Firstly, there is
no such thing as 'Group A' and hasn't been for over a decade. A regrettable change introduced at the time of JAR-FCL....
The NPPL (SSEA) allows someone to obtain a licence in less time than is required for a JAR-FCL PPL, but
only if they meet the required standard. Someone with some glider time / daddy's aeroplane time etc. won't have to go through the entire JAR-FCL PPL syllabus, but will be able to take passengers flying with less expense as a result
if they meet the requirements. Incidentally, €ASA has sneaked in a proposal which means that LAPL(A) holders won't be allowed to take passengers flying until they've gained an additional 10 hrs PIC since licence issue....
Most of industry considered the JAR-FCL PPL Skill Test to be far too daunting for the average bear. Also, to fly the Q X-C without having demonstrated adequate proficiency to an Examiner first seemed daft. So, for the NPPL, we decided on the NST, then Q X-C, then GST route which works very well.
Another point to remember in the 'NPPL or PPL' debate is that, if you wish to fly an aeroplane >2000 kg MTOW and/or with >4 PoB, then may not do so with a NPPL(SSEA).
There is an 'upgrade' route to the JAR-FCL PPL(A) from NPPL which I agreed with the CAA when the NPPL was first introduced - you can find it in LASORS. Someone from the CAA has clumsily added a clause stating that the additional dual training
must include instruction in those elements from the syllabus of flight instruction for the JAR-FCL PPL(A) not found in the syllabus of flight instruction for the NPPL(A) rated for SSEA.
Most people will already have plenty of dual time; this requirement is merely to ensure that you would be able to pass all elements of the JAR-FCL PPL(A) Skill Test. However, you can be credited with dual training carried out in, for example, the USA for a NPPL, but it won't be allowable towards a JAR-FCL PPL(A) unless it was conducted by a JAR-FCL FI. We decided not to be quite so bone-headed as JAR-FCL and to allow the UK FI to make a reasoned assessment; at the end of the day the Skill Test is the decider!
Similarly, if you've already flown a Q X-C for your NPPL which was of sufficient length to meet the JAR-FCL PPL(A) requirements, you won't need to fly another.
If money is tight (when isn't it...), you can start with an NPPL(SSEA), then upgrade once you've got the experience under your belt as you see fit, provided that you can hold a JAA Class II Medical Certificate.
Regrettably, much of the flexibility we have secured for the NPPL (with the CAA's approval) is likely to be swept away on a tide of bungling €urocracy, thanks to the Kölunatic nonsense of EASA part-FCL. But, unless the CAA change things, you will be able to continue to use a NPPL (SSEA) on both 'EASA' and 'non-EASA' aeroplanes until Apr 2015. The CAA will have to come up with a 'conversion report' to allow NPPL (SSEA) holders to convert to the LAPL(A) before then - and I've no idea how they'll tackle the concept of converting a NPPL(Microlight) to a LAPL(A). They dug the hole, they'll have to fill it!
I'm intrigued by the references to the use of the NPPL abroad - does this mean it is accepted by the FAA for the issue of a based on licence?
No. The only accepted use of the NPPL(SSEA) outside the UK is in the Isle of Man, Channel Islands (with an additional training proviso) and in France (if the 'ICAO equivalence' certificate is held, as well as an ICAO Class 2 Medical Certificate). The purpose of the 'ICAO equivalence certificate' - as agreed with the DGAC - is to prove that the pilot has the met the same training and experience requirements as a JAR-FCL PPL(A) holder,
without the need to hold another licence. Whether any other nation would accept it is up to the holder to find out for him/herself beforehand - as is clearly stated in the certificate and its accompanying guidance notes.