"fallacy to talk about "the rest of Europe" as if it is an entity"
Good point.
Rod1
Factory Built
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
Sorry you find it confusing that some people just want to buy and fly.
I don’t mind getting my hands dirty, I just don’t want to fly something I have built.
Why should it be more expensive, as factory built micros like CT can be self maintained?
I don’t care what people earn they should be welcomed to our LAA!(Or maybe you are right, and its time to get a Micro license and be able to buy and fly)
Maybe you are all right ………….Why bother…………Accept your lot………..Move to Russia………….Resist change………...
I really thought the move to LAA was to open our appeal to a wider audience, but I guess if you earn money and want to spend it you are seen as undesirable buy some so I guess its best to just accept the benefits and of our permit system and spend my money elsewhere !
I don’t mind getting my hands dirty, I just don’t want to fly something I have built.
Why should it be more expensive, as factory built micros like CT can be self maintained?
I don’t care what people earn they should be welcomed to our LAA!(Or maybe you are right, and its time to get a Micro license and be able to buy and fly)
Maybe you are all right ………….Why bother…………Accept your lot………..Move to Russia………….Resist change………...
I really thought the move to LAA was to open our appeal to a wider audience, but I guess if you earn money and want to spend it you are seen as undesirable buy some so I guess its best to just accept the benefits and of our permit system and spend my money elsewhere !
-
Graham Newby
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:00 am
Factory Built
Jeremy
I'm afraid your statement is incorrect regarding 600kgs. The Czech MEP lobbied the Commission during the Autumn last year to increase the Annex II limit from 450kgs to 600kgs in order to allow LSA type aircraft to be administered by NAAs. This was rejected and the ratified COM579 extending EASAs remit into licensing and ops includes the original weight limit.
The NPA for initial airworthiness for the ELA ( European Light Aircraft ) which we have been working on in the EASA MDM032 working group is due to be issued later this month and, if successful, this will incorporate LSA type aircraft and more with a European TC. See http://www.easa.eu.int/doc/Press_Room/A ... 202007.pdf or visit the EASA homepage for the link. Or you can always give me a ring at Turweston for more info.
Happy New Year
Graham Newby
I'm afraid your statement is incorrect regarding 600kgs. The Czech MEP lobbied the Commission during the Autumn last year to increase the Annex II limit from 450kgs to 600kgs in order to allow LSA type aircraft to be administered by NAAs. This was rejected and the ratified COM579 extending EASAs remit into licensing and ops includes the original weight limit.
The NPA for initial airworthiness for the ELA ( European Light Aircraft ) which we have been working on in the EASA MDM032 working group is due to be issued later this month and, if successful, this will incorporate LSA type aircraft and more with a European TC. See http://www.easa.eu.int/doc/Press_Room/A ... 202007.pdf or visit the EASA homepage for the link. Or you can always give me a ring at Turweston for more info.
Happy New Year
Graham Newby
-
Nick Allen
- Posts: 456
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
- Location: Oxford
- Contact:
Graham, Happy New Year to you too. And welcome: how many attempts did you have to make to work out the login!?
CP, I'm not confused by the desire to "buy and fly" (and for the record I fly a certified aircraft expensively crafted by top-notch German craftsmen, admittedly 30+ years ago), but I am confused why you assume an operating framework for microlights should be automatically applied to larger aircraft. And given how much work the PFA has put, and the LAA will presumably continue to put, into dealing with EASA, I think it's a bit much to talk about "resisting change"
CP, I'm not confused by the desire to "buy and fly" (and for the record I fly a certified aircraft expensively crafted by top-notch German craftsmen, admittedly 30+ years ago), but I am confused why you assume an operating framework for microlights should be automatically applied to larger aircraft. And given how much work the PFA has put, and the LAA will presumably continue to put, into dealing with EASA, I think it's a bit much to talk about "resisting change"
Nick CT is similar in size to Zenith, Sports Cruiser, TL Sting etc. and option to but and fly in most EU applies (and rest of world as lsa), so?
