Originally Posted by Pace
The enroute restricted IR is a halfway house which is asking for trouble
That depends strongly on how it's used.
I can see one use for it which has nothing to do with weather but with the horrible airspace restrictions all around us for VFR.
Northern Italy and the Rome Area are gigantic "A" airspaces which make VFR there unsafe and dangerous. With an EIR one could fly quietly and legally on airways through this airspace and not at 1500 ft AGL or worse, over the sea. The same goes for the airspace mess in France, Belgium and elsewhere. Take off VFR, join up and fly airways until close to destination and then descend and land at the airport of your choice.
A LOT of small planes hardly ever use IFR equipped aerodromes. They are based on non IFR strips and they fly to non IFR strips. In all those cases, the EIR will allow them to do exactly what they need to and not even make a difference if they had the full IR.
The "interesting" thing is that as usual in Europe, people will immediately suspect any rating holder to misuse it and to abuse the rights they are given. Well, if we pilots think like that, then what are we bitching about EASA's stance?
Apart, looking at the newly proposed ideas on what an airplane needs to be IFR certified (WAAS, dual 8.33 coms, no more "on conditon" e.t.c.) even if the new EIR will make it past the anti aircraft lobbies they just now again have won a decisive victory. Nobody will care for an IR if the airplanes involved are too expensive, or rather if the cost to upgrade them exceeds the airframe value.