EASA Part NCO vs Part CAT: Navigation and Flight-Planning in Business Aviation

Q: What are the different types of operations in EASA?

EASA defines four operation types: CAT (Commercial Air Transport), NCC (Non-Commercial Complex), NCO (Non-Commercial Other-than-Complex), and SPO (Specialised Operations). Business jet operators typically fall under CAT for charter services and under NCO or NCC for private, non-remunerated flights.

Q: What is the difference between an EASA and a non-EASA aircraft?

An EASA aircraft is type-certified under the EASA framework, meeting EU design and operational standards. Non-EASA aircraft, such as Annex I types, are overseen by national authorities. This affects airworthiness, operational approvals, and airspace privileges across EASA member states.

Q: How do flight planning responsibilities differ between Part-CAT and Part-NCO operators?

Part-CAT operators must follow detailed flight-planning procedures, including an Operations Manual and dispatch oversight. In Part-NCO, the pilot-in-command is responsible for planning, with no dispatch release required, but must still meet regulatory criteria for fuel, navigation, and weather.

Q: How does EASA regulate alternate aerodrome selection for business aviation?

Under Part-CAT, at least one alternate is required for IFR flights unless strict criteria are met. Part-NCO allows more discretion—no alternate is needed if VMC conditions are forecast ±1 hour of arrival. These rules impact fuel planning and route selection.

18 November 2025

| By Just Aviation Team

Table of Contents

Understanding the operational differences between EASA Part NCO (Non-Commercial Operations) and Part CAT (Commercial Air Transport) is essential for safe and compliant flight planning. While both share core navigation and airspace requirements, their planning, importance of aircraft documentation, and operational oversight differ significantly.

For instance, Part CAT mandates more stringent fuel planning, including contingency fuel and alternate airport considerations, to ensure operational safety and compliance. This article explores how each regulation affects route planning, fuel calculation, equipment requirements, and crew responsibilities; helping operators ensure their flights, whether private or commercial, remain efficient, compliant, and aligned with EASA standards across European airspace.

Understanding Part NCO & Part CAT in Business Jet Flight Planning

Part-NCO covers non-commercial flights of non-complex aircraft (basically private/business aviation without remuneration), while Part-CAT applies to commercial air transport operations (charter/air taxi AOC flights). Business jets may operate under either, depending on whether flights are private or revenue-generating. Key differences arise in how each set of rules treats flight planning, alternates, fuel and navigation requirements. In Part-CAT, operators (AOC holders) must document detailed procedures and carry formal operational flight plans; in Part-NCO, the pilot-in-command (PIC) has flexibility to plan flights with only minimal regulatory prescriptions.

Flight Planning Procedures

Flight planning under EASA regulations varies notably between Part-NCO and Part-CAT, reflecting their distinct operational structures:

Operational Flight Plan (OFP)

Under Part-CAT, an OFP is mandatory for every flight. The operator’s manual must include formal flight-planning procedures. The CAT pilot must ensure all performance, weight, equipment and weather factors are covered, and the OFP is on-board. By contrast, Part-NCO has no fixed OFP requirement – the PIC simply “ascertains by every reasonable means” that facilities, communications, charts and weather are adequate. IFR flights under Part-NCO should still file an ATS flight plan and carry it, but simple local VFR flights of non-complex aeroplanes can often proceed without any filed plan.

Documentation

Part-NCO requires the PIC to carry basic documentation: airworthiness certificates, crew licences, a journey log, the filed flight plan (if any), and current charts/MET data. Part-CAT operators similarly require aircraft documents and a copy of the OFP on board (often via standard checklists), plus any company load sheets, NOTAM briefings, etc.

Operator vs PIC

A Part-CAT operator (AOC holder) is formally responsible for ensuring compliance with all Part-CAT rules. This includes having an Operations Manual that spells out flight planning, fuel policy and alternate criteria. Under Part-NCO there is no AOC, so the individual owner/operator and PIC assume responsibility. In practice, the Part-NCO PIC must exercise judgment using the general rules (e.g. fuel requirements, alternate minima) set out in the regulations.

For example, EASA AMC advises the NCO pilot to verify RNAV routes in the database, check NOTAMs, and ensure RAIM availability for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) flights – tasks that in Part-CAT would be institutionalized in company dispatch or flight release procedures.