I appreciate and support the efforts by a few for the good of many completely, ref:- EASA,…………. just looking for fair playing field .
As for big earners, have you looked how much your houses are worth now….Re mortgage and enjoy!
I appreciate and support the efforts by a few for the good of many completely, ref:- EASA,…………. just looking for fair playing field .
As for big earners, have you looked how much your houses are worth now….Re mortgage and enjoy!
CP
I am finding your posts very hard to follow but I think what Nick was getting at is that a factory micro – like a UK factory built CT – is on a permit and you can do your own maintenance. A Factory built VLA will be on a C of A not a permit and will require professional maintenance. The situation regarding Factory built VLA aircraft (which I think all the aircraft you list can fall into) is common throughout Europe, to the best of my knowledge.
LSA is not “the rest of the world” it is just the USA, and it is dominated by European VLA designs.
The above is an attempt to help, so if I have misunderstood I apologise.
Rod1
I am finding your posts very hard to follow but I think what Nick was getting at is that a factory micro – like a UK factory built CT – is on a permit and you can do your own maintenance. A Factory built VLA will be on a C of A not a permit and will require professional maintenance. The situation regarding Factory built VLA aircraft (which I think all the aircraft you list can fall into) is common throughout Europe, to the best of my knowledge.
LSA is not “the rest of the world” it is just the USA, and it is dominated by European VLA designs.
The above is an attempt to help, so if I have misunderstood I apologise.
Rod1
021864
Rod, I will try to explain:-
In Europe they can buy and fly factory built aircraft and self maintain thus avoiding the expense you mention as your reasons to self build.
In Europe they have a busy economy evolved around aircraft/Kit manufacturing.
In Europe they have a choice we, at present can only dream of.
In Europe there is a mindset to innovate and move with the times.
We ARE European. Or have I missed something?
The number of Aircraft sold/operated in USA supports my statement “rest of the world” perhaps a better statement would be “most of the aviation world!”
So who has it right, where is our aviation industry, outside Rolls Royce?
I am very fair minded and feel we have the wrong end of the stick, and don’t like it so thought we could discuss it?
In Europe they can buy and fly factory built aircraft and self maintain thus avoiding the expense you mention as your reasons to self build.
In Europe they have a busy economy evolved around aircraft/Kit manufacturing.
In Europe they have a choice we, at present can only dream of.
In Europe there is a mindset to innovate and move with the times.
We ARE European. Or have I missed something?
The number of Aircraft sold/operated in USA supports my statement “rest of the world” perhaps a better statement would be “most of the aviation world!”
So who has it right, where is our aviation industry, outside Rolls Royce?
I am very fair minded and feel we have the wrong end of the stick, and don’t like it so thought we could discuss it?
CP I think I start to understand why we are talking different languages.
“In Europe they can buy and fly factory built aircraft and self maintain thus avoiding the expense you mention as your reasons to self build.”
My understanding of the rules is that it is fully balanced across Europe and they are as follows;
Micros.
A Factory built micro can be bought and operated in the UK on a BMAA permit (some on an LAA now) and this allows some degree of Pilot maintenance. A similar arrangement applies across most of Europe.
VLA
An AT3 (for example) can be bought as a factory built aircraft in the UK (40% more expensive then the a finished kit version by the way). It has an EASA C of A and requires to be maintained professionally. This arrangement applies across Europe.
Off the aircraft you mention most could be approved as VLA a few might make the Micro cat. A VLA would be treated in exactly the same way across Europe, (CS-VLA is a European design code valid across Europe for factory built aircraft). In the case of the Factory built micro’s the governance is handled locally and so some variance is built in. For example, some of the aircraft in your list may be classed as micros in Europe and as VLA’s in the UK. This is the only area where I can think of a difference between Europe and the UK.
To sum up.
