Rod 1
I was rather expecting that most people on this forum would be able to work out that the statment all aircraft was applicable to EASA aircraft only. After all the title of the thread was "EASA part M what are you doing?" Apparently I am wrong to assume that you are smart enough to work that out for your self.
Vee-tail-1
EASA part M requires a subpart G company to supervise the paperwork and an approved maintenance company to do the maintenance, this can be a company that holds both approvals. A subpart G company may well not have a licenced engineer and so the company issuing the ARC may well not have the authority to issue the CRS for the work done on your aircraft.
IO540
It would be nice if the CAA would communicate these things to the companys that have applied for EASA part M approval, I have not been told a thing about this by the CAA.
jxk
M3 maintenance was not perfect but on the whole it was a good system, the only problem with it is that it would not keep enough eurocrat snouts in the feed bucket. (annex 2 aircraft will stay on M3 for the time being).
So back to the question, have any of you put in place a contract for your EASA part M maintenance and have you decided on option 1 or 2 ? as option 3 is not a cost effective option at all.