NPPL FI
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NPPL FI
I am trying to set up a special interest group (SIG) to lobby for an NPPL FI rating that operates in the same way as the microlight FI rating - no CPL; unlicensed strips; A/C does not require public C of A. The various industry bodies are pursuing this type of thing already, but the timeframe is long term. 
If you wish to support or get involved with this SIG please e-mail me at [email protected].
If on the other hand you already have you FI rating (probably gained via the BCPL route), before you object to my proposal, ask yourself if you would be prepared to follow the present expensive and tortuous route to JAR FI – 42 weeks part time ATPL theory; 25 hours CPL et al; total cost in excess of £12,000.
If you wish to support or get involved with this SIG please e-mail me at [email protected].
If on the other hand you already have you FI rating (probably gained via the BCPL route), before you object to my proposal, ask yourself if you would be prepared to follow the present expensive and tortuous route to JAR FI – 42 weeks part time ATPL theory; 25 hours CPL et al; total cost in excess of £12,000.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dah dah.. very good point and you have my support for one.
Also, if there was no requirement for CPL this would imply no requirement for a Class1 medical? This would widen the field for those of us with refractive limits a gnats whisker over the current limit (which is why I went the FAA route!)
Your views?
Also, if there was no requirement for CPL this would imply no requirement for a Class1 medical? This would widen the field for those of us with refractive limits a gnats whisker over the current limit (which is why I went the FAA route!)
Your views?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hazardous Attitudes
I agree. Hopefully we can get a more pragmatic approach to the medical. I actually have my class 1, but I had to jump through a number of hoops to get it. Also, if you only manage to Earn £15 per hour as an instructor, you will be doing more than 20 hrs instruction a year just to pay for your class 1 medicals.
I agree. Hopefully we can get a more pragmatic approach to the medical. I actually have my class 1, but I had to jump through a number of hoops to get it. Also, if you only manage to Earn £15 per hour as an instructor, you will be doing more than 20 hrs instruction a year just to pay for your class 1 medicals.
dahdah - you ma alienate yourself from those working towards the NPPL if you jump in with both feet wanting everything at once. Whilst the prospect of a prudent FI flying a well-maintained private category Europa (for example) from a decent strip might be quite fine, the CAA must protect us all from a 'Bodgett Aviation' crook flying a decrepit old deathtrap from a mudhole somewhere in the back of beyond. Regrettably, there are plenty of devious so-and-sos out there waiting to make a quick buck in this way, believe me! Hence certain proposals are sitting there waiting for us to put forward, but only when we have convinced the CAA that the NPPL is entirely safe. I'm afraid it's this 'softly, softly' approach which is vital at this stage. You simply won't get anywhere if you start making demands; however, I assume that you have responded to the CAA's Letter of Consultation and I'm sure they will note any constructive comments you may have made.
With apologies if there is anyone trading entirely legitimately as 'Bodgett Aviation'!!
[ 04 September 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
With apologies if there is anyone trading entirely legitimately as 'Bodgett Aviation'!!
[ 04 September 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dead right dah-dah
Lets face it, your ATPL ground school will teach you nothing that will help you one bit to fully understand your profession and help you impart knowledge to students.
And as for CPL training.....complete waste of time for all those with a PPL and some hours. How on earth could advanced expensive training help improve your flying skills?
And while we’re at it, why don’t we let paramedics train doctors.
The NPPL, if it happens, will allow holders to fly aircraft above schools, hospitals and everywhere else that requires the highest standards of certification. Why should we reduce the qualification requirements for instrucors?
Lets face it, your ATPL ground school will teach you nothing that will help you one bit to fully understand your profession and help you impart knowledge to students.
And as for CPL training.....complete waste of time for all those with a PPL and some hours. How on earth could advanced expensive training help improve your flying skills?
And while we’re at it, why don’t we let paramedics train doctors.
The NPPL, if it happens, will allow holders to fly aircraft above schools, hospitals and everywhere else that requires the highest standards of certification. Why should we reduce the qualification requirements for instrucors?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle. I don’t disagree with anything you say and we will try very hard not to alienate the people working towards the NPPL. BUT, the current system is untenable and I don’t want to wait another 2 years before I can start my FI course. The purpose of the SIG will be to gather info, raise awareness and to highlight issues through the various industry groups. I have responded to the CAA and I have also made contact with my PFA representative.
