As all of you in the DOA space know, the EASA Certification Platform went live few weeks ago and SEPIAC is now closed to external access. The platform brings structured data, workflows and task ownership to the interface between applicant and Agency. It is a real improvement for exchanging data with the Authority.
A question worth asking is: was the transition handled well? And with that question I mean not only at the authority side, but at the DOA side too.
If someone asked you today for the current compliance status of your largest active project — paragraph by paragraph, evidence status, open items, rationale behind it — how long would it take to produce? Not how long it should take. How long it does.
And does it easily match what is in the EASA certification platform?
Because the latter only structures one side of that interface and only limited to the project and its deliverable. It does not address fully the compliance demonstration. Your internal compliance picture is a separate problem with a separate owner, and it does not improve just because the Agency's tooling did.
I am thinking of writing a longer piece on what I think the shift genuinely asks of applicants — and why the machine-to-machine line in EASA's roadmap deserves more attention than it has had.
How are others reading this transition?