gallois wrote:
Ten minutes before arrival at the ATZ you call up the AFISO to give them your intentions
I very much doubt the average ATZ around here would hear me from 10 minutes out from the ATZ boundary. Most seem to hardly hear me when I’m already in the ATZ and self-announcing. Usually FIS knows if there is any unusual traffic. Then again, this isn’t the UK, so maybe the UK ones are better equipped.
gallois wrote:
but you are talking ATC not FIS and usually the maximum distance would be 30 Nm and not as much as 50nm.
The 50 miles thing was meant to be an expression, not even a generalisation, and only only meant to illustrate a point. Please dont get me wrong, French ATC or FIS of all flavours are usually REALLY helpfull.
Im just in a bad mood because we’ve had torrential rain and flooding here over the weekend and have had to close our aerodrome for a week just as we are all allowed to fly. Oh, the irony of having had 2 months of the best weather for flying when we were not allowed to go the the aerodrome to fly, and now its closed… And the further irony in that before the lockdown we had the aerodrome closed for a week due, ou guessed it, torrential rain and flooding…
Regards, SD..
skydriller wrote:
French Regional airport ATC sometimes has a habit of making all GA for 50 miles wait for the only CAT of the day… Except I recall once at sunny Carcassonne: My second inbound call estimated 4or5 mins out was met with the classic reply “Orbit at xx for the inbound Ryanair”, the next thing I hear is a nice British accent pipe up “Ryanair xxx is 10 minutes out at FLxxx, Can the Robin not get down and clear before us?”, to which before the ATC guy could respond I quickly replied “Definitely”…pregnant pause before ATC cleared me to land and expedite clearing the runway. I seem to recall we were parked and shut down as we waved our thanks to the 737 as it taxied past.
Do they have airspace around? are you inside/outside? I think it is always easy to ask for an “immédiat” once you are inside class D, ATC do allow this but then will drop whole responsibility on the PIC to expedite, make separation or go around (got this so many times France or UK: Cardiff, Southend, Lille, Bergerac)
ATC OCAS, they get shaken to death when there is “coordinated of CAT/IFR inbound” in class G (e.g. Biggin, Newquay, Exeter, Oxford…), this creates so much confusion that you just better stay out of the way 
FISO OCAS, something similar happens as well, especially when they are giving “class G clearances” on behalf of “proper ATC”, so we end up with this “ATZ standby” none sense
Did anyone had a case where CAT/IFR lands in French AFIS airfields? (I am sure a Note will be around )
@Peter Sorry if this has been discussed/answered already – I didn’t read the whole thread.
But under what provision can an enforcement action be taken by the UK CAA against you if you’re infringing in the UK whilst not exercising any privilege of your EASA licence? Wouldn’t they have to refer the matter to the FAA for enforcement?
You will find some answers here.
The writer used to be senior NATS/CAA. The CAA exercises these options rarely.
ICAO also has a general provision which gives each Contracting State absolute soveregnity within its airspace – otherwise nobody would have signed it. Each CS can block its citizens flying on foreign licenses within its airspace. I don’t have a reference for this to hand.
In practice most pilots go along with whatever is dished out, on the grounds that it could always be even worse
Rwy20 wrote:
Wouldn’t they have to refer the matter to the FAA for enforcement?
I haven’t gone back through the thread, but I seem to recall that it was suggested that the CAA will inform the FAA who would just suspend / remove the license. I’m not sure if any real evidence was produced.
Indeed there must be some experience of how the FAA handles foreign infringements. I would be surprised if they turned their recent, pilot friendlier approach to infringements around almost 180° only because something happened abroad, as was suggested by “Cub”. Especially in cases where the infringement wouldn’t be a big deal in the US.
The FAA does have a history of regarding “foreign lands” as distant outposts. I had a situation more than 10 years ago (I am not interested in posting details because the person responsible is still “around”) where I had some personal experience of this.
On the topic above, I emailed US AOPA’s legal department to ask them this Q and they basically told me that even though I am paying their membership they are not interested in non US based pilots
But if you think about it, no country would allow a pilot to fly on foreign papers once they have removed his local papers. It would be a red rag to a bull. They would always find a way to get him, somehow.
The bit I was skeptical about was the legality of removing your local papers even if they were not involved in the offense committed. It would feel like going after your hunting licence for a boating transgression. Somehow it feels vindictive and unworthy of a state under the rule of law.
Rwy20 wrote:
Somehow it feels vindictive and unworthy of a state under the rule of law.
I don’t think the UK CAA would be too worried about that.
As far as they’re concerned you’re not playing the game anyway if you’re on the N-reg and FAA papers when they think that really you ‘should’ be on the G-reg and EASA papers. It’s a BS argument, but that’s how they’ll view it.
