UK planning to evict N-registered aircraft

ORVAL FAIRAIRN wrote:
In the US, all you need is three takeoffs and landings at night within
the past 90 days to be qualified at night -- no IFR, "night rating," etc.

to carry passengers; if you go on your own, you don't even need that.

--Sylvain

Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to find an ANO reference for anything?
I can't make heads or tails out of that silly document.

You're much more technically correct that I intended to be. I was only
trying to point out the original poster was in error about the IMC rating.

Shawn

"Peter" wrote in message
...

"ShawnD2112" wrote

You need an IMC rating to fly in IMC but it doesn't give
you the full priveleges of an IR (Class A use, for instance). It is
merely
to teach you to fly in marginal weather.

Do you have an ANO reference for the last sentence of the above?

The IFR privileges of the UK IMC Rating are essentially those of the
JAA IR, but limited to the UK, no Class A, and 1800m min vis.
Everything else is an opinion; fair enough but it's just that.

One can do perfectly safe fully-IFR flights, in solid IMC, with its
privileges. Just like the full IR, it needs currency and a suitable
aircraft and these cost serious time and money.

Unfortunately it's no good outside the UK, for IFR.

Its possession removes the UK PPL *VFR* requirement to be in sight of
surface and that removal is valid everywhere where they have not added
the "must be in sight of surface" requirement to the ICAO PPL (got
that in writing from the CAA).

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 7:08:08 +0100, ShawnD2112 wrote
(in message ) :

Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to find an ANO reference for anything?
I can't make heads or tails out of that silly document.

You're much more technically correct that I intended to be. I was only
trying to point out the original poster was in error about the IMC rating.

If you are referring to my post at 9:02 yesterday, then please go back and
read it again - I did NOT mention IMC rating or flying in IMC, only IFR !

IFR is not the same as IMC, you can easily fly IFR in VMC.

I wrote :

Not to mention that in the UK a basic PPL with no ratings can fly IFR,
and only needs a Night Qualification to fly at night. I understand
that elsewhere, any night flying (as here) is IFR, and IFR is not
allowed without a full IR.

Hence even night flying requires an IR outside the UK.

In hindsite I suppose I should qualify that statement as "Hence even night
flying requires an IR IN MANY COUNTRIES outside the UK." since I am aware
that the UK is not the only place that allows night flight without an IR.

Good point. I'll read more closely next time.

Shawn

"Simon Hobson" wrote in message
et...
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 7:08:08 +0100, ShawnD2112 wrote
(in message ) :

Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to find an ANO reference for
anything?
I can't make heads or tails out of that silly document.

You're much more technically correct that I intended to be. I was only
trying to point out the original poster was in error about the IMC
rating.

If you are referring to my post at 9:02 yesterday, then please go back and
read it again - I did NOT mention IMC rating or flying in IMC, only IFR !

IFR is not the same as IMC, you can easily fly IFR in VMC.

I wrote :

Not to mention that in the UK a basic PPL with no ratings can fly IFR,
and only needs a Night Qualification to fly at night. I understand
that elsewhere, any night flying (as here) is IFR, and IFR is not
allowed without a full IR.

Hence even night flying requires an IR outside the UK.

In hindsite I suppose I should qualify that statement as "Hence even night
flying requires an IR IN MANY COUNTRIES outside the UK." since I am aware
that the UK is not the only place that allows night flight without an IR.

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 06:08:08 GMT, "ShawnD2112"
wrote:

Are you kidding? Have you ever tried to find an ANO reference for anything?
I can't make heads or tails out of that silly document.

You're much more technically correct that I intended to be. I was only
trying to point out the original poster was in error about the IMC rating.

Shawn

"Peter" wrote in message
.. .

"ShawnD2112" wrote

You need an IMC rating to fly in IMC but it doesn't give
you the full priveleges of an IR (Class A use, for instance). It is
merely
to teach you to fly in marginal weather.

Do you have an ANO reference for the last sentence of the above?

The IFR privileges of the UK IMC Rating are essentially those of the
JAA IR, but limited to the UK, no Class A, and 1800m min vis.
Everything else is an opinion; fair enough but it's just that.

