International Travel - into the UK

[David Broom]

Like most people who enjoy international travel in my homebuilt aircraft I have sometimes felt a bit hard done by with the bureaucracy displayed by some foreign aviation authorities requiring prior permission and/ or payment to fly in 'their' airspace. I had never given particular consideration to our similarly equipped foreign friends wishing to visit the UK. However, recent postings on the RV squadron list have made me aware that our own authorities appear to offer the most resistance of all to visiting permit aircraft.
One such posting stated:

"The real problem is the annual
28 day limit, if you plan to take a homebuilt into the UK and the
trip doesn't happen, that still erodes the 28 days. Appeals based on
non-travel fall on deaf ears. The CAA used to have discretion to
extend the 28 days to 90 days, but this has now gone. Further, they
told me previously that they have half a person (an interesting
image, a semi-civil servant!) employed fulltime issuing Exemption
Orders, and they are looking at how to recover this cost. Basically
the attitude is that a person bringing an aircraft into the UK
without a CofA should have some particular reason for doing so,
examples being for sale in the UK or for maintenance. The concept of
a French homebuilder flying from Le Touquet to Headcorn (however
unlikely!) for a coffee and croissant, or an Irish homebuilder
flying to Enniskillen (just 2 miles inside the Scottish FIR) for a
cup of tea, is not of interest to them. ECAC treatment of homebuilts
is history as far as the UK is concerned, visits are subject to
restrictive bureaucracy."

Looking at the current version of CAP455 this is indeed the case. Foreign registered homebuilts need to obtain prior permission before visiting and visits are limited to 28 days in any one year.

Just think how incensed we all were when the French adopted a similar view a few years back. And how quickly they saw the light and put a more acceptable regime in place.

Who could blame a foreign authority for reciprocating with equally unfriendly rules toward UK permit aircraft, making it difficult for us to fly abroad.

My point in posting this here is to bring in to the attention of those who, like myself, were unaware of this situation and also to ask if any of the LAA hierarchy who monitor this forum has views or comments to make. Basically to open up a debate which may in some way help us all.

[Steve Brown]

good question - what is it about aviation that such stupid obstacles are put in the way - why is an a/c treated differently to a car. So much for EU freedom of movement etc

[cirrusvfr]

It all comes down to realising that the air above the UK is DIFFERENT

[Steve Brown]

More like the contents / air in the heads of the people who dream up these bureacratic rules is different.

On a more positive note - I understand one only has to register a car that is imported after six months of arrival (who checks & enforces this - no-one as far as I can see - immunity from parking fine & speeding cameras too) but prior to that I think you are free to use a car on British roads without permission, tax or MOT.

Perhaps there is a case for lobbying for some equality & non discrimination of aviators vs car owners ref freedom of EU movement - anyone fancy starting a Human Rights test case!!!

Or maybe more realistically lobbying the CAA for an agreement that (while holding the power to impose it) CAA permission will be auto & non expiryingly granted - provided the owner is not an undesireable alien; terrorist, married,working, law abiding, taxpaying, british subect; convicted criminal; sex offender; etc etc.

After all, aircraft are fewer in number & a darn sight harder to hide / disguise than cars - especially if Mode S is tracking them everywhere!!!!

Is there a liberal in the CAA (or do all their job role profiles explicitly exclude this trait)?

[Mark A]

All rather annoying and unnecessary really.

The 1980 ECAC recommendation (INT.S/11-1), that we are signatory to, invites states to "allow the navigation over its territory of these aircraft, registered in another member state, without any further limitation other than those reported in the certificate of airworthiness or permit to fly.

Even the Italians invoke it quite literally; no formality, just stick to the limitations and fly where you like.

France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden and probably others have similar concessions.

So wouldn't it be simpler and cheaper for the CAA to just set out an AIC just authorizing basic Day/VFR flying by European homebuilts that are approved in their own countries?

[steveneale]

Lets not forget the CAA is a private company with a monopoly. It has to feed it's masters a 6% rake off each year. It is not hard to see why they will charge for anything they can get away with. Why wouldn't they?

Quote from their 2007 Annual accounts:

"● Target Rate of Return Achieved
The financial results of the Group are assessed
by reference to financial targets agreed with the
Department for Transport (DfT). The Group is
required to set its unit charges at levels sufficient
to achieve a return before interest on the average
level of capital employed, expressed in current
cost terms. The regulatory sector, comprising
the activities of the Safety Regulation, Economic
Regulation and Consumer Protection Groups,
achieved a return of 6.9%, compared to a target
of 6.0%. The en route activities achieved a return
of 9.3% in the year, compared to a target of 6.0%,
the balance of which will be refunded to airspace
users in later years."

