MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Welcome In Madrid

• I would like first to express my gratitude to Yago, on behalf of all of us, for the great job he did to invite us to Madrid in the best possible conditions.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Welcome In Madrid

• I would also like to personnaly thanks all of you for your participation in these two days of work, which one more time will be useful to all our pilots.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Welcome In Madrid

All of them, in our respective countries, want that we defend their interests, particularly against the growing technocracy, no matter it is european or national, and that we make proposals or that we invent solutions for a regulation better adapted to our Microlight activities.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Significant achievements

• Most of initial goals achieved• Prag 1 resolution achieved

• Actually, and particularly as far as Microlights are concerned, my opinion is that we achieved most of the initial goals we decided when EMF was created and during the General Assembly in Prag :

• « That the European Microlight Federation is committed to defending the regulatory status quo for microlights outside EASA of all its members, with the aim of prenenting the erosion of any and alltheir existing rights and privileges ».

  • We know now that we were right.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Annex II

• Microlights remain in Annex II• 472,5 kg with BRS is in Annex II• In fact, by staying outside of EASA,

we are escaping the « Part 21 for initial airworthiness, all Part M for continuing airworthiness » and we obtained a Maximum Take Off Mass of 472.5 kg with a balistic recovery parachute.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Annex II

• Microlights remain in Annex II• 472,5 kg with BRS is in Annex IIIn fact, what we are avoiding is being part

of a relatively complex EASA system which initialy created lots of hopes but nowadays proves to be quite desapointing compared with what we could have hoped as a matter of simplification and adaptation to our light aviation.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Annex II

• Microlights remain in Annex II• 472,5 kg with BRS is in Annex II

• We avoided having been « phagocited » and loosing our identity and also what is in most of our countries quite well adapted Microlight regulations.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Annex II

• Microlights remain in Annex II• 472,5 kg with BRS is in Annex II• We achieved this result due to a lot

of work, determination, presence and actions towards EAS, EASA, the Council of Europe, the European Commission, the European Parliament and our national Civil Aviation Authorities.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

For The FUTURE

• a better position in case EU wants ML in EASA• In case of the EASA or the European

Commision would like, in a few years from now, to include Microlight into EASA, it will be easier to express our ideas and defend our interests, rather than being melted in all the measures taken to regulate the activity ofaircraft, which may be light, but are for sure heavier than our Microlights.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Prag 2 resolution

• Our views were not taken into account by MDM.032.• Jan will make a full report about MDM.032.

• About the second « Prag Resolution »,• « that the European Microlight Federation

forms a Project Group, to include members from a wide range of views, to prepare a proposal for EASA relating to the aviation activities of its members that might be better suited to a new category »,

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

Prag 2 resolution

• Our views were not taken into account by MDM.032.• Jan will make a full report about MDM.032.

• About the second « Prag Resolution »,

• We have to admit that our views were not so succesfull in the MDM.032, despite every proposals, repeted actions and the efforts of our representants, especially Jan, but he will tell you more about that during this week-end.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

OPOSITIONS

• Not only EASA is responsible for lack of modernism.

• Some members of MDM.032 are too conservative.

• But I really think that EASA is not solely responsible for my being disapointed of what seems to be a huge and complicated machinery.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

OPOSITIONS

• Not only EASA is responsible for lack of modernism.

• Some members of MDM.032 are too conservative.

• I had a very, very close look to all the work carried out by this working group and all the sub-commitees.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

OPOSITIONS

• Not only EASA is responsible for lack of modernism.

• Some members of MDM.032 are too conservative.

• Some members of MDM.032, representing other aeronautical activities were on purpose very conservative and refused to consider the regulation from a new point of view and start from a blank sheet, as initialy intended.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

ELA / LAPL

• ELA and LAPL help protecting Microlight.

• Annex II is secured for a few years.

• As far as ELA1, ELA 2 and LAPL are concerned, I am really pleased about the fact that we contributed to protect, at least for the few years to come, the Microlights within the Annex 2.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

PRIORITIES

• ML recognition at national level.• Coordinate our action to spread our view at European level.

• As I previously said, our priorities now should first be to drive our Civilian Aviation Authorities, through a coordinated and common effort, into a recognition of Microlights and microlights pilot licenses on the basis of Annex II, and then to coordinate our actions and lobbying with the other organizations, both national or european (including EAS) to spread our point of view and made them accepted, particularly to Eurocontrol, EASA and the european institutions (Council, Commission and Parliament).

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

PRIORITIES

• ML recognition at national level.• Coordinate our action to spread our view at

European level.

• In one word, we have to imagine and suggest solutions to all our common problems, like for instance the insurance problem.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

PRIORITIES

• ML recognition at national level.• Coordinate our action to spread our view at

European level.

• We will also have to be prepared and available if a european Microlight regulation under EASA comes on the table in a few years.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

CANDIDATE

• I request your official support to become a « full member » at « EAS Board »

• We must have a vote !

• In order to :– be informed– Press on the decisions

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

OPTIMISM

• 450kg ML is developping.• Optimism is now realistic

• I will conclude by stating my optimism for the future in Europe of the Microlights of 450kg Maximum Take Off Weight. The best evidence is the good condition of the Microlight movement in most of our countries, and its interesting rate of yearly grow, still higher than 10% in France for 2007.

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

OPTIMISM

• 450kg ML is developping.

• Optimism is now realistic

After I carefully read the last bulletin of the DULV, I noted that our friend Jo in his editorial is satisfied of the increase of the number of their members .

MADRID, 8/9 March ‘08 I 450 / 472,5 kg

CONCLUSION

• EMF can look to the future with hope• EMF is widely recognized• All that is for EMF a great hope and the

evidence that its actions can lead to success, for the interest of the pilots we are representing. When I look to the great difficulties for the traditional light aviation to make its newly founded european association living, I can only be, along with you, satisfied of the way the EMF is running, well known and recognized by european assocications and institutions.