NPPL & Aerobatic lessons

[Big Cheese1]

Afternoon all,

I'm hopefully completing the rest of my licence soon after a large gap from completion of my RAF flying Scholarship in 2000. (20hrs total inc. 4hrs 20 min solo)

Unfortunately, due to finances I'm only able to complete the NPPL at present and am trying to find a fairly decent/cheap club within the Croydon/South London area.

I'm also keen to find out about any aerobatic courses that anyone might know about, most probably on the C152 aerobat as I'm sure that thats what I'll be finishing off on.

Finally, I know that this will be subject to weather, but I'm hoping at completing the remainder during december as work id fairly quiet then and would be happy for me to take time off. Can anyone provide any info as to how long you think the remainder to NPPL would take, price estimate etc. I've spoken to a couple and I've been told £1500.

Thanks in advance everyone

BC:ok:

[scubawasp]

£1500 is about correct. With regards aeros, the most important thing to do is to get you're licence first (and some experience). Some do it on the C152 aerobat, some get differences training tail dragger and do the aeros that way. With regards to weather and December, you can get the best flying days or the worst and remember that as a student, it may be flyable with an instructor, but things like 12 knot crosswinds and 2500ft cloudbase for solo cross countries would rule those days out for you. Its going to be down to the weather, and your ability.

SW

[Big Cheese1]

Thanks for the reply scubawasp.

I'm fairly confident about my abilities, I did really good on my aptitude tests at Cranwell, and went solo in 7 hours (not that I'm cocky about it because this was 5 years ago!!)

I'd most definately get some hours behind me before going for any aero course.

Would anyone care to suggest a rough time frame for completion?

Looking at doing an extra 13-14 hrs, possibly 2 a day (or more?) so give or take a week??

Any thoughts would be really appreciated

[scubawasp]

If you are planning on doing an additional 13/14 hours (if I am reading the post right!), why not do the JAA PPL?

[AerBabe]

My thoughts exactly ...

I'd be very surprised if you managed to complete the NPPL course in the minimum number of hours. It's designed for medical reasons, not financial ones! if you can't afford a full JAR PPL, how can you afford to keep flying once you have your NPPL?!

[BEagle]

AerBabe, that is nonsense. The NPPL is not "designed for medical conditions"!

An extra 13-14 hours should be about right - your RAF scholarship training will stand you in good stead as you'll have done most of the basics. You should just need to get back up to speed with GH, then do the navigation element before the NST, Q X-C and GST.

Whereas a JAR-FCL PPL would be a minimum of another 25 hours on top of the 20 hours you already have...

(25-14) x £100 ph = £1100. For those who think that's an insignificant sum, well, you could always send Big Cheese 1 the odd £1100, I guess.

He can always upgrade his NPPL to JAR-FCL PPL at a later date - and with a licence he can legally cost share with his passengers, so can potentially fly at lower cost than would otherise be the case when he first gets his licence.

[J.A.F.O.]

Added to that the fact that the money you save on the medical pays for your flight with an instructor every 24 months; it can make a difference.

I wouldn't imagine that I'd have any problems with the medical, I have an annual medical at work and was A1G1Z1 in the RAF but I have an NPPL. Why?

Well, I have no wish to fly in rubbish weather, at night, to Latvia with six on board. Nice days bimbling around VFR are why I fly so why over-complicate it and pay more than is necessary when I can have a good old-fashioned 'licence for life' which I can afford to keep valid.

NPPLs are definitely not for the sick, lame and lazy; they are about informed choice.

[shortstripper]

You can always upgrade to a full PPL later anyway, so stick to your plan. True most people are likely to take just as many hours to get their NPPL, but if you are young and have the aptitude .... go for it!

SS

[italianjon]

Big Cheese,

I was in the same boat as you, and I have re-searched everything to tne n-th degree... So feel free to PM me...

I had completed a Flying Scholarship, and had not flown for over 6 years. I have decided to go for the JAR-PPL as I would like to go further with my licences and so it make sense, rather than NPPL first. It depends what you want to do. If you want to bimble around the UK on pleasure flights the NPPL will suffice until you can afford to upgrade. However if you wish to go further, I would try and go for the JAR-PPL straight out as this will be cheaper in the long run.

Also with respect to flying schools be very careful. I called around 6 in my local area; and explained that I had a scholarship and had not flown for 6 years. 5 of them said on the phone, in that case you will need x amount of hours to get back to solo standard... Only one said "Book an hour and we will have a look at what you remember and take it from there"... Well I booked the hour, a plan was generated from that hour, and 12 hours after starting I am staring at the skies waiting to do the Qualifying Cross Country!!! I am at 35TT. The school is excellent as the instructors are salaried and so not under pressure to "stretch out the lessons" like some hourly paid clubs.

All the very best with it, and hope to see you at an airfield, on a bimble one day!!!

Laters

Jon

[J.A.F.O.]

ItalianJon

Just a small point;

the NPPL will suffice until you can afford to upgrade
I don't necessarily see it as a cheap option until you can afford better, for many it is simply the better option. I think it'll be some time before many see it that way and there will be those who never will but if it covers all that you want to do then it is all you need.

BigCheese

I did a Flying Scholarship in 1986 and hadn't flown as P1 since the early nineties so I was in a similar (if not worse) position when I looked at getting back into flying a couple of years ago. I went for the NPPL as I didn't need anything else and I haven't changed my mind, yet. I suppose I did about a dozen hours or so and was amazed at how much I remembered. Like Jon I chose the club that said, "come down, we'll see what you can remember and take it from there."

I'm now thoroughly enjoying the privileges of my licence and that's not just a legal term; they really are privileges.

