done if D Registered"
Im assuming that is the case for the French Italians and anyone else under the EASA oversight. So when you get a SB from the legal department you can do what they ask or just round file it if its nonsense.
Trust me you will save big bucks by keeping it N Reg. Why do you think so many Germans/French/English are flying N Reg aircraft?
Regarding VFR flights in Germany Austria Hungary no big deal. France on the other hand is a hodgepodge of MOA R and P areas. I usually file IFR and avoid the stress when flying in France.
There are flight planning software that is available. Some for free others for a fee. Autorouter, which also has a great weather pictorial forecast, Rocket Route which has a human you can confer with, and some people like sky Demon which might only be VFR.
I use English all the time when I fly. Most but not all understand it. I cant speak Croate or Greek or Italian or.. or … English is the language of aviation. When I flew over did a quick tour of France and at small airports only French is spoken so I was given a list of rudamentary phrases like on final departing etc. My French is so incomprehensible that nobody understood me but everyone did help to get me out of their airspace as quickly as possible. 
Wow I cant believe this slipped by and nobody caught it. The aircraft import VAT!!! Unless you leave the EU every 6 months you will be charged a one time VAT on the value of the airplane. In Germany its 19% Unless you are moving to Germany resettling where you are allowed to bring all your goods into the country on a one time VAT exemption you will be paying that 19%. Guys correct me Im wrong but that is the way it was in Hungary. Be forewarned.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Wow I cant believe this slipped by and nobody caught it. The aircraft import VAT!!! Unless you leave the EU every 6 months you will be charged a one time VAT on the value of the airplane. In Germany its 19% Unless you are moving to Germany resettling where you are allowed to bring all your goods into the country on a one time VAT exemption you will be paying that 19%. Guys correct me Im wrong but that is the way it was in Hungary. Be forewarned.
I’m pretty sure that you’ll get the VAT exemption. The rules are the same than for cars, see this link . I did and it was no problem (well the custom office asked me to bring the vehicle physically at first). But indeed it’s a good idea to figure that out beforehand.
Peter wrote:
I believe mh is one so owning ELA1 works well for him.
You can write your own maintenance program. This is just a document where you define, how you handle Service Bulletins and manufacturer limits and what manual you use for maintenance. There you can define, that you do not follow TBO or that you will release the timed intervals yourself as pilot-owner maintenance (100hr checks for example). Once a year you update the AD-list, if anything changed, update the list of changes (Installations via STC or Standard Changes or minor / major changes), and when the annual is performed, the inspector just needs to inspect the aircraft according to the Maintenance program. He then inspects the aircraft, issues the new airworthiness review certificate and you’re good to go. This inspection usually costs around 300-400€ for an ELA1.
If you have a contract in a CAMO+, it manages your times and ad lists. Then you just need to send them a picture of your logbook, where you signed off for the 100hrs control or annual control, and you get the ARC issued remotely. A physical inspection is just done every third year in this so-called supervised environment.
If you have an ELA2, these alleviations are not in place, yet, but they are agreed upon.
There was much FUD about the system distributed by aviation press and some of the GA-associations, but mainly because they couldn’t overcome their old system thinking. In the end, since Part-M, my maintenance costs are considerably less than with the old german national system, where you could only do maintenance in a certified workshop (there really was an LBA audit before you could start maintenance in your hangar! And if you had unmarked tools, you weren’t granted permission to work on a plane with some inspectors. Today, you can repair all sort of stuff in your living room, and only your spouse must certify your workshop. I actually know one guy, who has repaired a broken ASH-25 fuselage in his living room. )
So… in the end, the EASA system and the FAA system are very much alike, only here around you’ll find more EASA66 inspectors than A&Ps.
When we reregistered our 172B from Nreg to Dreg, it was pretty straightforward. The other way round with a C310Q … not so much. This has cost the owner several AMUs for bureaucracy reasons. (He had to exchange fresh overhauled props to a different type of new props, because they were models not on the original TC but could be fitted with a 337 after transferring to NReg.)
