Source: https://www.pprune.org/private-flying/629708-caa-form-srg2141.html
Timestamp: 2020-02-29 13:57:28
Document Index: 25122866

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art 139', 'art 4', 'art 2', 'art 4', 'art 2', 'art 4', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'Art 2', 'Art 3', 'art 52']

CAA Form SRG2141 - PPRuNe Forums
13th Feb 2020, 15:51
I live in Guernsey and fly a N Reg Cirrus Aircraft with a Canadian Transport license / piggy back FAA license . Do I need to complete the CAA Form SRG2141 if I only enter UK airspace 1-2 times a year as most of my travel is to France/ Spain ?
Many thanks. Rregards, Woody
Find More Posts by Robert Milroy
I can't see that the UK has any interest in a flight/s in an 'N' reg aircraft, properly maintained, not based in the UK and flown by a valid pilot approved by the FAA. The FAA are the authority directly responsible in your case. You may require to fly to and from Guernsey and the UK daily throughout the year, for pleasure or business, and why not. There can be no case to restrict you to 28 days a year for private flights.
See: Information Notice Number: IN–2017/029 for a full explanation. You will see the rule pertains to flying UK/EASA aircraft.
VAT in Europe is a major issue for N reg but I'm sure you have already dealt with that.
Last edited by Fl1ingfrog; 13th Feb 2020 at 18:38.
13th Feb 2020, 18:17
The correct answer is yes you do.
14th Feb 2020, 09:10
What S-Works said...........
14th Feb 2020, 12:12
The difficulty i'm having with this is that the pilot and the aircraft are based wholly outside of the EU. He is not wishing to base the aircraft within an EU country but only to visit or transit. Is it the case that any aircraft and pilot that are based and licenced outside of the EU, in whatever country that may be, must apply for and obtain a 28 day validation before they may enter EU airspace. Are they then restricted to entering on no more than 28 days in the following 12 months?
Is the UK unique in all this? Is the UK approval/acceptance then also valid throughout the whole EU and how can this be shown? If not, the pilot states that he also flies to France and Spain, is the process required to be repeated for each EU country he wishes to visit/transit?
The above makes no sense and also flies in the face of ICAO. If things make no sense they are most likely not true.
Last edited by Fl1ingfrog; 14th Feb 2020 at 16:05.
14th Feb 2020, 16:17
Is it the case that any aircraft and pilot that are based and licenced outside of the EU, in whatever country that may be, must apply for and obtain a 28 day validation before they may enter EU airspace[?]
No. To determine this review para 1 of article 3 in the current consolidated version of the Aircrew Regulation (link):
Without prejudice to Article 8 of this Regulation, pilots of aircraft referred
to in Article 4(1)(b) and (c) and Article 4(5) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008
shall comply with the technical requirements and administrative procedures laid
down in Annex I and Annex IV to this Regulation.
Annexes I and IV are Part-FCL and Part-MED. Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 was the first Basic EASA Regulation. It was repealed by the current Basic EASA Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 (link), on 11 Sep 2018. Art 139 paras 1 and 4 of that regulation are:
1. Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 is repealed with effect from 11 September 2018.
4. References to the repealed Regulations referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3
shall be construed as references to this Regulation and, where appropriate, read
in accordance with the correlation table in Annex X.
The given mapping is:
art 4(1)(b) ---> art 2(1)(b)(i),
art 4(1)(c) ---> art 2(1)(b)(ii),
art 4(5) ---> art 2(3)(d).
The relevant points in art 2 para 1 are:
This [Basic EASA] Regulation shall apply to:
(b) the [...] operation of aircraft [...] where the aircraft is or will be:
(i) registered in a Member State, unless and to the extent that the Member State
has transferred its responsibilities pursuant to the Chicago Convention to a
third country and the aircraft is operated by a third country aircraft operator;
(ii) registered in a third country and operated by an aircraft operator
established, residing or with a principal place of business in the territory to
which the Treaties apply;
Art 2(3)(d) refers to aircraft listed in Annex I.
Therefore Art 3(1) of the Aircrew Regulation does not require either a Part-FCL licence or a Part-MED certificate to be held by any pilot involved in the operation of a third-country aircraft whose operator resides or is established in a third country.
See also relevant post here: Acquiring PPL in Canada or USA
14th Feb 2020, 18:48
Thank you selfin for your considerable amount of work, very much appreciated.
So Mr Milroy you may rest quietly in your bed at night and on rising enjoy the freedom to fly as you currently choose and to do so without any further ado and interference.
14th Feb 2020, 19:16
You need to understand the relationship between the channel islands and the UK. The question was about entering UK airspace not the EU and the answer still is yes.
Once again; What S-Works said............
15th Feb 2020, 18:00
As always...ask 3 pilots the same question and you get 4 different answers.
Robert, the correct answer is write to the CAA, and don’t phone, get it in writing.
16th Feb 2020, 10:50
The CAA are not likely to put anything in writing even if they bother to respond. The Information comes in an IN which is merely Guidance Information that is ill conceived and is badly written. The regulation is what matters and as Selfin says it does not apply in this case.
16th Feb 2020, 15:16
The UK requires the form to be completed. The CAA have and will put it in writing despite Whopity's view them and have already done so. I have signed more of those forms than I can count now for CI based people based on the UK CAA response to them......
