![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi,
Is there any news about the new 600kg mtow limit rules in european countries? Any draft or publication? regards |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 12:31:01 AM UTC, Emir Sherbi wrote:
Hi, Is there any news about the new 600kg mtow limit rules in european countries? Any draft or publication? regards Google it? https://flightdesign.com/easa-new-ba...g-ul-aircraft/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 07:38 07 November 2018, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 12:31:01 AM UTC, Emir Sherbi wrote: Hi, Is there any news about the new 600kg mtow limit rules in european countries? Any draft or publication? regards My understanding is this is happening BUT member states of the European Union do not have to adopt it so you might have 600kg ultra-lights in Germany but not in France? Of course I may be totally wrong but this seems to be the local gossip in SW France. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sorry,i didn't express myself correctly.
I was hoping that someone from Germany or Czech republic for example tell me "this is what we are going to do in our country". It's complicated to google this new stuff in google in another language. Regards |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The regulation is now in force:
REGULATION (EU) 2018/1139 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 4 July 2018 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Union Aviation Safety Agency [...] Article 2 Scope [...] 8. A Member State may decide to exempt from this Regulation the design, production, maintenance and operation activities in respect of one or more of the following categories of aircraft: (a) aeroplanes, other than unmanned aeroplanes, which have no more than two seats, measurable stall speed or minimum steady flight speed in landing configuration not exceeding 45 knots calibrated air speed and a maximum take-off mass (MTOM), as recorded by the Member State, of no more than 600 kg for aeroplanes not intended to be operated on water or 650 kg for aeroplanes intended to be operated on water; (b) helicopters, other than unmanned helicopters, which have no more than two seats and a MTOM, as recorded by the Member State, of no more than 600 kg for helicopters not intended to be operated on water or 650 kg for helicopters intended to be operated on water; (c) sailplanes, other than unmanned sailplanes, and powered sailplanes, other than unmanned powered sailplanes, which have no more than two seats and a MTOM, as recorded by the Member State, of no more than 600 kg. This means indeed that there no longer will be a single definition for microlights in Europe. As microlights approved in one country need a separate authorization to fly in every foreign country, this can mean trouble if your microlight doesn't conform to the foreign nation limits. Germany has notified the European Union that it will apply these exemption rules to their full extent. The French aeronautical authority has agreed with the microlight community to implement an exemption for airplanes and helicopters with MTOM 500 kg, 525 kg with global parachute rescue system, 545 kg with floats + parachute, AND minimum steady flight speed in landing configuration not exceeding 35 knots. For 2-axis microlights (deltas with engine), the limits will remain 300 kg MTOM for a single seater and 450 kg for a two-seater. No exemption announced for sailplanes. This could mean that a future German 600 kg microlight would be banned from flying in France... If sanity prevails and the French authorities decide that the French limits don't apply to a German registered microlight, this could mean that French pilots wanting a 600 kg microlight will have to register it in Germany. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 08 Nov 2018 22:20:24 +0000, Dave Walsh wrote:
This is exactly the sort of thing that one expects with "European Harmonisation". If you think it looks a mess try re-registering a German glider trailer as a French one. Two countries with a common border, 40+ years to get systems harmonised, in reality a bureaucratic mess! That sort of nonsense isn't the personal property of the EU, French or German bureaucracies. Its common to all bureaucracies world wide. In my experience anyway, it peaks in the Indian and British civil services, where I'm uncertain which is the worst or who picked up the most bad habits from the other. In all cases the actual job is not relevant: what counts is who has the biggest/most important department and, among anybody above Higher Executive Officer level, playing dominance games with one's peers. -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Friday, 9 November 2018 01:09:47 UTC+2, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2018 22:20:24 +0000, Dave Walsh wrote: This is exactly the sort of thing that one expects with "European Harmonisation". If you think it looks a mess try re-registering a German glider trailer as a French one. Two countries with a common border, 40+ years to get systems harmonised, in reality a bureaucratic mess! That sort of nonsense isn't the personal property of the EU, French or German bureaucracies. Its common to all bureaucracies world wide. In my experience anyway, it peaks in the Indian and British civil services, where I'm uncertain which is the worst or who picked up the most bad habits from the other. In all cases the actual job is not relevant: what counts is who has the biggest/most important department and, among anybody above Higher Executive Officer level, playing dominance games with one's peers. -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org Historically (pre-EASA), in gliding world, UK has been land of free like no other for gliding. Or at least that is my impression. Maybe you are heading to that direction again? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 07:25 09 November 2018, krasw wrote:
On Friday, 9 November 2018 01:09:47 UTC+2, Martin Gregorie wrote: On Thu, 08 Nov 2018 22:20:24 +0000, Dave Walsh wrote: This is exactly the sort of thing that one expects with "European Harmonisation". If you think it looks a mess try re- registering a German glider trailer as a French one. Two countries with a common border, 40+ years to get systems harmonised, in reality a bureaucratic mess! That sort of nonsense isn't the personal property of the EU, French or German bureaucracies. Its common to all bureaucracies world wide. In my experience anyway, it peaks in the Indian and British civil services, where I'm uncertain which is the worst or who picked up the most bad habits from the other. In all cases the actual job is not relevant: what counts is who has the biggest/most important department and, among anybody above Higher Executive Officer level, playing dominance games with one's peers. -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org Historically (pre-EASA), in gliding world, UK has been land of free like no other for gliding. Or at least that is my impression. Maybe you are heading to that direction again? Very good! Is this an example of European humour? From where I live it looks like we are heading for some degree of chaos. Even mundane driving licensing looks problematic let alone pilot licensing. Just hope I'm wrong again. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 08 Nov 2018 23:25:18 -0800, krasw wrote:
Historically (pre-EASA), in gliding world, UK has been land of free like no other for gliding. Or at least that is my impression. Maybe you are heading to that direction again? From what I've read, immediately post-war when the CAA was restarting its civil operations, they looked at gliding, decided they didn't want anything to do with it and handed control to the BGA, where it stayed until the advent of EASA, when we came under the control of the CAA and the BGA became part of the structure (CAMO). Before EASA, UK gliders didn't even carry G-registration: exception was the GSA (military gliding club) that put G-reg on their gliders until at least the early '70s. I only know this because my glider was originally owned by the GSA and I was rather pleased to get its original G-reg back. Historically the CAA and BGA have worked pretty well together and by and large this is still the case. We're heading into chaos at present because a number of greedy *******s are trying to claim considerably more controlled airspace than they need or can justify for their traffic level and think the resulting choke points in class G are SEP. Take a bow, TAG (Farnborough), Oxford and Norwich to name but two. This also happened immediately post-war: they were kicked back into their kennels then and it looks as if the same may happen again. -- Martin | martin at Gregorie | gregorie dot org |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Women, pt 5 - Microlight 02.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_3_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | April 16th 10 01:57 PM |
The Women, pt 5 - Microlight 01.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_3_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | April 16th 10 01:57 PM |
Breaking news out of Europe | Brad[_2_] | Soaring | 1 | April 12th 07 04:28 PM |
Ventus2cx/cxT at 600kg in 18m | ventus2 | Soaring | 0 | June 1st 06 01:57 PM |
FS Sky Walker Microlight | Oscar | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 28th 05 06:51 AM |