Clear prop!. I assume you are trying to be ironic. Re. your question, “why should we reduce the qualification . . . .”. Well, did you ask the opposite question when JAR was introduced? In my opinion there was no need whatsoever to change from the BCPL + AIF route. We can’t go back to that system (too much loss of face in many quarters) so lets work together to get an even better system. Maybe the new FI course will be more detailed than the existing one, covering the RELEVANT theory from the CPL course, but surely no one believes that the typical club FI needs the detail of the ATPL theoretic knowledge!
“Jumping in with both feet” – maybe if a few more of us had done that 3 years ago we could have avoided the whole JAR fiasco.
Please support the NPPL.
Clear prop!. I assume you are trying to be ironic. Re. your question, “why should we reduce the qualification . . . .”. Well, did you ask the opposite question when JAR was introduced? In my opinion there was no need whatsoever to change from the BCPL + AIF route. We can’t go back to that system (too much loss of face in many quarters) so lets work together to get an even better system. Maybe the new FI course will be more detailed than the existing one, covering the RELEVANT theory from the CPL course, but surely no one believes that the typical club FI needs the detail of the ATPL theoretic knowledge!
“Jumping in with both feet” – maybe if a few more of us had done that 3 years ago we could have avoided the whole JAR fiasco.
Please support the NPPL.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about an NCPL or NATPL as well?
For those that dont want to work on
the 'Continent'
This is because the JAA is a tad expensive
for many people
Why not have an international licence
and not one just confined to European
requirements.
We could get together in Chicago to discuss it
...I'll take my port and wine by the fire .. theres a good chap
[ 05 September 2001: Message edited by: RVR800 ]
For those that dont want to work on
the 'Continent'
This is because the JAA is a tad expensive
for many people
Why not have an international licence
and not one just confined to European
requirements.
We could get together in Chicago to discuss it
...I'll take my port and wine by the fire .. theres a good chap
[ 05 September 2001: Message edited by: RVR800 ]
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DahDah,
I agree and support the NPPL FI proposals/suggestions 110% as I think the CPL theory/exams portion of the current FI rating requirements is complete overkill for someone only ever doing PPL level instruction. eg. Knowing how to calculate the exact partial pressure of O2 in a persons alvioli at 18000ft.... alot of use when teaching someone to fly a C152...have they visited the planet earth recently? ...lets get real here!
Clear prop you wrote
>>The NPPL, if it happens, will allow holders to fly aircraft above schools, hospitals and everywhere else that requires the highest standards of certification. Why should we reduce the qualification requirements for instrucors?<<
Easy - the current requirements are absolute Tosh! (the theory not the flying training). The requirements for a FI in a PPL level club situation and a Commercial pilot are not the same, so why insist they are with the same licence???
DahDah, Can I suggest that you also involve AOPA etc in yr ideas, as a unified approach will be more successful with regards to CAA. Knowing how fast the CAA react it will help if there are multiple 'herders' trying to push the elephant to the watering hole, rather than one...
I know the CAA's attitude at the moment is 'wait until we get the NPPL sorted out and running and then we'll think about a NPPL FI'.
Let's hope
I agree and support the NPPL FI proposals/suggestions 110% as I think the CPL theory/exams portion of the current FI rating requirements is complete overkill for someone only ever doing PPL level instruction. eg. Knowing how to calculate the exact partial pressure of O2 in a persons alvioli at 18000ft.... alot of use when teaching someone to fly a C152...have they visited the planet earth recently? ...lets get real here!
Clear prop you wrote
>>The NPPL, if it happens, will allow holders to fly aircraft above schools, hospitals and everywhere else that requires the highest standards of certification. Why should we reduce the qualification requirements for instrucors?<<
Easy - the current requirements are absolute Tosh! (the theory not the flying training). The requirements for a FI in a PPL level club situation and a Commercial pilot are not the same, so why insist they are with the same licence???
DahDah, Can I suggest that you also involve AOPA etc in yr ideas, as a unified approach will be more successful with regards to CAA. Knowing how fast the CAA react it will help if there are multiple 'herders' trying to push the elephant to the watering hole, rather than one...
I know the CAA's attitude at the moment is 'wait until we get the NPPL sorted out and running and then we'll think about a NPPL FI'.
Let's hope
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Northampton
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RVR800,
That's the most sensible thing I've heard anyone say over the last few years. All this fiasco just so that a very few might fly commercially an aeroplane registered in a JAA state other than their own! Can't see it was all worthwhile myself. It would be interesting to know what proportion of professional pilots take up this 'opportunity'.
Regards, GT.
P.S. The above is merely my opinion, nothing more.