I would appear that a VLA aircraft (like my MCR which is 490kg) – Factory built would be about 40% more money and require professional maintenance. I would argue that kit built is much better value for money but requires a considerable investment in time. (see PS)
I do not think that Factory built VLA’s operating on an EASA C of A are treated differently across Europe.
For Micros it may well be that some European factory designs and not accepted in the UK due to non compliance with Section S. This would however not apply to aircraft like the Sport Curser, as I do not think this has a micro version?
Graham, if any of this is wrong please sing out!
Rod1
PS
AT-3 R100 is offered in 3 variants "Basic", "Club" and "Tourer", with various equipment packages and prices ranging from approx. EUR 85,000 (GBP 59,000) to just over EUR 100,000 (GBP 69,000), ex works, Poland +vat.
The kit is £20,000 plus vat.
My 40% saving on kit aircraft is very conservative, it could be more like 45- 50% on the fully equipped version
See http://www.s2taero.com/ for more data.
“In Europe they can buy and fly factory built aircraft and self maintain thus avoiding the expense you mention as your reasons to self build.”
My understanding of the rules is that it is fully balanced across Europe and they are as follows;
Micros.
A Factory built micro can be bought and operated in the UK on a BMAA permit (some on an LAA now) and this allows some degree of Pilot maintenance. A similar arrangement applies across most of Europe.
VLA
An AT3 (for example) can be bought as a factory built aircraft in the UK (40% more expensive then the a finished kit version by the way). It has an EASA C of A and requires to be maintained professionally. This arrangement applies across Europe.
Off the aircraft you mention most could be approved as VLA a few might make the Micro cat. A VLA would be treated in exactly the same way across Europe, (CS-VLA is a European design code valid across Europe for factory built aircraft). In the case of the Factory built micro’s the governance is handled locally and so some variance is built in. For example, some of the aircraft in your list may be classed as micros in Europe and as VLA’s in the UK. This is the only area where I can think of a difference between Europe and the UK.
To sum up.
I would appear that a VLA aircraft (like my MCR which is 490kg) – Factory built would be about 40% more money and require professional maintenance. I would argue that kit built is much better value for money but requires a considerable investment in time. (see PS)
I do not think that Factory built VLA’s operating on an EASA C of A are treated differently across Europe.
For Micros it may well be that some European factory designs and not accepted in the UK due to non compliance with Section S. This would however not apply to aircraft like the Sport Curser, as I do not think this has a micro version?
Graham, if any of this is wrong please sing out!
Rod1
PS
AT-3 R100 is offered in 3 variants "Basic", "Club" and "Tourer", with various equipment packages and prices ranging from approx. EUR 85,000 (GBP 59,000) to just over EUR 100,000 (GBP 69,000), ex works, Poland +vat.
The kit is £20,000 plus vat.
My 40% saving on kit aircraft is very conservative, it could be more like 45- 50% on the fully equipped version
See http://www.s2taero.com/ for more data.
021864
Rod, your missing the point.
Sport Cruisers, TL Sting ETC ETC ETC, can buy and fly in EU and Rest of World
IF we are in Europe, we are European and their safety record is as good as ours, then WHY can we not be European and buy and fly the same products.
I think its about time we had a test case to buy one of these aircraft and see what the European courts think about our human rights.
P.S. I think the price for the kit you mentioned was without engine and just about every other thing you need to finish it.(I wont list everything you need as it’s a long list)
Then of course you need the labour,……Whats that worth?
Sport Cruisers, TL Sting ETC ETC ETC, can buy and fly in EU and Rest of World
IF we are in Europe, we are European and their safety record is as good as ours, then WHY can we not be European and buy and fly the same products.
I think its about time we had a test case to buy one of these aircraft and see what the European courts think about our human rights.
P.S. I think the price for the kit you mentioned was without engine and just about every other thing you need to finish it.(I wont list everything you need as it’s a long list)
Then of course you need the labour,……Whats that worth?
