I think there is a requirement for the student to know what they are about to get into.
The C172 is the biggest aircraft that I am ever likely to fly, and the Bulldog is the fastest. I can do both on my NPPL so I don't see the need to change.
I'm not planning to go and work for Ryanair, or anyone else, so I'm fine. I knew the limitations of the NPPL when I started out on this flying thing, and nothing has changed for me.
I do think that students should read more and buy less. I see people with ten hours and their own BOSE headset....
Let's train people to fight the fight that they are in. The so called "warning" that you can't upgrade an NPPL to a CPL is truly bollocks. Why not do the NPPL or LAPL and find out of flying really is for you, then do a PPL and then CPL when you need to? In the meantime, you are doing the same flying, in the same airframe for less money.
We both know people who have spent more going solo, than it would have taken to get qualified. By all means educate the students, but let's not put them off. An LAPL/NPPL to fly C172/C152 or even a Traumahawk is a perfectly good way to get your first 150 hours.
Then you can start looking at what it's going to take to be a applying for Loganair jobs.
I certainly don't think the Microlight (3 axis or not) is the same thing. If you can't pass the PPL skills test after 150 hours flying a 172 on an NPPL, you probably never will be able to. One of the important parts of that for me, was the cost of medicals to have a PPL.
3 axis microlights have their place, but it is in the production of leisure pilots, not airline bus drivers.