You do get very simplified routing though...
That is however a huge plus of the EIR, which is why I say it will be good for "clever" VFR pilots who are presently
- trapped below CAS all the way, or
- have to preplan multiple routes, some OCAS, some CAS, and never quite know (especially in Italy
) which one they are going to be able to fly till the last minute, or
- unable to climb above clouds and icing conditions enroute, due to CAS
That said, I struggle to see how the EIR is going to work in practice unless there is some very directed training on how to play it. DIY letdowns are likely to be a popular feature, and there is nothing wrong with that if your nav is 100% (which let's face it it needs to be anyway) and you descend only to the SSA, or local MSA however derived (GPS moving topo map, etc).
FWIW I did comment on the EASA comment form that I think the ban on SIDs and STARs is very bad. Also there is no straightforward way to verify (during planning) what the weather conditions will be at the waypoint where you will be cancelling IFR (which, given the ban on STARs, could be many miles away from the airport unless you do some DCT hacks to get yourself nearer, but that will work only in airspaces where the MAX DCT is nonzero
).
a large portion of my flying would be from one uncontrolled airport to another and the rest being flights either originating or terminating at an uncontrolled airport. How much would this affect the usability difference between the EIR and the full IR?
Presumably there is no IAP at an uncontrolled airport? (There can be in the USA, because they have centrally funded IFR controllers, etc). If so then the EIR will be perfect for you