Originally Posted by
planesandthings
In your situation it's pretty clear, go straight for the 45 hour PPL (A) if you have any interest in flying more than just microlights. Having held a LAPL (A) in conversion from NPPL, it's a pretty pointless licence for a new person unless you have medical issues, as you can't carry passengers for 10 hours PIC after licence issue and to upgrade to a PPL you have to do the 10 hours differences training and another skills test (all ££££). Any new NPPLs now are dead in the water currently for anything EASA related so steer well clear if you are looking to fly anything other than microlights unless anything changes.
Search round your local schools and see what attracts your eyes, remember to factor in exam costs not just the flying costs, see if you can speak to a few students too.
This is a great example of why anyone seeking advice, should get as much of it as possible.
Have a look at the Annex II aircraft list, and you will find that they are not all microlights. You can fly the RV7/8, Gnat, Hunter or Jet Provost on an NPPL.
Annex II
There are aircraft like the EV97 at Perth which might fit the needs of the OP for the next five years. History tells us that a large chunk of people give it up in that timeframe anyway. So in my view, the OP should fly as much as he can, while he can, in what he can afford to fly. I don't see the benefit in spending twice the money to be able to do the things that you want to do, but in other countries, when you want to do it here.
The LAPL will allow the OP to fly any of the C172 / PA28 fleet that is out there for hire in Central Scotland. The extra ten hours of solo consolidation, is in my view, a good thing. Get yer early learning done without distractions.
Any experience gained in a three axis microlight will not be a bad thing if the OP wants to "move up" to a full PPL later, as the learning will include r/t skills, airmanship, nav, and situational awareness, which has no relevance to whether you are in an EV97 or a Bulldog.
As for the additional costs of a PPL Medical, compared to a declaration, that adds up to a few hours a year in the air, instead of paying the AME.
There is a huge difference between a C42 at Strathaven, and a C172 at Perth. Not just in price.
Looking at what the OP wants to do, why would he spend the extra money on a PPL instead of flying?