View Full Version : NPPL to PPL


mjtibbs
1st Oct 2002, 19:16
Hi, ive been gathering information on flying lessons/licenses etc. According to the main NPPL site (www.nppl.uk.com) the NPPL license will cost 131 pounds, where as the PPL ive seen is around 4,000. Would it be possible to get the NPPL, then move onto getting the PPL and moving the 31 hours of training from the NPPL towards the PPL thus only leaving the extra hours to add & ground exams which would mean you could have the PPL at a much cheaper cost?
Sorry if i could have explained myself clearer & please correct me if i'm wrong.
thanks

--Mike



BEagle
1st Oct 2002, 19:35
Don't mistake the actual licence issue cost for the whole training cost!

Yes, you can start with an NPPL and then convert it to a JAR-FCL PPL if, after obtaining your NPPL(SEP) you obtain at least a JAA Class II medical, complete the additional dual training requirements and pass the JAR-FCL PPL Skill Test. Then you'll also have to pay the JAR-FCL PPL issue fee (for 5 years, whereas the NPPL is for life)......

Fly Stimulator
1st Oct 2002, 19:40
BEagle,

Any news on the NPPL to PPL upgrade path for those who cross-credited microlight time and were not trained wholly by JAR-FCL instructors?

BEagle
1st Oct 2002, 19:44
I'll be posing that question to the CAA on Monday.

notice
3rd Oct 2002, 00:30
Although there are 'different' views on NPPL (ranging from most wonderful to a retrograde and dangerous relaxation of the rules), anyone who wants a JAA PPL should go for it directly.
Also and other things being equal, NPPL training cannot be cheaper than JAA PPL, except that you might be able to achieve the inferior NPPL status with less experience and lower medical.

long final
3rd Oct 2002, 06:28
Here we go again ......... ;)

StrateandLevel
3rd Oct 2002, 15:13
Notice

The reason the NPPL will cost exactly the same as the JAA PPL is surely because the standard required is exactly the same!

By the end of year one there will be lots of NPPLs (good for statistics) but less than a handfull will be ab initio.

Evo
3rd Oct 2002, 16:59
Any plans for a NPPL(H)?

BEagle
3rd Oct 2002, 21:45
No.

notice
5th Oct 2002, 00:37
ERR.. getting confused here.

The 'most wonderful' fraternity promote NPPL( Naff Private Pilot Licence) simply because the standard is LOWER than JAA PPL in that NPPL only requires 35, rather than 45, hours min. and allows inferior health status.

Obviously the training won't be cheaper - not because the standard is the same but because their aircraft and instructor will cost the same. If they won't let you pass in less than 45 hours the course will, also, cost the same.

BEagle
5th Oct 2002, 07:20
If I can try to explain so that even 'notice' might understand:

If YOU are ready for the NPPL GST after the statutory minimum training time, then it WILL cost you less. It can be done - it just needs regular attendance at your flying club and a fair bit of effort.

Costs will also be less than for a JAR-FCL PPL through:

1. Obtaining a NPPL medical declaration from your GP. Even if you are fit enough to hold a JAR Class 1 or 2 medical certificate.

2. Paying for a lifetime licence, not one that attracts a re-issue fee every 5 years.

3. Flying less-expensively equipped light aeroplanes which don't need the same level of avionics as are needed to teach the JAR-FCL PPL.

foxmoth
5th Oct 2002, 08:14
". Flying less-expensively equipped light aeroplanes which don't need the same level of avionics as are needed to teach the JAR-FCL PPL"

I don't see many schools getting a special aircraft to teach the NPPL and in fact there is nothing to stop them teaching for the JAR licence on a more basic machine (though you may need just a couple of hours on something better equipt) so the hourly savings will be negligeable. Yes you CAN finish the NPPL in less time, but how many will? The concensus seems to be very few, so for most, the only real savings are on medical and licence costs.
The main benefit I see for this licence is for those that can't get a class2 medical.

englishal
5th Oct 2002, 19:58
Costs will also be less than for a JAR-FCL PPL through
But Beagle, these costs are peanuts in the world of Aviation. Woopy doo, you don't have to pay your 140GBP every 5 years - medical will be the same plus or minus a few quid (MY JAA Class 2 was 50 GBP as mentioned before), and as Foxmoth points out, no club will buy "special NPPL" aircraft. I cannot see it as a cheaper licence at all?

The ONLY people this licence will benefit are either those who cannot get a JAR class 2 or those who may benefit from glider / microlight hours (not forgetting that you get up to a 10 hr reduction on JAR requirements if you havbe flown PIC hrs in microlights).

Sorry to be negative, but it seems like a half hearted attempt to regain a national licence, without deviating too much from the European concensus. In my opinion the NPPL should be radically different. For example, no medical certificate required if you hold a driving licence, no minimum hr stipulation at all. If someone can fly, then give them the licence, free tuition by experienced PPLs (there's plenty of willing volunteers around) etc etc etc...

Rgds
EA:)

BEagle
5th Oct 2002, 20:14
And therein lies the rub. No, 140+ every 5 years is NOT peanuts to some people who would like to fly. Just remember that.

As for foxmoth's misinterpretation, the point is that a RF will no longer need to equip every aeroplane to the avionic standard laid down for JAR-FCL training. Hence when another aeroplane is needed by a Club, it only needs to be a cheaper VFR-equipped 2-seater. No need to fit FM-immune NavComs, ADF or SSR..... Just 1 VHF would do.

Anyway, the NPPL is now here. Already I've heard of one Club oop Nawth which has been happily taking the money from a pilot training to NPPL level but which has then said "We don't believe in the NPPL, so you'll either have to go elsewhere or switch to the JAR-FCL course" - and that's because they prefer to use JAR-FCL PPL training as a device to get people interested in their CPL course..... It is, in fact, fraudulent to behave in that way....

englishal
5th Oct 2002, 20:37
140 GBP ever 5 years ~ 16.8 minutes flying time per year in an old Warrior....so you see in the world of aviation, 140 GBP every 5 years really is peanuts.

Cheers
EA:)

BEagle
5th Oct 2002, 22:51
If you really have to pay 100 per hour to rent an 'old Warrior', then 28 per annum won't go far. But if you were just paying for the fuel in your own Warrior, it would represent around 18% of the minimum time you need to maintain your NPPL (SEP). If you run something which is even less of a gas-guzzler, the money would go even further!

PS - A club Warrior actually costs around 60 ph to operate on the Transport (passenger) category including fuel and VAT......

BEagle
9th Oct 2002, 20:57
Some recent NPPL news:

1. Re. NPPL (SEP) to JAR-FCL PPL (SEP) for NPPL (SEP) obtained through licence allowance credit, the answer is that the CAA's thumbs are tied on this under JAR-FCL. Hence there can be no easement of the current 10 hours rule - but, of course, any dual instruction for a SEP rating will count. So I regret to say that, even with 1000 hours NPPL SEP, you'd still have to 'top up' the dual training hours and requirements and to do the 150 nm cross-country and the JAR-FCL PPL Skill Test, plus gain a JAA Class 2 medical in order to upgrade a NPPL with SEP rating to a JAR-FCL PPL with SEP Rating.

2. There will be no significant NPPL changes for at least 6-9 months to allow the current systems to be properly assessed. That includes the wider topics of flight instruction by non professional licence holders, the use of unlicensed aerodromes and private category aeroplanes - all of which will be given wider consideration at a later date by the GACC.

3. The NPPL Policy and Sterring Committee is now chaired by Head of PLD.