16th Feb 2020, 19:50
The scope of the retained EU legislation version of the Basic EASA Regulation was amended on exit day (31 Jan 2020 at 2300z) by article 84 of the Aviation Safety (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (link). That regulation, and a No. 2 follow up, were made under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 ("EUWA"). The relevant text in article 2 of the retained Basic EASA Regulation, as it applies in UK, is:
(b) the ... operation of aircraft ... where the aircraft is or will be:
(i) registered in the United Kingdom, unless and to the extent that the United
Kingdom has transferred its responsibilities pursuant to the Chicago Convention
to a third country and the aircraft is operated by a third country aircraft
established, residing or with a principal place of business in the United
For the avoidance of doubt the Interpretation Act 1978, sch 1, defines United Kingdom as meaning "Great Britain and Northern Ireland." The Crown Dependencies—the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man—together with the United Kingdom form the British Islands but the CDs are not part of the United Kingdom and UK law does not automatically apply in the CDs. Neither did EU legislation outside the scope of Protocol 3 to the UK's 1972 Treaty of Accession which placed the CDs in the EU customs union. Before exit day—interpreted in the Interpretation Act 1978, sch 1, as 31st January 2020 at 11:00 p.m.—article 2 of the Basic EASA Regulation referred to "the territories to which the Treaties apply." That territory is, according to art 52 para 2 of the Treaty on European Union, specified in article 355 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, specifically para 5:
(c) the Treaties shall apply to the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man only to
the extent necessary to ensure the implementation of the arrangements for those
islands set out in the Treaty concerning the accession of new Member States to
the European Economic Community and to the European Atomic Energy Community
signed on 22 January 1972.
The arrangements referred to are in Protocol 3. Some EU legislation has been voluntarily applied in the CDs and some of which may continue in spite of Brexit, eg EU aviation security standards, the Standardised European Rules of the Air, etc. You can read more in the article The Channel Islands and the European Union authored by the Channel Islands Brussels Office (pdf link). For an article on the history of Protocol 3 see Johnson, P. The Genesis of Protocol 3: The Channel Islands and the EEC. Jersey & Guernsey Law Review. Oct 2013 (link). See also the Lords EU Committee paper Brexit: the Crown Dependencies. 19th Report of Session 2016–17. Published 23 March 2017. HL Paper 136 (link). Specifically see chapter 2 The Crown Dependencies, the UK and the EU. There is also a helpful Ministry of Justice document dated Feb 2020: Fact sheet on the UK’s relationship with the Crown Dependencies (pdf link)—here is section 5:
Under the Withdrawal Agreement setting out the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU on
31 January 2020, the Islands’ relationship with the EU as provided for under Protocol 3 to the
Treaty of Accession 1972 will continue until the end of the Transition Period on 31 December
Under Protocol 3, the Islands are part of the customs territory of the EU. Therefore, EU
customs matters, the common customs tariff, levies, quantitative restrictions and any measures
having equivalent effect apply. There is free movement of agricultural goods and derived
products between the Islands and the EU. Also included are measures relating to the trade in
agricultural goods and derived products with third countries.
However, other EU Rules do not apply to the Crown Dependencies. Implementation of EU
provisions on the free movement of persons, services and capital is therefore not required, and
the Islands are not eligible for assistance from the structural funds or under the support
measures for agricultural markets. [...]
I hope that settles the fact that personnel acting as members of the flight crew of a third-country aircraft, whose operator resides in the CDs, are not required by the retained Basic EASA Regulation or the retained Aircrew Regulation to hold a licence granted converted or validated under the latter regulation. However, such a requirement may still be made in the UK Air Navigation Order 2016. The relevant article in the Order, article 148, has been amended by sch 1 to the Aviation Safety (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (link). The amended text has not yet been included in CAP 393 so I will present it here.
Requirement for appropriate licence to act as member of flight crew of aircraft
registered elsewhere than in the United Kingdom
148.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2), this article applies to any aircraft
registered in a country other than the United Kingdom.
(3) A person must not act as a member of the flight crew which must by or under
this Order be carried in an aircraft to which this article applies unless—
(a) in the case of an aircraft flying for the purpose of commercial air
transport, public transport or commercial operation, that person is the holder
of an appropriate licence granted or rendered valid under the law of the country
in which the aircraft is registered or the State of the operator; or
(b) in the case of an aircraft on a non-commercial flight and where the operator
of the aircraft is neither resident nor established in the United Kingdom, that
person is the holder of an appropriate licence granted or rendered valid under
the law of the country in which the aircraft is registered or under this Order
and the CAA does not give a direction to the contrary; or
(c) in the case of an aircraft on a non-commercial flight, where the operator of
the aircraft is resident or established in the United Kingdom, that person is
the holder of the appropriate licence granted or rendered valid under the
Aircrew Regulation.
16th Feb 2020, 20:10
S-Works, can you share with us the CAA writings and responses?
After 25 - 30 years plus of examining and working as a CFI I too have lost count of the forms that the CAA have told me that I must complete or countersign but later failed, even after a number of years, to tell me or anyone that they were wrong and that they no longer required the particular form or other document/evidence etc. They seemed content to continue to receive the unnecessary forms and/or evidence ad infinitum. I can only guess that it was easier and cheaper to just screw the stuff up and bin it rather than go through the laborious and complicated process of informing everyone of the change. Largely it should be said they will no doubt be in denial that they ever made the requirement in the first place. They will see it as the fault of the applicant and with, on their part, nothing to change.
Last edited by Fl1ingfrog; 18th Feb 2020 at 22:17.