I have read, that the trust for an N-Reg aircraft will cost around 800€ to set up and 400€ per year in trust fees. So if the A&P won’t give me 40€ to be allowed to perform the annual on my aircraft (as if someone would… ), the EASA system is actually cheaper here. As it should be.
Bottom line: If you plan to stay, think about getting into an EASA reg. If you plan to move back some time, don’t.
For flying in Germany: I do not fly IFR (yet), but you don’t need much more than https://www.autorouter.aero/ – setup your plane and with entering departure and destination, you will recieve a flight plan including all necessary information. It’s free. For VFR flying, take a look at Skydemon. I know Foreflight is in Europe now, too, but nothing beats Skydemon IMO. SD also shows IR routes and plates, so it seems to be sufficient for IR navigation, too.
Since Europe has had some nationalistic bs going on when they tried to allocate frequencies and airspace sectors, there weren’t enough free ones for every sector needed. So the nationalists forced us all to buy new radios with an 8.33 MHz spacing. Your A36 is probably equipped, but your Pitts maybe not. If you need to buy a new one, I can recommend the small Trig units, or, maybe, a KRT2 (if you like just cheap and don’t intend to switch anything more often than once a flight, the KRT2 is a PITA to use…)
Then, for most airspaces you need a ModeS transponder. But there is no ADS-B mandate, and probably there won’t be in near future, because ADS-B works on the 1090Hz Mode S frequency. So your ADS-B-In might how you very little traffic, if any. Because of this and the limited power available in sailplanes that time, FLARM was developed. FLARM-devices usually have FLARM out, FLARM, ADS-B and XPDR-In and some devices can be linked to your tablet, to show traffic. Gliders don’t have a transponder, but >99% of all gliders do transmit FLARM. And there are a lot of gliders. (in Germany, there are more gliders and motorgliders than SEP & light GA ME-aircraft, and they fly more miles in summer than the rest of the GA combined.
In Germany, you have airspace E beginning pretty low. But that’s usually not an issue, as you don’t need to talk to anyone. I personally don’t talk if I don’t need to, FIS is useless in most scenarios, but the chatter is gruesome. When flying VFR over land, usually I shut the radio off completely.
There is a pretty senseless thing in Germany, that is opening hours of airports. If there isn’t a “Flugleiter” present, who makes sure that no jews are fleeing the country, you are not allowed to land or take off. Okay, noone cares for jews anymore, but that’s the origin of this stupid law and since it was officially reasoned with emergency rescue service, we will be stuck with it for some time. (And yes, for landings on water, the same applies. I, too, need a Flugleiter, when landing on a water-airport. These do have “real” runways and taxiways and other senseless stuff… ) But since Flugleiter do cost money, usually you will have to pay for a landing. And for you not to pay the highest price (and for you to be allowed to land on some airfields in the first place) you need a noise certificate. On the EASA reg, you’ll get one issued by the national aviation authority, for N-Reg you just issue one yourself. If in doubt what to enter, the EASA has a noise list with every aircraft and every mod that they have measured. (yes, it’s quite a long XLS-table…)
For VFR night, you need to file a flight plan and talk to radar, but you are flying VFR (they won’t direct you at night). For aerobatics, you need a flight plan, unless you stay in G. And G starts usually in 2500ft GND, but in the vicinity of Airspace D, it is reduced to 1000ft gnd. For aerobatics below 1500ft GND you need a special permit by the local aviation authorities.
There are some truely wonderful things to experience when flying in Europe. When flying with the Bonanza, one to two hours flight time in each direction from Berlin brings you into regions with totally different culture, cuisines and history and music and art. You can learn a lot about how different cultures can grow together, how senseless borders are if you have a plane, how people can understand each other, even if they speak different languages and how valuable it is, to fly. Even in a region in the world, where ground based transport is optimised and beats flying on many routes.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Im assuming that is the case for the French Italians and anyone else under the EASA oversight.
Nope, It’s not. It was a pure LBA thing, that has been suspended for some time. You are referring to the Cessna SID.
