Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1839045
I have a newly declared personal medical, however I have reason to go for a professional driving medical and thought it may be worth having a LAPL done at the same time, assuming it is just an additional form filling exercise. I thought the simplest way to have both done would be to use an AME and save having to explain the aviation requirements to a GP. However, I have discovered my AME has retired and an alternative one I have just spoken to advises the CAA is actively discouraging medicals until the new system settles down.

So, it's off to my GP for the driving medical. Am I correct in my understanding that a LAPL medical is just a form filling exercise which my GP can do? My only experience until now has been Class 2 with an AME.

Is there any benefit of a LAPL over a PMD? I have an FCL.

TIA
#1839067
Thanks @Irv Lee, so I can self declare to a higher standard than my GP post a medical. :?

Little point in going through the pain of explaining to my GP how aviation medicals work, then. May as well just run with the PMD.
#1839108
As ORS4 No.1421C is no longer in effect, having expired on 31 Mar 2021, the associated PMD limitations referring to Part-FCL licences are no longer clear.

The CAA is aware of this and I understand that a review of the level of privileges which may be exercised when a pilot does not hold a Part-MED certificate is under way.
patowalker, G-BLEW liked this
User avatar
By Irv Lee
#1839185
What is the exact CAA problem?, (i don't doubt they have to one, but what is it?). Yes, the exemption expired for part 21, but the super stealthy aviation amendment act in January amended part fcl (or part med or both as needed) so that subject to ANO (2016) art 163(3), pmd are ok. And 163(3) says:
(3) The holder of a licence makes a medical declaration in accordance with this article if they—
(a) reasonably believe that they—
(i) meet the medical requirements for a Group 1 Licence issued by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency; and
(ii) are not subject to a disqualifying medical condition.
(b) make a declaration to that effect to the CAA in such form and in such manner as may be required or specified by the CAA; and
(c) in the case of a licence holder aged 70 years or more, have made such a declaration within the previous three years.

So is the problem that they think it is too liberal?
User avatar
By Rob P
#1839192
Speaking as one who would not be here but for the direction of an AME to seek a series of tests, I watch the glee at the financial benefits of a PMD compared to a Class 2 with some caution.

Rob P
Currently PMD but back to Class 2 as soon as possible
Cessna571 liked this
By riverrock
#1839196
My thoughts are similar - I'm on a PMD after my Class 2 expires a few months ago (I don't see me legally needing more than that for some time) but at some point I'm likely to get another Class 2, just for the general checkup.
I haven't seen my GP in the last 8 years, and I've never used the same AME twice (they keep seeming to retire). I don't really understand the concept of "your AME" but I can see benefit in occasional periodic checkups, even if I'm pretty lucky health wise.
User avatar
By Irv Lee
#1839198
@Rob P yes, I agree, the ecg within class 2 is an example of something some want, but for the moment we should be looking for ways to keep people flying and away from AMEs' queues if possible. Not just for that person individually, but to get more money flowing through the whole GA scene.
Rob P, flybymike liked this
User avatar
By nickwilcock
#1839232
The PMD was originally intended for simple VFR flying of non-EASA (then) SEP / TMG aircraft in national airspace , so thatthose who could not afford the cost of a LAPL Medical Certificate could keep flying.

But it lacked the safety factors of GP discussion which the old NPPL Medical Declarations included.

As currently written, now that ORS4 No.1421C has expired, in theory a pilot could fly a Piper Navajo with passengers sharing the cost, from Land End to John O' Groats in solid IMC at night outside CAS - while having only made a PMD.

The PMD has now drifted so far from its originally intended purpose that safety issues perhaps need to be discussed.
#1839250
nickwilcock wrote:The PMD was originally intended for simple VFR flying of non-EASA (then) SEP / TMG aircraft in national airspace...

That's my intention and for now it will serve quite nicely to keep me flying. :bounce: The alternative being trying to negotiate a new CAA system which apparently has the CAA advising AMEs to minimise the number of medicals done. :?
By Forfoxake
#1839262
nickwilcock wrote:The PMD was originally intended for simple VFR flying of non-EASA (then) SEP / TMG aircraft in national airspace , ....


So why is it that Part-FCL licence holders appear not to be able to do precisely that at the moment unless they are comfortable with making a declaration based on the confusingly worded up to 5700kg medical requirements??

And this appears to apply even in the case of a LAPL which only permits flight in aircraft no greater than 2000kg!

As Irv Lee asks, does anyone know precisely what the problem is now and when the CAA/DfT is likely to solve it?