Nppl? Safe?

[waspsad]

Im a newbie to this forum and have spent hours going through all the useful information here. I am just looking to fly recreationally so looking at the NPPL, maybe upgrade to PPL in the future if i feel like challenging myself that bit more. Of course while flying we all like to keep safe, and i was just wondering by doing the NPPL am i putting myself at more risk than if i did the PPL because i havent had as many training hours? Are there any others who went for the NPPL on here for reasons other than medical?

many thanks :ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

The NPPL is essentially the old UK Microlight PPL extended to light aeroplanes - and as such the test standards are the same, and pretty high: just a slightly thinner syllabus and lower medical standard.

So far as I know, the standards of microlight pilots pre-NPPL was pretty much as high as the PPL(A) as was, and the standards now are indistinguishable.

So, in my opinion, an NPPL(SEP) holder is on average neither more, nor less, safe than a JAR PPL(SEP) - they can just do a little less with their licence.

G

[IO540]

they can just do a little less with their licence.

Not being able to (easily) fly abroad?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Whilst the minimum legal hours for an NPPL are lower than for a PPL I believe it's generally reckoned that most people won't get the NPPL in the minimum hours any more easily than they'll get the PPL in minimum hours. So the only real benefit is an easier medical. So I would not expect to find a vast number of people choose the NPPL for other reasons?

[IO540]

Indeed; I recall reading some numbers a year or two ago, showing that 2/3 of the NPPL applicants were PPL holders who either failed or did not wish to continue their CAA Class 2 medical.

In that respect the NPPL was a disappointment to those who wished that it would revitalise the private pilot scene.

It is obviously beneficial for the medical side alone, but whether one should do it if one can pass the Class 2 medical is a good question.

A more cynical view is that the NPPL was pushed by the flight training industry who wanted a lower priced product on their training price list. This was achieved but for a given level of competence it won't cost any less. Very very few pilots do the PPL in the 45 hours minimum; those that do are either very young or have been benefitting from unlogged flying with mates etc.

[Big Pistons Forever]

We had the same outcome in canada with the introduction of the Recreational Pilots license. Virtually everybody that started the RPP ended up continuing on to a full PPL. I think the PPL skill level is the lowest realistic standard of pilot competance and to think it can somehow be achieved in less hours through some other training scheme is simply wishfull thinking. I think the terrible accident rate for French Brevet de Pilot holders is an example of the fact that there is a irreducable minimum level of flying training required to make a safe pilot out the average person.

[tangovictor]

I hold the nppl m, and fly a fast 3 axis composite microlight,
the only difference I can make out re training is, I was never taught nav aids
also the two nav exercises required are two leg, rather than three with the full ppl.
I would imagine most people have different reasons to go for either, my thoughts were, I don't wish to earn a living flying, I don't want to fly at night or by instruments, so it seemed a logical route to take, for me !
" oh you can fly all over europe in a microlight with the nppl m "
I believe the nppl sep version, permision needs to be sought.

[BroomstickPilot]

I thoroughly agree with Gertrude and IO540.

So far as I am concerned, unless you really need the lower medical standard of the NPPL, it is otherwise a waste of money. You are much better advised to spend just a little extra and get the full PPL.

I also agree with Big Pistons regarding the French Brevet de Bas. If EASA should eventually decide to foist upon us a euro-ised version of this grossly inadequate 'qualification', then don't touch it with a barge pole.

Broomstick.

[BEagle]

One of the original ideas behind the NPPL (SSEA) was that an applicant could get his/her NPPL one year, then enjoy flying with or without passengers for a while, before coming back to do the 'top-up' training for the JAR-FCL PPL(A) later.

This doesn't seem to have happened. Of course the training schools make more money out of a JAR-FCL PPL(A) student, so aren't too keen on promoting the NPPL(SSEA).

Industry told us they wanted the NPPL and we've delivered it. The fact that industry hasn't done much to sell it is the problem. Also ORS4 no. 711 (now no. 756) was launched without any RIA, so NPLG is losing revenue to SEP pilots able to use these exemptions with their UK-issued pilot licences who would otherwise have needed a NPPL(SSEA).

At least the NPPL is a far better and more flexible licensing concept than the ridiculous LPL proposed under NPA17b. The CAA are going to have such fun sorting out how to deal with that, should it ever happen.....:hmm:

[englishal]

Unfortunately JAR doesn't make very good allowances to "top up" anything.

Having reduced minimums is a false economy because one has to actually be able to fly and land an aeroplane, which to learn to do in under 45 hrs would be exceedingly difficult, or you'd have to have previous flying experience.

