New medical rules for NPPL/PPL
 

The latest CAA online form for Medical renewal states that cardiac surgery is an exclusion from the new scheme of self declaration. Mine was 20 years ago and have been happily operating with an NPPL (on GP signature) since 2002. It now seems I will need a LAPL from an AME to continue flying.Has anyone else got this problem?

As I understand it a lot of people are. At Sywell the CAA presenter was left in no uncertainty over the issue and level of concern (actually near outrage) expressed by some people.

We were left with the impression that the outcome was unexpected and they 'would see what they could do'. As to what timescale that implies who knows but it certainly took the gloss off their 'all new and so much better ANO 2016' presentation.

NPPL medicals
 

One problem seems to be the lack of a medical advisory dept at the CAA that we might be able to ask for advice. We can only approach an AME who's probably not exactly independent on the issue. I've got a few days before my existing 'medical' expires, so doesn't look good for Autumn flying.

Art.163
 

The relevant sections of Art 163. Medical requirements for specified United Kingdom licences and National Private Pilot’s Licences are:

A LAPL medical certificate seems a lot simpler, particularly now that the recent amendment to Part-MED states:

Lodem,

I also operate with a Med. Dec. but fortunately without any complications at the moment. However, when I read the new regulation as it applies to you I cannot see the problem:

For the purposes of this article, “disqualifying medical condition” means any physical or mental condition or illness, or any history of such a condition or illness, including—any surgery or medical treatment that might impair the safe operation of normal flight controls or render the licence holder unfit at any time to perform any function for which the licence is granted.

If you have been safely operating the controls for 20 years since your operation, and signed off by your GP, it cannot be described as a disqualifying condition under this regulation..

NPPL medicals
 

This is the guidance for the new form:
If you have, or have a history of one or more of the following conditions, this medical self-declaration form must not be used:

Being prescribed medication for any psychiatric illness
Bipolar disorder, psychosis or a diagnosis of personality disorder
Drug abuse or alcohol misuse or addiction (or conviction for drink/drug driving)
Being prescribed medication or treatment for angina or heart failure
Cardiac surgical procedures including cardiac device implantation
Recurrent fainting or collapse (syncope)
Unexplained loss of consciousness
Insulin treatment
Chronic lung disease with shortness of breath on exertion
Any neurological condition requiring medication
Seizures or epilepsy
Significant functional physical disability likely to impair safe operation of normal flight controls
If you have or have had one of these conditions you should make an appointment with an AME-certificated by the UK CAA to apply for a LAPL Medical Certificate. [/I][/I]

There does indeed seem to be a significant difference between Art.163(6) and the list shown at https://www.caa.co.uk/General-Aviati...rivate-pilots/

The ANO is the law. However, 'any surgery or medical treatment' cannot really mean 'any' surgery or medical treatment for anything since birth. Having your tonsils out, an ingrowing toe nail removed or certain minor surgical procedures in accordance with religious practice? Somehow I very much doubt it means that; as pulse1 suggests, surely it means At least the CAA's list is rather more logical - but is it actually the law??

Was this change really worth the bother? There must be more than a few NPPL holders feeling rather dischuffed about it all...

:confused:

I too have a similar problem, currently a NPPL holder using a DVLA based Medical Declaration, soon to expire.
Having looked at the new form srg1210, I will have to see an AME for a LAPL certificate due to heart surgery 15 years ago.
Having looked at the LAPL med160 form, the list of "lifetime" conditions is extensive and seems far beyond DVLA requirements.
My concern, (apart for refusal to grant a certificate), is that the AME may require medical tests and possibly referrals to specialists, which could be very costly!
Is the CAA trying to "ground" older pilots? I thought the principal of the new "self Certification" was to reduce bureaucracy and encourage GA!

As with all new licensing regulations the Authority haven't thought it through properly and these things only come to light when the "public" try to interpret the new rules....deja vu!

A muddle
 

I too am operating on a NPPL with a GP declaration due to stenting for angina in 2007, no problems since although on the standard pills. I currently mainly fly non EASA but keep current on an EASA type which I'm allowed to on the NPPL. Seems to me that in any event when my NPPL declaration becomes non valid on 8 April 2018 I will be prohibited from flying EASA types unless I can revalidate my old PPL by getting in effect a Class 2 medical, which the CAA quack refused to give me for my PPL at the time even though I got a Class 1 back for ATC purposes. In any event I'll have to see an AME to be able to do a self declaration before April 2018.

