EASA Light Aircraft Pilot's License (2010)

[HeathrowAirport]

Hello All,

I was just wondering having read the New NPA's for the FCL001.

Currently I am undertaking the NPPL (Thanks to those who guided me toward's It's existence), and will be solo by the Summer at earliest. Due to using EMA to pay my flying, it's one a month a lesson at the moment.



I was reading a certain section; that does not make sense to me.

FCL.110 LAPL — Crediting for the same aircraft category
(a) Applicants for an LAPL that who have held another licence in the same category of
aircraft shall be fully credited towards the requirements of the LAPL in that category of
aircraft.
(b) Without prejudice to the paragraph above, if the applicant’s licence has lapsed for more
than 1 year, he/she the applicant shall have to pass a skill test in accordance with
FCL.125 for the issue of an LAPL in the appropriate aircraft category.

So according to this, when I have my NPPL (If I get a part time Job) this time next year on the aircraft I am rated on, does this mean I get the LAPL license for that type? But I have to do another Skill's test, similar to the Skill's test I do for the NPPL when I get to it.

FCL.110.A LAPL(A) – Experience requirements and crediting
(a) Applicants for an LAPL(A) shall have completed at least 30 hours of flight time
instruction on aeroplanes or TMG, including at least:
(1) 15 hours of dual instruction in the class in which the skill test will be taken;
(2) 6 hours of supervised solo flight time, including at least 3 hours of solo crosscountry
flight time with at least 1 cross-country flight of at least 150 km, during
which 1 full stop landing at an aerodrome different from the aerodrome of departure
shall be made.
(b) Specific requirements for applicants holding a Basic LAPL for aeroplanes. Applicants for
an LAPL(A) holding a Basic LAPL for aeroplanes shall have completed 10 hours of flight
instruction, including at least:
(1) 6 5 hours of dual instruction;
(2) 3 4 hours of supervised solo flight time, including 3 hours solo cross-country
flight time with at least 1 cross-country flight of at least 150 km, during which 1
full stop landing at an aerodrome different from the aerodrome of departure shall be
made.
(c) Specific requirements for applicants holding an LAPL(S) with TMG extension. Applicants
for an LAPL(A) holding an LAPL(S) with TMG extension shall have completed at least 24
21 hours of flight time on TMGs after the endorsement of the TMG extension and
complied with the requirements of FCL.135.BLAPL(a) on aeroplanes, of which at
least 3 shall be of dual instruction.
(d) Crediting. Applicants holding a pilot licence for another category of aircraft, with the
exception of balloons, shall be credited with 10 % of their total flight time as pilot-incommand
in such aircraft, up to a maximum of 6 hours, towards the requirement in (a).
(d) Crediting. Applicants with prior flight experience may be credited towards the
requirements in (a).
The amount of credit shall be decided by the ATO where the pilot undergoes the
training course, on the basis of a pre-entry flight test, but shall in any case:
(1) not exceed the total flight time experience of the applicant;
(2) not exceed 50% of the hours required in (a);
(3) not include the requirements of (a)(2).

So If I have my license how on earth do I gain it if I have the NPPL? When I have more than 50% of the hours.

A further question is, looking at the rip off medical deceleration I need to get signed (£185 according to someone from LAA on the comment's, when I spent £10 for the NPPL one)

I meet all requirements for it currently (2008 NPA PART-MED for LPL) but I gather this will be less stringent come the release in May 2010. And come 2012 when this come's in to force due to recent talks.

Having that said according to this I meet Class 2 Requirements according to EASA. But the CAA say I don't, so that's why I am NPPL.


Does anyone think it will change?


All Help needed on what's going to happen. Thanks.

In reference too, http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/doc/CRD%20b.2%20-%20Combined%20Subparts%20+%20Appendices.pdf

http://www.easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/doc/NPA/NPA%202008-17c.pdf

[IO540]

My advice is to get on with what you want in your life now and forget promises of 64 virgins in 2010 :)

I've been flying only 10 years but if I got a penny for every time something worthwhile was promised "just around the corner" I would be flying a TBM850 :)

Your questions are reasonable but the kind of implementation detail is yet to be thrashed out in the political arena.

BTW, don't do the NPPL unless you actually fail to get the CAA Class 2 medical. Assuming a given pilot competence, it cannot cost significantly less money than a full JAA PPL, and if EASA fail to give some sort of credit for it, it will be a dead end unless you want to never fly outside the UK.

[HeathrowAirport]

IO540,

I sent my eyesight results to the CAA last March before the recent change's in September 09.

And they said my refractive error was outside requirements :{ and I did not look at an aircraft for about 6 month's and then realised the NPPL's existence.

So basically they wont let me pass a Class 2 Medical simply because my correction is just oustide their limits. (March 2009) I do however now meet their Sub-Standard Vision in one eye requirements. (Since Sept 2009)

However reading this NPA for the new requirements for the Class 2. Shown below, I actually meet it. But according to the CAA I don't. So were do I go? Because I would like to gain a Class 2 but cannot see it happening due to one small thing.

Because a) Their is no 'If you need correction the refractive error must not exceed +5 to -8 dioptres.' < that the CAA say you must have before gaining a Class 2.
b) I am better than 6/6 in the good eye, and no worse than 6/18 in the bad eye. Having only Mild Amblyopia.

