@Piotr, it is only possible for EASA member states to derogate from an implementing rule by filing a derogation to EASA and the European Commission. All derogations are published on the EASA website and there is no derogation for IFR equipment in Germany (also, such a derogation would most probably not be granted IMO).
No, gold-plating is not allowed / effective unless the European regulation specifically says so.
I certainly agree that gold plating should not be allowed. But it is in fact a common practice, at least in France.
it is only possible for EASA member states to derogate from an implementing rule by filing a derogation to EASA and the European Commission.
No, that is not correct. A member state cannot alleviate, nor add implementing rules without an EASA approved derogation. They can also not change the content of AMC, except they have filed an AltMoC to EASA and got it approved.
Here is some proof from the EASA flyer «Flying in the EU: OPS is in the air»:
«No additional requirements can be added, at national level, on top of the European rules.»
Follow this link to find all new EASA GA flyers etc., they updated them for the Aero 2017: https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and-events/news/easa-aero-ga-strategy-taking-big-step-forward-background-information
The same sentence can be found in the «Que SERA, SERA» EASA flyer.
Also, I would be extremely surprized if I was wrong, as I actually work with this stuff.
There is plenty evidence of the superiority of the European legislation to the national, and that is generally recognized with the national authorities in my experience.
But that does not mean that this is all straightforward. First, it is a challenge for an understaffed small authority to even notice and read all the new EU regs as they pop up or are amended. Second, national authorities has the sometimes non-trivial obligation to harmonize national legislation with EU. The Danish CAA has announced several times to me and AOPA that we can expect a back-log of 3-4 years with mismatch between the two, and that citizens until then with have to work out for ourselves if there is an EU regulation overruling whatever regulation! Third, it may not be obvious if a particular EU-reg is actually governing exactly the same matter as a particular national law. That is what the dispute is about in the case of Denmark not accepting permanently based foreign-reg aircraft – but there are many examples.
(As if this was not enough, there is also Greenland and the Faero Islands, which are parts of the Kingdom of Denmark, and under Danish legislation, but they are outside of the EU – all very entertaining for the lawyers, slightly more tedious for all the rest of us southern Danes having to sort tons of legislation that cannot be deleted because they still apply in the North Atlantic).
Theory and reality – two worlds collide….
huv wrote:
First, it is a challenge for an understaffed small authority to even notice and read all the new EU regs as they pop up or are amended.
That is certainly true. I had to tell the Norwegian authority about the FAA IR conversion outside if ATO and with no training required. They were very good about it though and soon came back to me to confirm.
huv wrote:
Second, national authorities has the sometimes non-trivial obligation to harmonize national legislation with EU
Why is that exactly? Why to EU member states have national legislation about the same things as EU legislation? Here in Norway we have to harmonize things, simply because we are not a EU member state. It makes no sense. If the EU parliament (and EASA), where Denmark is a part of, decide that from this particular date, part NCO and SERA are valid. How can Denmark then say, it is valid, but … ???
WhiskeyPapa wrote:
Img 3057
WhiskeyPapa
Wr. Neustadt/Ost LOAN
There definitely was one for the Rallye 235 The only thing that I can tell you about it was that the owner had to go the France to find an engineer licensed to fit it.
@Joe_90
Any details you have would be of interest!
EuroFlyer wrote:
Regulations aside. Who would seriously argue against an autopilot when flying single pilot IFR.
None, but if you’re on a trip and the autopilot fails its self test, you might want to fly back to base for maintenance.
