My club is looking for a 4 person IFR plane, which is likely not going to be a ELA1, but will be ELA2. The club requires that all club planes be EASA-reg and under a CAMO contract. Below is a “wish list” of sorts for what I, personally, would want to see in a CAMO. I don’t want to discuss the merits of FAA vs EASA in general, just what is possible within the EASA framework, and how. Which of these are “doable”, which are not? Which would you consider reasonable to expect, which not? What else would you look for in a CAMO?
So, my “ideal CAMO”:
- is focused on managing the paperwork and not connected to maintenance - is focused on making things possible - is focused on cost-effective solutions, not what is simplest for them - is willing to work with a properly licensed Part66 person, or a Part M.F org, instead a full Part-145 shop - is willing to allow on-condition maintenance, especially on big ticket items like engine and prop - is willing to accept a plane on a different EASA regSo, I guess I am asking, in a way, if it is possible to find a CAMO that would resemble N-reg Part91 as much as EASA will allow.
Finally, do you have a CAMO you would recommend? Do you have a CAMO horror story to share? Help us, or just me via PM, learn from your mistake!
Fiinding a good CAMO can be a nightmare (said as a Compliance Manager for a CAMO. 
) That said, most don’t want to generate nugatory paperwork as they are almost all linked to ‘real’ spanner work. Thoughts:
Endeavour to have a different CAMO to your Part F – this means there is the opportunity for proper oversight. Don’t dismiss 145s, some are comparable to Part F price-wise. That said, 145s normally like to do the full package.
Remembering the bit above, don’t give your CAMO a blank cheque to oversee the Part F.
Audit your CAMO – sounds daft, but ultimately you are responsible for airworthiness. Meet with the CAMO every 6 months and discuss the Exposition (the bit which defines how your aircraft is to managed in order to retain airworthiness) and the status of your aircraft. A good CAMO will be looking about 3-5 years ahead. Check that they are doing their job (notably SBs and supplements to the flight manual). Make sure the Exposition is reasonable. Have a look at it and question elements if you don’t like them. Talk about the advantages/disadvantages of different work schedules (50hr vs.100hr etc) However, remember that this document, including any amendments, needs to be approved by the regulator.
Try to understand their relationship with the regulator. Our current inspector is a pain and is creating unnecessary work (he wants paper copies, not PDF/email!); that costs the customer money.
There’s loads more but the bottom line is that you have to be able to work with each other.
tmo wrote:
Finally, do you have a CAMO you would recommend?
If I may: The former head of maintenance of the North Rhine-Westphalian group of the german aero club association, Ulf Calsbach, has started a company doing exactly that. He isn’t a friend of unnecessary legislation and is known to work very owner-friendly and transparent: https://www.ingenieurbuero-calsbach.de/
My airplane is with SAAG Plus at Fehraltdorf Switzerland. I’d say they do fulfil all of your wish list.
I had a great experience with ACG Air-Craft in Allendorf, DE.
They are really helpful, let me participate (fully) with my Annual, and are very reasonable/practically minded.
Reminded me a lot of being in the States…
http://air-craft.biz/