So for current NPPL holders the new system is much worse than the old. Thanks CAA for nothing. Yet another cock up in not thinking everything through, or perhaps last gasp revenge by the CAAs medics?

At 77 years of age it is certainly better for me as long as none of the exclusion items apply to me. In fact, I am delighted with the new system as I want to change my doctor and I didn't feel that it was sensible while I needed his signature every year.

However, I have just noticed that one of the items on the LAPL exclusion list seems to apply to me in that I suffer from a "chronic disease" which, except for the first 3 months, never prevented me from having a CAA Class 2 medical.

I only changed to a NPPL quite recently for convenience and cost.

I am in the same situation. Heart surgery 20 years ago and have been flying on a Group 1 GP declaration since. Now depending on which of 3 different CAA pieces of paper I choose to believe, I can a) fly my aeroplane, or b) not fly my aeroplane until I have an LAPL medical involving spending £500+ on an exercise ECG and a cardiologists report.
There is different wording between the Declaration form, the Guidance notes on the CAA website and the ANO Section 163.
It's a mess

The new self declaration without GP countersignture, is in principle a good thing, but for the likes of us who have had cardiac surgery and subsequent medication, it is potentially restrictive, and at odds with the DVLA Group 1 medical requirement.
At least with the previous declaration, your GP with knowledge of your history could use his or her common sense, as I would suggest that pilots with a condition that is monitored and appropriately medicated, are arguably less likely to suffer incapacitation than an undiagnosed one.
Being forced now to go for LAPL certificate, with possible cost implications, will cause many to think twice, myself included, before heading off to the nearest AME.

NPPL medical
 

It would be easy to assume there is an AME agenda behind all this. Could one of them perhaps be persuaded to comment to dispel that terrible thought?

Thanks "lodems" for starting this thread, it certainly seems there are many of us who are going to be discriminated against with these new regulations.
The words "had or have had" is a real "catch all" phrase, so maybe you are right, that AME's who might otherwise miss out on some income, helped in getting it put in!

I understand that a lot of the drive for the current changes, at least for the NPPL pilots, is driven from the unforseen consequences of the move to the self certified, doctor counter signed medical that came in with the NPPL. The way GPs interpret the process has been inconsistent leading to the costs for NPPLs being very different, some being charged serious money and other being charged nothing. I have found it to be very good, personally, as my GP is a sensible and reasonable man who was prepared to read the notes and see what was going on. I know people whose GPs started from the point of view that it was a "flying medical" and didn't feel qualified to put their signature to the form without actually doing a comprehensive medical and charged accordingly. One poor pilot I know was blessed with a GP that thought that flying an aircraft was a job for a highly qualified professional pilot, chaps in their 60s should not be going flying for fun. The other problem is that you are supposed see your own GP, if you have one that doesn't cooperate you are a bit stuffed. Since the self certified medical came about the world has moved on. The blame culture has taken a grip and GPs are now obligued to carry huge insurance in case somebody, whose form they have signed, comes back to sue them for any incident that might have happened. When I went to get my form signed this year the GP was OK about it but he charged me £25, the first time he has charged. He explained that it costs him £2500 pa for the insurance he is required to have before he is allowed to sign medical forms for flying, driving and shot gun licences. He doesn't think that the practice will be signing any of these next year as they can't recoup the cost of the insurance premiums.

I personnally think it is all OTT. At the end of the day, or more likely the start of the day, it is up to the pilot to ensure that he is fit to take the controls of an aircraft. You have to be fit for every flight, not just on the day the medical form is signed.

Rans6............

Personally speaking I have not had a problem with paying £20 and £50 to my GP for a signature, particularly if a few medical examinations were made, it's still less than a heating engineer charges for signing off a gas appliance, and my licence is invalid without it.
I assume Doctors/Practices must, in any event, have liability insurance for signing HGV and PCV medicals.
Of course, "fit to fly" is our responsibility, but all the GP was being asked to do, (with further consideration of medical history if necessary), was countersign to say that I met DVLA group 1 or 2 standards which are easy to check on their website under the "at a glance" pages.

NPPL medicals
 

I have asked the CAA to say what the official line on grounding is for those whose GP certification has expired since the new Guidance and have not yet obtained a LAPL. Await with (un)bated breath.