Next year, hopefully, is the SLMG for cheap bimbling; a tailwheel conversion, for interesting bimbling and maybe, just maybe, a taster of aeros, just to see how I feel about them now that I am older and, if not wiser then, more aware of my own mortality.

The best of luck and remember, the NPPL isn't a second class licence - it's first class for those that it suits.

JAFO

[italianjon]

JAFO,

Fair point. I didn't mean it the way it sounded. I ment in terms of possibly an IMC or other rating that requires a JAR-PPL... It made sense in my head, should have read post back to myself better. Sorry.

Didn't mean to imply that the NPPL is in anyway a lesser licence.

Laters

Jon

[J.A.F.O.]

;) Fair play, Jon.

:ok: None taken.

[BillieBob]

AerBabe, that is nonsense. The NPPL is not "designed for medical conditions"! OK BEagle, since its inception, what proportion of NPPLs, recommended by NPLG, have been issued to people who could have qualified medically for the JAA PPL? (Microlight NPPLs don't count as there is no other option).

[J.A.F.O.]

BillieBob

Whether Beags can come up with the statistics or not it is quite irrelevant - when the NPPL was introduced it was obvious that those most likely to be first in the queue would be those who had been excluded from the PPL for medical reasons as they would, in a large number of cases, have already held PPLs at some point or would have been keen to do so were it not for the medical considerations.

Far more interesting would be -

What proportion of PPLs do anything with their licence that they couldn't do with an NPPL?

Why are they committed to spending more money than they need to?

What proportion of PPLs never even make it to the first renewal?

[BEagle]

The NPPL was NOT designed for 'medical conditions' - it was designed to meet the requirements which industry had said they wanted. One of which was that 'The course shall be undertaken at a UK flying club/school or flying training organisation'.

The next ANO amendment will introduce changes which will be of considerable benefit for those wanting to fly SSEA, Microlight and SLMG aircraft without the need to revalidate all classes independently - and it will also get rid of the 'rolling validity' concept.

As for statistsics - nope, I don't have any.

[FullyFlapped]

BEagle,
and it will also get rid of the 'rolling validity' concept
What does this refer to please ?

FF :ok:

[FullyFlapped]

Beagle,

Just to bring this back to the top ... if you would be so kind?

Thanks,

FF :ok:

[BEagle]

The CAA made a complete balls-up when they introduced the NPPL; someone wrongly used the 'ballonists' validity requirements totally contrary to the NPPL Policy and Steering Group's decision. They also cocked up the Rating privileges for the SSEA Rating, saying that you could fly microlights and SLMGs on a NPPL SSEA Rating having only completed 'differences training'. Again, this ran contrary to the NPPL P&SC's decision.

So we've been trying to sort it out for nearly 2 years now - because at the moment:

Section 3 – Maintenance of validity of National Private Pilot’s Licence (Aeroplanes)

1 A simple single engine aeroplane (NPPL) class rating included in a National Private Pilot’s Licence (Aeroplanes) shall not be valid for the purposes of article 24A unless the provisions of this Section have been complied with.

2 (a) A simple single engine aeroplane (NPPL) class rating shall be valid if either:

(i) the holder has within the 12 months preceding the flight flown not less than six hours in an aeroplane falling within the simple single engine aeroplane (NPPL) class rating, four hours of which shall have been as pilot in command and he has carried out a training flight of at least 1 hour duration with a flying instructor within the previous 24 months; or

(ii) he has within the three months preceding the expiry of the rating undertaken a simple single engine aeroplane (NPPL) General Skills Test.

But there's no such thing as a 'rating expiry date'! Technically, it is impossible to 'revalidate a SSEA Rating if it doesn't have an expiry date!

It will change so that the validity is going to be for a 2 year period with a defined expiry date - you just need to meet the revalidation requirements before that date and the Rating will be revalidated for another 2 years from the expiry date.

[IO540]

According to aviation press reports I've seen (so they must be right...) 2/3 of NPPL candidates are existing PPL holders who no longer pass their CAA Class 2 medical.

Clearly this is not what anyone intended the NPPL to be.

The training industry (which is the most powerful GA lobby) wanted a PPL which looks cheaper on their price list.

But not all thought it would work. At the time, every instructor or flying school owner I spoke to told me the NPPL won't actually work out any cheaper because the pilot has still got to reach a standard where they can fly safely in UK's airspace. But the minimum NPPL requirement does look cheaper on the price list than the minimum PPL requirement!

Personally I think a complete revamp, with extensive modernisation, is called for but it will never happen. Certainly not before GA has shrunk to the insignificant levels seen in the outer reaches of Europe.

[J.A.F.O.]

Beags

As an NPPL (SSEA) who is hoping to do the SLMG "differences training" in the new year to give me access to some cheap aviating; could you tell me how and when it'll all be turned upside down.

Many thanks.

[DFC]

IO540,

Couldn't agree more.

------

BEagle,

So what you are saying is that the revalidation requirements will be the same as the JAR-PPL revalidation requirements?

If so then the NPPL is going the require the same flying as the JAA PPL to obtain and thus the same costs and the same requirements to continue to fly (same costs) leaving the only difference the different medical standard. All that and not be able to fly an SEP outside the UK?

Can't see a problem with SSEA pilots flying microlight 3 axis aircraft after appropriate differences training so where is the problem with that other than an examminer not getting their fee?

Overall as IO540 says, 2/3 of NPPLs are qualified and avoiding the JAA medical, and most of the rest are Microlight pilots. So how many NPPL SSEA licences are issued to new applicants?

Regards,

DFC