Le Labo du Pilote
FR | EN
Subscribe

Our methodology

How a dossier arrives on this site: where each statement comes from, who proofread it, what is verified and what is not. The rule that governs everything else: when data does not exist publicly, we write that it does not exist, instead of making up a credible one.

Medical content

Medical content, starting with the dossier on the class 1, class 2, and LAPL medical examination, strictly relies on regulatory texts (EASA Part-MED) and official sources from the authorities. They are written by a pilot and former healthcare professional, never as medical advice: in case of doubt, consult an aeromedical examiner (AME).

Proofread by authorized doctors

A site about medical fitness written by someone who is not a doctor must be proofread by doctors. Two authorized aeromedical examiners did so, and gave their written agreement to be named.

Dr Sébastien Bisconte

Authorized aeromedical examiner. He proofread the pages dedicated to the regulatory framework: vocabulary, periodicities, and thresholds. His proofreading scope covers France.

Regulatory framework · France

Dr Frédéric Loock

Class 2 authorized doctor, the formulation he chose himself. He proofread the section on medical history and treatments, and enriched it with his clinical practice.

Medical history and treatments

What we do with their remarks

Every remark is verified against the text before being applied, then reflected on all relevant pages, not just the one that was proofread. A medical proofreading serves to correct what we have written; it does not replace reading the regulation.

Text verification

What has not yet been proofread, we also state. These two proofreadings cover the European baseline and France. The Swiss and Luxembourg sections have not yet been proofread by a doctor from those countries. A Swiss proofreading is underway; we are still looking for a Luxembourg examiner. Until this is done, these pages carry no medical endorsement, and they note this.

Where a statement comes from

Four levels, never mixed

First the regulation, with the number of its point. Then the acceptable means of compliance (AMC), published by the Agency, where almost all figures live and which the Agency can modify alone. Then the national authority's publication. Then, lastly, an authorized center's page. A Labo page always says which level it is on, because an AMC threshold and a regulation article have neither the same strength nor the same lifespan.

What never enters

No forum, no school, no private directory, no anonymous testimony as a source for a rule. And since Brexit, British guidance no longer describes European law: it is only cited to point out a divergence, never to state a rule applicable to us. This is the most common trap, because it is often the most readable source found when searching.

Every figure has its date

A fee, a deadline, a list of centers: anything that changes is published with its recorded date, so you can judge for yourself if it's still current. We don't copy a figure without having gone to see it.

What we do not know, we write

This is the least "selling" part of this method, and the one we value most. Each dossier ends with its assumed limits: the documents we could not open, the versions we could not collate, the questions left unanswered.

  • When a country publishes nothing, we write that it publishes nothing.
  • When an official server served us nothing, we note it rather than concluding.
  • Not finding a rule is not proof that it does not exist, and we never present it as such.
  • No prognosis of fitness, no interpretation of results, no treatment advice. Never, in any form, not even reassuring.

Equipment reviews

Le Labo also tests gear: headsets, radios, GPS, tablets, flight bags, watches. This part of the site follows its own rules, independent of the previous ones.

1. Selection

We only cover what is truly useful in the cockpit. Compliance with EASA standards, reliability, and footprint are the first filters: gear that does not pass these three does not go further.

Criterion: operational utility

2. Approach

When gear is tested, it is bought with our own funds or returned to the manufacturer after evaluation. Analyses cross-reference real-world usage and sourced technical specifications.

Cross-referenced data

3. Data integrity

Data is verified, never invented. No grade inflation: a critical flaw is pointed out. We prefer a suitable / unsuitable reading rather than grades out of 10 on subjective criteria.

Objective analysis

Analysis protocols

Affiliation transparency

The gear pages contain Amazon affiliate links, marked as such on each page concerned: a purchase made through one of them can earn us a commission, at no extra cost to you. No page dedicated to the medical examination contains any, and there never will be. In any case, affiliation modifies neither the selection nor the conclusions: a mediocre product is not recommended, whatever the commission, and a product not sold on Amazon is mentioned without a link rather than being excluded.

Update policy

Aviation evolves, as does gear and regulation. Guides and comparisons are regularly reviewed, and the date of the last update is indicated on the relevant pages.

Corrections

A reported error is verified at the source, then corrected, including when it comes from us. Substantive corrections from medical proofreadings are applied to all affected pages, not just the one that was read. If you find data that seems inaccurate, please write to us.

What is free stays free

A paid guide exists alongside this site. Nothing that is freely accessible today will go behind a paywall, and no free page is intentionally curtailed to encourage a purchase. The boundary lies elsewhere: the site explains what the regulation provides, the guide gives the timeline, process, and tools.

Reader reviews

If reviews are published, they will only come from readers whose purchase is verified, solicited by a single message sent about a week after their order. They will be reproduced without rewriting, with the attribution chosen by their author. Critical reviews will be published like any other, and no review is bought or exchanged.

Geographical note

The site is aimed at French-speaking pilots in France, Belgium, Switzerland, and Luxembourg. Prices, availability, and the regulatory framework are indicated for these markets.

  • EASA compliance and certifications
  • Verification of prices and availability in Europe
  • Verification of support availability in Europe

The Labo du Pilote letter

An in-depth dossier with each release. Verified against official texts, written by an airline pilot who was also a healthcare professional.

Welcome gift: the medical examination preparation checklist, in PDF.

One-click unsubscribe.

An error, a clarification to make?

If any data seems inaccurate to you, write to us: it will be verified and corrected.

Write to contact@labodupilote.fr