I could not agee more, what we have here is a dumbed down system to suit all the countries in the EU.
I have always said that being a licenced engineer is all about making decisions, for instance, yes the MM tells us that the seatbelt has a 10 year life. This however is recommended so it is up to the individual engineer to decide to change or not. The aircraft may only fly 20 hours /year & be kept in a perfectly dry hangar out of direct sunlight etc.
& the belts are in virtually as new condition.
What EASA want is aircraft 100% servicable & airworthy 100% of the time, if they are not you can refuse to issue the ARC & the law is on your side.
I have recently heard of a situation where a maintenance organisation which has maintained an aircraft for several years , signed off annual inspections & no doubt recommended C of A renewal, has now refused to issue an ARC recommendation because the aircraft had a major airframe component changed several years ago by another company & there is no paperwork to prove the origin of the part.
Why has this aircraft suddenly become unairworthy?, Is it because the state of the aircraft has deteriorated or because the certifying engineer
cannot satisfy the terms of Part M ?. I think the latter. I which case be prepared for the vast majority of GA aircraft in the UK over about 25 years old to be grounded.
It is difficult to compare how other countries in EASA land are fairing with all this crap, because until September they do not have to comply. Good old Britain has swallowed Part M hook, line & sinker & become a model for the rest of Europe. Does anyone really expect us all to be doing it the same by this time next year?.