[BEagle]

Well, I drafted the top-up requirements, the CAA agreed that they met JAR-FCL requirements and they were later published in LASORS.

NPPL(SSEA) to JAR-FCL PPL(A) top-up requirements have stood the test of time unchanged for quite a few years now - but again, it is clear that very few flying schools are aware of the requirements. It seems that either it's all too difficult for them, or they can't be bothered to market any top-up training.

[Bla Bla Bla]

IO540,

I managed a ppl in 45hrs 5 mins at the time I was 27 and I did it over eight months with no other flying. I then passed my cpl just 10 mins over the minimum a few years later.

It can be done but as you say it is not for everyone, sorry for the thread creep.:ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

What it does offer is the ability for microlight or motorglider pilots to switch to light aircraft without doing stacks of extra exams and hours. That surely is a major benefit.

G

[TrueFlyer]

What do you have to do to convert from a microlight to a sep licence re hrs and exams

[BEagle]

It depends upon what you mean by 'a sep licence'.....:confused:

[Genghis the Engineer]

I'm pretty certain that our chap means NPPL(M) --> NPPL(SEP)?

Anyhow, the answer is at page 2 of this document (http://www.nationalprivatepilotslicence.co.uk/New/NPPL%20XC%20REV%2008.pdf).

G

[bingofuel]

I would suggest that whether you train to NPPL syllabus or PPL syllabus, the biggest factor in lessening the risk when flying is YOU.
Both licences mean you have achieved, and been examined to a minimum standard.

It is up to you to then build on that standard and fly in a safe and sensible manner. As pilots we never stop learning.
Just because you hold a particular licecnce does not mean that you will be any safer, it is more to do with your 'airmanship' qualities.

Whatever you choose enjoy it.

[J.A.F.O.]

I would turn the question that many above have asked on its head; if you have no wish to fly more than 3 pax, IMC or overseas then why would you go for the PPL?

The money you save on the medical pays for your biannual.

The NPPL is a lifetime licence.

You can easily add-on SLMG and/or microlight ratings.

You don't have to write a cheque to the CAA every few years.

If you're a day VFR pilot who is happy to fly in the UK only (or fly micolights abroad or ask for permission which seems to be fairly routinely granted) then why would you want to spend more money keeping your licence valid?

It may be small change to many but if you're in a group or flying a cheapish permit aircraft it can actually make a difference.

I'm all for the NPPL and I think it's a shame that the take-up hasn't been far wider than has so far been the case.

[pulse1]

It may be small change to many but if you're in a group or flying a cheapish permit aircraft it can actually make a difference.


Absolutely true and I wonder how many pilots, who would have given up by now, are still flying thanks to the NPPL. For me, a PPL medical costs about 2 hours flying not to mention the stress about passing it.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Also ORS4 no. 711 (now no. 756) was launched without any RIA, so NPLG is losing revenue to SEP pilots able to use these exemptions with their UK-issued pilot licences who would otherwise have needed a NPPL(SSEA).
That's an interesting take on it - I had wondered what the RIA had to say about the potential for lots of PPL AMEs going out of business, but if there was no RIA that answers my question!

[Lister Noble]

I went to NPPL from PPL as the medical cost to keep my PPL was 20 hrs flying per year.(£800=20x£40/hr)
I don't fly with many passengers and all flights are in the UK
A no brainer,as they say!

Lister:ok:

[tangovictor]

So far as I am concerned, unless you really need the lower medical standard of the NPPL, it is otherwise a waste of money. You are much better advised to spend just a little extra and get the full PPL.

I also agree with Big Pistons regarding the French Brevet de Bas. If EASA should eventually decide to foist upon us a euro-ised version of this grossly inadequate 'qualification', then don't touch it with a barge pole.
Broomstick.

so you think I and all other nppl licence holders are sub standard pilots compared to you ? :*

[englishal]

I also agree with Big Pistons regarding the French Brevet de Bas. If EASA should eventually decide to foist upon us a euro-ised version of this grossly inadequate 'qualification', then don't touch it with a barge pole.
Broomstick.
I read that as the "Brevet de Bas" is grossly inadequate - and it is really.

[XXPLOD]

I speak as someone who did the NPPL (SSEP) when it was first introduced, mainly as it was a little cheaper. The standard in respect of the NST and GST are exactly the same, so I don't think safety is an issue here.

I then upgraded to a JAR PPL which proved to me something of a headache. E.g. the QXC for a NPPL only needs to be 100nm compared to 150nm. Guess what, mine was 120nm so I had to do another for the PPL! Despite having flown all over the south of England with the NPPL!

