I believe LFAV is an example….? It has to do that the maintenance of the infrastructure which is handed over to the local commune and since on smaller AD’s where there is no commercial traffic this becomes an issue….(but again ..this is what I’ve heard..). I am sure there must be some French Euroga’er who can give more details.. 
This is why we will only see 200ft LPV approaches in the near to medium future at airfields that already have an ILS. The lights are the most expensive part of an ILS installation (together with the calibration flights).
That’s a very valid argument… 
Here in the US, we can get LPV200 without requiring an approach light system. The minimum visibility of 1/2 SM is increased to 3/4 of a SM if the approach light system is out or simply not installed, what’s the difference. Is the ILS unusable if the approach lights are out of service? Not here. Here, the standard LPV minimums are 250 feet DH but about a quarter are of the 200 DH variety. Usually LPV is the lowest, followed by LNAV/VNAV and finally LNAV, but there are exceptions.
1) Question I think a NON WAAS GNS430/530 has PT also and outputs holds for GPSS also…correct when GPSS is enabled (Bien Sure)?
It is not available in the non WAAS GNS430, but GPSS with turn anticipation and DME arcs are supported as well as straight courses.
Here in the US, we can get LPV200 without requiring an approach light system.
I have no idea but is that ICAO compliant?
If it is, why is €€€€land gold plating this when the USA is no more littered with aircraft wreckage than Europe?
Is the ILS unusable if the approach lights are out of service?
No, but as you write, higher minima apply. An ILS (or any other approach) without approach lights usually has a minimum RVR of 1100m or more. Commercial (as well as private in some countries) operators are subject to the “approach ban” here, i.e. you may only continue your approach beyond the outer marker or it’s substitute when the RVR is above minimum. Therfore, RVR is usually more restricting than the cloud base.
An LPV200 with a visibility requirement of 1/2 SM and approach lights is preferred, but would you rather have the visibility increased to 3/4 mile if approach lights are not installed or OOS, or would you rather have a higher DH as well. I don’t see any logic to increasing the DH if obstacles permit the lower value and it is permitted as a safe operation with the higher visibility requirement when approach lights are OOS. To be consitent, if one isn’t permitted, then neither should the other be permitted and visa versa.
