CAA, rating vv medical

[pembroke]

I know this has been done before but I think it's important and a touch of "mission creep" by the CAA. Today I asked PLD why a renewed SEP rating could not be issued to a UK lifetime PPL, without a class 1 or 2 medical. I realise, as does the PPL that the priviliges of the rating can't used without a medical, but I maintain the rating should be issued, given that the PPL passed the LST and the examiner signed the SRG 1119.
As an aside the PPL had a (NPPL) Docs. declaration and may well obtain a Class 2, or continue the NPPL, SSEA route
I was quoted AIC W 053/2001(June) and the FE handbook as reference. It was also put to me that if a licence doesn't have a medical it is no longer valid, and therefore can't contain a rating! It's a licence , in this case "lifetime" but in theory doesn't exist. I asked how an expired licence or a lifetime licence can contain old ratings, ie no longer valid, again I was quoted the AIC. (In my case , and in my licence,I remember the DC-10 and B737 well, sorry 10yrs ago!)
Re the AIC, I quote (para 3.3) "Similarly, an aircraft rating other than SSEA,SLMG or microlight cannot be revalidated or renewed without a Class 1 or 2 medical being in force". That is simply wrong.
Re the 2010 FE handbook, Sect. 2 , 2.3 gives some advice on checking the medical but importantly doesn't stop the reval./renewal process if the medical is out of date. Also the flow chart on Appx 9-2/3 doesn't require a check of the medical.
Comments please.
PS I was also told this will change again under EASA!

[BillieBob]

That is simply wrong.In what way is it 'wrong'? Or do you just mean that you do not agree with it?

ANO Article 65(3) - The CAA must include a rating or qualification if it is satisfied that the applicant is qualified by having the knowledge, experience, competence, skill and physical and mental fitness to act in the capacity to which the rating or qualification relates.

Since there is no evidence of the applicant's physical and mental fitness, the CAA is not obliged to issue the rating.

[pembroke]

Agreed, but if that is the case why have the CAA not included a medical status box on either the SRG\1119 or for example on the SRG\1125, the IMC application. Both concern ratings and both are about the ability to fly,ie an initial granting, revalidation or renewal of a rating. When I sign the F150 rating page, I am signing to say the rating is valid either by test or experience. I am not attesting to the PPL's medical status.

[Whopity]

why have the CAA not included a medical status box on either the SRG\1119 or for example on the SRG\1125, the IMC application.Because the Medical Certificate is a separate condition for the issue or renewal of a licence or rating, and is not actually a condition for taking the test! It is a recent recommendation that examiners do not test candidates without a medical certificate; but CAA staff have been seen to revalidate ratings without valid medicals however, they were not applying to have a rating or licence reissued, and would have been refused such an application.

Maybe you should read ORS 4 No 816 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_816.pdf)The use of a Medical Declaration with Pilot Licences other than NPPL when flying
SSEA, SLMG and Microlight Aeroplanes
1) The Civil Aviation Authority (“the CAA”) in exercise of its powers under article 242 of
the Air Navigation Order 2009 (the "Order"), exempts any person who holds a specified
pilot licence from the requirement of article 72(2) of the Order that the privileges of the
licence may not be exercised unless the licence includes an appropriate medical
certificate.
2) In this exemption a specified pilot licence is a pilot licence issued by the CAA, other than
a National Private Pilot’s Licence, which permits the holder to fly single engine piston
aeroplanes (SEP), simple single engine aeroplanes (SSEA), self launching motor gliders
(SLMG) or microlight aeroplanes.3) This Exemption is subject to the following conditions:
3.1 the licence holder shall not exercise the privileges of the licence in any aircraft other than
a simple single engine aeroplane (SSEA), self launching motor glider (SLMG) or
microlight aeroplane for which an appropriate class rating is held;
3.9 the licence holder has a medical declaration which is:
a) valid in accordance with article 73; or
b) valid in accordance with the following conditions:
i) the holder has signed a statement of belief in the declaration that the holder
meets the medical requirements to fly, having regard to the standards specified
by the CAA in the declaration;
ii) the holder reasonably holds that belief;
iii) aa) the holder has authorised a Medical Adviser acting on behalf of NPLG Ltd to
review the holder’s medical records and countersign the declaration; or
bb) the holder's general practitioner has reviewed the holder's medical records
and the consultant responsible for the holder's clinical care has
countersigned the declaration after discussion with the general practitioner
and a medical adviser acting on behalf of NPLG Ltd;
iv) the countersignatory is satisfied that there is nothing in the pilot’s medical history
which prevents the pilot from meeting the medical standards specified in the
declaration;
Your candidate needs the relevant Medical Declaration and then needs to apply for a SSEA Class rating. SEP cannot be added without a valid Class 2 Medical Certificate. It has been this way for the past 11 years and so far as I can recall was the case under the UK system before that.

[pembroke]

Whopity, the rating is being renewed, outside the 5 year period, not added. Re. the ANO, the PPL would not fly without adhering to your quote, ie a class 1 or 2 medical to use his SEP rating.
Also you mention advice to examiners. To quote the FE handbook ,sect. 2.3.2
"Checks and tests for rating issue, renewal or revalidation may be carried out on individuals whose licence or medical is out of date......Certificate of revalidation can still be signed if appropriate ,but a marginal note of the expired medical made on SRG\1119"
To my knowledge there is no NOTEX saying the opposite of this , given this was the 2010 FE handbook approved by the CFE!
Given the above, why can't the CAA follow their own advice and issue a rating irrespective of the medical status. As they are now effectively a regional office of EASA, why introduce more complication?