That's the most sensible thing I've heard anyone say over the last few years. All this fiasco just so that a very few might fly commercially an aeroplane registered in a JAA state other than their own! Can't see it was all worthwhile myself. It would be interesting to know what proportion of professional pilots take up this 'opportunity'.
Regards, GT.
P.S. The above is merely my opinion, nothing more.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The requirement for a FI to have CPL level knowledge comes from ICAO. You would certainly not become a FI in the majority of countries without that level of knowledge.
You can still become a FI in the UK as the holder of a PPL as you always have been able to, you may not of course be remunerated.
Since the UK adopted the ICAO requirement for CPL level knowledge FIC instructors have found it considerably easier to train FIs as they don't have to start by teaching basic Physics, candidates should start from a common datum. To revert to raw PPL holders with a mixed accademic background will be hard work. Once trained, any FI who does not meet ICAO requiirements will not be able to train for an ICAO licence. The cost of an FI Course (circa £5000) just to teach for the NPPL seems to me to be an expensive option.
Before the NPPL FI becomes even a possibility, the NPPL will have to prove itself successful, I suspect this will be considerably more than 2 years.
You can still become a FI in the UK as the holder of a PPL as you always have been able to, you may not of course be remunerated.
Since the UK adopted the ICAO requirement for CPL level knowledge FIC instructors have found it considerably easier to train FIs as they don't have to start by teaching basic Physics, candidates should start from a common datum. To revert to raw PPL holders with a mixed accademic background will be hard work. Once trained, any FI who does not meet ICAO requiirements will not be able to train for an ICAO licence. The cost of an FI Course (circa £5000) just to teach for the NPPL seems to me to be an expensive option.
Before the NPPL FI becomes even a possibility, the NPPL will have to prove itself successful, I suspect this will be considerably more than 2 years.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noggin. Your reply is factual, but does not reflect the current situation.
1. You cannot do CPL knowledge – no one is running the course.
2. People keep telling me that the JAR CPL knowledge requirements are so similar to ATPL that I might as well do the ATPL course anyway!
3. The ATPL course will take 42 weeks part time (including 4 weeks full time) and teach me all kinds of stuff I don’t want to know about (see UKPPL’s reply above)
I just want to teach people to fly in a club environment. I never want to become an airline pilot. I belive there are lots of people like me who WOULD spend 6 months and £6k to get what they want, but will NOT spend 18 months and £12k.
Regarding the success or otherwise of the NPPL itself. Well, this will probably be down to marketing. Hopefully the PFA will take this on as they have the most to gain. If the NPPL fails then I believe we will see even greater drop off in new PPL training and a significant increase in PPL(D) training on the new 450 KG aircraft. We might even see a migration from PPL(A) to PPL(D).
1. You cannot do CPL knowledge – no one is running the course.
2. People keep telling me that the JAR CPL knowledge requirements are so similar to ATPL that I might as well do the ATPL course anyway!
3. The ATPL course will take 42 weeks part time (including 4 weeks full time) and teach me all kinds of stuff I don’t want to know about (see UKPPL’s reply above)
I just want to teach people to fly in a club environment. I never want to become an airline pilot. I belive there are lots of people like me who WOULD spend 6 months and £6k to get what they want, but will NOT spend 18 months and £12k.
Regarding the success or otherwise of the NPPL itself. Well, this will probably be down to marketing. Hopefully the PFA will take this on as they have the most to gain. If the NPPL fails then I believe we will see even greater drop off in new PPL training and a significant increase in PPL(D) training on the new 450 KG aircraft. We might even see a migration from PPL(A) to PPL(D).
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lack of a CPL course is a major problem, perhaps some pressure on the providers of theoretical training is required.
The ATPL groundschool is a 650 hour course compared to 200 hour course for the CPL. Its fairly obvious that the longer course is the best to sell for commercial reasons. If candidates who only want a CPL opt for the longer course there never will be a CPL course available.
The ATPL groundschool is a 650 hour course compared to 200 hour course for the CPL. Its fairly obvious that the longer course is the best to sell for commercial reasons. If candidates who only want a CPL opt for the longer course there never will be a CPL course available.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noggin. I would happily do 200 hrs to get my CPL theory (can you feel a but coming on?), but, the 200 hrs is the minimum as defined by JAR-FCL and training organisations say that there is no way that the breadth of knowledge required can be covered in that time! Who knows where the 200 hour figure came from? It was probably a finger in the air job by someone in the JAA. PPSC used to quote ~450 hours for the UK CPL – why should the JAR CPL be any less!
