Fri Jun 18, 2021 9:28 pm
#1853891
Main thread here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=118305
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=118305
russp wrote:Peter Gristwood wrote:...and why not Part 21 types?
Because they are covered by EASA rules and not National rules.
G-BLEW wrote:russp wrote:Peter Gristwood wrote:...and why not Part 21 types?
Because they are covered by EASA rules and not National rules.
My understanding was that EASA had a favourable view on things like the UK's PMD, and at one point may have considered something similar.
There was however considerable pushback from some of the NAAs (I'd bet that Germany was one of them), so last I heard it was not an active project,
Ian
Peter Gristwood wrote:
That was my understanding too. But very odd that Part 21 types, maintained to a disproportionately higher and more costly standard are excluded, though PtF types aren't.
patowalker wrote:
No use posting a link to the AIP, because it requires user registration.
Smaragd wrote:Peter Gristwood wrote:
That was my understanding too. But very odd that Part 21 types, maintained to a disproportionately higher and more costly standard are excluded, though PtF types aren't.
More costly - yes. Disproportionately higher - do you have evidence?
CloudHound wrote:Can you expand a little on what is meant by "Flight Conditions"
Asking for a dumb pal
G-BLEW wrote:My understanding was that EASA had a favourable view on things like the UK's PMD, and at one point may have considered something similar.
There was however considerable pushback from some of the NAAs (I'd bet that Germany was one of them), so last I heard it was not an active project,
Ian
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:G-BLEW wrote:My understanding was that EASA had a favourable view on things like the UK's PMD, and at one point may have considered something similar.
There was however considerable pushback from some of the NAAs (I'd bet that Germany was one of them), so last I heard it was not an active project,
Ian
Hope you did not put too much on that bet as you would have lost.
G-BLEW wrote:Flyin'Dutch' wrote:G-BLEW wrote:My understanding was that EASA had a favourable view on things like the UK's PMD, and at one point may have considered something similar.
There was however considerable pushback from some of the NAAs (I'd bet that Germany was one of them), so last I heard it was not an active project,
Ian
Hope you did not put too much on that bet as you would have lost.
Wonder who it could have been then?
Ian