207(2) still refers to "class of operations" and not "category of aircraft".
We're basically talking about an aircraft in the charter category conducting almost exclusively private and airwork operations (don't ask why it's still maintained in the charter category - that's another issue).
If a piece of equipment fails - and it could literally be something as simple as a light bulb, according to 20.18.10 - then without an MEL (permissible unservicability being a function of the MEL) or executive order, the aircraft could not fly charter operations.
But it can still fly private and airwork ops. And while the aircraft still needs to be maintained to the charter standard, surely that comes under the maintenance schedule and does not apply to actual operations (assuming the unservicability has been entered in the MR)?
Simply put, our interpretation is that if an aircraft is in the charter category, it must be maintained to the charter category standards and - if it is to conduct a charter flight - it must conform to the charter category for that operation, but not for any lesser operation.
CAO 20.18.10.2 also clearly states:
Where flight is conducted with unserviceable instruments or equipment under the provisions of paragraph 10.1 or 10.1A, the unserviceable instruments or equipment shall be prominently placarded ‘UNSERVICEABLE’ or removed from the aircraft.
So the CAO is stating that a flight IS permissible under 10.1 or 10.1A as long as the unservicable equipment or instrument is placarded.
Again, if there is another regulation that turns this on its head, I would like to see it. I've looked everywhere - though admittedly I might be looking in the wrong places.
If yr right can point me in the direction of any reg that backs up what he is saying, then that would be very helpful.