P.S. I think the price for the kit you mentioned was without engine and just about every other thing you need to finish it.(I wont list everything you need as it’s a long list)
Then of course you need the labour,……Whats that worth?
Correct, that is why it is only 40% cheaper against 66% (I added in an amount for all the bits). My labor was worth nothing. It was me learning how an aircraft worked and how to put it together so I could look after it for the rest of its useful life.
The MCR answer came to about the same and that was actual against actual so I think 40 – 50 % is about right for a saving against a factory built machine.
Rod1
Then of course you need the labour,……Whats that worth?
Correct, that is why it is only 40% cheaper against 66% (I added in an amount for all the bits). My labor was worth nothing. It was me learning how an aircraft worked and how to put it together so I could look after it for the rest of its useful life.
The MCR answer came to about the same and that was actual against actual so I think 40 – 50 % is about right for a saving against a factory built machine.
Rod1
021864
CP
Regarding a test case, I think you are right and that the CAA would actually welcome it because it would absolve them of the responsibility for having relaxed rules that may have prevented an accident. Without being forced they will not risk being prosecuted by a bereaved family.
But being more realistic, reading TL 1.07, as per my suggestion last summer, it's now official that the costs of introducing new types to the approved list can now be recovered by private individuals. What is still needed is aeronautical engineers willing to tackle the task for a share of future income.
http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co. ... lding.html
Acceptance Procedure for a New Design
1.3.1 Recovery of External Engineering Costs.
In some cases where the applicant for approval of a new design, is required to invest in the Engineering Services of a Consultant to prepare the necessary detailed reports for LAA Engineering approval, they may be faced with considerable costs. In order to allow the first applicant to recover these costs the applicant may expect to recover a royalty of up to 10% of the costs from each subsequent builder who benefits from the approval of the design...
Regarding a test case, I think you are right and that the CAA would actually welcome it because it would absolve them of the responsibility for having relaxed rules that may have prevented an accident. Without being forced they will not risk being prosecuted by a bereaved family.
But being more realistic, reading TL 1.07, as per my suggestion last summer, it's now official that the costs of introducing new types to the approved list can now be recovered by private individuals. What is still needed is aeronautical engineers willing to tackle the task for a share of future income.
http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co. ... lding.html
Acceptance Procedure for a New Design
1.3.1 Recovery of External Engineering Costs.
In some cases where the applicant for approval of a new design, is required to invest in the Engineering Services of a Consultant to prepare the necessary detailed reports for LAA Engineering approval, they may be faced with considerable costs. In order to allow the first applicant to recover these costs the applicant may expect to recover a royalty of up to 10% of the costs from each subsequent builder who benefits from the approval of the design...
-
Graham Newby
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:00 am
CP
The problem is that you CANNOT fly factory built LSA type aircraft all round Europe. Yes, you can in some countries, but most have the 450kgs weight limit applied. What we have been working on in EASA in the MDM032 group is to enable a European standard approach so it IS possible. As I said before please look at the EASA website frontpage to see more details of the proposals or give me a ring to discuss more.
Graham
The problem is that you CANNOT fly factory built LSA type aircraft all round Europe. Yes, you can in some countries, but most have the 450kgs weight limit applied. What we have been working on in EASA in the MDM032 group is to enable a European standard approach so it IS possible. As I said before please look at the EASA website frontpage to see more details of the proposals or give me a ring to discuss more.
Graham
Thanks Graham I will try to call tomorrow/Wednesday.
You know a lot more about European legislation than most because of your involvement and commitment for which we thank you but, I thought you could fly an EU reg factory built in UK for 28 days?
If this is true my question is, what happens to the aircraft after this time to deem it unable to fly in the UK? This I feel is where the test case lies.
You know a lot more about European legislation than most because of your involvement and commitment for which we thank you but, I thought you could fly an EU reg factory built in UK for 28 days?
If this is true my question is, what happens to the aircraft after this time to deem it unable to fly in the UK? This I feel is where the test case lies.