[kestrel539]

Dont suppose there is any news on the SPL/LAPL(S) with a UK LAPL medical being accepted in France yet?
(Sorry about the thread drift)

[Irv Lee]

It didn't take long for "the usual" to happen. Not sure what the PC term for "stories changing as they are whispered down the line" is or I would use it.
I was quenching my thirst at an airfield not too far away last week, and happened to be in conversation with a lapl(a) pilot. As it was nice weather and lunchtime I think I mentioned either lunches in Le T or the demise of the Cherbourg BBQ, I cannot remember which, and that undoubtedly places like Sandown and similar would benefit as lapl holders would flock in.
It turned out he was particularly happy about some very recent news he had heard namely that France now recognised the UK Lapl, so lapl holders would be able to resume flights to France once Covid let them. My addition of "but that is restricted to certain permit aircraft" was not believed and certainly, judging by the tone change, not welcome. Apparently I can't have heard the news in the past month, that the UK lapl was now fully accepted by the French now and everyone with a UK lapl could resume flying there....
(Don't believe this at home, readers)

[Dave W]

It is illogical, though, to the 90% of people whose minds aren't locked into bureaucratese.

[Irv Lee]

@Dave W 2012-2019, when UK lapl were valid for flights to France, if my experience is ubiquitous, I suspect the majority were out of validity, changes to validity in 2019 to include all dual flights probably brought it under 50%, but not THAT much difference if they go now when they shouldn't, merely degrees of "shouldn't".
My point is more about where pilots get their news from! If we cannot simplify everything completely, 2nd best might be to concentrate on cafe owners and baristas,

[patowalker]

That is what happens when three year old regulations are announced as "new", with much fanfare.

[G-BLEW]

Macron is making a speech tomorrow night, so who knows what's coming

Ian
PS No, I'm not expecting hime to mention UK LAPLs, but maybe some more entry restrictions?

[nickwilcock]

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but although revised acceptance of 'ultralight' and homebuilt aircraft has been agreed, I haven't seen anything official which amends the current 4.3.4.3 (Google translation):

4.3.4.3. The Minister responsible for civil aviation may accept the exercise in France, and within the limits of the privileges attached to the French private pilot license, of privileges associated with a title issued or validated by a foreign State, or of special foreign privileges. not recognized in France, if this title or these privileges sanction a sufficient level of competence to obtain the title or equivalent French privileges. For the purposes of this paragraph, the holder of a national private pilot license (N-PPL) issued by the Civil Aviation Authority of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, to which is associated a declaration of conformity at the corresponding level of Annex I of the Convention on International Civil Aviation issued by this authority or on its behalf by an examiner authorized by it, is authorized to perform flights in France on board airplanes registered in the register of United Kingdom of Great Britain, on a private basis, in VFR and within the limits of the privileges held under this national license.

The significant words are 'a declaration of conformity at the corresponding level of Annex I of the Convention on International Civil Aviation issued by this authority' - which is why NPPL holders had to meet ICAO equivalence, including a Class 2 Part-MED in previous times.

Hopefully an official communication will be forthcoming from the DGAC, but for the time being I would recommend caution to avoid being greeted for a ramp check by les flics avec gants en latex et lubrifiant chirurgical......

[patowalker]

That became obsolete when "French" licences were replaced by EASA licences. As a result, the implementing instrument, AIC A 2010/13, was withdrawn.

BTW, it was not a Class 2 Part-Med that was required, but an ICAO Class 2.

[Paul_Sengupta]

Hopefully an official communication will be forthcoming from the DGAC

As I understand it, that's exactly what the LAA got from the DGAC, hence this thread.

Many thanks to LAA and EFLEVA President Roger Hopkinson, Neil Williams of the CAA and Thomas Iaconno at DGAC for their help in developing these clarifications.

[nickwilcock]

That is why clarification is needed and sight of the actual agreement in terms of licensing and aircraft totally essential.

The DGAC documents I've seen refer to acceptance of 'ultralight' and 'amateur build' aircraft, but there is no mention of other non-Part 21 aircraft such as Bulldogs, Chipmunks etc. Neither is there any clear statement agreeing to use of UK-issued LAPLs or PMDs.

[Paul_Sengupta]

The same blanket acceptance which accepts permit aircraft also permits "historic" aircraft, where the design was before 1955 and the production ended before 1975.

Anything more might need further negotiation rather than clarification!

[Pete L]

...and why not Part 21 types?

Because they are covered by EASA rules and not National rules.

And the ones in the gap? National permit to fly, almost treated as Part 21 in the UK but EASA no longer recognizing flight conditions since Brexit.

[Peter Gristwood]

In a way this shows one of the key weaknesses in light GA in the UK.

The homebuilt, ULM and 'historic' permit fleet gets an exemption from the French thanks to the hard work of the LAA. The Part 21 and 'gap' aircraft don't get an exemption, because no-one is speaking for them.

It should be the CAA, but I'm not sure they know what a light aircraft is, or even that there's an issue, as they have so much to do with RA(T) and drone stuff.

But even though they are covered by the EASA regs my reading of this is that any aircraft - Part 21 or 'gap' - can be granted an exemption by the individual country's NAA, such as the DGAC, at their own discretion. Is that right?

[patowalker]

That is why clarification is needed and sight of the actual agreement in terms of licensing and aircraft totally essential.

The DGAC documents I've seen refer to acceptance of 'ultralight' and 'amateur build' aircraft, but there is no mention of other non-Part 21 aircraft such as Bulldogs, Chipmunks etc. Neither is there any clear statement agreeing to use of UK-issued LAPLs or PMDs.

Re Bulldogs and Chipmunks see:

https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTe ... 0036437838

and EASA's list of the aircraft covered:

http://www.fokkervliegen.nl/Annex_II_dated_130907.pdf

Re PMD, Thomas Iacono, Deputy Head of aircraft and operations rulemaking unit at the DGAC, wrote:

Dear Mr. Walker,

In the article 4 of the decree dated 8 January 2018, recently amended,* « associated qualifications » are referring to « aircraft qualification » when a specific pilot’s qualification is required to act as a PIC of this aircraft in addition to his initial licence.

The medical licence is included in the « pilot’s licence » term. Indeed, the pilot’s licence is only valid if the pilot holds a valid medical.

So, if PMD is authorised in the UK to fly a homebuilt aircraft, PMD is valid to come to fly in France with your amateurbuilt aircraft in the conditions/limitations stated in the decree dated 8 January 2018.

I hope it clarifies the point.

Kind regards

Thomas IACONO

* amended to reinstate the UK, post Brexit.

I assume the LAA has had similar confirmation.

[Edward Bellamy]

But even though they are covered by the EASA regs my reading of this is that any aircraft - Part 21 or 'gap' - can be granted an exemption by the individual country's NAA, such as the DGAC, at their own discretion. Is that right?

@Peter Gristwood if the French really wanted to allow UK registered aircraft Part-21 aircraft (which are no longer EASA aircraft) flown by UK LAPL/NPPL holders, they probably could. Politically it seems unlikely at this time this would do so since it could be seen to undermine the EASA (and ICAO) rules.

On the other hand, the homebuild/historic 28 day agreement is long established, it is not particularly contentious and the fact that LAPL/NPPL holders can use it is more of a convenient side effect rather than any sort of result of the LAA lobby being stronger than those for certified aircraft.

There is no such thing as a 'gap' aircraft, they may be confusion around permits and their legal status, but whether an aircraft is Part-21 or non-Part-21 is defined by the Basic Regulation, as retained in UK law.