History did not constrain European countries from opening borders for cars on the ground, and there is no reason why they shouldn’t be completely open and ‘paperwork’ free for light aircraft.
There is no treaty covering free movement of people between the US and its neighbors, whether they are traveling by either cars or planes, similar to how there is no such treaty between the EU and non-EU counties starting at e.g. Belarus. In both cases there are little to no political alliances between the parties involved, few are particularly interested in there being any, and for that reason neither situation is relevant to the discussion about light aircraft travelling within the United States or European Union.
There is a treaty between US states, once independent colonies and today having considerable legal autonomy. That situation is therefore more relevant. One could argue that US states have more legal autonomy than European countries in 2024, in the areas protected by the Constitution – which is the treaty that finalized the current legal situation between states and which created limited but reasonably defined US Federal power, including regulation of interstate commerce. That comparison or contrast is however a diversion from the point at hand because there is also already NOW a political alliance between EU countries, and a treaty covering freedom of movement between most EU countries that was put into place for good reasons including the very small size of the countries. It allows ‘paperwork’ free and record free movement between those countries on the ground. It obviously already exists and it is equally obvious that the practical issue of small countries and fast 21st century travel applies even more so to light aircraft than cars. Also that light aircraft present a lesser threat to either national tax authorities or national defense than most land vehicles.
Well, distance from Munich to Baltics is close to 800 km with some deviation from straight line. So think about start in Prague , go to Salzburg and then to Baltic sea near Poland. So you do a few borders VFR and get 1000 km without talking to any ATC and no flight plans as well
It would appear that you have no new information to contribute on that thread about no-FP-border-crossing concessions in Europe. That’s good.
About "slagging " , the bias with some personalities is visible, let it not become obvious . . . . Vic
Try running a forum…
Better still, one which remains informative without asking readers to guess what somebody is getting at 
Or one in which most threads to not degrade into garbage.
Silvaire wrote:
That comparison or contrast is however a diversion from the point at hand because there is also already NOW a political alliance between EU countries, and a treaty covering freedom of movement between most EU countries that was put into place for good reasons including the very small size of the countries
Whatever your point actually is, it’s obviously something you have to take up with Brussels 
This thread is about how , not why.
vic wrote:
Flight plan required for that as well ??Even much more than that.
The baseline for VFR flying is and should be the ability to fly in Class E or lower airspace without radio contact.Agreed and this is also true within each European country.
Given that the same is the norm for ground transport within continental Europe, it is entirely reasonable and should be possible for air traffic to fly between countries or anywhere else in Class E or lower with no flight plan, no radio contact, and no need to advise anybody of any diversion.I also don’t have to advise anyone upfront, to legally drive from the US to Canada by car and back. I only have to pass an immigration booth upon entry. In contrast to Extra-Schengen borders, North American countries even don’t have exit checks. Everyone how wants to leave, can just go. So why AIPS upon leaving by GA? Why FPL for flights to Canada? Wouldn’t it be enough to land without radio contact at a point of entry, where border forces could check me on-site, without any further pre-notice stuff?!
There is a treaty between US states, once independent colonies and today having considerable legal autonomy.European countries might have similar systems, like German states, Swiss cantons, or some Italian autonomous regions like South-Tyrol.
The best solution would be to remove ALL of the nonsense, including cleaning up the airspace to provide Class E or lower airspace to most places that people would like to go.European GA has indeed much bigger issues than the obligation to send a pre-filed flight plan for international flights. How many topics does EuroGA contain on the increase of mandatory handling and their prices at airports, PPR requirements, restricted and class A airspaces, obligation that someone needs to be on-site (Germany, Austria, Netherlands) upon landing/departure at small aerodromes, immigration and customs procedures, (high) fuel prices and availability, UL restrictions etc. ? The list goes on… But if we could get rid of everything, I do agree no flight plans would be nice. But it’s not a killing factor for European GA at all.
This thread is about how, not why.
That’s a good point, but I also think it’s important to understand what constitutes a reasonable aeronautical infrastructure and legal situation, as opposed to being a puppet in the service of an unreasonable situation in which many negative factors are intertwined. In a democracy, to the extent that the EU government is democratic, that then sets you on the road to organize properly and do something useful versus being victimized by governmental incompetence. I think this is as good a forum as there is for that purpose.
The discussion of US to Canada (or Mexico) flying is completely irrelevant, just as a discussion of EU to Morocco flying would be irrelevant. That would be a different discussion about flying between countries where no significant political linkage or freedom of movement treaty exists. That is not the situation between EU countries (or US states) where all of the above exists… as I’ve described multiple times.
Silvaire wrote:
The discussion of US to Canada (or Mexico) flying is completely irrelevant, just as a discussion of EU to Morocco
Then what about EU-Switzerland or EU-Norway ? or (god forbid) EU-UK
I have never seen it as a hindrance to file a flight plan to go to EU. Sweden is super simple, a flight plan is all you need, there’s nothing else to it. The other way is not equally simple. A flight plan is still all you need, in principle, but Norway is a bit more klunky about customs than Sweden (EU). Going from Norway to Switzerland or the UK is not something I plan to do in one stretch anytime soon, but is it more to it than going to EU? I highly doubt it (except UK perhaps?)
US to Canada or Mexico is not completely irrelevant here. In fact what exactly is the difference between gong from Canada to the US or going from Norway to EU? Not to mention going to Russia, that’s also Europe.
Aren’t flight plans an ICAO requirement?
Please let’s move on from this. This nut will never be cracked in Europe.
Peter wrote:
Aren’t flight plans an ICAO requirement?
Yes, a very unfortunate one that is recognized as that by almost every country in the world by allowing VFR entry into controlled airspace with a radio call. The radio call is then termed a ‘flight plan’ as a work around. And yes, I know that a few places like Ireland don’t do that and e.g. require real flight plans to enter Class C… which is almost unbelievable to me.
As described by others here, a few countries in Europe do not require flight plans to cross specific national borders regardless, and it makes total sense.
Peter wrote:
Please let’s move on from this. This nut will never be cracked in Europe.
The situation with crossing borders between tiny countries where nothing similar is required on the ground, submitting formal flight plans, irrational airspace design and virtually mandatory ATC radio communication in so many arbitrary circumstances would be unacceptable to me, even if I were to live in Europe again. By “unacceptable” I mean that I wouldn’t do it unless I were paid to do it and the lesser of two evils for me would be flying only in one small country, probably in an ultralight or N-registered puddle jumper with performance matching the distances involved. I think a lot of other people act in that way already which if true is a major obstacle to individuals being motivated to own and fly aircraft in Europe, and why it is interesting to me. If it truly is a ‘nut that can never be cracked’ I think international GA in Europe will continue to pass away in concert with private transport options on the ground becoming less regimented – which has been a necessity to maintain European competitiveness and relevance. Private aircraft are always, by every government to varying degrees, seen as a threat to their authority and control, and one suspects that the mismatch between completely opening up European borders on the ground and not doing so for private air travel is not an oversight, its an objective.