Also, my local training org tell me that the CAA have yet to approve a CPL theory course. They say (hearsay I know) that the 4 Forces course (now defunct) was unapproved. I plan to follow this up in writing with the CAA.
You imply that people like me (who just want to become part time club instructors) are opting for the ATPL course. I don’t think this is the case. Guys with a frozen ATPL but no job, are going on to become instructors because they believe that they have a better chance of getting a job if they have 1000 hours rather than 250 hours (see posts elsewhere on this forum). I am not criticising this method – I would do the same – but it does mask the CPL issue. If there were no students for FI courses, then T/Os would make a fuss and we would get our CPL course (doubt it would be 200 hours though).
I’m sure the CAA could do something if they wanted to. If we can have a UK only IMC then I can see no reason why we can’t have a UK only BCPL!!
The whole thing’s a shambles. In my view the people that got is in this mess should fall on there swords. This of course will never happen, so we need to find a way forward. My SIG may not make any difference, but then again it might.
Also, my local training org tell me that the CAA have yet to approve a CPL theory course. They say (hearsay I know) that the 4 Forces course (now defunct) was unapproved. I plan to follow this up in writing with the CAA.
You imply that people like me (who just want to become part time club instructors) are opting for the ATPL course. I don’t think this is the case. Guys with a frozen ATPL but no job, are going on to become instructors because they believe that they have a better chance of getting a job if they have 1000 hours rather than 250 hours (see posts elsewhere on this forum). I am not criticising this method – I would do the same – but it does mask the CPL issue. If there were no students for FI courses, then T/Os would make a fuss and we would get our CPL course (doubt it would be 200 hours though).
I’m sure the CAA could do something if they wanted to. If we can have a UK only IMC then I can see no reason why we can’t have a UK only BCPL!!
The whole thing’s a shambles. In my view the people that got is in this mess should fall on there swords. This of course will never happen, so we need to find a way forward. My SIG may not make any difference, but then again it might.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GT
I suspect that the No of JAA qualified
immigrants to the UK exceeds the quota
going from the UK?
The effect on the UK pilot has therefore
been increased cost and more competition for
and jobs.
The whole thing is undemocratic as well.
Who asked for this? What is the value
in providing another layer of bureaucracy
and who foots the bill - umm that you Im afraid
The reality is that its a political initiative - the JAA is being set up as a rival organisation to the FAA. Its about
big buildings full of suits getting paid
lots of money and building empires and
it has nothing to do with the oft quoted
special european weather and airspace requirements which are no different to
say New Jersey in the US.
i.e. Job creation/power broking dressed up as a safety issue
I suspect that the No of JAA qualified
immigrants to the UK exceeds the quota
going from the UK?
The effect on the UK pilot has therefore
been increased cost and more competition for
and jobs.
The whole thing is undemocratic as well.
Who asked for this? What is the value
in providing another layer of bureaucracy
and who foots the bill - umm that you Im afraid
The reality is that its a political initiative - the JAA is being set up as a rival organisation to the FAA. Its about
big buildings full of suits getting paid
lots of money and building empires and
it has nothing to do with the oft quoted
special european weather and airspace requirements which are no different to
say New Jersey in the US.
i.e. Job creation/power broking dressed up as a safety issue
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noggin,
you wrote;
>>The requirement for a FI to have CPL level knowledge comes from ICAO. You would certainly not become a FI in the majority of countries without that level of knowledge.<<
.... but not JAR CPL level knowledge (my main point).
I recently went to the ststes and showed a few instructors over there my JAR CPL training manuals. Thay were absolutely dumbfounded and couldn't beleive a FI candidate in UK had to endure a six month minimum theory course and subject matter in such (stupid) depth. They explained a system such as that would never be tolerated in USA.
BTW I'm not saying there shouldn't be a theory course or exams for a FI course candidate... just not JAR CPL !
Best regards,
UKPPL
you wrote;
>>The requirement for a FI to have CPL level knowledge comes from ICAO. You would certainly not become a FI in the majority of countries without that level of knowledge.<<
.... but not JAR CPL level knowledge (my main point).
I recently went to the ststes and showed a few instructors over there my JAR CPL training manuals. Thay were absolutely dumbfounded and couldn't beleive a FI candidate in UK had to endure a six month minimum theory course and subject matter in such (stupid) depth. They explained a system such as that would never be tolerated in USA.
BTW I'm not saying there shouldn't be a theory course or exams for a FI course candidate... just not JAR CPL !
