It was my hazy understanding that politics in Europe resulted in an edict that N-registered certified light aircraft could not be operated privately (VFR or IFR) around Europe by a person based in EASA-land after some arbitrary future date e.g. April 2015 or 2018 or something (these dates keep moving). Is this the case?
Or is it OK indefinitely (at the moment) if you have an EASA licence with the relevant privileges in addition to an FAA one?
Then that will mean I suppose that to fly an N-registered private aircraft IFR you have to have both a current EASA IR and an FAA IR?
Forgive me if this is a very basic question.
It was my hazy understanding that politics in Europe resulted in an edict that N-registered certified light aircraft could not be operated privately (VFR or IFR) around Europe by a person based in EASA-land after some arbitrary future date
I don’t know where that came from. I never saw it in any real draft regulation or so. Probably just people misreading the drafts and spreading the word (the effect of the internet).
Or is it OK indefinitely (at the moment) if you have an EASA licence with the relevant privileges in addition to an FAA one?
Indefinitely is a big word. I wouldn’t bet on anything. The anti N-reg. crowd is still out there and they are “creative”. But based on current regulation there is no threat to flying and operating N-regs in Europe.
Then that will mean I suppose that to fly an N-registered private aircraft IFR you have to have both a current EASA IR and an FAA IR?
Correct. If you look up the archives, we have discussed N-reg vs. EASA reg several times. As far as licenses go, the general consensus is that for most pilots, obtaining and keeping an FAA license and ratings current in addition to the EASA license and ratings is a rather small (but not zero) effort.
Or is it OK indefinitely (at the moment) if you have an EASA licence with the relevant privileges in addition to an FAA one?
If you are based in the EU, then at the moment you can use an FAA licence (assuming the state in which you are based is implementing the appropriate derogation). From April 2016 you will require an EASA licence.
I still very very often come across people (or get an email on the topic almost daily, from somebody who has been to my website) who believe or have been told that EASA has killed off N-reg aircraft in Europe.
So it is a common misconception even now.
The only measure which EASA has thus far done against aircraft (i.e. the airframes) is that if you are EASA “complex” (meaning over 5.7T, over 18 seats, ME turboprop, turbojet, multi pilot) you need to get a Part M signoff, in addition to the usual State of Registry mandated maintenance. This applies to private ops (e.g. Part 91 if N-reg) too. The exact form this has taken I have no idea and have not come across anybody who wants to talk about it. It may not have yet been implemented. Some info here
Otherwise, as stated above, as things stand, from April 2016, if the operator (whatever that means) is EU based (whatever that means) then the pilot will need EASA papers, in addition to the usual State of Registry papers.
I am N-reg and will remain so. It’s a vastly better system. That said, I have all the papers sorted now (both sets including both medicals), and I have the maintenance well organised which needs some pro-active stuff.
The only measure which EASA has thus far done against aircraft (i.e. the airframes) is that if you are EASA “complex” (meaning over 5.7T, over 18 seats, ME turboprop, turbojet, multi pilot) you need to get a Part M signoff, in addition to the usual State of Registry mandated maintenance. This applies to private ops (e.g. Part 91 if N-reg) too. The exact form this has taken I have no idea and have not come across anybody who wants to talk about it. It may not have yet been implemented.
Indeed, it has not.
Interesting…
It was never obvious to me how it was going to work. My best guess was that if you had an “EASA Complex” (e.g. a King Air; note that in an obvious finger-up to the USA, the TBM or the PC12 are not “EASA Complex”) you would have to find a company which had both FAA and EASA approvals. The end result would be another €1000 or so for the Part M signoff, which a KA owner would prob99 not even notice. Most FAA 145 companies are also EASA 145. But I don’t know if you need a 145 company for most of these. You don’t need one for a KA. You might need one for a jet…?
Back to the original rumour, do note that in 2004 and 2005, France and the UK (respectively) proposed limiting long term parking of N-regs to 90 days in any calendar year. Parking controls are the only way to control airframes, assuming that you are civilised enough to not ban overflight. And there are trivial workarounds, resulting from the need to exempt (i.e. permit indefinite parking for) any airframe which is unairworthy (AOGd etc). And then what do you do about aircraft sitting inside closed hangars? It just gets silly.
So I am not surprised that lots of people still believe it. This stuff is very recent history.
Well thanks guys, I am glad the N-registered option remains feasible indefinitely, for now.
There have been so many regulatory changes post-EASA, each one surrounded by a cloud of rumours and (mis)interpretations, that establishing a clear picture is not always easy except for issues where one is directly involved and has firsthand experience.
The crew dual-licensing is a separate matter and I suppose something everyone will live with this. I’d better keep my standalone FAA licence valid after all!
Apologies if I’ve asked a question that has been dealt with here before but a quick search did not answer my questions.
Apologies if I’ve asked a question that has been dealt with here before but a quick search did not answer my questions.
No – always feel free to ask. This is a particularly confusing topic, with borderline-unreadable official documentation on it, and a lot of IMHO overly strict interpretations from some pilots of the terms “operator” etc. Nobody actually knows for sure how this will end up.
feasible indefinitely, for now
if confusion needed more illustration, here is
Ok sorry for asking something that is confusing to me and it sees a lot of others.
Im a US citizen I flew my N reg airplane here I have all the FAA lic to fly IFR and am current with BFRs Medicals. I travel back and forth between Hungary and Germany and am using the plane to visit various parts of Europe. You know, a tourist cause I retired, and now I have the time to have some fun.
Am I still going to be able to use my plane here? Do I have to fly to Serbia every 3 months to not be considered based in the EU?
