Keeping a LAPL current
I understand that if multiple flights are used to make up the hour, they have to be with the same instructor. At least that was what my instructor told me during my last biennial flight with him.
I understand that if multiple flights are used to make up the hour, they have to be with the same instructor. At least that was what my instructor told me during my last biennial flight with him.
Last edited by fireflybob; 25th Mar 2017 at 20:29.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fireflybob, your last two paragraphs are incorrect for a LAPL, which is what this thread orignally covered.
As already said, unlike Class Ratings on other licenses, the LAPL has no specific expiry date and instead has a rolling validity.
The differences between Revalidation requirements for Ratings are in my - unofficial but heavily reviewed - table here (hopefully link works after recent Dropbox changes):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/49r8nvlvpt...E_1-4.pdf?dl=0
As already said, unlike Class Ratings on other licenses, the LAPL has no specific expiry date and instead has a rolling validity.
The differences between Revalidation requirements for Ratings are in my - unofficial but heavily reviewed - table here (hopefully link works after recent Dropbox changes):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/49r8nvlvpt...E_1-4.pdf?dl=0
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here you go:
Above is for the SEP Rating, and the bold is mine.
Again, this is my bold in the equivalent CAA page for the LAPL (that you quoted in the OP):
SEP Rating and LAPL are both EASA qualifications, and I suggest it is therefore logical to assume that the intent is the same in both statements, despite the frustratingly different wording. Otherwise, why would the LAPL statement include the word "total"? It would be redundant.
As ever, finding the actual document and paragraph is a pain, but the link above does reflect what I've seen before in [CAP804? Part-FCL? An IN? Several official places, anyway] and the links are to a CAA web page so hopefully meets your needs unless you've a demand for a formally supportable legal reference!
Originally Posted by UK CAA
Revalidation
To revalidate the rating you must complete the following:
[Content deleted for simplicity]
12 hours of flight time in single-engine (single-pilot) aeroplane within the 12 months preceding the rating’s expiry date, including the following:
6 hours as pilot-in-command (PIC)
12 take-offs and landings
a training flight of at least 1 hour (or a maximum of three totalling 1 hour) with the same flight instructor or class rating instructor.
[Content deleted for simplicity]
To revalidate the rating you must complete the following:
[Content deleted for simplicity]
12 hours of flight time in single-engine (single-pilot) aeroplane within the 12 months preceding the rating’s expiry date, including the following:
6 hours as pilot-in-command (PIC)
12 take-offs and landings
a training flight of at least 1 hour (or a maximum of three totalling 1 hour) with the same flight instructor or class rating instructor.
[Content deleted for simplicity]
Again, this is my bold in the equivalent CAA page for the LAPL (that you quoted in the OP):
Originally Posted by UK CAA
Keeping your licence current, and what to do if you don’t meet the requirements
The privileges of your licence will only remain valid if you have completed, in the last 24 months, as pilot of an aeroplane or TMG:
At least 12 hours flight time as PIC, including 12 take-offs and landings; and
Refresher training of at least 1 hour of total flight time with an instructor.
The privileges of your licence will only remain valid if you have completed, in the last 24 months, as pilot of an aeroplane or TMG:
At least 12 hours flight time as PIC, including 12 take-offs and landings; and
Refresher training of at least 1 hour of total flight time with an instructor.
As ever, finding the actual document and paragraph is a pain, but the link above does reflect what I've seen before in [CAP804? Part-FCL? An IN? Several official places, anyway] and the links are to a CAA web page so hopefully meets your needs unless you've a demand for a formally supportable legal reference!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here you go:
Above is for the SEP Rating, and the bold is mine.
Again, this is my bold in the equivalent CAA page for the LAPL (that you quoted in the OP):
SEP Rating and LAPL are both EASA qualifications, and I suggest it is therefore logical to assume that the intent is the same in both statements, despite the frustratingly different wording. Otherwise, why would the LAPL statement include the word "total"? It would be redundant.
