IO540 makes a good point- US experimental types can do all sorts of things - but only in CONUS.
Forget the Vulcan - I expect that we are talking about piston engines types for this proposal.
No overflight of built-up areas at any height, no night flight and no IMC are in a large part down to the fact that in general it is accepted that a permit to fly aircraft is likely to have an engine faulire or even a series of engine failures in any one day. It was not unusal in past times to have 2 or 3 failures in a good days flying on an old 2 stroke.
In recent times engines such as the Rotax 912 have brought reliability close to that often available from Lycoming and Continental types.
One cal lobby all one wants but without data, the CAA or EASA is going to find it hard to justify making changes.
Who is going to complete and pay for the certification flight testing, reporting and other reams of work required to progress such a proposal to EASA approval.
The result will of course be a fully IFR equipped and mose S equipped aircraft with several Kgs of equippment. How many will spend £10s of thousands equipping their low cost aircraft for IFR flight just to sit and wait for their slot time.
Think beyond the bimbling round in Class G - there will not be much of that available to IFR flights who can not meet the full certification requirements including pilot licensing in the not too distant future.
The CAA are perfectly willing to lift the no night flight no aerobatics and no IFR flight from a permit to fly provided that the proposer can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the CAA that safety is ensured.
Please feel free to spend £500,000 to £750,000 doing that for your £20,000 or less aircraft.
Let me know when you are starting, I'll help you spend your money.
Regards,
DFC