Changes to Class 1 Medical.

[Whirlybird]

I've just renewed my Class 1 medical...and I'm annoyed and I need some answers!!!

As some of you will know, some recent changes were made to the frequency of Class 1 medicals for those aged 40 - 59. The details are given here. http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=49&pagetype=90&pageid=7156

Right, so as it says, all over-40 commercial pilots now need medicals only yearly, except those engaged in single pilot commercial air transport passenger carrying operations. And, as we know, this doesn't apply to instructors, since students aren't considered as passengers. Right? (If I'm wrong on that, please pm me now, and don't bother reading on).

Now, I do no flying work except instructing, so I mentioned to my AME that I wouldn't be seeing him for a year. And he told me I'd got it wrong! He insisted that students were passengers, and that what I did counted as single pilot etc etc. So we argued, and he said he'd phone the CAA. I relaxed, expecting to be assured I was right. Now, I don't know who he talked to (I should have asked), but he assured me it was the two women he usually consulted, who knew the rules backwards and inside-out. And......they said that instructors still needed medicals 6-monthly!!!! I was flabbergasted. I demanded to speak to the woman myself, but she was quite adamant that since it wasn't multi-crew, medicals were still 6-monthly. :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

So I'm in possession of a medical certificate which states clearly that its expiry date is next February except for "single pilot air transport operations carrying passengers". And I don't do those, or plan to!!! And I don't know what to do, or who to believe, or when to renew my medical. Did my AME and the woman he phoned at the CAA get it wrong? Or have the CAA worded their own rules incorrectly; it wouldn't be the first time? Or am I confused (wouldn't be the first time for that either). But I need to know, as do others.

Can anyone help? And, since I've promised to let my AME know what I find out, can they find something in writing which I can forward on. And also, please direct me to something I can show him that says that students aren't passengers. Since he won't believe me, and he'll go on misleading others.
Like I said, if I'm the one who's got this wrong, my apologies, and please let me know.

(And after all that, by some miracle he still got a normal blood pressure reading from me)

[unfazed]

Also an Instructor like yourself but my AME said "see you in a year"

Suggest that you check in with another AME and ask for a pointer in the right direction as far as rules definition. Your guy is definitely wrong.

[sierracharlie]

Well according to this CAA document (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/49/SRG_MED-MedicalCertificateExpiryDates%5B2362%5D.pdf) it is one year for Flying Instructors, see table in para 2.

Appears that the AMEs have not been properly briefed. Similar story documented here (http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=28828).

[P.Pilcher]

I think that all our AME's are a bit miffed at having their income from medical examinations significantly reduced by the new rules, they are bound to try and increase their income a bit if they can get away with it!

P.P.

[EvilKitty]

Forgive me if I am being dense on this (I am but a lowly student), I have a few questions. Firstly though, I fully understand that a medical is just an indication of your previous health and your health at the medical examination, and absolutely no guarantee that you wont keel over as soon as you walk out of the door no matter how long its validity is.

1) what is the difference between flight instruction and single pilot ops? Ok, for a post solo student then you know that they can land (although they may get lost and it might be bumpy, but generally speaking you'll survive). But for a low hours/pre solo student? From my experience as a student, you progress from being passenger to pilot.

2) at what point does flight instruction become single pilot ops? for instance if you have a "one flies there, one flies back" trip, or if the student brings along a friend? the non-flying person is in the back and so a passenger?

[latedownwind]

Just had the same response from my AME 2 weeks ago.
''You're an instuctor -- You're single pilot --so see you in six months-- oh and because my air transport multi-crew pilots are now visiting less frequently I'm putting up my fees to cover my costs'' Nearly 200 quid every six months inc CAA E.C.G costs is getting a bit steep!
I for one dont want to be flying illegally so its important to resolve this. If the official wordage says ''single pilot carrying passengers'' but the staff are verbally saying ''oh yes but that includes student pilots too'' where can I get a definitive answer?? That seems to be 2 parts of the same CAA giving conflicting advice.

