Belgium Free again -- EFLEVA

[mikehallam]

PRESS RELEASE – 21 June 2017 For immediate release In a joint effort the European Federation of Light, Experimental & Vintage Aircraft (EFLEVA), the Vereniging Vlaamse MotorVliegclubs (VVMV) and the Belgian Aviation Authorities we are pleased to announce that [b]amateur-built and certain historic aircraft registered in European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) member states no longer require a permit to over fly Belgian territory for 30 days in a calendar year.[/b] A Royal Decré has been published on 21 June 2017 which confirms and details this change. It comes in effect on 1 July.

N.B. Roger Hopkinson - President EFLEVA – [email protected] / +44 (0)7770 68 22 20

[John Price]

Yes well done Roger and the team!!

That saves an awful lot of 'faff'.

Maybe some one could verify if the DFT were in anyway involved?

John.

[Alan Kilbride]

That is brilliant. Thanks Roger and your team. We just need free access to all countries now. I know you are working hard on this.

Alan

[paulbh]

Does this include gyrocopters?

[Donald Walker]

The royal decree exempts amateur-built aircraft with a national permit to fly.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/47we7u3bws1ni ... 1.pdf?dl=0

[Brian Hope]

Hi Paul, I'm afraid it does not include factory-built gyrocopters because the Royal Decree actually recognises the ECAC agreements of 1980 (amateur-built aircraft) and 2015 (historic aircraft that have held a CoA - which means it excludes 'pure' ex military types). I do not know whether amateur built gyros are included in the amateur built aircraft definition or not.

[guillaume320]

Hello,

Can anybody tell me if Chipmunks on a Permit are now free to go to Belgium?

Thanks in advance,

Guillaume

[Donald Walker]

The Chipmunk probably meets the criteria for exemption:

- It had a CofA and is now operated under a national permit to fly or a restricted CofA

- it is

a) historic aircraft meeting the criteria below:
(i) non-complex aircraft whose:
— initial design was established before 1 January 1955, and
— production has been stopped before 1 January 1975;

- its MTOM is less than 5700kg

- it is not operated commercially.

But don't take my word for it, as that is only my interpretation of the royal decree.

[guillaume320]

Thank you Donald. What you say makes sense...

I might send the Belgian CAA an email, just to be sure, because one is never sure

[guillaume320]

Well, I'm glad I checked with the Belgian CAA directly.

In the email I received back is a recap of the Royal Decree. When it came down to "historical aircraft originally factory-manufactured", this is what they had to say:

"However, upon consultation of the UK CAA Aircraft Register, I noticed that the subject aircraft was built under licence by the Oficinas Gerais de Material Aeronáutico (Portugal) for the Portugese Air Force (not UK built). As a consequence, the subject aircraft would not comply with the above criteria, and a permission to fly over Belgian territory would still be required."

So a UK built Chipmunk is ok, a Portuguese one not! I personally think this could be open to debate, but there it is...

I hope this post will be found helpful.

Best regards,

Guillaume

[tnowak]

Guillaume,
I don't think their answer is quite correct.
I didn't think the "new" permission only applied to UK manufactured historic aircraft.
I own a US built historic aircraft (1948 Piper) and was under the impression these were now covered.
In the past I have obtained a Belgian permit (EUR 90 now I believe) and also a temporary permit last year (EUR 10) for the Oldtimer fly-in at Diest.
Tony Nowak

[guillaume320]

Hi Tony,

Thanks for your feedback. Me too I'm a bit puzzled by their way of reasoning tbh. But now they have sent this email, I don't think there is an easy way to 'appeal' their decision... If you have any suggestions I'm listening of course.

I found the Decree a bit vague, and that's why I sent them the email. An insurance company would certainly have double checked that in case of an accident, and from there on it could have become a lengthy legal struggle.

I'm not planning a trip to Belgium very often, but for now a last minute decision remains impossible unfortunately...

G

[Brian Hope]

Hi Tony, I am somewhat bemused by their interpretation of the ECAC 'vintage' recommendation too, so I have emailed somebody who will know better than I whether it is questionable. By their stated interpretation, Canadian built Chippies would not meet the ECAC criteria either.
The spirit of the recommendation is that aircraft types that have held a CoA but are now on a Permit or restricted CoA meet the requirements. Only a small number of 'pure' warbirds, aircraft that were never on a civilian register with a CoA but have only ever been approved for civilianised flight from the outset on a Permit or restricted CoA, usually fall outside the recommendation criteria. I can see that a Portuguese built Chipmunk that was never put on a CoA in Portugal or the UK, but went directly onto a Permit or restricted CoA, might be considered a 'pure' warbird, but in light of the rest of the Chipmunk fleet, that does seem a mite pedantic.
Rgds, Brian

[Donald Walker]

Did that particular aircraft ever have a CofA? It may be that they are (mistakenly?) applying the rule to individual aircraft rather than the type.

[guillaume320]

@Donald: not sure tbh, I'll need to investigate