This is what was said only this month. That seems completely out of step with some of the views expressed here. Either we should believe and rely on what emanates from EASA officials or if EASA is allowing officials to mislead us then clearly EASA is not fit for purpose.
Fuji
As in any comittee many people hold different views and may express those views. That does not mean that they are official EASA statements or policy.
It is probably likely that under the regulations alllowances may be made for "special needs". You mentioned the mountain rating and it is probable that a special needs excemption would be the cleanest way out on the IMCR.
As for the IR Lite you may well be right as NONE of this is about safety and never has been. It is more about protectionsism, self interest and politics.
The whole history of Europe and political leaning has been anti individualism and to have no freedom of the skies.
Given the European leaning its natural instinct is control not freedom. Stick the masses in large commercial people carriers. The big Brother state.
So yes you maybe right the way forward for Europe and aviation will probably be further tightening and restrictions especially against the percieved wealthy individuals who own or fly private aircraft but that isnt good for any of us the IMCR is insignicant in comparison to what we should be fighting.
I am afraid the IMCR is a Red Herring and one where we will end up shooting ourselves in the foot for fighting a blinkered battle.
Pace