If you read it there, you need a lot of salt 
You can absolutely fly into the USA. It is done all the time. ICAO privileges. Permanent basing eventually requires some TSA-related paperwork, but almost nobody has been involved with it since nobody with any sense would do that; you would transfer to N-reg ASAP. I knew a guy who kept a G-reg TB10 there for many years however, with no paperwork.
Katamarino wrote:
The corollary of this, of course, being that people on the EU-reg are incompetents with very little knowledge about aircraft, and therefore need to have their entire flying lives controlled by a maintenance organisation.
He he. Well, I don’t disagree with this. The EASA philosophy regarding light GA is probably as nutty as it gets, but it is improving – slooowly.
Either way, I believe in honesty. N-reg is a way to save money – period. Nothing wrong with that, or is it?
N-reg is a way to save money
It isn’t, in most cases. It is done mostly for the IR. Long story, however 
Most N-reg owners may more when they take their plane to a company – because they are perceived as having more money.
LeSving wrote:
Either way, I believe in honesty. N-reg is a way to save money – period. Nothing wrong with that, or is it?
It’s different things to different people. Some use it to get the same airplane (capability, maintenance level, safety) at a lower price. I spend the same on my N-reg airplane as I would if it was on an EU-reg; but I get so much more for the same money.
As you say, nothing wrong with it, but the post of yours I first quoted was suggesting that aircraft on the N-reg are in worse shape than those that aren’t (“What else will they cut corners on”). I see it as quite the opposite; N-reg is a way of accepting a bit more inconvenience to achieve a much better result. People who are lazy and cut corners would be on the EU-reg, and just hand everything over to a maintenance org as forced.
skydriller wrote:
EASA Reg aeroplane into the USA is made extremely difficult
I read an article a couple of years ago where a French controller moved back to France from (I think) Guadeloupe, and flew his F-reg PA28 up the US East coast prior to having it ferried home. I think there was a paperwork to do first, but can’t remember… His biggest problem was on the radio: the various controllers were used to “Cessna eight niner alpha” or “Speedbird one two three” but refused to believe “Fox alpha bravo” was a callsign
Lots of posts and even more opinions.
Generally, the very fact that N-reg did become so popular in Europe (and elsewhere for that matter) was the regulatory way Europe dealt with GA and still does in some regards. However, it has to be seen that a lot of these things have gone and others will go.
- IR: The new basic IR as well as the CB-IR have massively changed the archievability of the IR for PPL’s, either those who have the US-IR and now see a viable way to change it to also fly IFR in Europe via the CB-IR, secondly via the new upgradable Basic IR which comes very close to the US IR in terms of what is needed to achieve it.
- Maintenance: ELA1 and 2 in many ways emulate the US regs in the sense that TBO becomes what it is for non commecial ops: a recommendation. This as well as others. We also see that EASA is starting to refer to FAA AML’s when issuing STC’s (Garmin thread here for a recent example) and appears to be moving in that direction. The Roadmap goals are also going in the right direction.
- Medical: Many went the FAA way as they could not achieve a medical in Europe. While I am not sure how much that has changed, I see that a lot of pet reasons for AME’s to refuse medicals these days do not work anymore as the rules have changed in favour of the applicants in many ways. We don’t have self declaration yet as in the US, but also the fact that in order to fly in Europe you do need dual licensing and a EASA medical anyhow has closed that route to many.
So while there still are a lot of differences which may well keep some folks on N-Reg (IFR on experimentals for starters, though that is something which is gray zone at the very least) for a lot of us the incentive keeps getting smaller. Add to that the administrative side (Thrust, lack of FAA personell in Europe, Peter mentioned a few in his OP) will change the focus for many.
The proposition that n-regs are less well kept and for cheapos who want to save on maintenance is mostly rubbish. I’ve seen European wrecks as many as N-Reg ones but many planes are in good shape no matter what registration they have.
