Juozas wrote:
If I fly VFR, for example with RV7 to Spain from another EU country:
1. Do I need a permit?
2. Can I fly into controlled airspace (TMA, CTR)?
1. Spain requires a notification. In the good old days that was 1 quick email, now you would need to create an account in AESA system to post the form.
2. You need to request a clearance before entering TMA/CTR
2 solutions (posted in the IT/Website section)
It’s not a case of not posting again on EuroGA. It is just that dead links are of no use to anyone. I tend to fix posts when I can but often can’t because I am not a full time paid mod/admin (EuroGA does not carry advertising, which 99% of people would really hate, so there is only the donation income, and it doesn’t go into my pocket) and often I am on a trip somewhere and often with just a phone on which fixing anything is really painful. Other people make posts which they never check afterwards; it’s life…
It can be extremely difficult to post links with just a phone because of the difficult of obtaining and editing URLs. A lot of links also get posted with huge tails containing syndication data and normally I clean those up.
Most flyers ignore the regs – both those which can be found and those which can’t.
It’s about due diligence exclusively IMO, not about ignoring regs. For us this means to study the AIP. That’s what the AIP is for.
Take Germany again. They obviously have some quasi official/unofficial procedure/practice. Now, why on earth isn’t this published in the AIP? ULs are, historic aircraft are (a similar ECAC recommendation as homebuilt). Aircraft with some cryptic “restrictions” are, but not experimental homebuilt. I can speculate wildly, but to “trap” pilots into unlawful flying is not on my list.
The simplest explanation is there are a handful of persons in the German authorities that cannot come to an agreement. And none of them have any urge to solve the matter. It’s way way down on the lists of priorities. I would think the situation is the same everywhere, and has been that way long before the ECAC recommendation came in 1981, 43 years ago. This is the problem the ECAC recommendation solves in a super simple and practical manner Do as recommended by us, and all problems are solved.
Peter wrote:
The above PDFs should be downloaded and uploaded locally, otherwise they are sure to be dead links very soon.Some are dead already! PLEASE check your posts…
They were all working when I posted them – that’s how I got the quotes.
Apologies – I won’t post agin.
Peter, the Irish PDF file attached here as well.
an_a19_r7_jan_2017_pdf
Some dead links above!!
I downloaded the rest above.
It’s the quintessential “what can possibly go wrong” situation. It’s a personal thing depending how you imagine the worst case scenario to be. “Don’t wake sleeping bears” is a thing here also. If it’s not in the AIP, the reason is most likely this is something they don’t want to touch. Probably because they have no clear cut answer to all eventualities. Sleeping bears are usually best left alone.
Well, yes, that just about summarises the whole debate. Most flyers ignore the regs – both those which can be found and those which can’t. What one must not do is pretend it is something else, because one day, if you have a bad enough crash, with 3rd party claims into millions, someone might choose to dig deeper.
LeSving wrote:
The German “regulation” is simply a snippet from an ancient AIP from 1998, and superseded many times already by updated AIPs. These things may change overnight.
The link is to the appropriate section of the German CAA site. There is nothing else than the ancient document from 1985 as far as general entry permission for ECAC homebuilts into Germany goes. That is one of the reason why the Luftfahrtbundesamt will come up with an updated version “soon”.
Peter wrote:
otherwise they are sure to be dead links very soon
The main issue is that most of these are not regulations in the correct sense. They are more a reflection of how this roughly is practiced at the moment. The German “regulation” is simply a snippet from an ancient AIP from 1998, and superseded many times already by updated AIPs. These things may change overnight.
Unless it actually exist something in the current AIP, there’s only two outcomes:
It’s the quintessential “what can possibly go wrong” situation. It’s a personal thing depending how you imagine the worst case scenario to be. “Don’t wake sleeping bears” is a thing here also. If it’s not in the AIP, the reason is most likely this is something they don’t want to touch. Probably because they have no clear cut answer to all eventualities. Sleeping bears are usually best left alone.
Gathering information in one document is of course a good thing.
