Again, that's "complex", not "high performance":
‘Complex motor-powered aircraft’ is defined in the Basic Regulation (EC No 216/2008), Article 3 (Definitions), paragraph (j), as follows:
---
‘complex motor-powered aircraft’ shall mean:
(i) an aeroplane:
- with a maximum certificated take-off mass exceeding 5 700 kg, or
- certificated for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than nineteen, or
- certificated for operation with a minimum crew of at least two pilots, or
- equipped with (a) turbojet engine(s) or more than one turboprop engine, or
(ii) ... [helicopter]
---
The term "high performance" does not appear anywhere in Article 3.
It would be tempting to think that the two are interchangeable terms if it were not for the presence of the G520T, which is clearly defined as HPA but not Complex. Of course, it may well be that the two were
intended to be interchangeable - or that the list is wrong, and the 520T was
intended to be complex - but there are so many holes, errors and grey areas in the Regulation that we'll probably never know. The mega-minds that produced the mess are now more interested in spending millions changing the Agency's name than fixing the errors, fudges and missing definitions in what they've already concocted.
If you're thinking I'm not an EASA fanboi, you're right.