Easa rules
 

Would someone be so kind as to point me in the right direction regarding the current EASA rules regarding the following:
-Holding
-Procedural approach
-Circling approach

Sorry to 'answer' your question with another, but I is confused. Do 'EASA' actually have any 'rules'? I was under the impression that nothing was effective until April 2012. I would assume at the moment that EU-OPS pubs are the regulatory?

I sit waiting to be educated.:8

Edit: There you go - found it!

http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/46257...sa-eu-ops.html. Someone else confused.:)

I tell you - I would not wish to be involved in trying to set up an AOC or whatever it will be called right now.

BOAC thank you for your reply.I too was under the impression that as the minima we now operate to is Eu-ops that it would be EASA rules we operate to.Do you have a refernce to the Eu-ops legislation for the items I referred to?

Well, it depends on what you seek - I am further confused by the fact that SOME JAROPS have not yet been replaced by EUOPS, I believe. Are you seeking operational or design stuff? As far as I know, PANSOPS/8168 is still the 'design' reference, although what happens to that in April I know not

I assume you have access to EUOPS1?

Can you post a link to it please?

EU-OPS can be found here. It is available in all official EU languages from that source as well, however be careful, the english version is usually the master version and translated versions occasionally contain major differences, as they are binding european law that can lead to some problems.

whatever-OPS
 

To shed some light on the confusion

JAA published JAR-OPS. JAA no longer exists

JAR-OPS was superceded by EU-OPS which is a European Commision thingy.

Now EASA is finalizing EASA-OPS which is planned to come in to force April 2012.

as mentioned some JAR-OPS rules still hang around, these are, as far as I know, JAR-OPS 3 (helicopters) and FCL which will directly transfer to EASA. Maintenance was allready transferred to EASA with the intruduction of Part-M before EU-OPS came in to force. Now I might be as confused as anybody else so I stand to be corrected.

I dont have a direct answer to the topic starter, but as far as I have read the new EASA proposals the rules regarding airplane performance and procedure design rules will largely remain unchanged.

Hope it helps, all the best

Thanks for that, Ditched - do I infer that you believe that PANSOPS/8168 will still be the 'reference' or is EASA planning a replacement?

I must admit that at coalface level, this is one of the most confusing periods in aviation regulation I have seen - it all looked reasonably simple at the JAROPS stage, :confused:

As far as i am aware EASA is not planning a replacement or amendement of PANSOPS. Biggest changes I can see so far are in Flight Crew Licencing, Rest and Duty times and Non-Airline operators. Also the structure changed, so maybe operation manuals need a re-writing.

I agree it has become very confusing. The whole EU-OPS was something we could have done without. The European Commision was politically driven and impatient to force EU-OPS into action. If they would have been more patient a more seemless transition from JAR-OPS to EASA-OPS would have been possible and far more practical. A lot of small aviation businesses were forced out of operation with the introduction of EU-OPS.

In it self its not a bad idea to have everything under the EASA flag because there is where the knowledge is (or supposed to be) and its EU wide. Under the JAR system every country had it own exemptions (e.g. single engine turbine under IFR) which I believe a hinderance to a level playing field. EU-OPS was supposed to create a level playing field, by ending the local exemptions,
but it miserably failed.

Thank you all for the replies and links.As with anything to do with an EU agency it is clear as mud.!

Still not quite sure what your queries are, so in case you don't have this, here is a link to ftp 8168

BOAC It was part of my sim preperation and I thought I could do with a refresher of the rules.Thank you for the link.