Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Operating an FAA experimental type (VFR) in Europe on N reg

I have never heard any of those horror stories, but I have seen one or two on the internet from the USA. The usual thing is people do stupid mistakes especially when just starting up. Then they either give up, or start over again. I have built two horizontal tails for my RV-4 myself Similar things are much more usual than what non-builders thinks, but they are not horror stories, just part of the process. When you are finished and have enough scrap metal left to build another plane, then you have done a good job It’s easy to do a mistake. Usually it can be fixed, but not always without some patchy looking result. Structurally it is OK, no problems at all, but it’s irritating. With modern kits with matched holes and not to speak of these “factory homebuilts” things are much easier and mistakes are fewer.

Today I only look at the engineering aspects. I am not good enough to build home-made first class furniture like some very few people are, and I never will be. I only look at things like the rivets are set properly, the edge distance is OK, things are straight within tolerances, no crack inducing corners or edges and so on. An extra hole here, a protruding head rivet there because I found no easy way to dimple in the confined space, or a few patches here and there, I really don’t care. As long as it’s nothing wrong technically, I’m fine.

I also think that with wood or composite, things are much easier to hide. It’s a matter of filler and sanding. Enough of that medicine and a professional paint job, and the plane will look perfect, even though the structure beneath is below sub-standards. With aluminium that is not possible, every imperfection will show. An impeccable RV (or any other metal airplane) really is a true masterpiece, while a good looking Lancair may very well just be the result of a year of sanding and tons of filler. My Onex is polished aluminium, nothing is hidden there but it looks good, so I’m getting better

It’s like one at Vans airforce have in his signature: It’s not skill or craftsmanship that finishes an airplane, it’s the will to do so. That really is true, and to find that will can be hard sometimes after a big mistake.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Yes, there are those horror stories. But you’ll also find the opposite. Beautiful machines (many of them easily outperform all factory built) from very capable craftsmen, assembled in thousands of hours to their own highest standards with care taken for every little detail, perfection in mind.

Btw: My plane is somewhere in between

You just have to search for a homebuilt from someone, who loves the building at least as much as his wife

EDLE

Peter wrote:

There are stories which cannot be told…

There are a lot of RV horror stories on the internet. But most of these are from builders that buy half finished kits from the first owners who gave up half way. And the reason why they gave up are often very easy to see. But maybe not for the untrained eye during the purchase process.

My rebuild project is from a crashed RV-4 that run off a grass strip(in winter) and hit a tree.
Friends of mine bought the aircraft and starting restoring it. EAA Norway was involved all the way and they almost finished it. One of them had already built a similar RV, and the other is an Certified aircraft sheet metal worker for the airlines. So the work done is of top quality. Its probably 75% done.
How long it will take to finish? No idea. Just want it to be finished in the same quality as my friends started it.

spirit49
LOIH

But I will take the time I need

Depending on who built it, you may need it, and lots of it

There are stories which cannot be told…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Its going to be a pretty steep learning curve to restore a homebuilt.
But I will take the time I need, and make it properly. All the knowledge is out there, you just need to find it. Vans airforce is priceless.

spirit49
LOIH

spirit49 wrote:

I think this is the first time we have agreed on something on this forum. ;) ;) ;)

Good, there is a first for everything

I hope everything get sorted out regarding the restoration of the -4.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Thanks all for you inputs.

I put the question up here to make a bit of a statement. The price I will pay for this wreck is VERY good, so the VAT issue is actually almost negligible.
So to avoid the paperwork and hassle, Im just going to pay all countries, and for sure get a “Free Circulation” in EU. Have gone down exactly the same road last year with my P210, so it shouldn’t be too much of an issue.

Cant really see a problem keeping it on LN-reg even though it will be flown out of Austria. Since I will be the solve owner, and being a Norwegian citizen, living in Switzerland, they don’t have much jurisdiction over me beside the VAT thing.

@LeSving : I think this is the first time we have agreed on something on this forum. ;) ;) ;) (Thats a lot of smilies OK!)
Joke aside. I do think keeping it LN-reg’ed is a good idea. But there might be some issues getting the “Approval to fly” after Im done with the rebuild in Switzerland/Austria.
Not keen on having to truck it back to Norway just for this. But since its not a 1st registration for this home-build, I dont know how this is looked at.
But maybe a inspector can come down to give the approval, and Austria can give a “one-off” approval for the “Foreign” test flight.

Espen

spirit49
LOIH

spirit49 wrote:

Im about to buy a RV-4 restoration project

Which one? The one that tipped over on the first flight at Hamar? or is it just an old, possibly flyable one you want to modernize?

spirit49 wrote:

Initially I won’t touch country of registration(will leave it on LN-reg)

Today LN-reg is superior for experimental in Europe due to several changes at the CAA and other changes done with the help of the Ombudsman during the last 2-3 years. You will be able to maintain it yourself, 100 h signing, (eventually after some training and a course). Any certified mechanic or mechanic shop, in the world essentially, will also be able to do and sign 100h. You can install IFR equipment and fly IFR. The aircraft receives a C of A. And of course the ECAC recommendation makes it possible to fly within Europe with few problems (unlike N-reg). The CAA fee is about 5000 NOK a year, and Teletilsynet also want a fee for the radio+ELT at 1000 NOK, total about 6000 NOK or about 650 Euro per year.

In principle, if you keep it on LN-reg, you can do all the larger changes you want at a certified shop (or yourself, or by a mechanic) anywhere in the world, but you have to get an official approval from the CAA. You should not do any larger modification on the aircraft without getting approval first. The EAA Norway will be of priceless help here also. I’m not sure if you will get that approval without an approval from the country you are placed at, that this is OK by them (although within EASA that is no problem, or??). For some changes you also will have to do test flying (the CAA decides), and I guess this could cause a problem if the country (Switzerland) does not allow this. Both Sweden and Norway requires foreign experimental aircraft to have finished all test flying before they can fly within the airspace.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Well stripe me pink! I didn’t realise Norway had evaded capture!

Forever learning
EGTB

spirit49 I suggest you ask your local VAT official.

I am slightly familiar with a case where someone rebuilt a wrecked certified plane (of US make) and wanted the VAT paid certificate.

He declared VAT on the value of the wreckage.

Obviously the value was very low so it didn’t cost him much.

But here in the UK this is the only way if the vat route before you got it is unknown.

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

Back to Top