Airborne_Again wrote:
That is a very important point since the AIP in many countries includes information that is contrary to law. There are several reasons why this could happenThe law has changed and the national authority hasn’t (bothered to) update the AIP. (More common than you may think.)
The national authority doesn’t approve of the changed (EU) law and keeps the old information on purpose to spread FUD.
The national authority doesn’t bother to cover special cases of the law. (And a “special case” could be all of noncommercial light GA.)
Agree 100%
Airborne_Again wrote:
So, theoretically you don’t have to follow the standard, but if you don’t the entire burden of showing that an installation is safe rest on you.
Yes, but that is more theoretical than real. It’s the same with aviation equipment in experimental aircraft. The existence of standards and also standard contracts has the effect of reducing the required competence, also across the board. You may very well be able to show your set up is fine, but the guy/women on the other side of the table is in no position to verify your claims.
