No. The whole lot would cost around €150 but I might well get some of it back through the state and my insurance complimentaire.
There is a lot of taxpayer subsidy in France 
Or maybe consultant cardiologists drive 2CVs whereas elsewhere in Europe they drive Aston Martins, or each country’s elite equivalent (Ferraris, Lambos, etc in Italy). Here they make 200k-300k.
Maoraigh wrote:
My understanding is that colour vision is for life.
That’s what I thought too, before checking. (See above.) Apparently it is possible to lose colour vision temporarily or permanently due to illness, accidents or medication.
gallois wrote:
For the more mature (whom as Peter often points out) have both the money and the time, they too cannot be bothered with all this nonsense.
Well, at 63 I really don’t mind visiting the AME every year as that gives me some assurance that my body it still working as it should. If I was not flying, I would probably go to a GP instead which would be cheaper, but no less bothersome.
In fact, the other year my AME did uncover a medical condition that was dangerous and potentially life-threatening if untreated. Fortunately it was fixable. (And without limitations to my medical!) The only permanent consequence for my flying is that I have to do an additional blood test at every AME visit.
Re colour vision – i asked the exact sane question last time I did my “extended eye examination” for my medical – “I thought colour vision deficiencies are genetic, why the re-test?”
I was surprised to learn that there are many conditions which can damage colour vision, ranging from the serious (degenerative nerve diseases, strokes including undetected micro-infarctions in the brain, severe diabetes) to the less so, including side effects to some medication.
The fact that colour vision is completely irrelevant for flight safety is an entirely different debate..
gallois wrote:
ULM and gliding are the 2 ways which are still attracting those interested in aviation as a pastime. To call ULMs toys is a bit disingenuous and if I may say so a little elitist. That is unless you are referring to everything that is fun being a toy.
I agree that this “classification” was inappropriate.
My concern is however that we see a world wide trend that regulation of regular aviation leads to evasion tactics. In the US it is the experimental cathegory, in Europe it is ULM.
Both exist and thrive ONLY because regulation of normal certified aviation is totally over the top and way too expensive to sustain. If you would compare this to other parts of life, where would we be if everyone now starts to build some sort of go-cart vehicles because the upkeep and licensing for a normal drivers license became such a hassle, that most people would find it impossible or undesirable to sustain? We’d get the same situation that light weight flimsy vehicles which can be driven without licenses or with less effort would start to appear on our streets with drivers who are medically unfit to drive a normal car? (And what just occurred to me, it’s already happening with e-bikes and other e-vehicles which are license free and drive around sidewalks and parks totally uncontrolled such as e-scooters and similar devices. Do we really want that?)
For one, I don’t see why ULM pilots do not need a medical or, in reverse, if they don’t, why does certified aviation <2t need such class 2 medicals which become more and more unattainable in France? What is the difference which justifies this? An ULM pilot who has a heart attack in flight dies the same way a certified airplane pilot will if nobody can take the controls, an ULM which crashes somewhere will do similar damage and has the same potential to kill people on the ground, so why is it possible that ULM pilots may fly without medicals whereas in certified aviation we see perfectly healthy people like yourself bullied out of the revered Class 2?
And more so, if e.g. in Spain you need a Medical Class 2 to fly ULM’s then who will guarantee you that the same won’t pop up in a few years in France and elsewhere? Make no mistake: Right now it is light certified GA which is on the extermination list but once those are gone or have become insignificant, guess who will be next?
The US has 3rd class medicals for flying privately if I am not mistaken or even have possibilities of self declaration. However, there old age pilots are usually grounded by the insurances who deny to insure them if they want to buy or even keep airplanes they’ve had for decades. Also there, not all is well.
I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it again: Personally I see nothing wrong with the development of low cost (comparatively) light weight airplanes which are there for the purpose ULM’s are used. However, I am totally opposed to the way that this class of airplanes are misused as a vehicle to a) circumnavigate regulation and b) exterminate certified aviation by hassling out most pilots into this class. I am totally opposed to the way ULM’s are operated in comparison to certified aviation, as the lack of rules for one as opposed to the other means an intentional discrimination of a whole class of aviation in favour for another.
The division between ULM’s and certified aviation is a “divide and conquer” tactic which has the simple but straightforward goal to exterminate light GA for good. Your example shows that this is working indeed. And it’s not only medical, its maintenance and lots of other stuff as well.
