Peter wrote:
Snoopy – a lot of that is not correct.
Actually he is correct on all those things, your article is partly outdated and partly incorrect with regard to Part-ML aircraft.
Snoopy wrote:
EASA 66 freelance personell can now also issue the ARC.
An additional authorisation is needed. You don’t get the right to issue an ARC simply by having an EASA part-66 license.
Snoopy wrote:
For EASA-reg aircraft, there is currently a CAA/EASA requirement to comply with all ADs that apply to the aircraft regardless of the country of the AD issue.
A very practical question from the owner of an EASA reg aircraft: Assuming this rule exists and I want to comply with it, how could I even find out if Kurre Kurre Island has just issued an AD that would ground my ride there (and therefore is said to be mandatory here)?
Another issue: As discussed in the wings spar AD thread in some cases it is simply impossible to comply with an AD from an non EASA regulation as it might refer to operations or data that is not available for EASA Registered planes.
Actually he is correct on all those things
Negative. But we have done all this so many times… especially the value of freelance maintenance. Etc Etc. I am busy so it’s my turn to post a (rare) one-liner 
So Peter are you saying that Part-ML in practice doesn’t afford the privileges the text says it does because said privileges can’t be exercised?
I’m happy that with my normal FAA A&P IA not available this year (he’s up to his eyeballs in a personal project) I was able to find another. He’s busy, does not have a published phone number so the process for finding him was word of mouth plus stopping to chat with him… in German He can read the maintenance manuals!
This particular IA lives in his hangar, in the crew quarters, so is generally ‘around’. A little discussion back and forth established that he has no problem with me doing the work in my hangar and him doing only the inspection and paperwork. If we do find something needing significant repair, more tools, we’ll make a plan.
Payment will be in cash, no need to discuss rates in advance, no invoices, no VAT, no nonsense. All done based on trust and reputation. That’s the productive ‘get it done’ tradition from which both he and I are happy to benefit.
Airborne_Again wrote:
An additional authorisation is needed. You don’t get the right to issue an ARC simply by having an EASA part-66 license.
Yes, but it is possible for a Pt66 to get it. LBA website just posted the first one…
And the same applies to FAA. An AP needs additional authorization to become IA.
Peter wrote:
Negative. But we have done all this so many times… especially the value of freelance maintenance. Etc Etc. I am busy so it’s my turn to post a (rare) one-liner
Laws change. The discussions from the past are worthless.
I’d be curious to know to which part of my answers the „Negative“ applies to.
GA is full of „subjectivism“ („N-reg is the best“, „EASA is terrible“ bla bla). We need more facts and less opinion!
I personally couldn’t care less, I fly N- and EASA airplanes.
Silvaire wrote:
Payment will be in cash, no need to discuss rates in advance, no invoices, no VAT, no nonsense. All done based on trust and reputation. That’s the productive ‘get it done’ tradition from which both he and I are happy to benefit.
That’s nice and while it appeals to me personally it’s not really possible for the entire fleet of european private ga planes to imitate (unfortunately).
I wouldn’t bother about the fleet, I’d worry about the plane that I own and maintain. And I know which register is likely to make it easier, worldwide. 
