[ArcherII]

Hi All,

Is anyone currently operating an N reg aircraft with a properly set-up dry-lease strucuture? Or an alternative?

I'm considering changing to the N reg in order to take advantage of the FAA IR, but in order for my aircraft to work financially, I need to hire it from one of my companies the others when flying on business relating to that company (incidental personal travel, not public transport or aerial work).

I've discovered the potential pitfalls apparently requiring a dry-lease agreement and the lessee becoming the operator of the aircraft for the duration of the flight, and would very much like to talk to someone who is already doing this or knows the issues inside out, as I'm getting quite a bit of conflicting advice.

Alternatively, can anyone recommend a good specialist aviation law firm who won't try to charge me Learjet prices for an SEP, and what really should be almost a copy/paste job?

[peterh337]

Why dry lease?

About 10 years ago there was a prominent poster here (occassionally claiming to be a lawyer) who pushed the concept of a dry lease as being the only legal way to rent out an N-reg.

I did a lot of digging into it, including contacting the DfT (Roger Kinsey himself) and could not find the slightest hint of such a legal requirement.

Airlines often dry lease but they do it for convenience / operational reasons, not because an N-reg cannot be rented.

That forum chap eventually said I was probably right...

Or are you trying to set up some scheme to create a non EU based "operator" to deal with EASA FCL and its attack on N-regs, whose defence is for the "operator" to be outside the EU?

[ArcherII]

This is driving me nuts!

(Thanks, Peter. I'll call you.)

[SteveC]

Bit of a limited life switching to the N Reg just for the FAA IR with the EASA dual licencing requirements about to fall in your lap....

[ArcherII]

Thanks, Steve. I know it's all up in the air currently, but my intention is to convert using the 15 hour rule to the JAA IR (I just want to get most of the training done in my own aircraft, in a more flexible way that through a specific FTO, etc.. so FAA IR > JAA IR seems on balance slightly better for me personally).

But, I also understand that it's expected that there may be an even more straight forward conversion route once April 2014 comes in. Are you saying this won't happen?

[peterh337]

Steve knows no more than anybody else but likes to wind people up.

EASA is not proposing long term parking or overflight controls on non EASA reg aircraft. Their current position is the requirement for EASA pilot papers (in addition to the State of Registry pilot papers required under ICAO) if the "operator" is over here - done to death already.

Nobody knows what will happen c. 2014 or after 2014. Even today's UK CAA doesn't know the meaning of the term "operator" in this context (I have asked their top people in person).

[SteveC]

It is not an attempt to wind anyone up. I too have asked the 'top people' and the view is that dual licencing is coming full stop. I have no more idea than anyone else if it will actually happen or there will be some 11th hour change of mind, but moving to the N Reg at this stage to access the FAA IR could be a very short term move for the costs and effort involved.

Converting from FAA to JAA to cover all bases is a sensible move and even Peter despite years of rhetoric on the subject finally sucumbed and did it..... 'Just in case' to use his words......

[peterh337]

Much depends on details.

For example there is no doubt that the cheapest way to get the JAA IR is to do the FAA IR first (wholly in the USA) and then come back here to convert. If the conversion is done in say Greece then you have done it all as two intensive projects, which is again the most efficient way.

And if you have an N-reg plane available then you can fly it till 2014. That's two years. Two years of IFR flying. In two year's time, a number of people reading this will be dead.

I did the JAA IR in 2011 because I had a "time slot" between projects, and also because I wanted to get it in before the 15hr conversion route has a chance of getting killed as possibly planned in April 2012. As it turned out, the 15hr conversion route did not get killed, so there is no point in anybody rushing the JAA IR now. A point evidently not lost on Europe's FAA IR / N-reg community, judging from the miniscule numbers of pilots doing the JAA IR conversion currently.

If you have no particular (IFR-suitable) plane to fly, don't have the funding to do anything fast (both true for e.g. much of that Flyer group that did the IR en masse a few years ago) and don't really care whether you do this now or in 2014 or whatever, and any plane and any avionics mods you might get one day is fine on G-reg, then there is no point in doing the FAA IR as an intermediate step.

But in that case there is no point in doing any IR. The IR is worth doing only if you have the mission profile to justify it, not to mention the time and the funding to make it all come together, and if you do have the mission profile now then the FAA route can be a reasonable intermediate step.

Or it may even turn out to be a "final-ish" step if something happens after 2014 re an FCL BASA (which I don't believe will happen in any substantive sense; it is IMHO just something which the liars that run EASA keep mentioning as a wool over the eyes of the politicians).

The huge advantage of having an FAA IR is that the JAA IR mandatory bum on seat time shrinks from 50hrs to 15hrs.