Clearly, if you are happy with what ULM’s have to offer, I can’t blame you for going this way and I can see why many do that. Yet I feel it is a very wrong thing to happen and it will bite the whole aviation scene much worse than we can imagine if this is allowed to continue.
gallois wrote:
The place to start might be existing pilots being more positive about what one can get from aviation. But if one looks at GA as revolving around the certified world, then there are major problems in attracting and more importantly keeping new entrants.
Me; I have decided not to take on the establishment and just fly. For me its not so much a change of lifestyle and I am gaining IMO so much more than I am losing.🙂
To me it seems like that medical episode was more or less irrelevant perhaps, but an explanation nonetheless. More of a “proof of concept” The certified world seems to be increasingly more and more what we don’t want, while ULs is more and more what we do want. We want to focus on flying, the freedom of flying, technical stuff, having fun, the community, flying together with others. ULs simply offer that en mass, unrestricted. Having an UL is like having a boat or a MC, and they are used in the same way.
aart wrote:
I don’t know about “shrinking into irrelevance” here in Spain.
Depends on your point of view. The way it works in my community is like this: You get a message from another guy: “Tomorrow we are two guys flying to Sweden for dinner, want to come along?” Then we fly in each our planes in lose (or tight) formation, chatting along on the “air” frequency. Last weekend there was an ad hoc “bush” meeting at a god forsaken place with an overnight in tents. This is fun, this is freedom, and it doesn’t even cost much. If God had given us wings, this is what we would do all day. You can certainly do this with a certified aircraft, but for some reason nobody seems to be doing it. Experimentals on the other hand, same thing. AFAIK this is how it is all over Europe.
For some this is “shrinking into irrelevance”. For others this is finally seeing what freedom of flying is all about. For myself I’m far away from giving up my PPL, or losing my medical (touch wood), but if it should happen, it certainly would be no disaster of any kind.
For some this is “shrinking into irrelevance”.
Currently, not.
The ULM came about because of people’s wish to fly without being tied down with regulation and cost. Remember it started with people sticking an engine on a hang glider.
In order to gain and maintain that freedom the FFPLUM was formed. (We talk of France here other countries have their own associations)
There are rules but the FFPLUM has managed to limit these by negotiating with the DGAC. Things such as weight limits. Whereas other countries have more ULM regulation in order to get the MTOW lifted to 600kg the FFPLUM could only get agreement for 500kg + 25kg with parachute and I think there is a further allowance for floats whilst keeping self declaration on everything,licence revalidation, medical, maitenance, Cof A and CDN.
Other countries took a different route and took their UL/microlight scene nearer to EASA regulatory environment and the associated costs involved.
The microlight/UL scene is always evolving but the FFPLUM ‘s aim is to keep costs down and for that self declaration is a must.
I would like to see less regulation and more self declaration at a European level in all aspects of GA, especially under 2000kg. But if this is happening it is very very slow and will probably not be at the self declaration level of ULMs in my lifetime.
I have said on several occasions that I don’t have a problem with the concept of AMEs or any other sports doctor for that matter, especially if it serves to motivate you to have a check up. But you do not have to be stupid to be a pilot.
ULM pilots are expected to be sensible enough to take care of their health and not to fly if they don’t feel well enough to do so. To mitigate some of the risks involved the vast majority of 3 axis ULMs in France are fitted with ballistic parachutes.
I have asked various times does anybody have any figures to show that the current regulation on aviation medicals is actually saving more lives than those under a self declaration regime?Just because by moving to ULMs I don’t have to see a doctor doesn’t mean I wont have regular check ups. I don’t need regulation to tell me to do so.
Incidentally IMO the same applies to annuals and field and owner maintenance along with STCs and many other things. The FAA system has been showing the way for years and EASA has gradually been agreeing with that system.
The ULM scene here has always left the responsibility for all this to the pilot/owner.
So in answer to many of the comments on here if GA is not going to self destruct the regulations governing it need to move more towards those which govern ULMs.
The regulation needed for French ULM pilots is driven by French ULM pilots.
We accept the limitations to keep the freedom we have, and it seems that more and more French pilots are seeing it the same way.
Yet I feel it is a very wrong thing to happen and it will bite the whole aviation scene much worse than we can imagine if this is allowed to continue.
It might well be the case, but what can you/we do against it?
A mirror case is the IR rating. All the pilots getting and using an IR without having the need for it, are putting uncontrolled flight at jeopardy. The wet dream of ATC is to have all flying objects under control, period. The simple fact of using an IR in VMC is playing on their side of the field.
And the same principle, yes syndrome, applies to certified flying against the rest… and medical or none…
