Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Homebuilt / ultralight / permit (non ICAO CofA) and IFR - how?

Peter wrote:

The “exposure” there will depend on where the plane is parked (a private hangar is better) and how the pilot keeps a low profile.

Doesn’t flying across borders typically require a flight plan? It would seem trivial to check who hasn’t left (you could claim you forgot to file it but they would still have something to moan about and you’re getting on a thinner ice). I’m assuming that any such limit would be country-wide, not airport specific.

Even worse: some countries (Belgium, Germany) keep a register of movements per airfield.

EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

There has been much discussion on this in the past, going way back to the 2004/2005 French/UK long term parking limit proposals on N-regs. I don’t think this stuff is ever enforced (the situation in Denmark is vague, with random fines c. €300, and I don’t know about Norway). It would be difficult to do so because e.g. you could make the aircraft unairworthy by removing some part (which on a homebuilt is easily within your privileges) and then you can claim AOG. So any “civilised country” long term parking limit law would have to make a provision for this. The closest anybody in Europe (known to me) got to implementing this (as a criminal matter i.e. fines/jail) was Italy with its crazy tax a few years ago, and they put in an exception for aircraft undergoing maintenance. Then you face the prospect of having your plane “fixed” by a Vespa dealer and I don’t know if that is worse than the then proposed €3k tax

The issue, if any, is with insurance. The loss adjuster has all the time in the world and unless he is stupid he will know the regs.

some countries (Belgium, Germany) keep a register of movements per airfield.

In the UK, licensed airports are required to. This can be a plus or a minus. If you have been putting your plane through the business, and the tax people hit you, the airport records can be useful

So far nobody has posted on what appears on a typical SE- homebuilt permit…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

They would still get a list out of it. It would depend on how much effort they would want to put into harassment/ enforcement. It would negate any attempt at hiding the aircraft, say in a private hangar. If they set the fines high enough, it might be worth it. Would you claim the missing part was lost in flight? Or someone stole it? Or would you carry around a damaged one so you can show it to them? They could try to get around this by only accepting AOG as an argument if you engaged a maintenance company or a licensed mechanic (which is not needed for a homebuilt but it would make it harder for you, you would have to find someone to cover for you). And how long would you be able to keep it up? Presumably, you would want to fly it sometimes. As I wrote, it would depend on how much effort they would put in.

PS: The best strategy would seem to be to just fly often enough abroad. But even that would depend on how exactly is it worded (consecutive days or not, etc.).

Jan_Olieslagers wrote:

Even worse: some countries (Belgium, Germany) keep a register of movements per airfield.

Airports should have movement logs (which can be used to check your logbook), but I don’t know how centralized those systems are. And you have non-towered and private airfields and at least in some countries you can land on any suitable piece of land with the permission of the owner. I wouldn’t think such a system would encompass all of that.

Peter wrote:

So far nobody has posted on what appears on a typical SE- homebuilt permit…

Just yesterday I thought about asking LeSving whether he had a picture of a CoA of a homebuilt/ experimental.

Last Edited by Martin at 01 Jul 08:53

Some Swede should answer this. But, I’m 99% sure that this is purely a question of instruments in Sweden, as it is in Norway. Peter, you have to look at this from a different point of view. Experimental amateur built aircraft aren’t permitted to fly IFR, they are restricted to VFR only (for instance), IF they don’t have what it takes to fly IFR regarding instruments and equipment. This is not just a play with words, it is two very different concepts legally. The experimental class of aircraft has no restrictions other than no commercial operations, and cannot be used as a trainer for PPL. The reason most only have VFR equipment is because most builders don’t have IFR rating. The other reason is the cost. The cost of IFR equipment is the same as for a certified aircraft, thus to equip the aircraft with IFR will add what? €30-50k or more, or at least 20k for a minimum setup (I know you can use non certified display technology, but that only shaves off 50k from 100k). It doesn’t really make any sense to install it, except for people interested in homebuilding and who already has IFR rating and want to build their “optimal” private IFR touring machine (although without de-icing (another 100k), and a turbine (+150k), and pressurized cabin (+100k) how optimal is it as an IFR tourer? )

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Martin wrote:

what_next wrote:
So for example a Swedish experimental which is IFR certified by the Swedish CAA can fly IFR to Germany if it has the permission to enter Germany.
I think at least one owner posted such account here – Germany giving him permission without imposing any further limitations.

I discussed this a few weeks ago with the owner of an SE-X-plane who is installing an IFD440 and Aspen PFD. IFR with an experimental is allowed in Sweden as long as you have the instruments for IFR operations like in a certified plane, but not in Germany.
However, if you get your flight-plan through, it’s unlikely you will be rejected when you check in to the Bremen FIR. So it’s probably feasible, people will report they’ve done it, but not legal as far as I know. Unfortunately.
EAA is lobbying to get IFR OK’ed across Europe, so far without luck.

ESMK, Sweden

In the real world, if you plan, file and fly IFR and get a ramp check are they likely to question the aircrafts IFR credentials? (In a permit aircraft).
I ask because I am not IFR qualified so have no idea.

Forever learning
EGTB

are they likely to question the aircrafts IFR credentials?

Judging from this (search the linked PDF for e.g. Lancair) the answer is No

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

An old overflight for Sweden: no limitations other than the ones on the original permit.

Belgium

Very interesting – thanks for posting that!

So, where does this take us?

If SERA really ends any possible IFR flying ban on homebuilts, all that leaves is compliance via equipment carriage.

What constraints exist on aircraft type which can be SE-reg?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top