EASA PPL 70 Hours!!

[Milton1995]

As set out in the EASA licensing http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/c-May2011v3.pdf a PPL will now account to at least 70 hours. (I think)

With flying being the cost that it is, is that a really a good idea? I understand the safety aspect, but i see no elevation of privileges of the license (correct me if I'm wrong) so why the extra 25(at £150/hr) hours onto the minumum?

Any thoughts? :\

[douglas.lindsay]

I only found a reference to the number 70 on page 19. I think that relates to the required experience for converting an existing national license (might be a UK PPL or NPPL?) to an EASA PPL. It says it's for non-JAR licenses, too, and earlier in the doc says that JAR PPLs will be converted automatically. So I don't think it's about ab-initio training (if that's the right term).

Interesting bit in section 6.2 (page 9) on the IMCr. It's no guarantee but nice to know that EASA are at least trying to placate us. I'm studying for it now and quite keen to be able to actually use it - legally - for more than a year!

[BEagle]

The 70 hour figure refers to the conversion of an old-style pre-JAA UK PPL into an EASA part-FCL PPL.

You need to have 70 hours or more on aeroplanes and to 'demonstrate the use of radio navigation' in order to convert an old-style pre-JAR PPL(A) into an EASA part-FCL PPL - as has always been the case for converting to a JAR-FCL PPL(A).

There are no changes to UK-issued JAR-FCL PPLs; these will automatically be considered EASA part-FCL PPLs and will only need to be physically exchanged when the 5-year re-issue date is due, whereupon it will become a lifetime licence.

It would seem that with an EASA part-FCL PPL, you will be able to exercise the full range of Rule 28 VFR privileges - rather than being restricted as is the current situation unless you hold an IMCR.

[Whopity]

You will still be able to take your PPL skill test after just 35 hours as you have been able to for the past 11 years. 45 hours is required for licence issue and may include the test. EASA does not propose to change this. So far I have only met one person who actually passed the test with just 35 hours under his belt.

[IO540]

I have to say WOW... hats off to Whopity and his astonishing knowledge of the regs...

I had never heard of that one and I bet neither have 99% of schools.

BTW here (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/620/d-FAQMay2011_linked%20to%20paper%20v3.pdf) is more reading on the same stuff.

[mad_jock]

A few schools have. I did one who sat his test after 38 hous and then went on to do his night rating.

The boss didn't like this arrangement though and decided it wasn't to happen again as he felt diddled out of the night qual and bitched about not getting an additional 5 hours out of the punter.

[madlandrover]

Wasn't a boss up north was it?? Pointless moan anyway, the punter could have done the NQ before the LST and still done the whole lot without paying extra!

[mad_jock]

Aye thats the one.

It was the punter not paying extra that he didn't like, which ever way you did it.

[madlandrover]

He wasn't the only one. Think the death knell was the other Director moaning about lending a hi-vis to a paying AOC customer rather than forcing them to buy one to complete the flight!