[Whopity]

To my knowledge there is no NOTEX saying the opposite of this , given this was the 2010 FE handbook approved by the CFE!The recommendation came from the CFE himself at a Examiner's Standardisation Meeting at Gatwick in Oct 2010!
why can't the CAA follow their own advice and issue a rating irrespective of the medical statusWhere is your evidence of any such advice? The CAA have required existing National licence holders to maintain licences in accordance with JAR-FCL since Jan 2000. JAR-FCL 1.035 States:JAR–FCL 1.035 Medical fitness
(See IEM FCL 1.035)
(a) Fitness. The holder of a medical
certificate shall be mentally and physically fit to
exercise safely the privileges of the applicable
licence.
(b) Requirement for medical certificate. In
order to apply for or to exercise the privileges of
a licence, the applicant or the holder shall hold a
medical certificate issued in accordance with the
provisions of JAR–FCL 3 (Medical) and
appropriate to the privileges of the licence
You are applying for the re-issue of a class rating which has expired and therefore, no longer exists. To do so, you must have a valid medical certificate. Nothing to do with EASA yet!

From CAP53:
Chapter 2 Medical Certificates and Declarations of Health


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 A Private Pilot's Licence (PPL) will not be issued or renewed unless the applicant holds a valid medical certificate of the appropriate class. There are two types of certificate:

Class 3: Private Pilot's Licence (Aeroplanes and Helicopters)

Declaration of Health: Private Pilot's Licence (Microlights and Balloons)

(Class 1 and 2 Certificates apply to professional licences see CAP 54.)

[BEagle]

The original intention of the earlier versions of ORS4 No.816 was to allow pilots who had become unable to hold a JAA Class 2 medical certificate to continue flying. All they had to do was to obtain a 'NPPL Medical Declaration' and maintain their SEP class ratings, albeit restricted to NPPL-level privileges.

Unfortunately, this was seized upon by opportunists and the "Where does it say I can't" brigade, who then began renewing expired SEP Class Ratings in a manner totally against the spirit of the exemption.

Despite gypsies' warnings*, they persisted with this folly and royally screwed the pooch for everyone else. So, when ORS4 No.816 came out, the major change was that non-NPPL holders could henceforth only use the exemption until either their SEP Class Rating or Pilot Licence reached its validity expiry date (whichever occurred first), after which they either needed an SSEA Class Rating (and/or SLMG and Microlight Class Ratings if they'd already been exercising such privileges under an SEP Class Rating) or an NPPL. A JAR-FCL Pilot Licence cannot be re-issued without a valid medical, so the main effect has been that some 'legacy' UK PPL holders have had to obtain SSEA Class Ratings in accordance with the exemption.

However, there is little point in any non-NPPL holder applying for an SSEA Class Rating now, because come the joys of EASA part-FCL (which is anticipated for Apr 2012...:hmm: ), the CAA will be unable to sustain ORS4 No.816 - it will no longer have the necessary powers. So the exemption has a limited remaining usefulness. Any PPL holder unable to meet EASA part-MED Class 2 medical requirements (which are expected to be far less demanding than the JAA Class 2) should instead change to the NPPL (SSEA) which will continue to be valid until Apr 2015 at the earliest. Thereafter they will be able to convert to a LAPL, provided that they can hold a LAPL Medical Certificate (which will be available from their GPs).


*For those who don't understand what this means, a gypsy's warning is a quiet word to an employee or aquaintance, suggesting that they'd best proceed with caution in respect of their current conduct or attitude, or they may be in for an unpleasant surprise. The details of which aren't actually set out by the giver of the warning, who may or may not have control over their fate.

[pembroke]

Whopity, to answer some of your points;
Yes the SRG\1119 is a form used for test or revalidation, but it is now used for an english language tick, why not include the medical status if it's that important?
The FE standards meeting is an FIE meet, any "cascade" of info might take 3 years to filter down to humble PPL FEs. Why was the 2010 handbook published with such obviously inaccurate information, and why wasn't an urgent NOTEX issued?
Your final JAR FCL quote again refers to a licence, not a rating contained in the licence.
It's probably time to close this but I hope it's provided some illumination on yet another apparent glitch. I've just attempted to understand the IMC thread close to this. How shambolic is that. The CAA should expedite EASA and it's PLD implementation asap, and then maybe we can consign the CAA to history, or at least to a portacabin attached to the DVLA!
For my reference and on behalf of quite a few PPL/NPPLs out there, paying an arm and a leg to fly, I looked at(or should do):
AIC, ORS, CAA subscriptions, GASIL, RSS, CAPs, ANO/ANR, AIP, EASA NPAs,LASORS, and more. Is it any wonder that many pilots are confused?

[Whopity]

Your final JAR FCL quote again refers to a licence, not a rating contained in the licence.It refers to exercising the privileges of a licence and that requires an in-date licence, an aircraft rating and a valid medical certificate. I agree that there is a lot of confusion out there, but I also believe the requirement to get a licence or rating reissued is quite clear, and has not changed for many years. There is no real reason, or any JAA requirement, for a candidate to hold a valid medical certificate in order to undergo a skill test for a rating hence no justification for a box however; it is only fair to make the candidate aware that they will not get the rating re-issued without the medical certificate.The CAA should expedite EASA and it's PLD implementation asapRather difficult as its not yet law and even the CAA don't know what the final wording will be. When it is unleashed, its going to make matters many times worse than it now is and will not simplify anything!