Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Welcome to our forums

Is there, or should there be, a comeback on a flying school or an instructor?

Silvaire – I guess the same here, if someone with a pilot licence flew without a valid medical the fine would be very different than flying without a licence (or valid licence for some other reason). I bet there are more than a few people who didnt realise their medical had just lapsed, but have flown. Keeping up with everything is a nightmare, although I make no apologies for it having to be done. Here I have to make sure my MEP, SEP, instrument are all valid (with different periods of validity) and medical, and then keep my FAA current and Australian – it is a paperchase nightmare.

As ever, what the insureres would make of it who knows – I think there is now some rational generally that unless the accident can be proven to be caused by lack of something, then the insurance may still be valid (for example a car without an MOT usually only invalidates the insurance if the accident is caused by a mechanical defect with the car) but who knows. Generally it is not the regulator that causes the biggest problems, as these things so often only come to light when there is an accident and then the inusrance company is involved!

Silvaire wrote:

EU rules are certainly strange (in many ways). FAA pilot certificate status and medical status are two independent things, the pilot certificate is not contingent on a current medical.
So they are in EASA-land. What is strange?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

I was responding to the following post, which would not apply under FAA rules, because the pilot has not “lost his license” nor his “ability to pilot an aeroplane” Interesting discussion here which explains the situation better than I’d like to at this point (I’m currently on the side of road organizing, but happily not performing, a trailer bearing repair in the desert). The issue is logging versus acting as PIC.

PS now that I’m back in the A/C, I know several older pilot/owners who fly with a medically rated pilot in the right seat. More power to both of them. I find this kind of stuff tiresome, these are little privately flown puddle jumper planes, not airliners. Assuming I were legal to fly PIC in his plane I’d be happy to fly right seat, assuming the guy were a good pilot. I’d likely learn something from him, and the whole thing is good for the community.

BeechBaby wrote:

I was approached recently, guy had lost his medical. He still wants to fly. I suggested we go flying in my aeroplane. I also highlighted the fact that he has lost his licence, and his ability to PIC an aeroplane. He did not get that point. He came back Its my plane, I will fly it, and I just want you along to check on me. I still have my licence I tried to explain that the flight would be my total responsIbility, as PIC.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 14 Sep 18:57

Airborne_Again wrote:

So they are in EASA-land. What is strange?

In EASA land the privileges and eventual ratings are dependent on a current medical. The privilege of a PPL is to act as PIC in a SEP. Which brings me to the question. The medical is valid for 1 year for PPL and 2 years for LAPL (past 50 ) Can I, or can I not use LAPL privileges on my PPL to fly past the validity for PPL, but within the validity for LAPL ? Without actually having a LAPL, but a PPL?

My understanding is yes you can

EHLE / Lelystad, Netherlands, Netherlands

In EASA land the privileges and eventual ratings are dependent on a current medical.

It may not be so simple if someone spends a lot of time unravelling the regs.

For example a CPL needs a Class 1 for some stuff, Class 2 for other stuff.

Does any EASA reg say a PPL or CPL is “invalid” without a medical? Sure, you cannot act as PIC without a medical.

In the FAA system, there is also the Class 3 which can be valid for a CPL, for an instructor, IIRC (i.e. working as a CFI).

Can I, or can I not use LAPL privileges on my PPL to fly past the validity for PPL, but within the validity for LAPL ? Without actually having a LAPL, but a PPL?

That would make sense, that you can. But do the regs say that?

Anyway, plenty of ways for somebody to screw up, being an instructor, if they work a bit “loosely”.

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

That would make sense, that you can. But do the regs say that?

Who knows? The privilege section in the FCL about PPL does not mention LAPL as a privilege. But there is no way to get a LAPL from a PPL without converting the license to LAPL. Your PPL becomes invalid when converting, to my knowledge, but obviously the LAPL “is there” when converting since it’s only a matter of getting a document, it’s a downgrading sort of. One “high ranking” local here say, “Yes you can”, but it’s it’s all fudgy IMO, since none of this is mentioned in FCL or on the license itself.

I have sent a question to Norway CAA, hopefully an answer will come in not too long time.

If you wish to use a PPL with a LAPL medical you have to surrender the PPL and be reissued with a LAPL. A PPL does not contain a LAPL in Section II of your licence.

Oxfordshire / Glocs

Silvaire wrote:

I find this kind of stuff tiresome,

Yes and don’t we all The problem, certainly in the UK, is there is always a lurker who will gladly call the CAA, dub you in, and ruin your day. It is a particularly British thing, ‘Tall Poppy Syndrome’, where lots do not like you getting above your station. Inevitably, it is the innocent ones who get humped as the true rogues build riches.
All so British…….Anyway, whether we like it or not, no PIC without valid medical. (I think)

Fly safe. I want this thing to land l...
EGPF Glasgow

I know of an FI who got chucked out of a school due to doing a training flight with a student whose membership had lapsed. I believe it may have been posted here by the FI, years ago. It could be that they wanted the said FI out anyway for other reasons and this was a handy transgression (apparently also practiced occassionally by other FIs at the said “aeroclub” but those FIs had remained friendly with the Club President) but if one takes insurance conditions seriously, it is likely the flight was uninsured, for both the school and the instructor personally. If the insurer paid out post-crash, that would have been a bonus.

This was outside the UK and I am sure settling scores and all the other variations of human nature are pretty universal among all the sub-species of homo sapiens

This is true for all kinds of activities e.g. water-skiing; I used to be in a WS club where you paid £10 for a day membership. At the end of the day the manager pocketed most of the £10 notes if there was no accident I can write this because he died many years ago (due to eating too much, not skiing).

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top