I find it very hard to believe that flying for 1 hour every 30 days is hard.
I don't have an aircraft to look after, but I may only have a few days a month when I can get to the airport to fly. Some people go on holiday for over 30 days at a time. The aircraft I hire was recently out of action for 2 months for SID checks and a change of the engine mount, during which time I doubt if the engine was run at all.
I can see the point in aspiring to the 30 day recommendation, but it would seem excessive to make it a rule. I do think that it would hit sole owners very hard, though probably manageable in a group. Realistically, is it going to make any difference if the engine isn't run for 31, or 60 days just once in a while?
They have done and do for imported planes
That is near-universal on a registry transfer e.g. N to G. So nothing has changed there.
Yes this catches a lot of people out because some transfers don't catch it and then you can't go back unless you overhaul the engine. I have some notes here but haven't researched which transfers allow > 12 years. It is possible that a transfer to N doesn't enforce it, but there may be a problem getting the G Export CofA before then.
You are in the enviable situation to both have an IR and a flexible time planning
If there is terrain around, the IR makes very little difference unless you are also based at an instrument airport, and then only if there is either no icing, or you are fully deiced. Switzerland in the winter will mean icing conditions in any IMC, I would think. But 30 solid days with no gap? It's possible but I have never seen it even in the crappy UK weather system, since I started flying in 2000.
If there is no terrain (e.g. a coastal airport) then an IR makes a difference only if the wx is below say OVC006 
Flexible time - I agree with that. Being absolutely limited to weekends is a big problem in GA. But every person I have ever employed, since 1978, could get a day off work. Initially it comes out of the holiday entitlement (which might start at say 25 days a year) and if you use that all up then you lose the pay for that day. What a UK employer is allowed to block is somebody taking say the whole 25 days in one lump, because that is likely to be massively disruptive to a small company, and frankly in a big company too unless the person is just one of a load of toilet cleaners etc.
The report basically presents a legal challenge to their practice, so they have now actively got to justify why they allow on condition at all.
They need to get their little heads around the FACT that these manufacturer recommendations originate in the USA and in the FAA/ICAO certification regime. In the ICAO system, when a mfg gets a Type Certificate, he gives up direct control of his product in the marketplace. He can issue SBs all day long but has no legal power to enforce them. Even a "Mandatory" SB is not mandatory. A Mandatory SB gets done free of charge under the mfg's warranty, so mfgs prefer to start issuing MSBs after all warranties have ended . Only the TC issuing authority has the power to force something - via an AD which is usually but not always based on an SB.
The European regulators (who in large part are self proclaimed intellectually superior people who hate the USA and everything it stands for) pretend this principle does not exist, and that is where we get the system where EASA is taking some US SB and makes it mandatory - without there being the slightest engineering basis for doing so. Obviously the fact that it creates nice work for EASA145 companies (which is where many EASA employees come from) is just a coincidence
If its a Thielert, I'd want it inspected before flying it.
Silvaire, Why do you think that? After all, it is an automotive engine and I am not aware of corrosion problems if you don't run a car for a month.
I don't think this is terribly new. I seem to recall problems with Superior cylinders too. Barrett Precision (who rebuilt my engine in 2008) use only Lyco cylinders which they say are the best.
Peter,
If there is terrain around, the IR makes very little difference unless you are also based at an instrument airport, and then only if there is either no icing, or you are fully deiced. Switzerland in the winter will mean icing conditions in any IMC, I would think.
The usual situation here is that you get a closed cover of cloud about 500 - 1000 ft thick and with 200-500 ft ceiling. Above it, bright and wonderful sunshine for weeks and weeks thanks to a large high pressure area which keeps the skiing folk raving while the low land folk sink into depression. I have flown with a friend in a Columbia 400 who has the IR and which is not deiced. Take off in ZRH takes you straight into the murk and you are out in less than 1 minute after entering. Even if that murk has ice in it, it won't catch in that short time. Same on approach, you won't catch any noticable ice in the 2 minutes you fly in IMC.
But 30 solid days with no gap? It's possible but I have never seen it even in the crappy UK weather system, since I started flying in 2000.
I'd say it can be more than that. "no gap" is an absolute which has happened in the past but it doesn't need to be with no gap. In Winter, the game of the day is to predict the dissolving of the low stratus and you are wrong 99% of the time. Sometimes it desolves between 1500 and 1530, sometimes to 1600, sometimes a bit longer, most of the time not at all. So how do you want to plan a flight on that, if you a) have fixed working times and b) need to ask and receive a +-15 min slot time for dep and arrival 24 hours ahead of time if you want to be sure to take it? Not feasible.
