Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

LAPL and extension to a new type

I believe we had discussed this mater here already but can´t find any trace of it.. I was providing PPL/LAPL ground school on Saturday and got question on LAPL and flying a different type. My immediate answer was “you need to do a training plus checkride with examiner”. After doing some internet research later I am not 100% sure any more – especially reading FCL “limited to the class and variant”. Why they mention class? and some people are of an opinion “different model” means a different aicraft within the SEP – which I am not buying at all.

My understanding is as follows – do you guys share it or am I completely off?

  • LAPL is limited to a given type of the aircraft, not class. For example Cessna 172. To move to Piper 28 there should be 3 hours of instruction followed by skill test with examiner (see (a) of FCL.135.A.)
  • To move to 172SP (as the originally flown 172 was an old 172G) differences training is enough (so FI/CRI signature only, not checkride with examiner) (see (b) of FCL.135.A.)

LKKU, LKTB

My opinion:
Class: aeroplane (single engine piston), TMG.
If you have taken the skill test in a C172, you have to familiarize yourself with a PA28 before flying it. You don´t necessarily have to fly with an instructor (although it makes sense in many cases) and it does not have to be documented in your logbook. However, if you want to fly a G-109 afterwards, you´ll need to do 3 hours of training, including the mentioned 20 landings, plus a skill test in the new class (TMG).

Variant: You need following endorsements for other variants: fixed vs rectractable undercarriage (RU), EFIS vs steam gauges (EFIS), SLPC vs throttle&prop control (SLPC), tailwheel vs. tricycle (TW), pressurized vs. non-pressurized (P), turbo vs non-turbo (T).
These require differences training which has to documented in the logbook. You´ll need as many hours as you need, and you don´t have to take a skill test for every variant. If, for example, you change from the C172G to a steam gauges C172SP, you only have to familiarize yourself. Moving to a C172RG you need the RU endorsement (after your differences training), for flying an XP you need the VP training and endorsement, on a G1000 SP you have to be EFIS endorsed.

Last Edited by Caba at 23 Feb 19:02
EDFZ

Yes, our ECAA treats it exactly as @Caba wrote, you need endorsements for RU,VP etc, but not for different airplane in the same class.
The endorsement does not require ATO , simple signoff by FI is enough.

EETU, Estonia

are you folks speaking about LAPL or PPL?

LKKU, LKTB

Since you mentioned FCL.135.A LAPL(A), my answer referred to that. For the PPL it´s very similar, but getting a new class rating (which you technically don´t have on a LAPL) requires a training course at an ATO (or DTO, as per the new version of FCLs)

You´ll find regulations regarding class ratings here:

