Airmail is far the best value for money. Unfortunately almost no American company will use it (to send stuff to Europe) which is a pity because we end up getting massively ripped off. I think they (a) like the easy to use service they get from their courier and (b) like the tracking facility.
Its the tracking. Tracking of international post is a mess. The postal system works well within the US, arguably better than anything else, but once it gets outside of the US the package is impossible to trace in my experience. Conversely if you use Fed-Ex you're dealing with one company, one tracking number, good on-line traceability regardless of where its going.
Airmail is not tracked along the route; all you can do is prove the package was delivered and, for a UK recipient at least, you can get the name and a (crappy copy of) the signature of the person who signed for it.
The basic point I would make is that the 5x-10x cost increment of a courier is so huge that in most businesses with any significant international trade you could incinerate 10% of your factory output and you would still waste less money than by using Fedex (etc) for everything. Sure, the occasional airmail package will go astray, some even due to fraud, but the price of guarding against this is high. At work we send all export stuff < 2kg by airmail regardless of value, taking the insurance option sometimes - unless the customer either (a) is happy to pay for DHL (we get a sort of a bulk deal with them) or (b) is in China (where ~50% of incoming airmail packages are stolen, presumably by Customs).
It's not a good situation. In some cases you could send a young student on a cheap ticket, for less, with the package in his/her backpack 
I asked them the same Q on their facebook site
Is f***book now mandatory for avionics purchases? (not entirely a joke - a reflection on today's society)
Garmin have a "tired of waiting?" promotion which made me chuckle ;)
I was trying to work out what that was. It looks like a straight discount, not any kind of trade-in, and possibly for US customers only.
Farcebook is mandatory for life nowadays. I'm pronounced dead not having it. lol
AOPA Germany has clarified in an article published on Nov 7th, 2013, after bilateral talks with German CAA (LBA and BAF) that
for the time being (i.e.unless EASA amends the regulation) starting January 1st one 8.33Khz radio set out of two required IFR radios is sufficient for private IFR flights within Germany.
This article is written in German only.
https://aopa.de/aktuell/kein-zweites-8.33-funkgeraet-fuer-privates-ifr-vorgeschrieben.html
unless EASA amends the regulation
My understanding is that the EASA equipment carriage regulation is not specific on how many 8.33 radios need to be carried, so any reg on how many, and also the hugely aggressive (rumoured) reg that non-8.33 radios will need to be removed, has to be a local interpretation / gold plating.
Equally that means EASA cannot do anything to stop it – it is their fault for drafting the usual kind of European law which is vague. No litigation is possible in this case, as I see it. It is an area where the LBA can generate its own rules.
But equally if German AOPA has got a deal with the LBA, that should be it, and German avionics shops cannot continue demanding 2 x 8.33. In practice they probably can once your plane is in their shop because they have you over a barrel. Unless you fly out VFR, without the IFR certificate…
It’s just the avionics check that has a field for VFR / CVFR / IFR and it has to be done every 2 years for VFR / CVFR and every year for IFR, usually as part of the annual. Similar in most other countries.
However, my point is that this check is illegal.
I don’t know of any country that doesn’t have this tests. I do a lot of these tests and I do think they make sense.
FAA also has these test, in form of FAR 91.171, which requires a sign off. Many European N flyers don’t seem to know this FAR or don’t want to know. The other test, for altimeter, encoder and transponder are often carried out, as they are carried out by companies.
In Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and UK these kind of tests are part of the rules of these members states. Then avionics and pitot static test equipment is used to carry out these test, every year of every other year. These tests are not cheap, it is very expensive specialised test equipment, which also needs updating (for mode S, 406 MHz and 8,33 kHz) for example) and expensive calibrations.
These test will regullary detect out of tolerance issues which was unknow to the customer. This is also good, and the purpuse, it is important to detect errors before the equipment noticeably fails.
For example, have seen VOR error’s upto 30(!) degrees on an aircraft used for IFR flights by multiple pilots, which got unnoticed. While if you tell that maximum error would be 4 degrees most will pilots think that that is a lot.
Another example, when measuring a transponder of DME, you can clearly notice poor coax cables. A poor coax cable can damage your transponder / DME. Detecting this issues can save you money on the long run. These tend to happen on older Cessna’s with the antenna near the cargo door.
nobbi-
AOPA Germany has clarified in an article published on Nov 7th, 2013, after bilateral talks with German CAA (LBA and BAF) that
for the time being (i.e.unless EASA amends the regulation) starting January 1st one 8.33Khz radio set out of two required IFR radios is sufficient for private IFR flights within Germany.
that is great news for the few D-reg but UK based owners that were facing a hefty and probably pointless bill in the next year or two. It was one of a number of things causing me to consider moving from D to G reg- Which Ill discount now. Thanks for reporting it!
[quoted text is now quoted – please see Posting Tips]
I don’t know of any country that doesn’t have this tests. I do a lot of these tests and I do think they make sense.
FAA also has these test, in form of FAR 91.171, which requires a sign off.
91.171 is the 30 day VOR check – a trivial exercise taking seconds in the air, costing nothing, and signed off by the pilot with his license number. If you don’t do this, you are not legal for IFR (with some exceptions e.g. WAAS/EGNOS navigation I believe).
The point about the German system is that the CAMO has the owner over a barrel, with the annual “IFR certificate”. This is IMHO wrong.
