NPPL renewal - how ?

[cirrusdancer]

It's coming up to the first renewal of my NPPL (SSEA) and I'm not sure what I actually have to do.
I meet the revalidation and renewal requirements and my medical is still valid so it's the actual procedure I'm asking for advice on, what I actually have to do.
Do I complete CAA form SRG 1119 and present myself to the CFI complete with completed form and log book for him to verify ?
I assume money must pass to the CAA.

[Tupperware Pilot]

You just need the back of your lincence signed.......
If you have meet all the renewal requirements ....
simples
:ok:

[Genghis the Engineer]

... by an examiner.

(Which your CFI probably is, and he is likely to want to see your logbook to check you've met the recency requirements.)

G

[BEagle]

Refer to CAP 804 Section 5 part A Sub-part 1 pp3-4. This lists the current revalidation requirements whereas the original LASORS 2010 does not - the subsequent LASORS 2010 amendment was necessary to correct the errors.

While there are experience requirements for pilots wishing to revalidate by experience, there are no specific recency requirements for revalidation - recency only refers to the 90-day rule for flying with passengers.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I used the term recency referring to flying within the last 12/24 months.

G

[Dan the weegie]

Fairly sure you need to send in an 1119 as well as getting the examiner to sign the licence. No money required.

[Crash one]

You don't have to send anything anywhere. You need 1 hr with an instructor entered in your log book, 12 hrs as P1 during the last 2 yrs 6 of which in the last 1yr & your licence signed by an examiner, who does not need to be the same guy that flew with you.
I have a NPPL (SSEA) & have dun it twice.
Don't forget to send a copy of your Med dec to NPLG.

[BEagle]

The NPPL revalidation requirments haven't changed for 4 years now - and are not as Crash one suggests:

They are as follows:

With the exception of those licence holders who elect to revalidate their ratings by General Skill Test, the revalidation requirements for SSEA, SLMG and Microlight Class Ratings are stated in the Order as follows:

(1) In the case where one of SSEA, SLMG or Microlight Class Rating is held:

(a) The holder has, in an aeroplane coming within the aeroplane Class Rating, within the period of validity of the current certificate of revalidation for the rating:

(i) Flown at least 12 hours which includes at least 8 hours as pilot in command;

(ii) completed at least 12 take-offs and 12 landings;

(iii) subject to sub-paragraph (b), undertaken at least 1 hour of flying training with an instructor entitled to give instruction on aeroplanes of that class; and

(iv) flown at least 6 hours in the 12 months preceding the validity expiry date.

(b) Where the holder has not undertaken the flying training specified in paragraph 1(a)(iii) a certificate of revalidation may be issued but must be endorsed ‘single seat only’.

(2) In the case where more than one of SSEA, SLMG or Microlight Class Ratings are held:

(a) The holder has, within the period of validity of the current certificate of revalidation for each rating:

(i) Flown a total of at least 12 hours in an aeroplane coming within any of the aeroplane Class Ratings which are held which includes at least a total of 8 hours as pilot in command;

(ii) completed not less than 12 take-offs and 12 landings in an aeroplane coming within any of the aeroplane Class Ratings which are held;

(iii) subject to sub-paragraph (b), in an aeroplane coming within each of the aeroplane Class Ratings which are held,
either:

(aa) Flown at least 1 hour as pilot in command; or

(bb) undertaken at least 1 hour of flying training with an instructor entitled to give instruction on aeroplanes of that class;

(iv) subject to sub-paragraph (b), undertaken at least 1 hour of flying training in aeroplanes coming within any of the aeroplane Class Ratings which are held, with instructors entitled to give instruction on aeroplanes of those classes; and

(v) flown at least 6 hours in the 12 months preceding the specified date in an aeroplane coming within any of the aeroplane Class Ratings which are held.

(b) Where the holder has flown at least 1 hour as pilot in command as specified in paragraph 2(a)(iii)(aa) but has not undertaken the flying training specified in paragraph 2(a)(iv) a certificate of revalidation may be issued but must be endorsed ‘single seat only’.

In all cases, certificates of revalidation for NPPL holders have since 31 January 2008, been included in licences and not in personal flying logbooks.


There is nothing to send to the CAA.
The Examiner will sign the licence, for which there should be no fee.
You must send a current copy of your Medical Declaration to NPLG Ltd.

[Crash one]

I stand corrected on the elaborate details.

[cirrusdancer]

Thanks to all for the information, things are clearer now.

My original Medical Declaration is valid until I'm 65 in a couple of years time according to the NPPL website (http://www.nationalprivatepilotslicence.co.uk/medical.php) so isn't being renewed.

In this case I assume that I have no need to send anything to NPLG Ltd, but I hope BEagle will clarify.

So, apart from a grilling by the CFI it all seems pretty straightforward.

[BEagle]

As stated on the NPPL website, there is no requirement to send anything to NPLG Ltd until your Medical Declaration is revalidated.

It might be easier if you provide the Examiner with a summary of your flying during the SSEA validity period, so that all he/she needs to do is to check it off.

There should be nothing to pay for a simple revalidation signature, particularly if you make things easy....

Ask your CFI to explain how you could convert your NPPL to a LAPL after 17 Sep 2012. If he/she doesn't know, ask him/her to find out - it's all in CAP 804!

[Dan the weegie]

Thanks Beagle,
I always thought an 1119 was required for revalidating any rating, even SEP or SSEA however I stand corrected.

Some examiners do charge a small fee for the work, I'm only a revalidation examiner and have never charged but it has been a source of disagreement with a few people.

[BEagle]

Some examiners do charge a small fee for the work...

They deserve to be named and shamed!