[VFE]

I think that all our AME's are a bit miffed at having their income from medical examinations significantly reduced by the new rules, they are bound to try and increase their income a bit if they can get away with it!

P.P.

I think that's a little unfair PP. Most AME's are PPL holders themselves and are hip to the financial problems which most of us instructors and recreational pilots endure whilst pursuing our pleasures and goals. Indeed, my AME (who incidentally is a retired GP but very keen flyer) always gives me a discounted price at renewal which is absolutely fantastic of him.

VFE.

[Pirate]

The wording on the certificate specifies single pilot air transport operations, carrying passengers. Article 157 of the ANO defines, in a rather convoluted way, public transport as the carriage of passengers. It follows that an instructional flight with a bona fide student is aerial work. What may muddy the water is the selling of 'trial lessons' which are actually pleasure flights. The definitive answer can only come from CAA legal department, who are very helpful in such matters. Write to them at:

Secretary and Legal Advisor's Office
Civil Aviation Authority
CAA House
London
WC2B 6TE

Confundemus

[Whirlybird]

sierracharlie,
That document seems pretty clear; thank you. I'll send a copy to my AME. I find it absolutely horrendous that not only the AMEs, but also the people at the CAA, don't know their own rules - the lady I talked to was quite adamant about it.

Pirate,
Trial lessons are NOT pleasure flights, period. The two are totally different. This has been discussed at length in other places. There is no muddying of the waters so far as that is concerned, so don't let's go over it all again here, where we have other important issues that clearly need sorting out.

[Pirate]

Whirlybird.

Sorry to disagree with you but I have some knowledge of this matter as I was working in CAA when this was discussed at length in the context of whether FTOs needed an AOC for purely flying training. It really does hinge on the definition of a bona fide student but it's still a grey area as it can only really be tested in court and, thankfully, that hasn't happened.

Happy landings.

[Whirlybird]

Pirate,

OK, sorry, I didn't know that. But I don't think it alters the medical issue.

Either a trial lesson is what it says - and you don't need an AOC, and the instructor needs yearly medicals (according to the CAA's own rules).

Or it's a pleasure flight, you do need an AOC, and the medical requirements are of course in accordance with commercial flying requirements.

Since at the moment a trial lesson is considered as flying training, what happens in the future or in a hypothetical court case is not relevant. I'm trying to establish what bona fide flight instructors, carrying out real flight training, need in the way of medicals. And I think that's now clear. I've printed out the document which sierracharlie kindly directed me to, and sent a copy to my AME. So many thanks to everyone, and I sincerely hope this matter is now sorted.

Phew! Why is everything to do with flying so complicated? :ugh:

[IO540]

Re: trial lessons being pleasure flights

This one has indeed been done to death in all the usual places. One can rest assured that if the regs were tightened most smaller schools would close. AIUI, the minimum cost of getting an AOC is about £20,000 and that is a very simple one.

I don't think the CAA wants this to happen. The end result would be even more people going to Florida, etc, not to mention a decline in GA activity as a whole.

It's easy to find somebody "in the CAA" or "formerly in the CAA" who feels otherwise. I've met current CAA employees who want to ban all single pilot jet flights in UK airspace, who want every pilot in the airways to have an ATPL, you name it. Get any CAA CofA inspector talking privately and you will get loads of "inside info on what is going to happen very soon".

Same if you speak to people at NATS. If some of them got half a chance they would ban business jets from UK airspace, on the grounds that they have 2.5x more busts than BA's Nigels.

Thankfully none of these people are policymakers.

[unfazed]

Interesting point made about loss of AME annual income from medicals

I was advised that every test would have to be "synchronised" date wise and it just so happened that my normally 150 to £180 medical suddenly cost me £200

:\

[vetflyer]

If AME are mainly GP then i am sure the money made from medicals must be a small part of their income given the recent pay rise .( and changed work load)

But this is side issue , if FI need medicals twice yearly then it is the least well paid group being forced to pay.