In an ideal world, we should not NEED to keep any flag of convenience neither in aviation nor in any other way, but there will always be those who think the grass is greener on the other side. Personally, N-Reg keeps loosing attractiveness but on the other hand, flying and possibly living in the US if you are aviation minded becomes more and more attractive. The problems with airports, outpricing, slots, CFMU system, e.t.c. in my view today outweigh the registration question by far.
What has always bothered me in a way is that while people complain a lot about the EU and it’s regs, it still allows people to operate airplanes under a different legal system while they are resident here or even worse never have been US residents or citizens with the clear premis to circumnavigate European Law. The US has never allowed the same and never will. Likewise, the US has a very restrictive policy of acknowledging European or other ICAO certifications, mostly everything has to be re-done in the US, likewise for manufacturers and in licensing. Many here expect Europe to act differently and in fact it has been more liberal on this issue, but the US policy in that has since ever been in defiance of the spirit of mutual reckognition which would be in the ICAO spirit. Maybe because the US for a long time in fact was the ones defining standards and most other things in aviation, but that time has long gone. For that reason I am not totally opposed to some of the restrictions EASA has done which do nothing else than replicate the US policies on EU built equipment and airplanes, yet I wish both would go away and simply reckognize that one is as capable as the other. That would be a real step forward and again not only in aviation.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
We don’t have self declaration yet as in the US
The US does not have medical self-declaration, that is I believe a UK term. The US has Sport Pilot, which does not require any paperwork, just a valid US driver’s license for medical compliance to fly lighter, slower aircraft types. The US also has BasicMed, which replaces the normal 3rd Class medical with an exam done by any licensed physician and no FAA interaction. That one is more hassle for me than the 3rd Class medical itself which IME takes about 15 minutes if you have no medical issues, and is therefore my choice.
I knew of a guy who flew a Danish registered plane in the US for a few years, but he crashed it and then after rebuilding it registered it as Experimental Exhibition, which is a very advantageous category. The only issue for him is that it would be very difficult to put the plane back onto a European register and the type is not well known in the US. Eventually he must’ve figured out neither the plane nor he is likely to return to Europe.
Otherwise, there are some odds and ends of Mexican and Canadian registered planes living more or less permanently in the US but given that N-registration is preferred worldwide on every conceivable level, except where local restrictions try to block access, you’d have to be in a near unique situation to want to know about foreign registration if US based. The first things almost anybody does if bringing himself and an aircraft to the US is to take the opportunity to get the plane off foreign registration and to do the paper exercise for a no-hassle ‘based-on’ FAA pilot certificate.
It would be ironic if the FAA decision that the ‘Writtens’ must be done in the States – especially the IR paper – resulted in the curtailment of people obtaining FAA IR’s when we have managed over many years to frustrate and curtail the attempts of EASA/CAA to achieve that end!
Ibra is right when he writes:
“For IR rating, the convenience and practical skill you get with an FAA IR in the past for private flying is a universal truth”.
I believe this – despite improvements by the authorities in Europe – is still true.
The ability to self-study; the practicalities of only one paper for the IR (still requiring a lot of hard work, but within the grasp of more people than the European system); the ability to keep it current under the 6/6/6 rule; together with the sensible rules for Standard Directives on improvements makes the N register still eminently practical.
I think too much has been made of the ‘difficulties’ that the Written must be taken in the States. With the convenient self-teaching methods – Books; Question Banks; CD’s; Internet courses – and the ability to self-test on line to the point where one is scoring 100% every time, means that one can go to the States with confidence and for $50 be ‘guaranteed’ a pass.
If you use the occasion to arrange for your ‘piggy-back’ license to be collected in the States for free, you will have saved yourself £440 – the fee which two gentlemen in the UK charge for the privilege – a saving which pays for the flight.
If your then do the ‘practical’ flying whilst out there, you will have obtained a very useful, practical certificate which you can ‘convert’ if/when you want to; but which many of us don’t see the point of doing until we have to – a speculative date which continues to recede.
