AEA Comments On EASA Rulemaking | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-11.24.25

AirborneNextGen-
11.18.25

Airborne-Unlimited-11.19.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-11.20.25

AirborneUnlimited-11.21.25

LIVE MOSAIC Town Hall (Archived): www.airborne-live.net

Sat, Jul 19, 2003

AEA Comments On EASA Rulemaking

On The Record Regarding Part 66 And Part M

The Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA) has sent official comments to the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) on Implementing Rules (IRs) for Part 66 and Part M. Previously, AEA sent comments on EASA IR 145. AEA represents nearly 100 European aviation businesses.

Part 66

AEA does not support the proposed expansion of Part 66 to aircraft below 5700 kg.  The proposed licensing does not conform to the progressive career paths of aviation/avionics maintenance technicians, the proposal is cost prohibitive, the current licensing and oversight of technicians of light aircraft does not support an expedited implementation of a transitional regulations.  In addition, this proposal is cost prohibitive to the individual technicians and the small businesses that employ them.

The proposed regulation is also discriminatory in that it favors businesses located in countries that have state funded/state supported technical training schools while placing a significant financial burden on companies located in countries without state funded technical training programs.

Part M

AEA also  does not support the proposed expansion of Part M to aircraft below 5700 kg, saying the requirement to individually approve each and every aircraft's maintenance program is administratively burdensome to individual National Aviation Authorities; extremely costly to individual owners/operators; and will introduce a lack of standardization essential to the improving safety of general aviation maintenance and operations.

Furthermore, the proposed regulation will discourage growth in the ownership of general aviation aircraft.  The proposal will channel limited financial resources away from safety enhancing cockpit technology in order to develop maintenance work cards and maintenance management plans.  The administrative burden imposed by this proposal is not based on quantitative or qualitative analysis of any known problems but rather an arbitrary expansion of JAR-OPS criteria intended for commercial aircraft operations.

FMI: www.aea.net

Advertisement

More News

Airborne 11.24.25: ANN's 30th!, Starship’s V3 Booster Boom, Earhart Records

Also: 1st-Ever Space Crime Was a Fraud, IAE Buys Diamonds, Kennon Bows Out, Perseverance Rover An interesting moment came about this past Sunday as ANN CEO, Jim Campbell, noted tha>[...]

ANN FAQ: Submit a News Story!

Have A Story That NEEDS To Be Featured On Aero-News? Here’s How To Submit A Story To Our Team Some of the greatest new stories ANN has ever covered have been submitted by our>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: DeltaHawk Aero Engine Defies Convention

From 2023 (YouTube Edition): Deviation from the Historical Mean Racine, Wisconsin-based DeltaHawk is a privately-held manufacturer of reciprocating engines for aircraft and hybrid >[...]

NTSB Final Report: Glasair GlaStar

Smoke Began Entering The Cockpit During The Landing Flare, And Then The Pilot Noticed Flames On The Right Side Of The Airplane Analysis: The pilot reported that about 30 minutes in>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (11.22.25): Remote Communications Outlet (RCO)

Remote Communications Outlet (RCO) An unmanned communications facility remotely controlled by air traffic personnel. RCOs serve FSSs. Remote Transmitter/Receivers (RTR) serve termi>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC