BEagle/All
Perhaps Kirstey was a little combative in tone, but his/her point remains (I have talked this over at length with qualified FI's and other pilots)-
What is the NPPL
for, exactly?
Apart from the lower medical costs, how the award of a licence within the lowered hours requirement is going to be acheived by a majority of applicants is a mystery to myself and others, especially given that the average time taken by both CAA and JAA students is much higher, (anecdotally 55-65 hours, with some of that admittedly due due to delays caused by the lovely weather we enjoy in these tropical islands).
This 'mission creep' is not going to magically disappear under the NPPL. To my mind, what will happen is that in addition to schools being able to advertise a JJA PPL package for aroung GBP 4500-5000, they will be also able to offer the NPPL for around GBP 3000 - 4000.
That may well prove to attract more people initially, but when they too find that this estimate of costs proves to be somewhat, er, elastic, (I spent WELL over GBP 7000 to get my JAR PPL all in all) it won't be long before we are back at square one again.
BEagle, I have no doubt that you and your colleagues have worked extremely hard and dilligently on this project, what I would question is the validity of the project itself.
If you want to attract more people into flying and GA,
make it more affordable. IMHO, the energies of the PFA, AOPA etc. would be much better spent campaigning for:
Reduction or abolition of taxation on AVGAS
Reduced landing fees for students (this is a BIG component of any PPL course)
Restoration of some kind of goverment credit/VAT exemption to all, or at least genuine career students (I believe that NVQ still applies to certain Yachting courses, for example, so why not a pilots licence? Much more useful to society
)
WxJx
