Originally Posted by IO540
They are generally the best people for getting a decent job done (because the buck stops right there) and this is one of the advantages of N-reg ownership. It's easier for the owner to be pro-active on maintenance and use different people for different tasks according to their different skills and honesty.
I agree. That is how I currently maintain my aeroplanes, and how I would like to continue to do so under Part-M. Assuming the latest EASA amendements are passed in to law, and non-commercial use, I'm hoping it will work like this:
I, the owner, am responsible for the airworthiness management of my aircraft.
I engage a Part-66 licenced, independent engineer to carry out the maintenance required under the LAMP.
Every year for aeroplanes >1000Kg and <2000Kg, and every third year for aeroplanes < 1000Kg I need to take the aeroplane to a CAMO with sub-part I privileges.
The CAMO conducts an airworthiness review and recommends the re-issue of the ARC for another year.
For the <1000Kg aeroplanes my Part-66 engineer conducts the 1st and 2nd year airworthiness reviews.
The CAA re-issues the ARC on the basis of the CAMO/engineer recommendations.
Part-M calls this an uncontrolled environment, but in reality I'm doing the controlling.