EASA definition of HP airplane

[Soave_Pilot]

Could someone light me up on where can I find on the EASA regs, the definition of high performance airplane? I was only able to find the definition of complex airplanes...

[Fossy]

complex aircraft, single pilot

https://www.easa.europa.eu/download/...t_Aircraft.pdf

[Sepp]

Not so, Fossy. If you look down the list you posted to page 9, you'll see that the Grob G520T is listed as SP HPA, but not complex.

edit/

I do however accept that the list quite possibly indicates that the true answer is unfortunately "it's high performance because we say it is".

[AndiKunzi]

I can't cite the source, but IIRC aircraft are EASA HPA if they have at least one of the following:
- 2 turboprop engines
- 1 jet engine
- MTOM over 5,700 kg
- more than 20 (?) seats
- require more than 1 pilot

This list may not be accurate or correct in all details, but should give a rough overview.

[Sepp]

Again, that's "complex", not "high performance":

‘Complex motor-powered aircraft’ is defined in the Basic Regulation (EC No 216/2008), Article 3 (Definitions), paragraph (j), as follows:

---
‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ shall mean:

(i) an aeroplane:

• with a maximum certificated take-off mass exceeding 5 700 kg, or
• certificated for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nineteen, or
• certificated for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or
• equipped with (a) turbojet engine(s) or more than one turboprop engine, or

(ii) ... [helicopter]
---

The term "high performance" does not appear anywhere in Article 3.

It would be tempting to think that the two are interchangeable terms if it were not for the presence of the G520T, which is clearly defined as HPA but not Complex. Of course, it may well be that the two were intended to be interchangeable - or that the list is wrong, and the 520T was intended to be complex - but there are so many holes, errors and grey areas in the Regulation that we'll probably never know. The mega-minds that produced the mess are now more interested in spending millions changing the Agency's name than fixing the errors, fudges and missing definitions in what they've already concocted.

If you're thinking I'm not an EASA fanboi, you're right.

[Soave_Pilot]

I think it is safe to say that there is no written definition of high performance aircraft on the regulations, meaning that, it is considered a HP aircraft only the ones chosen by the agency after a specific technical evaluation.

[AndiKunzi]

Sepp, you're right, I confused HPA and complex.
Some (most) SET like Piper Meridian and TBMs are HPA and require an HPA rating, although not complex. Thus, for a TBM you need SET and HPA type ratings.

And yes, I agree: there's no general definition of HPA.