More often than not, Peters “the less I know, the more I pay” is at work in these cases. Happens in the US, too, if you drop the keys and a blanco cheque at a maintenance hangar.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Trust me you will save big bucks by keeping it N Reg.
I know what I pay, even the trust costs more.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Why do you think so many Germans/French/English are flying N Reg aircraft?
wleferrand wrote:
I’m pretty sure that you’ll get the VAT exemption. The rules are the same than for cars, see this link . I did and it was no problem (well the custom office asked me to bring the vehicle physically at first). But indeed it’s a good idea to figure that out beforehand.
Yes, there would be an exemption as the aircraft would be treated as a household good, see https://www.zoll.de/EN/Private-individuals/Staying-in-Germany/Transferring-residence/transferring-residence_node.html for details and conditions.
C210_Flyer wrote:
Why do you think so many Germans/French/English are flying N Reg aircraft?
In the context of mh’s comments, here are some factors that occur to me:
No maintenance program of any kind, declared or otherwise
No traceability required for new or used parts
No periodic IFR certifications, and no associated removal and inspection of instruments – are these still an ordeal in Germany?
No autopilot required for IFR – or is this a German airspace requirement, versus D-registration?
FAA type certificates are never be reduced in status, and are never contingent on a commercial support organization (no orphans)
Field approved major modifications are possible, with or without DER involvement.
No requirement ever to have a commercial company or facility involved in maintaining your aircraft – the single exception is for inspection, not maintenance: the transponder/static certification every 24 months, if needed.
Many more PMA replacement parts
Many more pre-approved (STC) modifications
No direct or indirect paperwork fees to government for anything
All the above assuming its not a wood Robin, Bölkow 207 or something else without an FAA TC.
My airplane #2 has been out of annual for a little while, I don’t fly it much any more, but my A&P IA called me up this week and said he needs one more annual inspection to meet his minimum quota for the year… so we’ll do it this weekend. The cost will be zero, and no fees or taxes will apply either. Try that with a company.
Silvaire wrote:
No maintenance program of any kind, declared or otherwise
That’s actually not such a bad idea. In the end, it’s nothing you wouldn’t do anyway as owner: define how you cope with SB, TBO, etc.
Silvaire wrote:
No traceability required for new or used parts
EASA has upcoming a rework of the necessity for traceability. In the new system, there are part categories for the important ones you need a Form1, for the not important ones you need a bill. Inbetween there are two categories with different COCs.
i.e. if I were to replace a main bolt, I do want traceability for my own purpose. For a fairing not so much…
Silvaire wrote:
No periodic IFR certifications, and no removal and inspection of instruments – are these still an ordeal in Germany?
No such requirement in EASA-land.
Silvaire wrote:
No autopilot required for IFR – or is this a Germany airspace requirement, versus D-registration?
Not anymore, since Part NCO is in place. EASA says you have just to be able to navigate and hold your a/c in attitude and on course. HOW you do that is not specified and up to the pilot.
Unless, you intend to fly special procedures, like an ILS approach, then you need an ILS.
Silvaire wrote:
FAA type certificates are never be reduced in status, and never be contingent on a commercial support organization (no orphans)
Yes, that’s a bureaucratic issue. As our Associations wanted to keep some aircraft out of the scope of EASA (now Annex I-aircraft), Part 21 was crafted that only planes with a TC holder can have a TC, and therefore have an ICAO-compliant CoA. However, Special Airworthiness Specifications were installed in place of a TC. So if an aircraft becomes orphan, the owner applies for an SAS and must comply to some of the duties of the TC holder, mainly to report safety-issues with the type. Usually all flying rights are grandfathered. However, for most popular american aircraft, I do not see a reason to fear this condition. I do not think a Bonanza will become orphan, or any Cessna.
Silvaire wrote:
Field approved major modifications are possible, with or without DER involvement.
