Is the N-reg community in Europe going to just disappear?

The US also has the disadvantage of possibly needing to have an appropriate visa.

My due diligence into the subject tells me that the final three hours with a FAA FI needed for the sign-off and the checkride itself do not constitute “a course of study” so they can be done on a visa waiver or a tourist visa.

So, to circle back to Peter’s question – IMO the N-reg community probably will not disappear, but will shrink, roughly at the rate overall leisure GA activity is shrinking.

FWIW, I’m hoping to be on the N-reg route soon. And no, it does not look a bit less expensive than EASA, possibly even somewhat more expensive and inconvenient to get going, but I’m hoping to be in it for the long haul.

And, I guess, if push comes to shove, moving a plane from N-reg to a EASA-reg should now also be “easier than ever”. Getting an export CofA for a lowly SEP one can’t just fly over the pond would likely be the biggest hassle, right?

chflyer wrote:

that the owner makes the decisions and the mechanic does the work requested by the owner. The owner/pilot is essentially responsible for compliance to the regs about the aircraft/licence, and the mech is responsible for compliance to the regulations about his work. This is the KEY difference between the two systems, and for the owner is invaluable IF the owner wants to control a) his pocket book, and b) his safety. This requires that the owner recognize that he/she is responsible for the maintenance and safety of his/her aircraft. The authority (FAA) sets the rules, but the owner is responsible for compliance, with most validation/signoff activity (maintenance, check rides, etc) delegated

I respect that many owners, such as those who have commented on here, have the highest standards, but do all owners of N reg? I don’t know and that is the issue. But the system as mentioned above opens the door to all sorts of interpretations. I particularly refer to things like running over TBO.

By the way I have owned (or my company has owned) aircraft on the N reg, G reg, SE reg, OE reg, M reg, and D reg

Neil wrote:

I respect that many owners, such as those who have commented on here, have the highest standards, but do all owners of N reg? I don’t know and that is the issue.

N-registered light aircraft are the majority of those operating worldwide, and the system actually works fine without probing questions from the minority who do things in a ‘different’ way based on their systems relative lack of experience and development.

If I personally were a European based certified aircraft owner, there is zero chance it would be on anything but N-register. This is obviously supported by having both European and US citizenship and residences in both areas, but there is just no way I would be prepared to submit to EASA style maintenance process. As soon as somebody in power told me I needed to predeclare my maintenance over next year so they could have a look for their own entertainment, my plane would be sold.

I’m not interested in IFR (as an AA captain friend says “I don’t fly IFR unless paid to do so” ) but I suppose when subjected to nonsense airspace design I might change my point of view. More likely I’d be attracted enough to ultralight-style flying in that circumstance that I’d go in that direction instead and would learn to fly Continental trips ‘under the radar’ as is (not infrequently) done but little discussed.

Neil wrote:

I respect that many owners, such as those who have commented on here, have the highest standards, but do all owners of N reg? I don’t know and that is the issue. But the system as mentioned above opens the door to all sorts of interpretations. I particularly refer to things like running over TBO.

I cannot believe that people are still wandering about in 2019 with this perception. Sorry Neil, but utter bollox. I have sat in a Part M shop and watched G reg, Ei reg, pieces of total garbage be flown in, just!! after being maintained under the EASA regime shops. I have witnessed most N reg aircraft beautifully cared for and maintained. Some years ago I filed 16 MOR’s to the CAA Inspector after my plane was released to service by an EASA approved shop.
It was the first departure i aborted on the runway. Back to the shop it went. Guess what the CAA view was. You are the owner, it is your responsibility, not the shop. I left his office stunned. No action was taken against the shop involved. That is my experience of the CAA/EASA system. A regulatory system not fit for purpose.

Silvaire wrote:

As soon as somebody in power told me I needed to predeclare my maintenance over next year so they could have a look for their own entertainment, my plane would be sold.

I am in total agreement here. The whole set up is a farce, and apologies to the few good ones out there. N Reg all day long for me.

I am one of the FAA/IR pilots and owner of an N reg aircraft that has just given up flying. I failed both my FAA and EASA medicals this February so I’ve decided to pack in flying. I could probably get my medical back but to be honest it gave me the excuse to stop flying. Everything takes its course and I was flying less and less.
I’ve been a pilot for 20 years and had an IR for 19 of those years amassing 2500 hours of flight in four continents. There is a huge element of been there and done that so that’s it, enough.

20 years ago I took a JAR PPL. Very quickly I realised that living at 54.5N I had to have an IR to get year round utility from my plane. Also, virtually no Non commercial pilots were bothering with the JAR IR, everyone I knew and came in contact with took a stand alone FAA PPL and IR. Why, to a man they wanted to fly IFR anywhere in the world with a sensible IR which they could do with FAA licence and an N reg aircraft. JAR IR pilots were a bit sniffy about the FAA IR, they said it was easier. It wasn’t, it was different. The FAA wanted to know if you could fly the plane safely in IFR conditions. So did the JAR but the course was designed for commercial operations so a lot of the content was of no benefit to the private pilot. The FAA IR is a totally practical fly anywhere rating, that what I and others wanted.

Maintenance on the N reg aircraft was a bonus but in my circle of acquaintances it was not the primary reason to go this route, it was a go anywhere IR that was important. It became clear that the FAA maintenance regimes was again much more common sense and practical. I’m an engineer and I’ve always gone by the old adage “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it”. FAA maintenance embraces that where these days others seem intent on rebuilding props at 6 years for example which is in most cases pretty unnecessary.

So, my aviation career/hobby has come to a natural end. My plan is being ferried back to the US for sale later this month. Enjoyed every minute, apart from Continentals crap cylinders and Lycomings propensity to rust away from the inside, time for a change.

BeechBaby wrote:

Sorry Neil, but utter bollox

Thanks for the insult for a perfectly reasonable opinion.

Bollox notwithstanding, as I said we have operated aircraft for 30 years on many different registers. I am not some spotty schoolkid that has no experience.
I have seen examples of good and bad maintenance under many regimes. My concerns with N reg are not all about maintenance, but a suite of issues, starting with the admin issues of the trust, including FCL, other regulatory issues against N reg, difficulty of finding the right people to sign off things etc etc.

My original point is that in the round as I sit here in Europe I don’t think the pluses outweigh the minuses for GA N reg.

Neil wrote:

Thanks for the insult for a perfectly reasonable opinion.

Your very welcome. It was not intended as an insult, but a fact.
Neil wrote:

I am not some spotty schoolkid that has no experience.

Then frankly you should know better.

Neil wrote:

suite of issues, starting with the admin issues of the trust, including FCL, other regulatory issues against N reg, difficulty of finding the right people to sign off things etc etc.

You see this is the very problem. A little Englander perspective, sniggering behind the bar, telling tall tales about those blasted Gerries and Muricans. Ruining our pitch because they chose to fly under another flag. Of convenience? No, of a much respected, tried and tested, massive regime that spans the globe and knows what it is doing. It is about freedom and aviation common sense, not stiff upper lip types telling Johnnies what to do, or not, whatever way the wind blows.I own and operate aircraft in both systems and I know which way I would register every time..Sorry Neil I speak through bitter experience of the system..

STOLman wrote:

I am one of the FAA/IR pilots and owner of an N reg aircraft that has just given up flying

STOLman wrote:

My plane is being ferried back to the US for sale later this month

I am really sorry to hear that both for you and the aircraft, I saw your aircraft at Gloucester last December and was very very impressed …. especially those tyres.

Please put a pic of the on here of a King Katmai so everyone can see how good an N reg aircraft can look