No issue with groundschool - same 7 exams. (Microlights you do need to do additional exams, can't recall which ones).

But... the biggest issue is that NPPL Ltd who administer the NPPL licensing and the CAA do not communicate terribly well in my experience. The CAA had no record of my groundshool passes. They accepted I had an NPPL and that I must have passed the exams to get it, but they wouldn't issue the JAR PPL as I couldn't provide evidence of the groundschool passes! Fortunately a very helpful lady at NPPL e-mailed me the scanned copy of my groundschool records which I was able to supply to the CAA and all was well.

My advice; unless medical issues prevent it do the PPL from the outset unless you are cast iron sure you will never want an IMC, night, MEP etc... Unless you achieve the NPPL in minimum hours the savings are unlikely to be that much.

[David Roberts]

"But... the biggest issue is that NPPL Ltd who administer the NPPL licensing and the CAA do not communicate terribly well in my experience. The CAA had no record of my groundshool passes. They accepted I had an NPPL and that I must have passed the exams to get it, but they wouldn't issue the JAR PPL as I couldn't provide evidence of the groundschool passes! Fortunately a very helpful lady at NPPL e-mailed me the scanned copy of my groundschool records which I was able to supply to the CAA and all was well."

The applications for NPPLs (except microlights) are processed by the LAA under the service agrement with NPLG Ltd (not NPPL Ltd, BTW). LAA is one of the three shareholders in NPLG Ltd, along wth the BGA and AOPA. After checking, the LAA retains the records of the relevant paperwork before sending the application to the CAA for issue of the licence. NPLG Ltd therefore does the admin work and record keeping on behalf of the CAA. All records are scanned for storage. I trust it was one of the ladies at the LAA (acting in the name of NPLG Ltd) who helped you out. We try to provide a good service.

Company Secretary, NPLG Ltd (formerly Chairman, 2002-2007)

[XXPLOD]

David - it was indeed and the service received from yourselves was first class.
My gripe was more with the CAA who did not seem to know how to sort things out or indeed get in touch with yourselves. Makes you wonder what their extortionate fees are for.

[David Roberts]

Yes, we have been known to ask the same question.....!

[tangovictor]

when I received my nppl m, it was for life, pending periodical medicals, then the goal posts got moved, and a revalidation has to be taken, although I have never been informed of this officially, it wouldn't hurt, the CAA / NPPL people advising all nppl holders of the change.

[IO540]

IMHO it would be mad to have a lifetime license without a revalidation flight at regular intervals. Anybody believing otherwise should go for a flight and see/listen to some of the stuff that goes on out there.

I also think the flight should have a FAIL option but that's another story :)

[rans6andrew]

why did the NPPL(M) have it's goal posts moved? The PPL(M) or D licence has never had (still doesn't have) a revalidation requirement and, if there had been a good safety based reason for the NPPL to be changed, it would have been imposed upon the PPL(M) licence at the same time. This change went against the Government guidance in that rule changes are supposed to be measured and proportional to the need AND a full impact analysis carried out and published before infliction. This didn't happen.

Can you really be prosecuted for breaking a rule that was brought in by breaking the rules?

[IO540]

If aviation regulation was really evidence based, at least 90% of the rules we have would disappear immediately :)

[Whopity]

Some years ago microlights were not aeroplanes, they did not need a licence and operated for some time this way. Unfortunately there were a number of fatal accidents and as the devices involved were not legally aeroplanes the Ministry of Transport required some level of regulation. The BMAA dida good job of this and the D rating was born requiring a minimum of legal change; with it came the second tier medical or declaration for which there was absolutely no provision in the ANO.

When AOPA who dragged the PPL into the JAR realised they were not in control of the final outcome, started to attack the CAA re the JAA licence and were told to go away and not come back unless they had something constructive to say. They came back with the NPPL which was a reasonable proposal that could have been implemented with minimal law changes and the existing medical declaration arrangements.

Unfortunately a recently retired RAF Office seeking to make his name in the CAA, grabbed this as the ideal opportunity. All the initial work was done by people with no experience or knowledge of licensing, resulting in a tranche of unnecessary and bungled legislation. Realising that after the first burst of old group A licence holders who couldn't pass a medical had past, there would only be a limited ab-initio flow, the SLMG and Microlights were dragged in to make the statistics look better. Then followed the biggest dose of nonsensical beaurocracy and bungling ever seen ion the history of aviation.

All that was needed was the standard ICAO requirement (Because nobody does it in less) a second tier medical which already existed and a limitation at the UK FIR boundary.

