more lapl nppl

[much2much]

if a person has a new lapl,based on a nppl conversion, but on issue lacks the 12 hours in the previous 24 months,


can they fly?




or do they need to build the 12hours under the supervision of a ato, or using nppl privileges if it is still current?


if they take a proficiency check instead of flying solo supervised, ,but after that flight still fail to meet the hours,


how long does the check last ?


or does it simply allow them to fly solo to rebuild the hours?

[BillieBob]

You may only exercise the privileges of a LAPL if you meet the recency requirements at the time of each flight. If the recency requirements are not met, you must either pass a proficiency check or complete the shortfall in hours dual or solo under the supervision of an instructor (not necessarily within an ATO).

The proficiency check only enables you to "resume the exercise of the privileges of the licence"; it has no validity beyond your next flight.

[Mach Jump]

Even after being revised, the requirements are still very badly writen.

FCL.140.A LAPL(A) — Recency requirements
(a) Holders of an LAPL(A) shall only exercise the privileges of their licence when they have completed, in the last 24 months, as pilots of aeroplanes or TMG:
(1) at least 12 hours of flight time as PIC, including 12 take-offs and landings; and
(2) refresher training of at least 1 hour of total flight time with an instructor.

(b) Holders of an LAPL(A) who do not comply with the requirements in (a) shall:
(1) undertake a proficiency check with an examiner before they resume the exercise of the privileges of their licence; or
(2) perform the additional flight time or take-offs and landings, flying dual or solo under the supervision of an instructor, in order to fulfil the requirements in (a).

In (a) there should be the alternative of having completed a proficiency check in the last 24 months.

Without that, there is no point doing a proficiency check, because you still have to complete the shortfall of hours/refresher traing in (b)(2)


MJ:ok:

[Level Attitude]

the 12 hours in the previous 24 monthsIt is 12 Hours and 1 Hour with an Instructor. Total 13 Hours.

If your LAPL is not valid then you cannot exercise it's Privileges. But if you hold another valid Licence (eg NPPL) then you can fly on those Privileges until the experience gained renders your LAPL valid again.

build the 12hours under the supervision of a atoThe rules don't state nor, as far as I can see, even imply that an ATO needs to be involved. However it would be a very brave Instructor who authorised an 'unlicenced' pilot to fly solo outside the auspices of a flying school. This would also have to be authorised by an FI, I cannot see this falling within the privileges of a CRI.

[BillieBob]

Without that, there is no point doing a proficiency check, because you still have to complete the shortfall of hours/refresher traing in (b)(2)You could always take a proficiency check before each flight until you gained the required recency :E

[BEagle]

Unfortunately, EASA forgot to specify the content of any LAPL proficiency check (whether for aeroplanes, helicopters, sailplanes, balloons or airships), so at the moment there is no such animal.....:confused:

One of the many items the oft-delayed FCL.002 NPA is supposed to have addressed......:rolleyes:

[much2much]

OK thanks guys just thought i must have missed something?

but alas not.

been dealing with these amazing bureaucrats for nearly 40 years

oversight, should have been expected


thanks

[much2much]

FI outside of an ato,??? perhaps superposition on my part? or pre- empting.

which we all know is is dangerous," a instructor said and so on",

YES "March jump,"or have completed a check would indeed seem to have made sense,

but when i try to explain licence issues to people,and they argue with the statement,

"that does not make sense because.....", i either over complicate the issue trying to explain or have to say .

sense!!!!!!!

read this!:ugh::ugh: tha tis how it is ,in CAA/EASA land? sorry!!:sad:im just trying to help.

[xrayalpha]

Oh isn't this some great bEuro-boll*cks!

So we have a chap who has just got a free LAPL (apart from fees) on the back of his NPPL SSEA.

But since he kept his NPPL SSEA valid by using the hours on his microlight (since he also had a microlight rating on his NPPL) plus an hour with a SSEA instructor, he can't actually use his LAPL!

Of course, to use his LAPL the day after it arrived in the post, he needs to have light aircraft hours. And he can't even reval by test, since he would have to do about 12 of them!!

How could you have made this up?!

(yes, I know, he just does the light aircraft hours on his NPPL SSEA, but still, why d I have to explain this stuff? Are these rule makers just idiots, or are they professional red-tape-tanglers)

[Mach Jump]

...Are these rule makers just idiots, or are they professional red-tape-tanglers...


Probably neither. I doubt they did it deliberately, just carelessness, and a lack of adequate proof reading. :rolleyes:


MJ:ok:

[much2much]

The ATO bit, new i seen it some where (CAA web page how to stay legal)

EASA licences

EASA licences are lifetime licences but to be able to fly legally you need to have a suitable valid medical and ensure that your ratings or personal validity remain current.

Some ratings, Single Engine Piston (SEP) for example, have expiry dates. Others, like a Night rating, do not. Your ratings may need revalidating to keep them current. If they have expired you will have to renew them.

If you have a LAPL, your personal validity is self-assessed, but if it has lapsed it will need to be re-established through a test or flying under the supervision of an approved training organisation (ATO).

Your licence, ratings, certificates or privileges do not automatically allow you to fly with passengers. If you want to fly with passengers then you must have completed three take-offs and three landings as the pilot in the 90 days prior to your planned flight.

Use the menu on the left to navigate to more information on common licence types, including those not issued as EASA licences.

[Level Attitude]

The ATO bit, new i seen it some where (CAA web page how to stay legal)FCL.140.A LAPL(A) — Recency requirements
(b) Holders of an LAPL(A) who do not comply with the requirements in (a) shall:
(2) perform the additional flight time or take-offs and landings, flying dual or solo under the supervision of an instructor, in order to fulfil the requirements in (a). Flights may be either solo or dual.
CAA 'How to stay legal' web page only refers to the solo element which, although not mandatory at an ATO, is (as I previously stated) probably a good idea. Dual flying can be conducted by any suitably qualified FI - either inside or outside of an ATO environment.