Mon May 29, 2017 6:10 pm
#1537637
In the end the only sensible direction is to force acceptance of FAA class 3 medical. And this is really what I would expect AOPA to work for.
glazer wrote:So Nick Wilcocks suggestion of flying on an LAPL is not possible with Nreg.
nickwilcock wrote:I understand from my informant that this referred to pilots who had been unable to hold an FAA Class 2 but were able to hold a Special Issuance FAA Class 3. This is endorsed 'NOT VALID OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES', but my informant alleges that some pilots may have been using an SI Class 3 in Europe. Hence the reticence to accept Class 3 FAA medicals as complying with ICAO if some don't.
The FAA may derogate from ICAO rules as they please in the US, but not elsewhere.
The draft BASA requires FAA PPL holders who need to hold an EASA pilot licence in order to fly EASA aircraft to hold at least an EASA Class 2 medical - and the relevant text has been transposed into ORS4 No.1220.
glazer wrote:That may be true but doesn't address my concern about being restricted to the UK
Paul_Sengupta wrote:Not in itself, but if it's allowed in the UK, the next question was about what the DGAC's stance is in France.
Irv Lee wrote:4 - I think the laa got some faa decision recently on this to allow a UK issued lapl licence for N reg in UK airspace didn't they?
Irv Lee wrote:Ah but... what is France doing about the April 7th/8th last minute surprise that the third country rules would not get a two year extension? The UK pushed out form 2140, 41, 39 etc. What did France do?