As of now, I am grounded, so I hope the CAA does give some guidance.
I expect to stay grounded until I know if I can meet LAPL requirements and that it will not be too expensive.
The LAA have asked for members to let them know if they have difficulties in getting the LAPL certificate, but I am not a member.....yet!

I think that all the AMEs who listened to the CAA introduction to the proposed changes at the AME Meeting in April understood that they had not been fully deliberated.
Previously a pilot's own GP with access to the medical records was required to countersign the Medical Declaration to provide some defence against fraudulent concealment of disqualifying medical history. In addition a split was made between those pilots flying solo who only needed to meet the DVLA Group 1 standard and those carrying passengers who were required to meet the higher HGV Group 2 standard. Now the CAA has decided that no split is required and that the onus is on the pilot to declare any disqualifying condition with no GP involvement required.

However instead of linking the declaration to a published standard, the declaration takes a broad brush approach to disqualifying conditions which may be recent or in the distant past. This means that a condition such as a cardiac stent which is acceptable under DVLA Group 1, does not satisfy the declaration requirements and now requires expensive specialist tests and reports in order to satisfy LAPL requirements. AMC2 MED.B.095 d(4)
The answer is that the declaration needs more specific text regarding disqualifying conditions and their timescales and in addition to allow greater discretion to AMEs to issue LAPL certificates with or without an OPL to those pilots who are unable to complete the declaration.

Thanks "topoverhaul" your summary really clarifies the problem well.
It is to be hoped that the CAA will issue AME's with some guidance enabling them to use their discretion and judgement, when faced with us pilots who are now effectively "grounded".

I have a UK PPL and an EASA PPL
My medical has lapsed by a few weeks.
I have never had significant surgery (except appendix about 4 years ago).
I am required to have "24hour Holter" results reviewed by the CAA as well. (this is effectively a 24 hour ECG recorder)
Reason? My (lovely and well qualified) AME failed his 'medical' and my personal records were reviewed.
The next nearest AME who performed my subsequent and latest medical renewal has since retired.
As a result of the CAA's simplifications, I am now seriously confused, so I consulted the CAA website for clarification.
Here's what I have to exceed (I think) ... Guidance for medical certification of private pilots | UK Civil Aviation Authority
While I understand the need for a clear definition of the medical requirements for AMEs, there is also a need for lay guidance for non-medically qualified PPL candidates. Would also be nice if the hurdles for Class 1 and Class 2 were shown separately.
I don't expect answers here, maybe a sympathetic pat on the head?

SD

NPPL medicals
 

As expected the CAA confirmed to me today that I am grounded until I obtain a LAPL.
There was however a small glimmer of hope in their reply: 'they are in discussions with the BMAA/LAA to ascertain the numbers involved' and members should contact them.Somewhat belated discussions,one might say.

Basic question
 

I filled in the form and submitted it (three times as no acknowledgement that it had worked) and received two emails later saying "Thank you for your application." with an attached pdf copy of the form.
My kinda thick question is - is that all there is? Can I just stuff these three pages in my licence and fly, or was it really just an "application" and I have to wait for something else to arrive?

As the LAA were the administrators of the NPPL medical declaration, I would have thought the number of pilots affected by these new rules could have been obtained during the consultation period.
On another tack, just found CAP1441 on the CAA website, what happens after 8th April 2018?, cannot make sense of it!

Unrelated to all this medical stuff............

I tried to fill in my declaration online and submit it (using Internet Explorer as requested by the site) but I keep getting an error message when I submit my form saying that the CAA will be notified.

I've tried 3 times - same problem. Anyone else had this issue ?? - I'm not sure whether I've successfully submitted it or not !!, I've not had any email response confirming it (or not)

Thanks

Arc

fixed already !!

NPPL medicals
 

Have just had clarification from the CAA that under UK law the LAPL medical certificate validates the NPPL, so there's no need to apply for the actual LAPL(unless you want to fly EASA a/c after 2018). My AME wasn't aware of this and the form he fills in doesn't seem to mention it either, so there's still some confusion in the camp.

Costs of Class 2?
 

Slight thread drift, but just discovered my Gatwick AME has hiked prices by 50%. What does the team think/pay for their EASA Class 2? And for ECG?

Advice appreciated....... (NPPL option not an option, as IR (R) in regular use......

