Just to show you how serious I am about owning a flying car, I started on that to do list. I picked up the phone and called the regional Transport Canada office. And I am crushed. The airplane is not only not registrable in Canada until the manufacturer applies for it, but it's possible that I won't even be able to fly it in Canada.
I started with a generic question, "Would there be any impediment to registering a new, US-manufactured, FAA-certified aircraft in Canada?" The receptionist said tht was a tough one and transferred me to a superintendent. Before I even mentioned which airplane I had in mind, he said that there were US aircraft that could not be imported to Canada because they had never received certification. Doesn't this seem silly? Shouldn't two technologically advanced, safety-conscious countries like Canada and the US be able to agree on a reciprocity arrangement for the certification of manufactured products?
"So," I said, ready with a fallback plan, "I would have to keep it N-registered and fly it on an FAA licence." That's not much of an obstacle.
"Only for 90 days," he says.
"But," I sputter. "How come I know people who have owned November-registered aircraft for years in Canada?"
"Not as private owners. They must be owned as corporate entities."
"I can be a corporation." (Add incorporate to to-do list).
"But," he continues, "If the manufacturer doesn't apply for Canadian airworthiness certification, the aircraft cannot be operated in Canada."
So now I have to raise $200k and shift a government bureaucracy. I have a busy two years ahead of me.
Nooooo! Really? Can't you plan on registering it as a AULA, which I gather is the equivalent of the FAA's "light sport" category?
"Light sport" is Terrafugia's US plan, so it ought to work for daylight VFR.
Plan B: move to the US?
It would take more than a flying car to make me leave my country.
Live near border - land in US and drive home? Next hurdle - is it legally "roadable" in Canada?
If I lived near a rural border crossing so there wouldn't be a long border wait that might work. Takes the fun out of it if you have to wait an hour at the border.
Thanks for the addition to the list. I'd better check if it can even be registered as a car in Canada.
>>> Shouldn't two technologically advanced, safety-conscious countries like Canada and the US be able to agree on a reciprocity arrangement for the certification of manufactured products?
Doesn't work for baby strollers, either. Even if they're identical (built in China and shipped to the US and Canada), they're supposed to have the proper stickers from each country.
>>> if you have to wait an hour at the border.
Another use for the Nexus card!
American Thanksgivings are cool.
Shouldn't two technologically advanced, safety-conscious countries like Canada and the US be able to agree on a reciprocity arrangement for the certification of manufactured products?
You really don't want to go that way. Instead of just a reciprocity arrangement they'll decide they need a common set of standards which will be the union of the current US and Canadian rules (nobody can give up on any of their rules as that would be admitting that they weren't needed before).
It seems to me that's what's happened in Europe with aviation over the last few years. It's been a right pain for gliding in the UK for very little, if any, real gain.
I was under the impression that there *was* some sort of system of reciprocity in place for aircraft certification between the US and Canada. Perhaps the problem is that the Transition will be certificated in the US Light Sport Category, which doesn't have a sufficiently close analog in Canada for the reciprocity to apply.
There is a bilateral agreement in place for aircraft certification between the US and Canada. Not sure about the details of how it works in reality, but I'll bet that the LSA category is at the root of why the Transition won't receive an airworthiness certificate.
Could it be registered as "experimental?" That's usually the way the warbird community gets around it.
geez. Does no one read my (first) comments? :(
The AULA lists most of the 'light sport' types I am aware of as "advanced ultralight" TC permitted aircraft.
With daytime, VFR, etc limitations.
Sara, I saw yours, and clicked through, but I couldn't find the numbers required to qualify as an advanced ultralight. It requires a certain maximum weight and max wing-loading, and I feared the Terrafugia would be over that.
Ed: I knew where you were going halfway through that comment, and you're right: a new level of bureaucracy for jointly approved products would not be good.
If I were going to get an airplane that could only be registered as an ultralight, I'd get a $20k ultralight. And maybe the amount of *want!* I've discovered in myself over this flying car will get me to look at that.
Or at least to go and visit Lite Flyer and get another ride in Bug.
Well, the US "Light Sport" numbers are 1320lb or 600kg max gross, 120 kt max speed and 45 kt stall. There are airplanes on the AULA list that are at that limit or very near it.
For instance, the Flight Design CT - 1230 lbs, same engine as the Terrafugia.
There's a lot more to certification standards than weight and airspeed limits. My suspicion is that the US LSA and the AULA are sufficiently different in other aspects that the reciprocity is not invoked. FWIW, I did read your comment prior to posting, I'm having difficulty identifying how you think it negates what I posted.
@A^2: I'm having difficulty identifying how you think it negates what I posted.
I'm sorry if you think I was disagreeing with you, I was not.
I agree there's no automatic reciprocity, and that the TF likely won't get a standard TC airplane certification. I was just pointing out that based on similar aircraft, the chances are very good TC will call it a "AULA". But perhaps not. The Terrafugia certainly is different as we say in Minnesota.
Post a Comment