sw1969 wrote:
but there is a discussion if you can revalidate your class rating without a class 2 medical.
Yes, that’s a real trap. Revalidation has to be done with a valid class 2 medical. I didn’t know about that in the beginning, but by coincidence my medical (the second year with LAPL privileges) was up in January and my PPL revalidation in May the same year, so it was always OK. Others have been not so lucky.
Peter wrote:
there is a discussion if you can revalidate your class rating without a class 2 medical.Why not, if the FI is PIC. You should need a medical at all. No idea whether this works in practice; some papers you cannot apply for (like the EASA CPL, the UK PPL, the UK national PPL) unless you hold a current medical.
To my knowledge there is no consent between the 16 Authorities how to interpret the regulations about it. They require the application form for revalidation and a copy of the license and medical. The argument is that, as holder of a LAPL medical, only LAPL privileges apply. Because a LAPL contains no class rating according to FCL.740, you can’t revalidate without class 2 for the reason that class ratings apply only for PPL and up.
I think the typical german bueraucrat requires a clarification that a class rating has nothing to to with the executed privileges.
there is a discussion if you can revalidate your class rating without a class 2 medical.
Why not, if the FI is PIC. You should need a medical at all. No idea whether this works in practice; some papers you cannot apply for (like the EASA CPL, the UK PPL, the UK national PPL) unless you hold a current medical.
Peter wrote:
Why not just have a PPL which downgrades to LAPL privileges if you have an LAPL medical?
The use of a PPL with LAPL privileges should be no problem, but there is a discussion if you can revalidate your class rating without a class 2 medical.
gallois wrote:
I wonder if I could get a class 2 medical in Spain which would allow me to fly the Super Guépard there should I so wish🙂
In theory you should be able to get your Class 2 in any EASA member state and be done with it. And somehow I doubt they would all behave like the French do.
Remember, I had the same garbage with one AME and even a change going to a different AME got rid of that. For good. Now as you say that in France the AME’s rely on a comittee which rules every single case, I’d think going abroad to get it may well be a consideration.
As for the LAPL, the regulations for it are less strict and moreover, you only have to do it every 2 years, not every year.
Peter wrote:
Serbia, along with most countries, is unlikely to be “with it” when it comes to understanding the subtleties of EASA FCL.
You can fly a UL with a LAPL and nothing else. You can fly a UL without a LAPL also for that matter 
IMO you won’t know unless you have checked with the CAA of Serbia.
In practice, the way this works is that ICAO papers are automatically accepted (unless a specific rejection is filed, which is very rare) but non-ICAO papers are automatically invalid (unless explicitly accepted, which almost never happens).
Serbia, along with most countries, is unlikely to be “with it” when it comes to understanding the subtleties of EASA FCL.
Oh and just in case you should have a CATscan each year also
Does nobody consider the high x-ray dose cancer risk, or other risks if a contrast enhancer is used? This is bonkers.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
The LAPL is valid in EASA states only, of which to my knowledge Serbia is not a member.
Serbia is perfectly free to acknowledge LAPL as a valid license. It would be highly surprising if they didn’t, because they accept any UL coming from anywhere in Europe.
gallois wrote:
What is the point is all the IMO unnecessary confirmatory tests I will need in order to pass the medical each year.
They might be fewer for a LAPL medical.
I figured the LAPL medical would be just the same.
Possibly, but that is not certain.
My class 2 medical has PPL and LAPL on the front. The LAPL medical, here, must also done at an AME. The same AME as I have now and following the same process. So I can’t see how it would make much difference to my situation.
Remember its not about whether I am fit to fly. All concerned agree I am. What is the point is all the IMO unnecessary confirmatory tests I will need in order to pass the medical each year.
Maybe I am being bloody minded but I have had tests which clear me totally as in no sign I have ever had a problem. But I am monitored every year by a specialist. My choice. The extra tests demanded by the AME and the DGAC have nothing to do with the procedure I had and do not appear in the normal list of AME tests required.
As an analogy let’s say you have a serious accident. You are rushed to hospital and doctors check you have no brain damage, no internal damage, only a broken leg. They fix the broken leg and you have some time off flying..
Some time later you go back to the doctor who reset your leg and he takes an X ray and announces you are fine, everything is back to normal. But at your next visit to your AME he demands that you bring your X rays and a blood test so that he can look at them to see if the surgeon did his job properly. These he sends off to the NAA medical department, who at their 3 monthly meeting look over your X ray and blood test and decide you need to provide these every year alongside your class 2 medical. Oh and just in case you should have a CATscan each year also. So you do that for a number of years but in your licence is written that there should be further surveillance every 3 years and the AME decides that that should be a full MRI scan to see if anything else has developed.
I figured the LAPL medical would be just the same.
I simply decided enough was enough and there was a tempting alternative which required none of this. I wonder if I could get a class 2 medical in Spain which would allow me to fly the Super Guépard there should I so wish🙂