Route & Navigation Planning

Navigation planning under EASA rules follows the same safety principles, but oversight differs. Part-CAT enforces strict operator procedures, while Part-NCO relies on pilot judgment and adherence to general navigation standards:

Equipment Requirements

Both regimes require sufficient navigation and communication equipment to fly the planned route and alternates. In Part-CAT, “an aeroplane shall have sufficient navigation equipment such that, in the event of failure of one item, the remaining equipment allows safe navigation along the flight plan to an alternate or a visual landing”. Part-NCO has a similar concept: any NCO flight over IFR routes must be “equipped with any navigation equipment necessary to enable [flight] in accordance with the ATS flight plan”. In short, a Part-NCO jet must still carry IFR nav gear (VOR/DME/INS/GPS as needed) just like a CAT jet.

Performance-Based Navigation (PBN)

Both Part-NCO and Part-CAT flights must follow and imply the operational impact of Performance-Based Navigation (PBN) (RNAV/RNP) procedures. EASA’s AMC to Part-NCO instructs the PIC to ensure that RNAV- and RNP-based routes/approaches (e.g. RNAV1, RNP APCH) are correctly loaded in the database and not prohibited by NOTAM. Likewise, Part-CAT AMC mandates the flight crew verify RNAV routes and check navigation databases and RAIM availability.

Business jets flying IFR anywhere in Europe or the U.S. will comply with the same ICAO PBN and airspace rules regardless of CAT vs NCO status. The difference is administrative: under CAT, compliance is enforced through the Ops Manual and dispatch process, whereas under NCO it is left to pilot judgment (with standard AMC guidance).

Database & RAIM (Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring)

Both categories emphasize database currency and RAIM checks for GNSS navigation. For example, the pilot/crew must ensure the nav database AIRAC cycle is current and verify RAIM for GPS-based legs. In Part-CAT, operators typically have formal procedures for database updates; in Part-NCO, the PIC “should check” the database validity and plan around any predicted GNSS outages.

Alternate Aerodromes & Minima

Part-CAT Alternate Rules

For each IFR flight, a Part-CAT operator must designate at least one alternate aerodrome in the OFP. An alternate can be omitted only if both: (1) the flight (or remaining flight) is ≤ 6 hours and (2) two separate runways are available and usable at the destination and forecast ceilings are ≥ 2,000 ft (above runway threshold) with vis ≥ 5 km for ±1 hour around ETA.

If these conditions are not met, an alternative is required. Furthermore, if destination weather is forecast below planning minima, two alternates must be filed. These criteria are codified in CAT.OP.MPA.180(b–d) and reflected in the Ops Manual.

Part-NCO Alternate Rules

Part-NCO uses more flexible, pilot-centric criteria. The PIC “shall specify” at least one alternate for IFR flights unless forecast weather at destination allows VMC (Visual Meteorological Conditions) – level arrival. In practice, no alternate is needed if, for the hour before to the hour after the estimated arrival, the ceiling is at or above 300 m (1,000 ft) over the instrument approach minima and the visibility is at least 4–5 km (depending on approach category).

If the destination is isolated (no close alternates) and has an instrument approach, the alternate can be waived only if forecast clouds ≥ 1,200 ft above the approach minima and visibility ≥ 1,500 m above minima. Otherwise the PIC plans an alternate.

The table below highlights these differences:

Aspect	Part-NCO (Non-Commercial)	Part-CAT (Commercial)
Flight plan	IFR – pilot files ATS flight plan as needed; VFR local flights need not file	Mandatory operational flight plan for every flight (even complex VFR flights)
Alternate required	One alternate unless VMC ≥300m/4–5km for ±1h around ETA (or isolated dest with ≥1200 ft clouds/1.5km vis)	One alternate unless flight ≤6h and two runways with forecast ≥2,000 ft/5 km; two alternates if destination weather below minima
Fuel reserve (turbojet)	Final reserve 45 min at normal cruise (day/night IFR); no fixed contingency percent, but pilot “shall take account of” delays and failures	Final reserve 30 min at holding speed for turbine aeroplanes; contingency fuel (≥5% or 20 min) plus alternate fuel as per operator policy

Fuel Planning

Part-NCO: Fuel rules in Part-NCO are basic. For IFR aeroplane flights, the regulation requires fuel for the flight to the destination plus an alternate (if any) plus 45 minutes at cruise speed.) In computing fuel, the PIC must consider forecast weather, ATC delays and the “worst-case” events (engine failure, depressurization). There is no mandatory “5% contingency” in the text, only the fixed 45-min rule. In practice, a Part-NCO operator (or owner) typically instructs PICs to carry some contingency, but it isn’t spelled out in regulation.

