Death of the NPPL

[wrecker]

If I read this correctly
Licensing and Training Standards | EASA | Safety Regulation (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?gid=2061)
The NPPL will die in 2014

[BillieBob]

You have not read it correctly and the NPPL will not die in 2014 or, indeed, in the foreseeable future. Look at Attachment 3

[David Roberts]

Correct. The NPPL will not die post implementation of EU FCL. But it will be restricted to flying Annex II aeroplanes. To fly aircraft within the scope of EU law (i.e. non-Annex II) will require at least the EU LAPL which will be very similar to the UK NPPL, and for which holders of the UK NPPL will be 'transitioned' by the UK CAA (subject to a CAA 'conversion report' at the macro level rather than an individual level).

Of course the UK NPPL (M) will continue also for microlight pilots as these aeroplanes are Annex II.

DGR / Secretary, NPLG Ltd

[thing]

David as I read the regs for the LAPL (probably not very well I admit, jargonese is beyond me) it appears to require the same class of medical as the JAA PPL. Being as a lot of people are on NPPL because of the lower medical standard IE they can't pass the medical for the JAA PPL does this mean they are effectively grounded?

[J.A.F.O.]

2.2 States that it will not be necessary to hold a Class 1 or Class 2 for a LAPL and final requirements have not been decided upon.

[thing]

Ah, good spot JAFO, missed that bit.

[J.A.F.O.]

good spot JAFO It's what they pay me for ;)

[BEagle]

2.2 States that it will not be necessary to hold a Class 1 or Class 2 for a LAPL and final requirements have not been decided upon.

Correct. But this is one area in which you may be assured that the CAA is very much on-side. The CMO is entirely content with the current Medical Declaration system, but that is not the case amongst many non-UK AMEs.

Whereas the CAA devolved many aspects of the NPPL to the NPPL Policy and Steering Committee, including an element of flexible accreditation, the same is not true of the LAPL. As with everything else in EASA, if it isn't in the rules, then it cannot happen..

Befehl ist befehl!

[Whopity]

I find it quite amazing that the EU who have so much Human Rights legislation fly in the Face of ICAO Annex 11.2.2.2 Recommendation.— A pilot licence issued by a Contracting State should be rendered valid by other Contracting States for use in private flights.The EU may not be a Contracting State but all individual States are. The whole PPL side of EASA is unnecessary, in view of the ICAO recommendation, and simply displays the ignorance and incompetence of those involved in developing unnecessary licences. This was highlighted by the Deputy Director of the EU in 2008. In fact EASA have not even developed the licences, there is not a single theoretical question for any of the proposed private licences, so there is not even a glimmer of standardisation. It is a shambolic mess that should be binned by the European Parliament.

[xrayalpha]

You know Whopity, it is all a total shambles.

But who cares.

My business is as a Annexe 2 flying instructor, with an Annexe 2 airfield (well, you know what I mean, I fly microlights!).

I am spending 600k plus this year on a new 10,000 sq ft hangar and a house at the airfield.

So my life and money is tied up in aviation, and how to improve it. It's not just a hobby, a sport or a business.

That's not the case with these prats.

I am letting these people write up their own ar*es with regulations because it would just get me totally hacked off to try and argue with them and their gold-plated salaries, pensions and pay-offs. Plus expenses.

I am not longer even intersted in "victories" by our negotiators.

Let them draw up the rules. Then we just follow them - ish.

It has been that way for 100 years. It will always be that way.

Whatever they do, it is easier to adapt than to fight.

[Whopity]

I recall watching the David Dimbleby program the 7 Ages of Britain; we are now in the 8th Age: The Age of Stupidity!

[proudprivate]

I am not longer even intersted in "victories" by our negotiators.
Let them draw up the rules. Then we just follow them - ish.


IMHO, the text has not yet been transmitted to parliament, because the Commission having a look at the "legal aspects" (Read : they want to lobby parliament themselves because they fear it will be shot down).

You vote for your MEP's. The head of the EP Transport Committee is a fellow countryman coming from a background and region where you quickly learn to discern what is fair and what is not fair.

For his re-election, he depends on you. If your livelyhood is at stake, and it's caused by a few overpaid axe-grinders in Brussels or Cologne, well outside their operational scope and mandate, why wouldn't he listen ?

State your case, write to him that €110 Mio and then some can be better spent on de-regulation.


It is a shambolic mess that should be binned by the European Parliament.

Exactly ! And the more people write to their MEP's that it should, the more chance it will indeed happen...

[BEagle]

At a recent meeting, one of the EASA €urocrats announced that the political lobbying was 'unhelpful'.....

Sympathy? If he wants it, he can find it in the dictionary between '****' and 'syphilis'!

Europe is culturally and geogrpahically diverse. The closer to the grass roots you look, the more this is true. The same applies in aviation - why should someone in Norway have any say about private flying in Greece, or someone in the UK about private flying in France, or someone in Germany about private flying in Spain?

Remove all PPL-level activity from EASA's grasping clutches and recognise a minimum standard for cross-border flight as the ICAO-compliant PPL. Forget the LAPL, the EIR, the 'achievable' IR and all similar €urocratic nonsense and let everyone get on with life without the needless trouble and expense of wholly unnecessary and expensive €urocracy!

Keep up the political lobbying!

[Blacksheep]

Shades of the engineers' licensing debacle. :(

Once the EC became involved we got the JAA, then the Part 66 licence that made hoary old LAMEs go away and swot for yet more exams and modules in order to carry on doing exactly what we had been doing for decades. Meanwhile, over in France, where there previously hadn't been any AME licences at all, the French authorities adopted the new rules by simply giving Part 66 licences to those who could prove they had been working on aeroplanes for some time. There's more than one EU, we're just living in the wrong part. :{

[Whopity]

Its nice to see EASA and the CAA singing from the same hymn sheet:

EASA Newsletter 05 2010 (www.easa.eu.int/communications/easa-news/EASA-Newsletter-issue-5.pdf)Mathias EASA News 05 Page 3

However we should stress that our main goal is that all pilots who have certain privileges today should keep it with the new licence


CAA Information Sheet (http://go.redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.caa.co.uk%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fgid%3D2061&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dnewre ply%26noquote%3D1%26p%3D6314964)European (EU) legislation is going to change the pilot licensing rules and will effect the privileges of many existing licence holdersSurely that is contrary to some other EU legislation.

The CAA information sheet then says:
These Part FCL Licences will all be compliant with Annex 1 to the (ICAO or Chicago Convention) and so will be recognised for international flight worldwide So why don't they recognise ICAO Annex 1 Recommendations:1.2.2.2 Recommendation.— A pilot licence issued by a Contracting State should be rendered valid by other Contracting States for use in private flights. That would imply that a UK issued ICAO licence is equally valid to fly an EASA aircraft! There is more pooh in these proposals than a blocked toilet! Is the EU actually an ICAO signatory?

[BillieBob]

Is the EU actually an ICAO signatory? Nope, it can't be as it is not (yet) a sovereign state. However, whatever the devious and untrustworthy politicians and €urocrats may tell you, that has always been the eventual objective.