Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Welcome to our forums

Does PPL or CPL include LAPL privileges?

I would think that anyone choosing to drop med down to LAPL might be best placed still following revaluation rules for their SEP rating (full biannual; signed)

LAPL rules continue to confuse everyone. A senior examiner last week accused me of being illegal because my LAPL “biannual*” was not signed on the license. He later came back to apologise.

* for those unaware you don’t have to do a biannual. You just need an hour with an instructor. It’s my understanding that this hour can comprise of any instruction and the instructor need not even be aware they are revalidating you. However 50% of people seem to disagree with this! It’s relevant because of the rolling validity: so you might do a full proper check flight and sign the log book, but 6 months later you might do an hour as part of a night rating…which then boosts you for another 2 years.

My PPL application is pending as an upgrade from a LAPL. If they issue it happily then the above must be true :)


Peter wrote:

What would be the argument for the EASA PPL to not include LAPL privileges?

There is no argument AFAIK. The whole thing was just a miss when writing the regulations. When I first contacted the authority about this, is was just a big NO. Then, a few months later (after this was handled in the local GA media), it was of course LAPL privileges are included. Obviously lots of confusion about it, and also IMO something that no one really has noticed until 1-2 years ago when more people started downgrading to LAPL due to age or simplicity or both from PPL and CPL and saw the difference.


My SEP expires in a few weeks. I have flown a few hours with an instructor a year ago, does that mean I can still fly on LAPL privileges for another year?

Novice pilot
EDVM Hildesheim, Germany

Ask ten people and get ten answers.

My understanding is: one instructor hour every 2 years and 6 hours in the last year and 12 in past 2 years. So…. yes.

However CAA wording is a bit more specific:

The privileges of your licence will only remain valid if you have completed, in the last 24 months, as pilot of an aeroplane or TMG:

At least 12 hours flight time as PIC, including 12 take-offs and landings; and
Refresher training of at least 1 hour of total flight time with an instructor.

Anyone know the definitive answer and definition of “refresher training”?


A PPL cannot function as a LAPL, unless the competent authority makes an exemption, at least according to a grammatical interpretation and I do not believe technical requirements should be subject to teleology. The implementing rule is clearly absurd and enforcement action is unlikely but it is the perception of voiding insurance which will settle opinion.

There’s an adjunct interpretation for refresher training in AMC1 FCL.740(b) (renewal of class and type ratings) and all refresher training must satisfy the essential requirements for aircrew in Annex IV to the Basic Regulation:

1.8. Training course
1.8.1. Training must be executed through a training course.
1.8.2. A training course must meet the following conditions:
(a) a syllabus must be developed for each type of course; and
(b) the training course must comprise a breakdown of theoretical knowledge and practical flight instruction (including synthetic training), if applicable


Qalupalik wrote:

A PPL cannot function as a LAPL, unless the competent authority makes an exemption

And that is exactly what EASA is about to change, isn’t it? Those “exemptions” are what at least Danish and UK CAA have made, in order to allow PPL pilots to continue flying, exercising their LAPL rights in case of a Class 2 medical downgrade or lapse.

So, when the planned EASA rule changes are in force, will the answer to this question:

My SEP expires in a few weeks. I have flown a few hours with an instructor a year ago, does that mean I can still fly on LAPL privileges for another year?

be a YES ?

Last Edited by huv at 03 Jun 12:58
EKRK, Denmark

Looking at this realistically (i.e. politically; that is what really matters in most aviation-regulatory matters) I don’t see any national CAA having an issue with a PPL downgraded to an LAPL in terms of privileges, which are clearly a subset in all respects but I can see most not liking the “silent” downgrade of a medical.

The UK experience clearly shows that most license downgrades are done for medical reasons. In the case of the UK NPPL, and going onto the medical self declaration, this is usually due to medical issues which you definitely don’t want to disclose to any AME. And in most cases there is no going back… short of spending thousands on tests even if you would pass them. The UK route is unmatched by any other country in the world AFAIK, not even the US where you cannot downgrade if you failed an AME medical. In the UK you can fail an AME medical and immediately apply for the NPPL and continue flying on the medical self declaration, provided you are allowed to drive a car and don’t have specified mental issues. In the UK, the CAA was able to catch pilots who continued to fly without a medical, by looking at who had revalidated their license but not the medical, but after the NPPL arrived they lost that “surveillance” capability.

The pilot medical landscape is highly emotive, as well as economic with the AME lobby being pretty powerful, discreetly behind the scenes.

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The UK general exemption E 4764 made 4 Oct 2018, published as ORS4 No. 1283, does not state that CAA is exercising power with the consent of the Secretary of State and pursuant to article 71(1) of the Basic EASA Regulation. As written the exemption is from UK law only! A further UK general exemption E 4843 made 12 Feb 2019 and published as ORS4 No. 1293 applies only to UK national licences.



carlmeek wrote:


Just a nitpick – if it were a biannual, you’d do it every six months. If you’re doing it every two years it’s biennial.

Andreas IOM

Good nitpick! I’ll remember that :)

Sign in to add your message

Back to Top