Part-CAT: Fuel planning is more detailed. CAT requires operators to establish a fuel policy covering taxi fuel, trip fuel, contingency fuel, alternate fuel and final reserve. In particular, for turbine-engine aeroplanes the final reserve is 30 minutes holding fuel (45 minutes for reciprocating engines). Contingency fuel is usually defined as at least 5% of trip or 20 minutes enroute, whichever is greater. Alternate fuel must cover flying from destination to alternate. Thus, a CAT flight plan will typically have: taxi + trip + 5% contingency + alternate + 30′ final (for jets). By contrast, a private Part-NCO jet might legally fly with only dest + alt + 45′ fuel.

Operational Insights

IFR Business Jet (Non-Commercial vs. Charter)

Gulfstream G500 plans an IFR flight Munich → Zurich. Under Part-NCO (private flight), the PIC files an IFR flight plan and checks Zurich weather. If Zurich forecasts 3,000 ft clouds and 10 km visibility for ±1h around arrival, the PIC can omit an alternative and load fuel for destination + 45 min cruise.

Under Part-CAT (charter flight), the operator must check CAT criteria: Munich–Zurich is <6h and Zurich has parallel runways, but the weather (3,000 ft/10 km) just meets the 2,000 ft/5 km rule, so an alternate may not be needed. Fuel would be calculated as taxi + trip + 5% contingency + 30′ final. Both flights would use RNAV; the CAT crew would ensure the RNAV route is in the database and RAIM is OK, while the NCO pilot would do the same by personal checklist.

VFR Local Flight

A light business turboprop departs and returns to the same field in clear weather. As Part-NCO (private), the pilot may legally not file any flight plan at all (simple VFR within the local area). If the same flight were Part-CAT (rare for a charter), a flight plan would be required, because the aeroplane is complex/turbojet: CAT provides no exemption for complex aircraft on local VFR legs.

Long Flight with Alternate

A mid-size bizjet is chartered from Rome to Oslo. Part-CAT rules force an alternate since flight >6h: the operator will pick e.g. Copenhagen as alternate and plan fuel accordingly (dest→Copenhagen + contingency + 30′). As Part-NCO (if it were a non-commercial trip), the PIC would independently determine an alternate unless Oslo’s weather was very good (≥1,000 ft/4km). In either case, the crew must have all appropriate charts and NOTAMs for Scandinavia.

Understanding the differences between EASA Part-NCO and Part-CAT is vital for business aviation operators, as they directly influence maximizing business jet flight planning and schedule management, fuel policy, and compliance procedures. These frameworks define how flights are prepared, monitored, and documented to meet EASA standards. Just Aviation ensures seamless coordination and regulatory accuracy, helping operators maintain safe, efficient, and fully compliant operations across all mission profiles.

FAQs about EASA Part NCO vs Part CAT

1. What does NCO mean in aviation?

NCO stands for Non-Commercial Operations. Under EASA regulations, it covers private or corporate flights conducted without remuneration using non-complex aircraft. These operations follow simplified operational and flight-planning rules under Part-NCO (Annex VII of EU 965/2012), giving flexibility to operators and pilots while maintaining essential safety standards for fuel, weather, and navigation compliance.

2. What are the different types of operations in EASA?

EASA defines four main operation types: CAT (Commercial Air Transport), NCC (Non-Commercial Complex), NCO (Non-Commercial Other-than-Complex), and SPO (Specialised Operations). Each applies to specific aircraft and activity categories. Business jet operators typically fall under CAT when performing charter services and under NCO or NCC when operating privately without passenger remuneration.

3. What is the difference between an EASA and a non-EASA aircraft?

An EASA aircraft is type-certified and overseen under the EASA regulatory framework, meaning it meets EU design, maintenance, and operational standards. Non-EASA aircraft (e.g., Annex I aircraft) fall under national authority oversight. For operators, this distinction affects continuing airworthiness, operational approval requirements, and what airspace or operational privileges can be used across EASA member states.

4. How do flight planning responsibilities differ between Part-CAT and Part-NCO operators?

Under Part-CAT, operators must maintain detailed flight-planning procedures, an Operations Manual, and approved fuel and alternate policies; usually managed by a dispatch department. In Part-NCO, the pilot-in-command assumes full responsibility for flight planning, with no dispatch release requirement, though they must still comply with fuel, navigation, and weather criteria specified in the regulation.

5. How does EASA regulate alternate aerodrome selection for business aviation?

EASA requires Part-CAT operators to plan at least one alternate for every IFR flight unless strict weather and runway criteria are met. Part-NCO allows more discretion; no alternative is required if VMC conditions (≥300 m/4–5 km) are forecast ±1 hour of arrival. These differences influence fuel load, route selection, and pre-departure planning processes.

Sources

Post Views: 10