That said my AME is very good and does not overcharge me.

So any ideas how to resolve the query ?

[Whirlybird]

vetflyer,
If you read the document which sierracharlie provided the link for, the query is solved - it specifically says that instructors' medicals are yearly.

Now how do we get this through to the AMEs? (Mine hasn't replied to me yet. :( )

[ariel]

For pleasure flights of any nature, (of which instructing is NOT), you require an AOC.

quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
For instructing, an AOC is not required.Sorry to disagree with you but I have some knowledge of this matter as I was working in CAA when this was discussed at length in the context of whether FTOs needed an AOC for purely flying training

God help us all if the above ever transpires. As somebody who works in close context with organisations who have HAD to obtain and operate an AOC, it is an extremely time consuming, difficult and very expensive operation.

If flying schools are forced to obtain their own AOC in the future, I can quite confidentely predict that most small, (and some not so small), schools will go out of business - it simply wouldn't be worth it. This would obviously mean that ultimately, instructors would lose out, because there would not be much work around at all.

Perhaps the CAA want this - I don't know....

(sorry to go a little off subject)

[BEagle]

From the CAA's website:

The JAA will shortly publish Amendment 5 of JAR FCL 3 Medical Requirements. One of the changes is that class one medical certificate holders aged between 40 and 59 years of age, other than those engaged in single pilot commercial air transport passenger carrying operations, will have an increased certificate validity from 6 months to 1 year for examinations undertaken after the December 2006 UK implementation date.

Other changes affecting ECG validity periods and the period of validity of some class two medical certificates will also come into effect on the same date. (See change in frequency of medical examinations below for details of these other changes.)

Please note that these changes will come in December 2006 and medical examinations undertaken before this date will be subject to the current requirements, including validity periods. There will be no retrospective application of the rules.

Class one certificate holders who would be due to undertake an additional investigation (eg electrocardiogram or audiogram) with a future revalidation examination are advised to bring forward the date of the investigation to the date of their first examination on or after the December date on which these changes are implementated, so that the dates of medical examinations and investigations are synchronised. Otherwise, additional tests will become due, and have to be completed, in-between periodic medical examinations.
The exact date of implementation is subject to IT changes and will be notified in due course.

All UK Aeromedical Examiners have been briefed on these changes and will be able to answer any individual queries.

It is clear to me that some AMEs do not understand the meaning of the words commercial air transport which is emphatically NOT the same as SEP ab initio instruction, for example. Whether this is driven by their avarice or whether by ignorance of terminology is unclear; however, I will write to the CAA and request that all AMEs are re-briefed accordingly.

[Whirlybird]

BEagle,

Many, many thanks. I was hoping someone like you would do something like that.

I'm pretty sure that in the case of my AME at least, it was ignorance rather than avarice. We had a fairly heated argument on the subject of students. He was saying that it's entirely illogical to say that pre-solo students are members of the crew. I don't know what logic has to do with aviation law, personally! But what really worried me was that he phoned the CAA, and whoever he spoke to was someone whom he invariably trusts to give him the correct answers. And she also said instructors needed six-monthly medicals!!! I wish I'd asked who it was, but anyway, maybe you can get it through the CAA's collective heads that such people need to know their own rules.

[BEagle]

Whirls, I've e-mailed the CAA people responsible as promised.

Incidentally, a CAA chap (whop osts on PPRuNe) confirms that FIs (40-60) do NOT ordinarily need 6-monthly Class One Medicals (unless they're also involved in Single Pilot CAT Ops, of course).

[loftustb]

The cost of my Class One increased by £55 at the last renewal. I think AMEs ARE trying to preserve their income.

[Noggin]

My AME took the trouble to explain the new form to me correctly.
Those AMEs who incorrectly claim that students are passengers and that instructors need a mediacl every 6 months should sit back and think before they open their mouths. If they were right, it would not be possible to instruct over the age of 60; single pilot public transport over 60 is not allowed! Oh dear their income would go down if that was true.