Sure, that is the context we talking about on euroga.
That is true, except that
[…]
Nice, but it would have been interesting to
get opinions from other people as well. New users like our friend from EDFV might be less inclined to post their POV if „the ultimate truth“ has already been spoken…
I’m about to transfer from one EASA reg to another, which I understand to be straightforward—moreso than onto N-reg. As an American living in Europe I had considered N-reg initially, but my investigation led me to believe it’s more trouble than it’s worth. As Peter said, some may have local benefits, and I’d have done it in a heartbeat if it meant not going through the pain of an EASA IR conversion (those theory exams are no joke!). But with the benefit of the FAA IR gone, and having to have dual papers, I also wonder if it lowers the value of an AC in Europe. I notice a lot of N-reg AC sitting longer on PlaneCheck, so it makes me think maybe people are less interested in obtaining/maintaining FAA papers these days.
if „the ultimate truth“ has already been spoken…
I don’t think anything I write is the ultimate truth 
It is no more than a debating position. I like to kick the ball around
I also wonder if it lowers the value of an AC in Europe. I notice a lot of N-reg AC sitting longer on PlaneCheck, so it makes me think maybe people are less interested in obtaining/maintaining FAA papers these days.
I spoke to an SR22 owner recently, who (not short of cash at all!) has got through a number of them, and he says he will never again get an N-reg one (he has all the papers) because it took so much longer to sell. But that may be an SR22 specific thing, because there are probably hundreds of EASA-reg ones in Europe which you are competing with when trying to sell yours.
Getting the FAA papers is much harder today, compared to say 15+ years ago when I did most of mine. But then a large % of European N-reg flyers are “not young” and they did their stuff in the good old days… Today, the FAA writtens need a US trip, and it means even the Foreign Pilot IR exam (which gives you an FAA IR on the back of a 61.75 piggyback PPL) needs a US trip.
This punctures my view that for certain higher value piston types popular in the USA, maintaining them on the N reg protected the value. The SR22 would be the sort of type I had in mind, also 206, Saratoga, Beech 36, etc.
I’m not sure that’s any longer true as well. More yield possible when selling where you are. The cost of ferrying the plane over the pond back to the USA or v.v. bites of a chunk of money. A nice Cirrus in Europe is rare, in the US the market is tenfold or more. Yes, it might sell quicker, but adding up all expenses… does it really make financial sense?
I believe well maintained higher end twins (414, 421) are where this “keep it N-reg, sell it in the US” rule makes sense.
Peter wrote:
Getting the FAA papers is much harder today, compared to say 15+ years ago when I did most of mine. But then a large % of European N-reg flyers are “not young” and they did their stuff in the good old days… Today, the FAA writtens need a US trip, and it means even the Foreign Pilot IR exam (which gives you an FAA IR on the back of a 61.75 piggyback PPL) needs a US trip
It still the only way some people can get an IR, I met someone who could not score his IR or CBIR exams after 6 years of trying, he did IR in US/EU two years ago, he told me he flew about 80h IFR in 3 months and now has both EASA & FAA
Ibra wrote:
It still the only way some people can get an IR, I met someone who could not score his IR or CBIR exams after 6 years of trying, he did IR in US/EU two years ago, he told me he flew about 80h IFR in 3 months and now has both EASA & FAA
But you still have to take the three to convert (Air Law, Met, and Flight Planning), which surely must be among the more challenging of the exams. After flying 21 years and spending 7 years building weather forecasting systems (so I know a thing or two about weather), I still found these exams quite challenging (just passed them two weeks ago). Of course I did the recently released iteration, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the question bank on AviationExam.com and is apparently much harder. Certainly was harder than the AE.com questions.
It was UK PPL with few hours then FAA PPL & IR, 50h PIC and CBIR practical, I don’t think there were any TK exams except EASA PPL+FAA IFP on top?
I doubt there is much fuss about IR/CBIR/ATPL exams if someone is technical & motivated with load of spare time, but some people just can’t get past them and just want to fly
Most of the discussion on CBIR and BIR is on reducing hours, doing non-ATO…but as long as the TK LO are dense and are not pragmatic I doubt much of it will change?
The practical flying will just take as much as for one to be ready: some will get in 10h of IFR, some will get in 80h of IFR but it’s less of a bottle neck to get the rating: once you start flying you just get done with it
I have done CBIR exams (to get IR) and now doing ATPL exams (halfway through for fun), it’s much easier to study for TK exams when it’s not in the way of your flying 
dutch_flyer wrote:
But you still have to take the three to convert (Air Law, Met, and Flight Planning), which surely must be among the more challenging of the exams.
If you substitute human factors for flight planning, then I’d agree.