Mmmmm! And pigs might fly too. It's a great life running a cost plus business.

[Peter Gorman]

This is from Airworthiness Notice 52 dated Sept 2006:
"Since the {previous} exemption was issued European Union legislative changes have removed certain constraints on aircraft ownership. As a result of these changes the exemption issued by the CAA could be a mechanism for importing into the UK a foreign registered home-built aircraft that has not been shown to comply with UK safety requirements. The CAA considers that the intent of the ECAC agreement was to permit over flight and short-term visits only. The CAA also has concerns over the level of airworthiness regulation that the States of Registry would be able to exercise during prolonged periods of operation in other States. "

The sniffy tone of the second sentence indicates clearly that the CAA is not willing to have automatic mutual recognition of homebuilt permits, so the ECAC recommendation is no longer accepted.

Mark A, my understanding is that France does not adhere to the ECAC recommendation, and that the position of LAA permits in France does not apply to homebuilts from other states.

Roughly half the countries of Europe adhere to ECAC's recommendation in one form or another.

This is an important issue that I would like the LAA to take up with the Forces of Darkness, and/or maybe it should be addressed by the new international grouping of homebuilder organisations. At the very least the LAA should be concerned about complaints leading to possible retaliation .....

[Nigel Hitchman]

I had no idea that this was the case until it was pointed out on the RVsqn email list by Peter. This really isa big turnaround by the CAA. I agree that this, along with other EASA member countries imposing similar rules or charges like belgium, is a big problem and needs to be looked at by EFLVA (or whatever its called ) and should bepushed by the LAA.
We should have complete freedom of movement between all EASA states, with no requirements for prior permission as long as for example the aircraft has a national Permit to fly (or equivalent) and the visit is not longer than X days (but no limiton multiple visits).
Surely insurance also plays a part in this too?

But one problem we have that other countries dont is that our "airworthiness" is called a "permit to fly". In many countries this is a term used for a one off flight, or series oftest flights.Perhaps we really need to change the name. Perhaps "C of A (homebuilt)" would be a better wording then we may already have authoirty to travel without permission in many countries. but we all need to use the samewording for the same thing.

Unfortunately there are also people who arent playing by the rules as seen by a number of foreign registered homebuilt aircraft thatare based in the UK permanently which perhaps dont have the permission and thus are why the CAA changes the rules.
A recent newspaper pictures showed a foreign registered homebuilt crashed in someones garden in the UK. Ive no idea if its true but am told that the aircraft has been in the country for a couple of years. The type was subject to a mandatory mod before further flight under the LAA system, but perhaps not under the foreign regulations. (maybe nothing to do with the crash either) If this is true, this obviously doesnt help our case!

[JohnMead]

[quote="Nigel Hitchman"]IBut one problem we have that other countries dont is that our "airworthiness" is called a "permit to fly". In many countries this is a term used for a one off flight, or series oftest flights.Perhaps we really need to change the name. Perhaps "C of A (homebuilt)" would be a better wording then we may already have authoirty to travel without permission in many countries. but we all need to use the samewording for the same thing.
-------------------------------------------

Perhaps we could square the circle and have " Special Category" CofA; or perhaps a "Restricted Category" which should appeal to our neighbours who have CNRA .

John Mead

[Peter Gorman]

Getting an Exemption Order is only one of the more peculiar features of flying a foreign light aircraft to/from the UK.
There are bewildering combinations of separate notifications to Customs, immigration (notify the office - wherever that may be - covering the airfield in question), local police (with different local forces having quite different interpretations of the requirements). Notwithstanding having checked the published Notams before arriving in the UK, you also seem to be supposed to separately check royal flights and where the Red Arrows are by contacting UK phone numbers.

The diligent but unwary foreign pilot may send details of his flights to the Customs "National Coordination Unit" thinking that national co-ordination means what it says. Alas, no, this is only for Customs, according to most police forces, and does not deal with immigration.

There are customs-designated airfields, and police-designated airfields, but these lists are not the same! (See the lists on the GAR form). And a lot of the designated airfields are high-cost places that are not encouraging general aviation visitors.

Then if you tell the foreign pilot that some flights carried out entirely within the UK require 12-hour advance notification to the local police force - allegedly as part of preventing terrorism - he/she will probably conclude that it would be easier to go elsewhere.

I suspect that nowhere else in Europe - other maybe than Russia - does the visiting private pilot encounter such a confusing maze of requirements........