Am I legal?

[Level Attitude]

so still don't know how to get a LAPL

Same as for any Licence or Rating that you do not hold - You apply to the CAA for issue.
(Though don't rely on the 'Scheme of Charges' to tell you how to apply.)

However be warned, due to:

FCL.015 Application and issue of licences, ratings and certificates
(c) A person shall not hold at any time more than one licence per category of aircraft issued in accordance with this Part.

If you do apply for an LAPL your current EASA PPL becomes a worthless piece of paper (which in some EASA countries would be required to be surrendered) so, in theory, even if a Class 2 Medical was regained in the future you would have to apply again to the CAA for the issue of a PPL.
(I don't think EASA has actually been in force long enough for anyone to have yet gone through this process; so exactly how the CAA would work this in practice remains an open question)

Well I'm off to get a class 2 medical, it seems the safest option

And may possibly give you the flexibility you want in the future as it is hoped that the rules will be changed such that LAPL privileges are included in an EASA PPL.

[Level Attitude]

The people who put in place this over complicated and strange system should ask themselves how we reached this level of complication

Part-FCL is badly written but a lot of the current rule complications are due to the transitional arrangements (which will run out next April) and the maintaining of various concessions, requested by GA organisations, including adding concessions built on other concessions:

EG
Many years (~10?) ago the LAA successfully argued that someone who was safe to fly, but couldn't quite reach Class 2 standards, should be allowed to do so - And the NPPL was born requiring a Medical Declaration signed by a GP to be used. Sensibly, if someone held a Class 2 (or Class 1), they didn't also have to get a Med. Dec.

Later the LAA argued that if an existing PPL holder's fitness fell temporarily below Class 2 standards but they could get a Med. Dec. then they should be able to use their PPL as if it was an NPPL without the time and hassle of applying for an actual NPPL The CAA agreed, but emphasised this was a temporary measure and that this concession, therefore, only applied until the expiry date of the existing SEP Rating.

EASA comes in to force in April 2012
Initially CAA applies for two year transition (UK PPLs can be used in EASA aircraft for two years). Later they apply for maximum transitional arrangements (UK PPLs can be used to LAPL privileges from April 2014 to April 2015).

LAA argue that LAPL Medical is equivalent (or even more stringent) than GP Med Dec so should be allowed to be used with NPPLs. CAA agrees.

LAA then argue that LAPL Medical should, therefore, also allow NPPL privileges to be exercised on a UK PPL. CAA agrees.

LAA then argue that if a UK PPL is only valid for EASA aircraft to LAPL privileges then only an LAPL needs to be held. CAA agrees.

A UK NPPL is also valid in EASA aircraft until April 2015 and can be used with either a GP Med Dec or an LAPL Medical. BUT because it is not a PPL it cannot be used to LAPL privileges, only NPPL privileges.

Not sure exactly of the history above - but you can see how complications creep in with every concession.

[glide1]

So what privileges do you get with A LAPL that you do not get with an EASA PPL?

[BEagle]

Not sure exactly of the history above - but you can see how complications creep in with every concession.

Mostly inaccurate.......

glide1 wrote:

So what privileges do you get with A LAPL that you do not get with an EASA PPL?

None. No IFR privileges may be added to a LAPL, neither may an instructor certificate, nor SEP privileges on aircraft of over 2000 kg and/or with more than 4 PoB. The LAPL medical is simpler and cheaper and (at the moment) the LAPL validity criteria are on a continuously rolling basis.

[glide1]

Thanks Beagle that is exactly how I understand it. The original poster memories of px seems a bit confused as to what licence he applied for and has received.
He is then not helped very much due to (well intentioned) but very misleading replies.

[A and C]

The elephant in the room

One of the things that I most dislike about aviation is the people who love complicated and intricate rules and restrictions that they turn into some form of black art.

It is from committees of these people that we get the situation outlined above and the EU & EASA thrives.