Same in EASA, just you have several levels of changes:
Standard Changes: Defined in CS-STAN (with an annual update and any person can suggest these), to be released by either the owner or the inspector. Other than with the FAA, there is an easy procedure to legally mount Gopros on the aircraft. The FAA just stated, it will look the other side, if it sees one. This is a subtle but important difference :-)
Minor Changes: Anyone can apply and paperwork is usually done in an hour or so. EASA fees apply (in the region of 100€ or so). Any certified design organisation (the equivalent of a DER/DAR, but without the necessity of personality) can approve minor changes without EASA involvement, just notification.
Major Changes: Anyone can apply, but a design organisation has usually more experience and reduced costs.
STC: to be released by a Part66 engineer.
Silvaire wrote:
No requirement ever to have a commercial company or facility involved in maintaining your aircraft – the single exception is for inspection, not maintenance: the transponder/static certification every 24 months, if needed.
I do not know of it’s really an advantage. In an organisation, I can exchange, staff up or down peaople much more easily with on the job training, without the requirement of them holding this and that license. Makes a lot of sense in the certifying world. and DAR/DER has a license to print money. Especially if they are based outside the US.
Having said that, the new agreed Part ML lists a CAO as a one-man-company, able to do anything on a/c up to 2700(ish) kg MTOM (I think 6000 lbs was the mark).
Silvaire wrote:
No direct or indirect paperwork fees to government for anything
OTOH, on EASA reg you have some freedoms, you don’t have on N-Reg. Like taking people for cost sharing rides with a PPL, or even making introductory flights with complete payment of all costs within aero clubs.
If you are a manufacturer, you’d rather go the EASA route, too. With the FAA, you need to follow rules by the letter, with EASA by intend. So bad worded regulations can be discussed. If you can’t or don’t want to comply to CS-23 for instance, you can argue an equivalent means of compliance for the goal of certification. A friend of mine works in certification / development for a US company and he is not even close to happy about having to work with the FAA, their DERs and DARs. This line of work is much easier in Europe. Especially if you know what you’re doing :-P
The FAA has the big advantage of never been set the task to unify 28+4 national regulations into one unified set of rules. However, this has made the EASA rulemaking processes much more agile and transparent as the FAA processes.
For example, the possibility for any citizen to comment rule changes or to propose rule changes and getting a mandatory qualified reply by the agency was crafted into EASA from the very beginning. Yes, the process usually takes some time, but is very democratic and transparent. How much influence can you take in changes in FAA regulations? Were you asked if you thought the ADS-B mandate was a good idea?
Silvaire wrote:My airplane #2 has been out of annual for a little while, I don’t fly it much any more, but my A&P IA called me up this week and said he needs one more annual inspection to meet his minimum quota for the year… so we’ll do it this weekend. The cost will be zero, and no fees or taxes will apply either. Try that with a company.
Oh easy, as no company is obliged to bill anything. So I have gotten work for a beer, too. But your A&P-friend can’t live off this, can he? Or does his butcher have to meet minimum quotas, too, and give him his steaks for free? So your A&P will have some kind of business after all. You can’t base any system comparison on free work by a friend, can you?
If I said that a friend donated me a plane, I couldn’t claim in Europe you can acquire planes at no cost, can I?
My A&P IA has a real job too, he makes about $150K a year doing other stuff and works on planes for fun. Everybody I’m involved with in flying and aircraft, certified or otherwise, is doing it on the weekends for fun. During the week their real jobs may or may not have anything to do with engineering and aircraft…
Periodic registration of my aircraft was $5 – I did it last month for one of them. Its up over $1.50/year now under the new system. Shocking 
The FAA rule making process is well documented, starts with NPRM, then public comment period, AOPA lobbying, endless publication of all of the above in each step of the rule making sequence. When its all done, the process, public comments and responses are summarized in something like this on the web. Yes, many people used their opportunity to weigh in on ADS-B as it applies to light aircraft.
Those people often work under the scope of a company and do the same, here. It’s just called by different names, that’s all.
Silvaire wrote:
Periodic registration of my aircraft was $5 – I did it last month for one of them. Its up over $1.50/year now under the new system. Shocking
Hmm, transfer of ownership was 40€. Once.