As ever, finding the actual document and paragraph is a pain, but the link above does reflect what I've seen before in [CAP804? Part-FCL? An IN? Several official places, anyway] and the links are to a CAA web page so hopefully meets your needs unless you've a demand for a formally supportable legal reference!
Above is for the SEP Rating, and the bold is mine.
Again, this is my bold in the equivalent CAA page for the LAPL (that you quoted in the OP):
SEP Rating and LAPL are both EASA qualifications, and I suggest it is therefore logical to assume that the intent is the same in both statements, despite the frustratingly different wording. Otherwise, why would the LAPL statement include the word "total"? It would be redundant.
As ever, finding the actual document and paragraph is a pain, but the link above does reflect what I've seen before in [CAP804? Part-FCL? An IN? Several official places, anyway] and the links are to a CAA web page so hopefully meets your needs unless you've a demand for a formally supportable legal reference!
"Total" could be to allow for multiple flights and "an instructor" does not necessarily mean the same instructor imho.
I have now found some very useful guidance on the LAPL on the internet. On finding the EASA documents that make the rules, it starts by stating "It's incredibly confusing." I have looked at the three documents it cites (2 EASA and 1 CAA) and essentially cannot find any more information than in my first post. On validity, it further states that "There's HUGE confusion about LAPLs by pilots who have them!" Very true.
Anyway, I have e-mailed the author and will post here when/if I get a definitive answer.
Last edited by Forfoxake; 26th Mar 2017 at 21:00.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have also found further guidance by the author under "how do I revalidate my 2 year S.E.P. rating on my Certificate of Experience?"
It states "Since EASA rules came in the hour can be made up of 1, 2, or 3 separate flights providing all the flights counted to make up the hour are with the same instructor.."
Not sure yet if this also applies to the LAPL, but looks like you might be right BossEyed.
Will let you know.
It states "Since EASA rules came in the hour can be made up of 1, 2, or 3 separate flights providing all the flights counted to make up the hour are with the same instructor.."
Not sure yet if this also applies to the LAPL, but looks like you might be right BossEyed.
Will let you know.
Last edited by Forfoxake; 26th Mar 2017 at 21:01.
The CAA quote comes from an old derogation which appeared in CAP804 shortly before EASA changed from the old 'single flight of at least an hour' to 'cumulative total of an hour's refresher flying'. This followed lobbying by IAOPA (Europe).
I don't believe that the CAA's more restrictive '3 flights max, all with the same instructor' still applies - if it does, it would be blatant auric embellishment*!
*They hate the term 'gold plating'!
I don't believe that the CAA's more restrictive '3 flights max, all with the same instructor' still applies - if it does, it would be blatant auric embellishment*!
*They hate the term 'gold plating'!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There's HUGE confusion about LAPLs by pilots who have them!" Very true.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In any event, this discussion has revealed a more important question:
In the case of a LAPL, can the hour with an instructor be carried out over multiple flights and do these need to be with the SAME instructor?
Any further thoughts?
Last edited by Forfoxake; 27th Mar 2017 at 11:16.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that I have a dog in this fight - got an EASA PPL(A)
But I created a basic spreadsheet that calculates this 'within 24 months' status. Others have done the same.
It isn't difficult to keep track of this and the rule is quite straightforward
However I do feel that the LAPL should have a ratings arrangement like the PPL(A) so everyone has a date they can work to. It is obvious that a fair number of pilots are still trying to work to PPL rating rules and failing to recognise it is different.
At our airfield I've seen pilots almost in tears when they realise they've not understood the rules and need to fly as a student for a period
But I created a basic spreadsheet that calculates this 'within 24 months' status. Others have done the same.
It isn't difficult to keep track of this and the rule is quite straightforward
However I do feel that the LAPL should have a ratings arrangement like the PPL(A) so everyone has a date they can work to. It is obvious that a fair number of pilots are still trying to work to PPL rating rules and failing to recognise it is different.
At our airfield I've seen pilots almost in tears when they realise they've not understood the rules and need to fly as a student for a period
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a friend ask me about keeping his LAPL current. He's done an hour's flight with an instructor who asked him to hand over his licence and logbook and complete an SRG 1157 form (an examiner form for a skills test or revalidation). He was well inside the 2 yearly timescale so it would not have been a test.