Last winter, between november and May, I had NOT ONE day off on which there was plannable and actual VMC at ZRH. And if there was a gap, you were gambling that vis would not go below 5 km before you get back (which usually is the limiting factor). I've seen days which had 4.5 km all day long plus a 1400 ft ceiling. By the time you get off, you find some of the GA crowd in the pub drowning their frustration...
Apart, Terrain is a problem to the south only. To fly North, West, East, terrain is hardly an issue.
If you depart from an uncontrolled and not IFR Airport, things are "slightly" better at times as a) there is no METAR to tell you you are below airspace E limits and b) they won't lock the door for you if you are. But it is dangerous. Very dangerous. To fly with 2km and 500 ft ceiling in Airspace G with hills and power lines e.t.c. is in my view irresponsible in a 150 kt airplane. And it has lead and will lead to accidents.
You seem to be a nice person to work for... shift work, where shifts are planned months ahead of time and you can try to find someone to take it over for you but otherwise you are there, period. And which of your colleagues will change a shift with you at the ONE sunny day in 3 months? Not likely and understandably so.
Obviously the fact that it creates nice work for EASA145 companies (which is where many EASA employees come from) is just a coincidence
That is one bit which is totally wrong in their thinking. No, it does not create work other than in a maybe short span of time when people are FORCED into something they can neither afford nor want to do. The next reaction is: Sell the plane, take up golf. So what they do with this is to destroy the marketplace.
Aart - in my mind, the issue with storage and inspection of the Thielert would be the rubber cam drive belt. I pull the covers and take a look if one of my (4) similarly equipped motorcycles hasn't run for a while.
Peter - under FAA type certification the 12 year thing does not exist for a registry change (it actually doesn't exist for private aircraft in any sense). As you've explained, the manufacturer of a certified aircraft does not have authority over the owner - service bulletins are not mandatory. Equally, under FAA type certification the concept of government appointed commercial 'support' for the type certificate does no exist. What matters for the owner are the FAA regulations and ADs, not the opinion of the commercial organization that long ago manufactured the aircraft owners current property.
The new Continental cylinder issue mentioned above will result in an FAA AD if the legally mandated process determines it must, but that process will undergo public comment, will result in multiple means of compliance, and will not mandatorily direct business to anybody in particular.
Take off in ZRH takes you straight into the murk and you are out in less than 1 minute after entering. Even if that murk has ice in it, it won't catch in that short time. Same on approach, you won't catch any noticable ice in the 2 minutes you fly in IMC.
Agreed... so why not base yourself at Zurich during the winter months (and get an IR)?
It seems like a great case for an IR.
For 99% of UK based pilots, an IR is not needed because they have the IMCR, and they have the "no questions asked IFR in Class G" which makes it trivially easy to drill holes in IMC whether legal or not.
And when going abroad, you use the IMCR to get out of the UK and come back to the UK. While outside the UK, with a bit of care, one can avoid "most" IMC
It's funny to think that whole I enjoy my IR immensely and get immense value out of it, the longest trip I have ever done from home (EGKA-LGST) was done both under VFR and IFR.
Thanks for the info about the 12yr business, Silvaire. The people who got shafted were sometimes the ones who went G to N and then got scared when the UK threatened to put a 90 day long term parking limit on foreign regs, and tried to go back to G..... Never act on fear, is the lesson.
In these days of 12 grand for zero houring an 0-200 to fit into a 10 grand Cessna 150.
I know of a couple of schools that actively hunt out high timed but low houred engines. In Fact both have recently purchased aircraft on time extension with cica 800 hours to go.
After 10% plus 10% of 12 years they will be out of hours and sold on for say 8 grand.
I'm not saying I like it but it is what it is
I am suprised that makes sense, because such old planes must incur other costs.
For example a friend used to run a large syndicate (~25) around a C150, and their Annuals used to run ~£7k. The plane might have been worth 15k. It was shagged through 30 years of heavy usage, and it stayed shagged. I used to run my TB20 on 1/2 that and that was when using a company to do it all.
FWIW, I have today had a quote, from the top US shop, of $38k for overhauling my IO540-C4D5D. Subject to the usual caveats i.e. no issues with crankshaft and crankcases, etc.
