EASA License from JAR with NPPL medical

[cct]

What is the situation regarding the proposed EASA PPL licences?

I have a JAR PPL, currently without a medical, but hopefully should get an NPPL medical later this year.

Presumably the new LSA type licenses (whatever it is now called) will have similar medical requirements to the NPPL, but are there any notes for laymen - I just looked at the draft document, and got very lost.

Also I read somewhere that it will not allow flight in permit aircraft - which seems pretty mad to me.

Any links etc appreciated

--
cct

[Whopity]

The Light Aircraft Pilots Licence (LAPL) has its own medical which can be found in Section 2 of this document Clearly it will be more involved than the current NPPL medical and looks closer to a Class II.

Your JAA PPL will translate to an EASA PPL however; if you can't make Class II standards but can make the LAPL Standard then it should translate to a LAPL

[BillieBob]

Also I read somewhere that it will not allow flight in permit aircraft

That is not entirely true. 'Permit' aircraft fall into Annex II of the Basic Regulation, which lists aircraft that are administered by individual states. EASA cannot, for this reason, introduce any legislation (including licensing legislation) that affects Annex II aircraft and the Implementing Rules do not cover them. However, each individual state will have to produce requirements for pilots to fly Annex II aircraft on it's registry and it is logical to suppose that they will use to the EASA licensing system - we just don't yet know how this will be done.

[BEagle]

There's a good chance that the pointless and wholly unnecessary LAPL will be killed off at birth because the medical standards - and who administers them, cannot be agreed by the €uroquacks.

That would be the best solution; we could then simply ignore the nonsense of EASA and carry on with sub-ICAO pilot licensing as at present.

But that would require the politicians to change EASA's beloved 'Basic Regulation'...

[BillieBob]

But that would require the politicians to change EASA's beloved 'Basic Regulation'...

....and that will never happen, the precedent that such a move would set would be wholly unacceptable to the eurocracy. Instead, some way will be found (by re-interpreting/misinterpreting/ignoring EU law) to allow it to happen. The euroquacks have no more influence than you or I on the progress of Monnet's Great Plan.

[cct]

Thanks - the medical looks to be possible - just the same issues I currently have,

I suppose we just have to wait and see...