The guy I used last time charges £110-165 for a Class II (depending on what you need).

Have no idea if this is more, or less, that you pay.

I did my last (Class 1) with him - no complaints:
Mach Med | Aviation Medicals

OC619

Mods: If the link breaks some rule, or other, then please remove it. I, honestly, have no connection with the business - beyond having my medicals there.

Thanks OpenCirrus. Certainly better value and closer to home. Sounds about right, but would appreciate any other comments or recommendations in Kent!

Other AMEs in Kent: AME Search Results

I don't have any info on them - I'm sure others will have views.

OC619

It seems to me that for most older NPPLs the licence was welcome in that the reduced medical criteria enabled those who would have been grounded following certain illnesses were able to carry on with acceptable limitations. I reckon the vast majority only got a NPPL for this reason. The NPPL medical rules were eminently sensible as your own GP has a far better take on your current health than a remote AME who sees you infrequently and has no ongoing access to your medical records. Indeed that was one of the main selling points as a replacement for the largely meaningless class 2 examination which is like an MOT and only covers your condition on the day. It looks like the NPPL medical type model will be repeated in the USA soon too for regular PPLs.

So the ill thought out revisions will likely ground an awful lot of us older pilots for absolutely no valid medical reason, creating untold stress, misery and denying the GA industry of a large revenue source - after all we are the ones with the reserves of disposable income - as long as we managed our pensions well!

Rather than encouraging GA it looks to me that the CAA, whilst paying lip service to releasing the shackles, have decided that they went too far and now want to put the claws back in, probably as the AMEs could see a big reduction in potential income. As usual all this only comes to light after the thing is introduced, we all having been tantalised by the false promise of simplification and "good news" ahead.

It stinks. The LAA should be ashamed of themselves in signing this debacle off and it proves that certain elements in the CAA as well as being either ignorant or incompetent don't understand GA at all. I speak as an ex employee myself, so am not proud.

Had another look at the consultation CAP1284. - "Hants Eaglet", you are spot on!
Out of the stated 8000+ NPPL holders there must be plenty who are affected by all this, so please CAA (and LAA!), get on with a serious re-think, because you have caused unnecessary anxiety and expense, not to mention missing out on good flying weather.

NPPL medicals
 

We are drifting a bit off-thread, but I paid £185 for a LAPL/NPPL medical this week- that included an ECG. Most of us with previous heart history will probably have to do one, as that's why we are at the AME's in the first place.He said it would be cheaper next time. I shall try to console myself with 12 years of free certificates from my generous GP and not feel jealous of my friends who can now self-certify for nowt.

Still not right though, have we been duped?

New problem for the medical declaration -

We have been advised to check with the club insurers because some are refusing to cover pilots who self declare. I'm not yet sure what our own status is yet, or which companies are making this policy.

I also gather that some clubs are refusing to hire aircraft to pilots who do not hold either NPPL medical declarations or Part-MED medical certificates....

:hmm:

Change to NPPL medical rules
 

When I kicked off this thread a month or so ago I had a feeling I would be one of the first to be caught by the new self-certification'guidance' notes. I'm now the grateful holder of a LAPL medical certificate, so a couple of points on my experience of getting it might help some of you fellow unfortunates.
If you've had surgery a long time ago (20 years for me) you may find you have to provide proof of tests carried out directly after the operation. I had to organise a new private echocardiogram (£221) because neither my GP nor the hospital had copies that old. Secondly the CAA computer has a very long memory. In my case in 1995 it designated me as 'long term unfit with no prospect of improvement' and put up a large "computer says NO" warning so that any AME trying to enter new medical details was locked out. My subsequent very successful surgery was not registered there because I didn't feel it necessary to tell them, as I had no intention of flying commercially again. The NPPL GP certification procedure some years later got me back into powered flight but by then the CAA had lost interest in me (but not so their computer...)
Fortunately my AME finally found a human(?) to speak to and I was re-designated 'temporarily unfit' so that I could then be re-classified as 'fit'.
I would advise anyone who is going to try to enter this minefield that they allow plenty of time to tick all the boxes. Best of luck! Off now to apply for a LAPL.

They've sorted it.

New form now issued - if you're fit to drive you can fly up to 2000kgs. Thanks to those involved for getting it resolved.

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalap...e=form&id=7493