FFF,
Your comments echo what I am feeling about the nppl. BEagle has explained the main differences being the VOR tracking/fixing and Instrument training. Now ignoring the actual min. hours issue I do feel missing these two elements off any private license is ill advised. When learning to fly, my instructors, examiner and fellow club members only had one totally common piece of advise, that being - flying into cloud without enough experience/training WILL kill you.
In this country, as today proves - 500ft cloud base throughout a large area of the NW ( but its sunny south of Birmingham so all the telly news tells us what a lovely day it is everywhere
) it is very easy to get yourself near an IMC situation, without showing poor airmanship. Knowing what I do now ( very little, I apreciate ) I would not want to pass a nppl without at least the 4 hours I got from the CAA system.
As for the VOR tracking, I just can't see the reason to remove this for the nppl, except for cost. And we are only talking about 2-3 hours? Knowing how to find where you are has got to be essential, and if another £300 provided this, well.
It just seems to me that many of the issues drummed into me about reserve methods to conduct a safe flight have been binned. Flying VFR, maybe in less that perfect conditions, no Radio Nav experience - Bang, the radio goes...... We have been instructed on all these situations because they will happen one day - the radio happened to me, it was a shock!
If I am misreading the situation please educate me, but I just can't see the point of missing things that I was told throughout my training where life savers.
Flying is expensive - learning to fly is expensive - we who have been able to learn and then able to continue to fly are lucky, and I am most certainly not saying ' I had to pay so you should ', but in my book, 45 hrs is very basic anyway. Flying is all about hrs - the more you have and your still alive, simply the better you SHOULD be.
Any comments welcomed.
Regards
LF
