June 2019: new microlight regulations

Season 20191 June 20193 min read

This issue is mainly devoted to the publication of the new microlight regulations. The guiding principles behind them are fidelity to the declaratory system, simplicity, pragmatism and the unity of the microlight movement.

It is the result of a long collective effort, undertaken mainly from March 2016, when we were re-elected to the Board of Directors, before presenting the "ULM generation" team of the current term of office in March 2017.

Beyond the controversies, the intense lobbying and the "experts" of every kind, at national and European level, we had to build a framework that began by going back to technical fundamentals. We would like to thank in particular Philippe Tisserant (former editor-in-chief of Vol Moteur), whose experience as a pilot and engineering background are invaluable in the microlight world. We very quickly worked with a very talented young DGAC engineer, Antoine Toulemont, who helped link the technical and legal aspects of the regulatory framework.

It was in July 2018, at the instigation of the experts of the European Agency (EASA), that the EU member states, through the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of the European Union, drew up and adopted the Annex 1 reference framework, ultimately leaving each member country responsible for defining its own microlight regulations in view of the disparities in regulations and practices, ranging from certification to deregulation, by proposing to exempt (Opt-Out) from the Agency's regulation aircraft with a maximum take-off mass between 450 and 600 kg. The DGAC's support in the European negotiations was decisive, and we must again acknowledge the constant support of Director General Patrick Gandil and Patrick Cipriani for our ultralight aviation.

The whole of 2018 was spent working on the details of the order which, for technical reasons of legal simplicity, is in fact an amendment to the 1998 order and will later give rise to a new order. The technical fundamentals will be the same, but some peripheral regulatory aspects deserve to be amended. Doing so now would have delayed publication of the new regulations, which are awaited by manufacturers, importers and pilots in France and in Europe. This strictly regulatory work was done with the DGAC and in particular the teams of Nathalie Domblides and Benoit Pinon. All aspects of a cross-cutting subject had to be handled collegially.

Long meetings, all rich and instructive, led to the decisions we have widely communicated since Blois 2018, followed by adjustments during the final drafting of the order.

This is also the role of the MALGH (Mission aviation légère générale et hélicoptère), which is in constant contact with the Federation and has helped maintain the link in a certified world that has little understanding of the specific features and dynamism of our activity.

What should we conclude from this long collective effort?

First of all, we are lucky to have national regulations! They allow us to build a lasting and coherent model on shared experience. These national regulations do not prevent us from flying in Europe! Quite the opposite! But wanting to harmonise at 28 would mean drowning our current regulations by falling within the scope of the Agency (EASA). Regulation is like the ship of Theseus: a project that is never really finished, made of compromises and precarious balances.

But this regulatory work makes no sense unless it is linked to the other essential aspects, which are flight safety and training. It is this triptych that balances federal policy in conjunction with the DGAC and the Ministry of Sport. At this point in the year, we have never had so many members and never so few fatal accidents. A policy cannot be judged over a few months, but we have now been working for two years to encourage this trend.