While I have some sympathy for the transitional problem argument this situation has got out of hand and is a prime example of the regulators driving people away from aviation as a result of the rules, after all if you were thinking of taking up recreational flying this thread is enought to put you off.

Those of you instructors above who have an intimate knowlage of the complicated licensing rules should be asking yourselves if this is a good use of your time and effort or would your students be better served by a simple PPL licensing system that they can understand and yourselfs spending your time and effort teaching them to fly the aircraft.

Just as in engineering were EASA over regulation has taken the Chief Engineers of small maintenance companies off the hangar floor and into the office to sort out the paperwork burden this sort of over regulation is doing the same thing with CFI,s as they get further from the briefing room.

The conclusion that I have to draw is that over regulation is the enemy of flight safety and the main culprit of this erosion of safety standards is an organization that calls its self the European Aviation SAFETY authority !

This morning we have awoken to the news that voters across Europe have rejected the people who bring us this over regulation nonsense to all walks of life, perhaps now there is both a political and practical message that unless the EU and EASA change their ways and put in place appropriate, practical and understandable rule making within ten years they will swept aside.

[Level Attitude]

The original poster memories of px seems a bit confused as to what licence he applied for and has received

True, but initially no one was aware of this (nor assumed it). The nub of the original question was "Can I fly a C-172 on an LAPL Medical". A question that cannot be precisely answered without knowing the licence held; and it took several Posts to tease this information out - the impression I had was that they hadn't even bothered to look at the 'two pieces of paper' in the 'little blue book' until prompted to by the replies on this Thread.

He is then not helped very much due to (well intentioned) but very misleading replies

I disagree. This has been one of the more helpful PPRuNe threads. The answers may not initially have provided the information 'memories of px' was seeking but that was due to additional information needing to be drawn out.

None of the replies, that I can see, on this thread are misleading at all - which ones are you referring to?

To me the most worrying statement in this thread is:

local examiner was equally unsure

[glide1]

Level Attitude

Firstly I agree with your comment about local examiner not knowing.
Here is one example of misleading info.

"And may possibly give you the flexibility you want in the future as it is hoped that the rules will be changed such that LAPL privileges are included in an EASA PPL."

An EASA PPL already gives you LAPL privileges. I think what you are meaning is at the moment it does not allow you to fly with LAPL privileges if your medical is downgraded to LAPL status, This is what might change in the future.
At the moment you would have to apply for a LAPL(A) (and give up your EASA PPL in the process).

[Whopity]

An EASA PPL already gives you LAPL privileges.

Common senses says it does, but the third rate legislation does not!

FCL.205.A PPL(A) — Privileges
(a) The privileges of the holder of a PPL(A) are to act without remuneration as PIC or co-pilot on aeroplanes or TMGs engaged in non-commercial operations.

No mention of LAPL wheras if you compare with the CPL

FCL.305 CPL — Privileges and conditions
(a) Privileges. The privileges of the holder of a CPL are, within the appropriate aircraft category, to:
(1) exercise all the privileges of the holder of an LAPL and a PPL;

To me the most worrying statement in this thread is:
Quote:
local examiner was equally unsure

It is hardly surprising as examiners have not been told anything by the CAA in recent years. Standards Documents are inconsistent and do not comply with Part FCL. The Regulation itself is incoherent in many places, and I note in a recent AAIB report they have not even managed to keep up with the changes either. The CAA itself does not understand much of the regulation, or their own documents, judging by the number of incorrect answers they dish out.

A and C is correct:

The conclusion that I have to draw is that over regulation is the enemy of flight safety and the main culprit of this erosion of safety standards is an organization that calls its self the European Aviation SAFETY authority !

Despite the fanfare of trumpets heralding in the new GA Dept, nothing has actually improved, or rather stopped getting worse. CAA Staff are generally disolusioned and they continue to resign.

[Level Attitude]

An EASA PPL already gives you LAPL privileges. I think what you are meaning is at the moment it does not allow you to fly with LAPL privileges if your medical is downgraded to LAPL status

NO. I mean an EASA PPL does not give you LAPL privileges.

