Polite discussion about EASA, the CAA, the ANO and the delights of aviation regulation.
Forum rules: Please keep it polite!
#1683712
Yup, you can in the UK.

Because your licence can be validated with a PMD (CAA Self Declaration), LAPL or higher EASA Medical)
#1683735
SteveX wrote:Have EASA PPL, EASA class 2 medical just expired but says ok for LAPL until 2020. Can I fly a PA28 today?

Best think of it like this for the moment:
LAPL is a licence, that is what the final L is. Your medical is now ok for a Light Aircraft Pilot Licence. You haven't got one !
You cannot fly a pa28 today even with a self medical declaration unless you get one (5 minutes?) AND obey the restrictions in ors4 1283. So if you mean Jersey to Biggin (for example), then no. If you mean D reg, then no. Check the limitations in 1283 http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplic ... il&id=8704 and if it fits your intended flying, spend 5 mins getting the self declare medical and fly the pa28.
#1684025
Thanks guys, have to say I am stunned I can fly an EASA aircraft on a EASA license with no medical (the self-dec not being an actual medical of course)! As it happens Ive manged to get a class 2 examination booked before I next intend to fly.
#1684188
Why stunned?
What's the safety case for having a medical specifically for GA?
How may flights have ended badly as a result of pilot illness not previously foreseen as a result of the self dec process?

I don't know the answer but I suspect it is not many . But the process seems reasonable.

I have an LAPL med and a self dec :thumright:
Richard Dastardly liked this
#1684521
cotterpot wrote:Why stunned?
...
How may flights have ended badly as a result of pilot illness not previously foreseen as a result of the self dec process?
...


The self dec process (wrt EASA aircraft) is still too new for there to be any meaningful statistics but hopefully ten tears from now the stats will support the process.

I do find it surprising that a generally risk averse organisation like the CAA has allowed the process, not least because it relies so much on the common sense and honesty of the applicant.

As an example, last year I was taking medication that invalidated my Class 2 medical. I knew this because I took the trouble to Google it. Two reasons were given by the CAA, it has a sedative effect and there is a risk of cognitive impairment. I experienced both. Even knowing this (and consider that I might not have), I could totally honestly make the medical declaration required. I chose not to (being a sensible chap), until a suitable time after coming off the medication. Again, this was totally my opinion without any professional medical support. I think I made the right decision, but it was not black and white and other scenarios could be far more blurry.

So, full marks to the CAA for enabling pilots (like me) to get back in the air with less than perfect health, but I remain uncomfortable that they may have lowered the bar a little too far and/or put too much faith in the pilot community. I hope to be proved wrong on both counts.
#1684525
Tall_Guy_In_a_PA28 wrote:
The self dec process (wrt EASA aircraft) is still too new for there to be any meaningful statistics but hopefully ten tears from now the stats will support the process.

I do find it surprising that a generally risk averse organisation like the CAA has allowed the process, not least because it relies so much on the common sense and honesty of the applicant.



Let's hope it is 10 years rather than 10 tears!

Contrary to popular belief the UK CAA Medical Department is using an evidence base for making its aeromedical decisions and move away from what in the past may have been a more 'them's the rules'

Amongst aviation regulators they are a few streets ahead compared to most.

Certifying insulin dependent diabetics for all classes of medicals, certifying people with disabilities, the NPPL GP declaration and more recently the introduction of the PMD are all pointing towards that view.

This is a constantly changing environment and there will always be some lag; some of that is due to the fact that the CAA does not operate in a vacuum but is part of ICAO and EASA and the other issue is that good robust peer reviewed scientific material is not always available, not in the least as the issues that we look for in aeromedical certification (risk of incapacitating events etc) is not always part of the set up of clinical studies and drug trials.

Where a pilot is able to provide good quality peer reviewed material this will always be taken into account; 'my doctor says so' a lot less.