Is there any difference in safety between a NPPL and JAA PPLNo, the standard is exactly the same. Nobody has ever brief examiners to do anything different, or should I say examiners have never even been brief with regard to the NPPL!

[steveking]

I have a few friends that have gone from owning a microlight to getting a group A aircraft and the NPPL has been an excellent way of getting to fly the new machine in a short time period. My friends have then gone on to the JAR PPL later.

Interesting though about the easy medical, my son has just completed his NPPL M and our GP wanted more money to sign the form than it cost for a class 2.

[Crash one]

Interesting though about the easy medical, my son has just completed his NPPL M and our GP wanted more money to sign the form than it cost for a class 2.

That is nothing short of criminal.
My GP signs mine each year with a smile & £15.
Is there nothing that can be done about ripoffs like this?

[XXPLOD]

My NPPL medical was most amusing. I was a custody sergeant at the time. When a friendly police surgeon attended for one of our detainees - "Doc - whilst you're here......" Cost - £ZERO!!!

I hasten to add, he did complete a proper medical, not just sign the form!

[Crash one]

a friendly police surgeon attended for one of our detainees - "Doc - whilst you're here......"

I thought it was supposed to be your own GP who has your medical records to refer to rather than just any passing consultant brain surgeon?

[851Pilot]

For some of us it's a real dream come true!

Ever since I can remember I've stared skyward.

Always had a passion for aircraft.

Wanted to fly so much it ached...

Then - age 16 - RAF said - 'sorry - eyesight no good'...

Followed by asking about PPL - told - 'sorry - no way you'll get through medical' (one really good eye - one very poor - even with corrective lenses).

Problem is that I had a difference in long-sightedness in my eyes when I was young - your brain concentrates on the signal from the good eye and the signal from the poor starts to get filtered out - although peripheral performance remains relatively good.

Told basically to give up on the idea.

But the passion continued. Stayed connected with aviation through joining the RAFVR(T) and eventually commanded an Air Cadet Squadron at quite an early age - so at least got some Chippy flying from time to time.

Few years ago was nagged to have another go and went through the JAR medical - failed on eyesight again.

Then I heard about the new National Private Pilot's Licence.

Passed the medical for DVLA Class one equivalent (yes - was marginal on my left eye - oh - and it turned out my GP was also a pilot and AME!) and have been doing my NPPL with some lovely people at RAF Halton Aeroplane Club.

My eyesight has been no problem at all (one brilliant eye - one marginal) - I can easily spot other a/c and distance/speed perception absolutely no problem at all.

Training/Examination wise I'm doing everything I'd need to do for the JAR licence and expect to be examined to the same standard.

Went solo end of September and passed my Navigation Skills Test just over a week ago. If weather gets it's act together am about to do solo cross country's and the Solo X-Country Qualifier - for which I'll be doing the same route as the Halton JAR boys - Halton - Leicester - Gloucester - Halton. Yes - I could do a shorter route - but I want to do the full monty. After all - I don't intend sticking to local area once I've got my licence!

Funnily enough - I think the NPPL course scores here as you have to pass the Navigation Skills part of the GFT *before* you can do any solo X-Country - far more sensible way of doing it than at the end of your course (and after your qualifying Cross Country).

Hopefully qual early next year (should be at around 50 hours) - then I'm onto tail draggers and hopefully some solid aerobatics training (did a rather ace aeros sortie in a friends Extra 300 last year and *loved* it!!).

Always dreamt of doing this - but until the advent of the NPPL was always told it would be impossible.

If I can I'm aiming to undertake IMC/IR training (even though I can't 'qualify' for the rating) simply out of interest and in order to make me a safer/better pilot.

BIG THANK YOU to everyone that helped make the NPPL possible. Sometimes dreams do come true - and I'm still pinching myself http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

So - please - NPPLs are NOT second class pilots! :)

Iain

[Captain Smithy]

I find the assertion that the NPPL is somehow "unsafe" rather rediculous. I know several NPPLs, all are perfectly safe, sensible pilots who are no different skills-wise to those of us with the JAR ticket.

Much of the training is the same, so I'm not sure what the problem is. The thing is it's great for people who for whatever reason cannot hold a Class 2, or cannot be bothered with the hassle. It must be a boon in that respect.

Since all of my flying is in the UK I would've went for the NPPL option, but being unable to add a CPL/IR onto that I had to take the JAR option instead.

NPPLs are certainly not second-class pilots, nor is the NPPL an "inferior" license compared to the JAR. What rediculous snobbery. :rolleyes:

Smithy