VISUAL SYSTEM class
2 medical certificates
1. Eye examination
1.1. At each aeromedical revalidation examination an assessment of the visual fitness of the
licence holder should be undertaken and the eyes should be examined with regard to possible
pathology. Conditions which indicate further ophthalmological examination include, but are
not limited to, a substantial decrease in the uncorrected visual acuity, any decrease in best
corrected visual acuity and/or the occurrence of eye disease, eye injury, or eye surgery.
1.2. At the initial assessment the examination should include ocular motility, binocular vision,
colour vision and visual fields.
1.3. At the initial assessment the applicant should submit a copy of the recent spectacle
prescription if visual correction is required to meet the visual requirements.
2. Routine eye examination
A routine eye examination should include:
(i) history;
(ii) visual acuities; near, intermediate and distant vision (uncorrected and with best optical
correction if needed);
(iii) examination of the external eye, anatomy, media and fundoscopy;
(iv) further examination on clinical indication
3. Visual Acuity
In an applicant with amblyopia, the visual acuity of the amblyopic eye shall be 6/18 (0,3) or better.
The applicant may be assessed as fit provided the visual acuity in the other eye is 6/6 (1,0) or
better, with or without correction, and no significant pathology can be demonstrated.
4. Substandard vision
4.1. Reduced stereopsis, abnormal convergence not interfering with near vision and ocular
misalignment where the fusional reserves are sufficient to prevent asthenopia and diplopia
may be acceptable.
4.2. An applicant with substandard vision in 1 eye may be assessed as fit subject to a satisfactory
flight test if the better eye:
(i) achieves distant visual acuity of 6/6 (1.0), corrected or uncorrected;
(ii) achieves intermediate visual acuity of N14 and N5 for near;
(iii) has no significant pathology.
4.3. An applicant with a visual field defect may be considered as fit if the binocular visual field is
normal and the underlying pathology is acceptable.
5. Eye Surgery
5.1. After refractive surgery, a fit assessment may be considered provided that there is stability of
refraction, there are no postoperative complications and no increase in glare sensitivity.
5.2. After cataract, retinal or glaucoma surgery a fit assessment may be considered once recovery
is complete.
6. Correcting lenses
Correcting lenses should permit the licence holder to meet the visual requirements at all distances.

All I want to do now, is fly privately for re-creational purposes such as an expensive hobby. And go from their. That's why I took the opportunity to get a NPPL Group 2 License.


What can I actually do - what suggestion's do you have? If EASA say this about Class 2 but CAA put their own stupid restriction (according to someone from CAA whom I spoke to on here said it's their for no reason (Long-sighted) - Were do I go about getting a Class 2 if the Authority that now as far as I am aware run's/will run the CAA legally states I can gain a Class 2 with my current eyesight but CAA say's no? :=:mad::\

I am happy to get an EASA LAPL due to it's benefits as long as I meet their eyesight requirements. Last I heard it's the same as UK DVLA driving standards?

I have just had the Commercial Dream taken away forever, and having only just started my NPPL, I won't let this one go without fight. I am not the only one either. I will sue EASA, if they take away something I have just gained (Legally I am able to do)

[robin]

Only my personal take on this

The NPPL is likely to be directly transferred to the new LAPL but they haven't yet sorted out the medical requirements.

Whilst the Brits want the current medical arrangements the EU and the medical fraternity are a bit p*ss*d off at the potential loss of income and want us to fork out at least the cost of a Class 2 medical.

This is by no means sorted yet and I'd doubt it will be by the projected 2012 deadline.

As with all things EASA, it's best to wait rather than believe what they say today.

I wish the CAA would take that approach.............

[champair79]

Whilst the Brits want the current medical arrangements the EU and the medical fraternity are a bit p*ss*d off at the potential loss of income and want us to fork out at least the cost of a Class 2 medical.


Sounds typical of the E.U. Money comes before safety and common sense!

[HeathrowAirport]

Typical, European Bureaucracy at it's bloody best. :ugh:

Well that was the expected thought, that it will be transferred but in what capacity? And how easily - is what I want to know.

I actually meet in terms of Amblyopia Class 2 Requirements. (So I cannot see the LAPL Deceleration being more advanced than this) But I don't meet the CAA's requirements for the correction to reach said said vision. Rather annoyingly and upsetting.

From recent experience (the hours I have done so far) I can see everything very clearly. I have completed exercises 1-9, I am now on exercise 10A (Dreaded Stall/Spin awareness) and then Emergencies then Circuit/Solo Circuit.

I think if their was issue's they would have been seen by now, but that's besides the point.

Why are EASA trying to KILL GA?

[IO540]

The medical department in each national CAA is the most powerful department there.

IMHO this is because of the hugely emotive subject of pilot incapacitation. Arguing for any relaxation in medical standards goes down as well as arguing for convicted paedos to have unsupervised access to kids...

This is why, as various attempts have been made to simplify this and that, the medical stuff has proved to be very stubborn.

One example is the private IR (PPL/IR) which still needs the Class 1 audiogram (which many older people fail in one ear) despite its lack of relevance to private flight which is always done with monaural headsets!

If the only way to get flying now is on the NPPL, then go for the NPPL. It is reasonable to expect that there will be a conversion route to an "EASA PPL"...

[HeathrowAirport]

IO540

Thank's for the help.

So will the CAA likely ever remove this restriction on refractive Error (that was Include in JAR) But is not Included in the EASA requirements?

[IO540]

Nobody could possibly answer that question.

I think the history of the UK CAA relaxing medical requirements, especially the initial ones which they hold so dear, is not encouraging.

[HeathrowAirport]

I also just realised, it's JAR Medical requirements.

So when EASA come through I might have a brighter picture?

As this is what the CAA go by/will go by, come 2012?

[trevs99uk]

EASA are surpose to issue the next part on Medical requirments in May
ie Part-MED Comment period closed MAY 2010

Then there should be a CRT comment response period where perhaps question like these could be asked. Just like you have a CRT to reply to for the just issued FCL.

trevor