Silvaire wrote:
I cut and pasted the text above directly from the link, top of page 31.
Indeed, and you
1) omitted the “also includes” part
2) gave the impression that the whole list was the EASA list when actually only 14 out of the 5-600 aircraft types (the ones marked “N”) were from EASA’s list.
I probably should have just posted the original document.
The EASA activity is ridiculous, but It’s equally hilarious that UK CAA catalogs aircraft designs with which they have had no involvement whatsoever including listing in some cases the US or other foreign TC number with which they have no involvement or authority. The whole thing is just silly.
For reference, FAA practice for foreign certified aircraft is dependent on the treaty status between the foreign certifying nation and the USA. If a treaty exists, the aircraft type can be given an FAA type certificate on the basis of the foreign TC. The type is then actively managed by FAA within US law, meaning for example that foreign nation ADs are collected, reviewed and potentially enhanced or modified to eliminate illegal ‘business development’ practices originating in countries where ADs are mostly the product of the aircraft manufacturer with little oversight. A disciplined process exists for public comment by US owners of the type by US regulators with power over their aircraft. If an applicable international treaty does not exist, the aircraft can be operated in the US within Experimental Category, generally without reference to foreign government actions. There is a marked contrast between the legal and technical discipline of the FAA approach and what is shown here. The FAA earns its living doing something beyond extending childhood interest in plane spotting to collecting a paycheck.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Really, I never cease to be surprised that some people are so convinced that EASA is evil that they grasp at every straw that seems to support their conviction.
Fully agree – but sometimes it’s simply due to a lack of understanding that EU is something completely different than USA and therefore the relationship between the EASA and the independent CAAs in the member states is a quite complex one.
Too many people outside the EU (and some inside) still believe that EASA is something like FAA and the national CAAs are something like FSDOs…
Silvaire wrote:
For reference, FAA practice for foreign certified aircraft is dependent on the treaty status between the foreign certifying nation and the USA. If a treaty exists, the aircraft type can be given an FAA type certificate on the basis of the foreign TC.
So what’s in your opinion the difference to Europe?
