It looks like this has been voted in at EASA level – US AOPA article
It’s a similar thought to what we’ve had in Australia all the time:
Approved for IFR Commercial ops are (and only these):
- PC12
- Cessna Caravan
- Socata TBM700
All with a PT6. It’s the only engine that is reliable enough apparently.
Don't get me wrong, I really wish Hendell all the best!
It's just that considering what I assume is the core of their business model: flying business people and wealthy individuals, doesn't have the legacy nor critical mass over here. To be honest, Finland is very well connected by airlines domestically, within Europe and long-haul. People and companies are very cost consciuous.
Then there is location. We're a long way from mainland Europe. Again, the Airbus has an advantage.
I'd see their business in Nordic medevac and flying the odd organ transplant. That's where operating SE literally pays off. And St. Petersburg is really close!
Well I wish them all the best.
I wonder how many UK airports would be commercially (more) viable if SET commercial ops was allowed. Plymouth and sheffield city spring to mind and I'm sure there are many others.
It's fairly obvious that Hendell's prime market is in Russia and other ex-Soviet countries. At least it's not in Finland!
Hendell may find, as I did, that flying SE-IFR commercially in Europe is greatly restricted. I only checked with the closest countries at the time; Denmark, Poland, Germany, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, but they all replied with varying and interesting versions of the word "No".
But, this was a few years ago and things change. Perhaps Hendell will be successful, and given their proximity to Russia, provided they don't disapprove of SE ops, they may see a market in that direction.
SVFR does not meet VMC criteria and when it's not VMC, it's IMC by definition 
I'm slightly confused by 2) as I didn't think you could fly SVFR under IMC.
