Fallen at first hurdle?
 

New member here, researching doing my PPL. So I looked at the CAA class 2 medical requirements which says:

Given I am +6 and +5.5, I'm assuming this means the PPL is closed off to me and I am left looking at the NPPL. Is this correct, or is there a modicum of flexibility in the system?

Any advice gratefully received.

:ok:

Looks like it's the NPPL then. 'Must' would seem to imply no fudge factor. Otherwise it would be 'should'. However, feel free to see an AME and give it a try. It's your money......
However, the NPPL isn't actually that restrictive, so unless you want to go on to CPL it shouldn't cause you any problems.

Your eyesight will get worse as you grow older (that's considering you're not already ancient!)

NPPL is not negative at all, if you're not looking to add on IR and all that jazz and flying out of the UK I don't see why it wouldn't be your first choice anyway.

The NPPL(A) is getting less restrictive, so unless you have your heart set on a commercial career it is perfectly fine for average GA. The only "rating" you can add at the moment is Seaplane.

Thanks for the replies. I was considering the PPL over the NPPL purely due to versatility. I would like the ability to take family abroad (although I understand a future EASA LPL may sort that problem out), and have night and instrument capability.

Oh and I'm 40 this year which, according to my 12 year old daughter, IS ancient!!

Give the CAA Medical Branch a ring and ask them, you'll find them suprisingly helpful and at least you will know.

I'd re-iterate what Niknak said. Have your prescription handy.
I did this prior to going for my Class 1 and they were keen to give you the best possible outcome. I passed the opthalmic and made another appointment to do the rest.
I originally failed the CAA Class 3 medical over refractive error but now have a class 1.
Another alternative is a FAA PPL which only assesses your corrected vision and permits you to fly G registered aircraft.

An FAA PPL only allows you to fly a G-reg in UK airspace. But, once you have this ICAO compliant licence you can apply for a JAA-PPL and vision will be assessed not on the initial standard, but on the renewal standard, which might be less less stringent. It is for astigmatism. As suggested above, it is worth talking to the CAA Medical Dept.

I'm outside that "must" range. I just get a stamp on my medical saying "not JAA compliant", which nobody has ever cared about.

In my case this was because I was flying before the new rules came in and my AME (clearly with the agreement of the CAA) said that the new rules were not intended to ground people who were already flying perfectly happily. He says that the testing shows that I can actually see better (with glasses, obviously) than some of his customers who are within the range.

I've had it confirmed this morning by an AME that I am outside the acceptable limit for the Class 2. That also puts rotary out of my reach I believe.

Thanks for all the responses. They've made interesting reading. The FAA route was initially promising, but I found this in the JAR guidance:

So that closes off that route. Looks like the NPPL for me then, which I'm sure will be fine. I've also seen on the NPPL website that they may be acceptable for flying in France soon, however, it also states an 'ICAO-level pilot medical certificate' will be required. Does this mean a Class 2 again?

ICAO level does not mean JAA Class 2, because, for example, the FAA Class 3 is ICAO compliant. I am only guessing, but it seems to me what will be acceptable to fly in France on the NPPL is the pre-JAR UK or French Class 2 standard, like Gertrude is flying on.