One can do perfectly safe fully-IFR flights, in solid IMC, with its
privileges. Just like the full IR, it needs currency and a suitable
aircraft and these cost serious time and money.

Unfortunately it's no good outside the UK, for IFR.

Its possession removes the UK PPL *VFR* requirement to be in sight of
surface and that removal is valid everywhere where they have not added
the "must be in sight of surface" requirement to the ICAO PPL (got
that in writing from the CAA).



If you look at the ANO under Schedule 8 it gives the PPL privileges of
an IMC and Night Rating:
http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/s...0/20001562.htm

As for Operating Mimima this is in the AIP under Aerodromes General
AD-1. In particular from section AD 1-1-6:
http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/p...omes/30101.PDF

As noted previously you may only wish to "fly in marginal weather" but
you can legally fly "fully-IFR flights, in solid IMC". The CAA may
wish to stress it's only to get you out of trouble but that is only
their recommendation.

I have an IMC rating and usually file IFR on longer flights in the UK,
especially as flights over the Cairngorm Mountains are rarely blue
skies! Sometimes I can get on top at FL70 to FL10. If only I could use
the IMC rating when on holiday..

David

If the situation were reversed would the US tolerate people
registering a/c overseas to dodge the US requirements?? No.

Even though the Brit requirements are ridiculous, they are their
prerogative. They should have put paid to offshoring registration years
ago. (Or else why not just do like shipowners and license in some
country like Liberia?)

"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...
If the situation were reversed would the US tolerate people
registering a/c overseas to dodge the US requirements?? No.

Even though the Brit requirements are ridiculous, they are their
prerogative. They should have put paid to offshoring registration years
ago. (Or else why not just do like shipowners and license in some
country like Liberia?)

But there is a difference to Liberia and Panama as flags of convenience
registers.
In no way can the US be considered a flag of convenience registry in that
sense and as the biggest GA registry in the world it seems absurd that FAA
regs and licences are not "deemed to satisfy".

Pardon, but the US laws don't impose the onerous requirements that your
government is planning on implementing, and even though our FAA can be quite
incompetent and pigheaded when they want to be, they're not nearly as anal
as the folks the UK pilots have to deal with.

"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com...
If the situation were reversed would the US tolerate people
registering a/c overseas to dodge the US requirements?? No.

Even though the Brit requirements are ridiculous, they are their
prerogative. They should have put paid to offshoring registration years
ago. (Or else why not just do like shipowners and license in some
country like Liberia?)

"Juan Jimenez" wrote:
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
roups.com...
If the situation were reversed would the US tolerate people
registering a/c overseas to dodge the US requirements?? No.

Even though the Brit requirements are ridiculous, they are their
prerogative. They should have put paid to offshoring registration years
ago. (Or else why not just do like shipowners and license in some
country like Liberia?)

Pardon, but the US laws don't impose the onerous requirements that your
government is planning on implementing, and even though our FAA can be quite
incompetent and pigheaded when they want to be, they're not nearly as anal
as the folks the UK pilots have to deal with.

Pardon, but the Liberian laws don't impose the onerous requirements
that your government has implemented, and even though the Liberian
government can be quite incompetent and pigheaded when they want to
be, they're not nearly as anal as the folks the US ship owners have to
deal with.


Tim
--
You are being watched. This gives you power.

Pardon, but the US laws don't impose the onerous requirements that your
government is planning on implementing, and even though our FAA can be quite
incompetent and pigheaded when they want to be, they're not nearly as anal
as the folks the UK pilots have to deal with.

Pardon, but the Liberian laws don't impose the onerous requirements
that your government has implemented, and even though the Liberian
government can be quite incompetent and pigheaded when they want to
be, they're not nearly as anal as the folks the US ship owners have to
deal with.

What are these onerous requirements?

I'm in the U.S., but I'm anti-globalist, and a heretic to boot-I
firmly believe GA here brought its own problems on itself and besides,
what is good for the goose is good for the gander.