The CI register is going to have to go a long way to catch up with the lead that the IOM register has already established, which in just five years is now the second most popular aircraft registration domain in the WORLD. That is quite an achievement, and one which is raising eyebrows among those who are closely aligned with, or working within the bureaucratic nightmare that is EASA.
Quite why the IOM have been so successful is due to several reasons, most notably of which is the quality of service that they offer to their target audience of biz jet owners and operators. Their service is OUTSTANDING, and unlike most authorities they offer direct contact to decision makers, and generally speaking the decision makers make an effort to help their clients rather than hinder them with obstacles. The UK CAA has a LOT to learn from the very well qualified and customer orientated staff of the IOM, and so too do many European authorities. The guys working in the IOM under the charge of Hartley Elder are top notch, and they really do know their stuff!
The bureaucrats in EASA may have good reason to be a little "miffed" by the success of the IOM register. Private operators who choose to reside outside of the EU and register with the IOM will escape much of the new Basic Regulation, which when analyzed has little or nothing to do with safety regulation, but instead is an attempt to regulate for the sake of creating yet another empire filled with trough swigging eurocrats.
Regrettably though, for the owners of small light singles, I doubt if the CI reg will be of help. As previously mentioned the costs associated with export CofA's may be prohibitive, and most importantly the "operator" will have to a resident outside of the EU in order to completely escape the clutches of EASA. Most light singles are not "operated" by anyone other than the owner/pilot, and the residency of the operator is what the new Basic Regulation hinges on.
Last edited by sooty3694; 13th February 2013 at 19:40.