FCL.700 Circumstances in which class or type ratings are required
(a) Holders of a pilot licence shall not act in any capacity as pilots of an aircraft unless they have a valid and appropriate class or type rating, except in any of the following cases:
(i) for LAPL, SPL and BPL;
.
.
.
FCL.705 Privileges of the holder of a class or type rating
The privileges of the holder of a class or type rating are to act as pilot on the class or type of aircraft specified in the rating.
.
.
.
FCL.710 Class and type ratings — variants
(a) In order to extend his/her privileges to another variant of aircraft within one class or type rating, the pilot shall undertake differences or familiarisation training. In the case of variants within a type rating, the differences or familiarisation training shall include the relevant elements defined in the operational suitability data established in accordance with Part-21.
(b) If the variant has not been flown within a period of 2 years following the differences training, further differences training or a proficiency check in that variant shall be required to maintain the privileges, except for types or variants within the single-engine piston and TMG class ratings.
(c) The differences training shall be entered in the pilot’s logbook or equivalent record and signed by the instructor as appropriate.
.
.
.
FCL.725 Requirements for the issue of class and type ratings
Regulation (EU) 2018/197
(a) Training course. An applicant for a class or type rating shall complete a training course at an ATO. An applicant for a non-high-performance single-engine piston class rating, a TMG class rating or a single-engine type rating for helicopters referred to in point DTO.GEN.110(a)(2)(c) of Annex VIII (Part-DTO) may complete the training course at a DTO. The type rating training course shall include the mandatory training elements for the relevant type as defined in the operational suitability data established in accordance with Annex I (Part-21) to Commission Regulation (EU) No 748/2012.
(b) Theoretical knowledge examination. The applicant for a class or type rating shall pass a theoretical knowledge examination organised by the ATO to demonstrate the level of theoretical knowledge required for the safe operation of the applicable aircraft class or type.
(1) For multi-pilot aircraft, the theoretical knowledge examination shall be written and comprise at least 100 multiple-choice questions distributed appropriately across the main subjects of the syllabus.
(2) For single-pilot multi-engine aircraft, the theoretical knowledge examination shall be written and the number of multiple-choice questions shall depend on the complexity of the aircraft.
(3) For single-engine aircraft, the theoretical knowledge examination shall be conducted verbally by the examiner during the skill test to determine whether or not a satisfactory level of knowledge has been achieved.
(4) For single-pilot aeroplanes that are classified as high performance aeroplanes, the examination shall be written and comprise at least 100 multiple-choice questions distributed appropriately across the subjects of the syllabus.
(c) Skill test. An applicant for a class or type rating shall pass a skill test in accordance with Appendix 9 to this Part to demonstrate the skill required for the safe operation of the applicable class or type of aircraft.
The applicant shall pass the skill test within a period of 6 months after commencement of the class or type rating training course and within a period of 6 months preceding the application for the issue of the class or type rating

Last Edited by Caba at 23 Feb 21:18
EDFZ

moving between SEP and TMG is clear – 3 hours+check ride. What I am not getting is space between (a) and (b). By (a) you move between “class” and by (b) you move between variants of aeroplane. So I am missing there how to move between aeroplanes. They mention limitation to class and variant in the first sentence of (a) but on the third line of (a) they do not speak about the aeroplane anymore, only class.
BTW, to get a new rating into PPL (like getting SEP into your PPL/TMG can be done also in DTO/CRI/FI but this is not related to this topic

LKKU, LKTB

Michal wrote:

My understanding is as follows – do you guys share it or am I completely off?

I think you are completely off. :-)

FCL.135.A(a) states: “The limitation may be removed when the pilot has completed in another class the requirements below”

A PA28 is the same class as a C172, so the 3 hour training in another class can’t possibly be relevant. It would make no sense if the pilot actually had to train for another class (TMG say) in order to fly a different aircraft in the class (s)he trained for the license (SEP(land), say)!

I feel that the LAPL paragraphs are poorly phrased. “Variant” should really be “model or variant”, in which case FCL.135.A(b) applies. The LAPL part was written long after the PPL/CPL/ATPL parts and I think the author didn’t really consider the phrasing used in the other parts.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Michal wrote:

are you folks speaking about LAPL or PPL?

LAPL. As a LAPL holder myself, and after my SEP(A) checkride where the examiner held the similar theory,(that I would need signoff for each new type) I went to ECAA to get my license and asked them about it. The answer was very clear- the LAPL(A) is valid for all SEP( LAND) (under 2ton),provided i have the necessary differences training.

EETU, Estonia

Thanks for confirming this, Ivark.

I don’t k know why folks keep repeating nonsense about LAPL being a useless rating and all that, the majority of private pilots never need more privileges than LAPL gives them, namely flying any SEP in VFR conditions under 2 tons and with no more than 3 Pax.

The only reason I went straight for the PPL is because I could, but I’ve never flown a flight that would not have been possible in a LAPL…

Novice pilot
EDVM Hildesheim, Germany

MedEwok wrote:

I don’t know why folks keep repeating nonsense about LAPL being a useless rating and all that

They do? The only question in my mind is if in practise enough people manage to get the LAPL in the minimum amount of hours.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
21 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top