He was told that because the instructor was not an examiner his logbook and form needed to be countersigned by the school examiner.
This sounds like complete BS to me. But are instructors really being told to do this?
He was told that because the instructor was not an examiner his logbook and form needed to be countersigned by the school examiner.
This sounds like complete BS to me. But are instructors really being told to do this?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFAIK, no skills test, revalidation or any form signed by an examiner is required as long as the rolling validity requirement is met ie
He has completed, in the last 24 months, as pilot of an aeroplane or TMG:
At least 12 hours flight time as PIC, including 12 take-offs and landings; and
Refresher training of at least 1 hour of total flight time with an instructor.
However, it is probably wise to have the instructor sign the training time in his log book.
He has completed, in the last 24 months, as pilot of an aeroplane or TMG:
At least 12 hours flight time as PIC, including 12 take-offs and landings; and
Refresher training of at least 1 hour of total flight time with an instructor.
However, it is probably wise to have the instructor sign the training time in his log book.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 5 nM S of TNT, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a friend ask me about keeping his LAPL current. He's done an hour's flight with an instructor who asked him to hand over his licence and logbook and complete an SRG 1157 form (an examiner form for a skills test or revalidation). He was well inside the 2 yearly timescale so it would not have been a test.
He was told that because the instructor was not an examiner his logbook and form needed to be countersigned by the school examiner.
This sounds like complete BS to me. But are instructors really being told to do this?
He was told that because the instructor was not an examiner his logbook and form needed to be countersigned by the school examiner.
This sounds like complete BS to me. But are instructors really being told to do this?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that. It supports what I told him. But still can't understand why the (very experienced) instructor who should know this has told him a complete fabrication.
" can't understand why the (very experienced) instructor ..."
Nor me. Instructors are wonderful people, but like the rest of us make mistakes.
The rules are not the problem.
Complexity and confusion comes from what the rules aren't, from what senior people like this imagine them to be.
LAPL holders have a wonderful system, no examiners, no paperwork, responsibility rests on the pilots shoulders, nowhere else, just as it should be.
You will understand why I do not support replacing this with something requiring examiners, paperwork, etc.
Nor me. Instructors are wonderful people, but like the rest of us make mistakes.
The rules are not the problem.
Complexity and confusion comes from what the rules aren't, from what senior people like this imagine them to be.
LAPL holders have a wonderful system, no examiners, no paperwork, responsibility rests on the pilots shoulders, nowhere else, just as it should be.
You will understand why I do not support replacing this with something requiring examiners, paperwork, etc.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 5 nM S of TNT, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" can't understand why the (very experienced) instructor ..."
Nor me. Instructors are wonderful people, but like the rest of us make mistakes.
The rules are not the problem.
Complexity and confusion comes from what the rules aren't, from what senior people like this imagine them to be.
LAPL holders have a wonderful system, no examiners, no paperwork, responsibility rests on the pilots shoulders, nowhere else, just as it should be.
You will understand why I do not support replacing this with something requiring examiners, paperwork, etc.
Nor me. Instructors are wonderful people, but like the rest of us make mistakes.
The rules are not the problem.
Complexity and confusion comes from what the rules aren't, from what senior people like this imagine them to be.
LAPL holders have a wonderful system, no examiners, no paperwork, responsibility rests on the pilots shoulders, nowhere else, just as it should be.
You will understand why I do not support replacing this with something requiring examiners, paperwork, etc.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keeping a LAPL current
Given that the LAPL is a European licence, does anyone know if a UK LAPL holder can do the biennial refresher hour with a foreign instructor in his European country of residence? What proof is supplied that this refresher requirement has been completed (log book entry, separate piece of paper, .....) ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the LAPL is a European licence, does anyone know if a UK LAPL holder can do the biennial refresher hour with a foreign instructor in his European country of residence? What proof is supplied that this refresher requirement has been completed (log book entry, separate piece of paper, .....) ?
However, almost certain that no separate piece of paper required and probably not the instructor's signature in logbook either!