Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

International overflight permissions and privileges for microlights / ultralights / UL / ULM

By old corroded cessna 150 is easier that by new ultralight.. ahh.

Yes; the C150 has an ICAO compliant CofA.

What makes me sad is when somebody, or even a syndicate, spends c. 100k on one of these, not knowing the limitations.

Usually the salesman won’t tell you but that’s to be expected. What should not happen anymore is that one reaches the buying stage without discovering it. But then even here on EuroGA we have one poster who lives in an alternate universe.

And many existing owners of both homebuilts and ultralights don’t like to talk about this stuff. Well, would you, having spent 100k on one?

What most people seem to do is they “just fly”. There doesn’t seem to be anybody checking. The problem might be with insurance…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

You could buy something like the Tomark Viper SD4 as an LSA and then it’s easy as with the C150.

mh
Inside the sky.
EDXE, EDXF, Germany

europaxs wrote:

if your bird wasn’t registered in Belgium, you’d avoid that as well, right?

Hm; you’ll excuse me to quote from another thread:
it isn’t handled that strict as the law reads as the feuervogel website states as plain as they dare – and well done!
I have never heard of any conviction for someone not satisfying our (indeed ridiculous) overflight regulations.
That said, event organisers always seem to take their measures and to help foreign visitors where they can – would they be over careful, or would there have been fines in the past? I don’t really think so but will be glad to learn.

Then again, as Peter has pointed out again and again, we have every interest to comply with all regulations even if they seem ridiculous: not carrying mandatory equipment can be an excuse for insurers to refuse paying out. But could and would they refuse even for non-compliance with some administrative rule? So I think the Dutch requirement for an ELT is more stringent than Belgium’s overflight tax.

Last Edited by at 19 Feb 13:45
EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

Peter wrote:

What makes me sad is when somebody, or even a syndicate, spends c. 100k on one of these, not knowing the limitations.

And who does that? real references please.

IMO, if anyone don’t know the difference in operational requirements/limitations, maintenance requirements/limitations, regulatory requirements/limitations of ICAO compliant, national, EASA (in it’s many incarnations) – then they shouldn’t be flying. I mean, this is like saying “nobody told me I cannot carry my rifle openly around in the city center”, or “nobody told me I actually need insurance”, or “nobody told me a B-737 requires two pilots”. People aren’t that ignorant Peter, not after they have got their PPL. And if they are, why is that “our” problem ? Seriously, I just don’t get it.

mh wrote:

You could buy something like the Tomark Viper SD4 as an LSA and then it’s easy as with the C150.

For once I agree with mh. If you want something simple and straight forward, the EASA LSA is an alternative. It’s also much better than a corroded C-150, and the Rotax is orders of magnitude more reliable than an old, worn and corroded Lycoming/Continental. Valid throughout EASA land also, no questions asked. (That you pay premium for what is a straight forward, moderately low performance UL is another matter though).

LeSving wrote:

It’s also much better than a corroded C-150

… Yeah and more or less on par with a C150 in good shape. It all boils down to taste.

LeSving wrote:

and the Rotax is orders of magnitude more reliable than an old, worn and corroded Lycoming/Continental.

Not convinced. I don’t think they differ much, based on my experience with both engines. The sound of the O200 is much better, though.

mh
Inside the sky.
EDXE, EDXF, Germany

My concern would not be with a perfectly maintained example of almost any plane or engine, but in the real world I am quite interested in the tolerance of any design for damage, abuse and wear. I also know what designs I respect more on that basis, and which I think are fine for less demanding duty.

And who does that? real references please.

Since they are mostly on EuroGA already, and haven’t outed themselves, I am not going to do it for them.

Nobody wants to admit that sort of thing, anyway.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

mh wrote:

The sound of the O200 is much better, though.

It sounds like a tractor from 1951, seriously. My neighbor has an old gray little Ferguson that he starts up from time to time and take for a spin in the neighborhood. Every time he starts that nice little piece of classic agricultural equipment, I have to go out and look, because it sounds exactly like a Cub. Nothing wrong with the sound, but it’s the sound of an old fashioned engine, nothing more.

Peter wrote:

Since they are mostly on EuroGA already, and haven’t outed themselves, I am not going to do it for them.

That’s not very convincing. I also think people are perfectly capable of purchasing what turns out to be useless (to them) machines, rotting in hangars and outdoors throughout Europe. Machines that are certified according to every regulation in EASA and ICAO. There are much more of these around than non used microlights or experimentals. The 40 year midlife crisis doesn’t care, a plane is a plane.

Quote
Since they are mostly on EuroGA already, and haven’t outed themselves, I am not going to do it for them.
Nobody wants to admit that sort of thing, anyway.

I think it perfectly ok to spend as much as you want on any airplane as far as it fits you mission.
A lot of pilots on EuroGA seems to fly far, high, have an IFR license etc. But what about the pilot that just flies around for fun?

I know a lot of Belgian based pilots who do a lot of nice flights to Germany, France, Swiss, Italy etc with an 100K microlight.
They just fly for fun and you are right, they invested a lot in ‘just a microlight’, but why should they buy an expensive slow Cessna if they do not intend to fly to IFR or to countries that have these restrictions. Right now they have a nice and fast plane, which is extremely cheap to operate and fun to fly.

Have you thought about all the pilots that fly fully restored Piper cubs and other vintage planes.
Some of them cost as much as the new microlights and are much more expensive to operate and they are also used ‘just for fun’.

Last Edited by jvdo at 20 Feb 09:47
EBMO, EBGB

Sure; what I was saying is that some people spent the money without knowing the legal limitations. For most forum regulars, especially those here, this may be hard to accept that it is possible.

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

Back to Top