A reminder about Licensing

[peterh337]

That would indeed have been the outcome of hanging the anti N-reg proposals on the residence (or better still the citizenship ) of the pilot, yes.

A good job opportunity for Croatians and Albanians

[SteveC]

So to be totally safe I need to be sacking some pilots?

How you going to choose?

[Irv Lee]

Interesting how the usage of the word "safe" is adapting since EASA hijacked it.

[ac11flyer]

Interesting how the usage of the word "safe" is adapting since EASA hijacked it.

It all comes together nicely. Less pilots more safety.

[AlanB]

I still can't work out where the non EU EASA members fit into all this. Example, Norway. Everything refers to the EU so if I was "resident" in Norway would I be a resident of the EU or not with regards to EASA? Or even Alderney come to think of it? Should I start looking for a house in Alderney and de-resident myself from the UK? I could still spend 3 months in the UK and be non resident.....

[SteveC]

Norway and the CI are both covered by EASA as they are EASA member states and therefore subject to the same regulation. There are a number of states that are technically not EU but are EASA.

The whole thing is a real buggersmuddle. We have had an odd problem at work with certain of our Euroepan pilots who hold JAR FCL Licences where the CAA have said they would not recognise them. This was because their CAA did not bother to do what the UK CAA did and state that a FCL licence was to be considered a Part FCL licence as they started issuing new Part FCL licences from April. This meant that suddenly the old licences were no longer compliant!! This means from 1st July unless they are replaced with the Part FCL licence there are going to be a lot of delayed flights for airlines like Whizz who will have crews without licences! This has left them having to rush through an approval with the commission to cover them until they get the Part FCL licences issued!!! This licence issue has started but is going to take them ages get sorted.

Considering we have so long to get this sorted they have made such a hash of it!!

[peterh337]

There has been a lot of c0ckups on this.

One is that flying on a foreign IR used to preserve JAA IR validity indefinitely. This has just ended, so a lot of ex UK airline pilots who went to work in say Hong Kong and want to come back to fly for a UK airline found they have lost their papers and have to re-do their IRs... the 7 or 14 exams, 55hrs at an FTO. Completely stupid.

I still can't work out where the non EU EASA members fit into all this.

Switzerland has not filed for any derogations but their CAA assures Swiss pilots who ask that they can continue flying. The bottom line is that while Switzerland has signed up to EASA FCL, it is not in the EU and thus the EU regulation cannot be binding on it. Same for Croatia, but Croatia has the extra problem of EASA not recognising their "JAA" papers...

Presumably Norway is in the same category as Switzerland but I hear that Norway just went ahead and implemented EASA FCL some months ago, apparently summarily grounding their (several) N-reg based pilots.

Denmark may or may not be rubbing its hands, being the only European country with an actual law against long term N-reg parking. Unsuprisingly it is a vague law (reference with a translation on my site, somewhere) and they enforced it with sporadic ~300 euro fines. Now, they have to end this practice because EASA has legalised long term N-reg parking, but the pilots will have to get EASA papers.

[AlanB]

But if the EU law refers to "EU resident" then being a resident of a non EU state means you are not an EU resident and hence that part would not apply? And Norway definitely is not in the EU !!!

I do have a JAA PPL as well as my FAA CPL which are both valid, so not really an issue for me, but it would be nice to know where I stand!

[SteveC]

But if the EU law refers to "EU resident" then being a resident of a non EU state means you are not an EU resident and hence that part would not apply? And Norway definitely is not in the EU !!!

I do have a JAA PPL as well as my FAA CPL which are both valid, so not really an issue for me, but it would be nice to know where I stand!

What exactly are you trying to achieve? Norway is an EASA state so claiming you are a resident of Norway just subjects you to their FCL standards which are EASA.

[AlanB]

I want to know that if the "law" says that if you are an "EU resident" then blah blah, and you have some countries who are EASA states but not EU members then the law obviously does not apply to these states?

The Noggies can tell you that you have to wear reindeer skin when flying if they want, or they can tell you aeroplane must have red markings on the wings if the sun has set, or they can say "you cannot base an N reg in Norway for more than 30 days", but if they apply the bit of Eurolaw that says "if you are an EU resident you must have an EASA licence" then that bit simply does not apply to a Norwegian.

I am simply trying to sort out for myself what the hell is going on....

[SteveC]

My understanding is that the countries that are non EU that have adopted EASA FCL have done so through their own equivalent of our ANO. Therefore if you are claiming to be a Norwegian resident you need to check with 'your' CAA on the rules and regulations.

If you are indeed a permanent Norwegian resident then I believe under EASA you are required to change the state of licence issue for your JAA/EASA licence to Norway along with your medical records. You will then be subject to whatever rules they choose to apply.

If you are however trying to work the angle that as you are not an EU resident due to permanant residency in Norway and as such you can continue to fly using your FAA licence outside of Norway then I would suggest that you contact the noggie CAA and the CAA of each country you intend to fly in for clarification.

[dublinpilot]

I want to know that if the "law" says that if you are an "EU resident" then blah blah,

First step is to see what the law actually states. I doubt very much that it states that if it's intended to cover people outside the EU.

[dublinpilot]

And if it does say "EU Resident" then as Steve says, you need to check Norwegan leglisation as it may say something to the effect that this law applies as if a Norweigan resident were an EU resident.

[GrahamB]

Someone please remind me what all this is trying to achieve, and particularly what safety benefits it is supposed to be bringing?

Haven't our masters got better things to be spending their time (= our money, and lots of it) on?

[bookworm]

I still can't work out where the non EU EASA members fit into all this.

Article 66 of the BR says:
Participation of European third countries
The Agency shall be open to the participation of European third countries which are contracting parties to the Chicago Convention and which have entered into agreements with the European Community whereby they adopted and apply Community law in the field covered by this Regulation and its implementing rules.
Under the relevant provisions of these agreements, arrangements will be developed which shall, inter alia, specify the nature and extent of, and the detailed rules for, the participation by these countries in the work of the Agency, including provisions on financial contributions and staff.

IIRC Switzerland has transposed the BR and other EASA regs into national law, and, interestingly, the English text is authoritative. I expect other such states have done likewise.