It is true that both a valid PPL+SEP holder and a valid LAPL(aeroplane) holder can do pretty much the same things but that is not the same as saying a PPL contains/or gives someone LAPL privileges.

Unlike an LAPL holder a PPL holder is governed by the requirement to have a valid Rating.

FCL.700 Circumstances in which class or type ratings are required
(a) Except in the case of the LAPL, SPL and BPL, holders of a pilot licence shall not act in any capacity as pilots of an aircraft unless they have a valid and appropriate class or type rating, except when undergoing skill tests, or proficiency checks for renewal of class or type ratings, or receiving flight instructio

It does not matter if a PPL holder has 1,000+ hours experience, including, 100+ hours as PUT, in the previous year - the day after their SEP Rating expires they can no longer legally fly as PIC - whereas, if their PPL did contain LAPL privileges, they could.

[glide1]

Level Attitude

What you are saying is correct for recency requirements and rating validity.
That is not what is deemed as privileges which is why they are not contained within the privileges box on the relevant pages in CAP 804.
CAP 804 requires careful reading which takes time as A & C eluded to in an earlier post.

[Whopity]

Why mess about with CAP 804, which is riddled with errors, when you can go directly to the source regulation where the privileges are quite clearly laid out?

[memories of px]

CAA reply to my query

I am now legal again after passing a class 2 medical & ECG, i finally got a reply from the CAA, i reproduce my query and their reply below.
Dear sirs,
after phoning your staff yesterday to confirm that a ppl would cover lapl benefits, i came along this morning to have the licence issued.
However , reading through the licence i cannot see any reference to lapl.
All i want to do is make use of the second year of my class 2 medical which is good for lapl use.
i only intend to fly a C172, 4 seater, under 2 tonnes, am i covered?
or if not what do i need to do please.
Yours sincerely, pf.
The Reply:-
When you came to our counter you annotated that you would like ATPL, PPL and LAPL you can only have one of these and you confirmed that you would like PPL, the types you mentioned below are covered within your PPL and you are fully entitled to a PPL and this is a higher class then the LAPL, as you hold a CLASS 2 medical this also granted you the PPL.

Kind Regards
FCL

Although not fully answering my question, with the help of people on pprune ,
i have come to the following conclusions:-
you cannot use the second year of a class 2 medical unless you actually have a LAPL, this is not embedded in your PPL , you have to be issued with one and hand back your PPL.
at my age , 60, you need a class 2 medical annually with ECG every two years for a PPL, it cost £100 including ECG,( i was quoted £180 from another medical centre) for peace of mind and possibly early detection, i think it makes sense to have an annual medical rather than save a few quid with a LAPL medical and LAPL licence.

[Whopity]

A fairly typical answer however;

you annotated that you would like ATPL, PPL and LAPL you can only have one of these

But, if you had obtained the ATPL, it would have included all the others as mine does!

[memories of px]

I didn't realise that they wouldn't issue
an atpl without a class one medical, as I'm winding down I didn't see the need
for all that expense, I just want to fly the c172 as cheaply as possible!

[Whopity]

You are correct, you need a Class one to get the licence, but then it is valid for life and the privileges are simply dependent on the medical you hold. They have not written LAPL in the licence, but as its clearly written in the regulation they don't need to.

[memories of px]

so, the thing to do would be, next medical renewal, get a class one, get the uk atpl converted to easa, then after that go back to a class 2. It seems worth it to have the atpl current and the associated benefits, thanks Whopity.

[Whopity]

One further tip, do it before you are 65 or you will need a stress ECG, another £200 or more.

[BillieBob]

You also need a valid MPA type rating to have an EASA ATPL issued.

[mad_jock]

there is some rule now that you can only use a class 1 with a CPL or ATPL.

So you have to keep the medical up now to class 1 standards even if you only using PPL privileges of your ATPL.