Best regards,
UKPPL
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dah Dah,
I am intrigued that schools who do not have a CPL course can quote how long it is going to take! As the JAA produced both the papers and the minimum course time one can still conclude that a CPL is one third of an ATPL course not, just about the same. It is less than a UK CPL theoretical course because it does not include any of the IR theory.
The absense of a school to run the CPL course is without doubt a major obstacle. The CAA will do nothing because it is not their job, their task is to provide exams for anyone who needs them, the exams are available.
The difference in theory between the JAA and FAA systems reflects a difference in opinion between Europe and the US. It is interesting to note that one airline has reported new JAA licence holders as being deficient in theoretical knowledge. It would appear we have developed an exam passing culture where little of the information is absorbed or related to the flying.
I am intrigued that schools who do not have a CPL course can quote how long it is going to take! As the JAA produced both the papers and the minimum course time one can still conclude that a CPL is one third of an ATPL course not, just about the same. It is less than a UK CPL theoretical course because it does not include any of the IR theory.
The absense of a school to run the CPL course is without doubt a major obstacle. The CAA will do nothing because it is not their job, their task is to provide exams for anyone who needs them, the exams are available.
The difference in theory between the JAA and FAA systems reflects a difference in opinion between Europe and the US. It is interesting to note that one airline has reported new JAA licence holders as being deficient in theoretical knowledge. It would appear we have developed an exam passing culture where little of the information is absorbed or related to the flying.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK/Spain
Age: 62
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dah dah.
' I don't want to wait 2 years... '
' I only ever want to instruct in a club environment ...'
'Want want want' comes to mind.
So you feel people who only learn in a club environment are not entitled to quality instruction ? Because I currently work in a club environment and every now and again you come across people who are the products of instructors who have not done any CAA theoretical exams, ie those with grandfather rights from the old system and also those who are products of 3 week PPL packages. Believe me it is horrifying what some qualified PPLs are capable of not doing and invariably it transpires that they just don't understand what is going on. Why ? Because the instructors haven't understood properly what they are teaching !
As an instructor your only interest should be in providing the absolute highest quality of teaching you can and that is exactly what you are, a teacher. If you think it is just a bit of fun then do something else.
What is the NPPL about ? A significant reduction in minimum training requirements and a nominal restriction of privileges of the licence holder - quite a dangerous combination really. Now you want to add to this a lowering of instructor understanding.
' I don't want to wait 2 years... '
' I only ever want to instruct in a club environment ...'
'Want want want' comes to mind.
So you feel people who only learn in a club environment are not entitled to quality instruction ? Because I currently work in a club environment and every now and again you come across people who are the products of instructors who have not done any CAA theoretical exams, ie those with grandfather rights from the old system and also those who are products of 3 week PPL packages. Believe me it is horrifying what some qualified PPLs are capable of not doing and invariably it transpires that they just don't understand what is going on. Why ? Because the instructors haven't understood properly what they are teaching !
As an instructor your only interest should be in providing the absolute highest quality of teaching you can and that is exactly what you are, a teacher. If you think it is just a bit of fun then do something else.
What is the NPPL about ? A significant reduction in minimum training requirements and a nominal restriction of privileges of the licence holder - quite a dangerous combination really. Now you want to add to this a lowering of instructor understanding.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Newborough, Staffs, UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
‘I’ in the sky.
Interesting piece of vitriolic hyperbole, but if you are so keen on the current system I would have been more impressed by some reasoned argument as to why FI’s need the same theoretical knowledge as airline pilots!
Re. your attack on instructors with grandfather rights, I believe there are good instructors and bad instructors in both camps. We could play tit for tat on this subject for months and make no progress.
What is the NPPL about? In my view the NPPL is a stepping-stone to a more pragmatic approach to leisure flying in the UK. It’s about reducing costs whilst maintaining standards to an acceptable level.
I am pleased to be able to agree with you about instructor understanding. Yes I would like to see a lowering. In fact I believe that an instructor’s understanding of much of the APTL theoretical knowledge should be lowered to zero.
[ 09 September 2001: Message edited by: dah dah ]
Interesting piece of vitriolic hyperbole, but if you are so keen on the current system I would have been more impressed by some reasoned argument as to why FI’s need the same theoretical knowledge as airline pilots!
Re. your attack on instructors with grandfather rights, I believe there are good instructors and bad instructors in both camps. We could play tit for tat on this subject for months and make no progress.
What is the NPPL about? In my view the NPPL is a stepping-stone to a more pragmatic approach to leisure flying in the UK. It’s about reducing costs whilst maintaining standards to an acceptable level.
I am pleased to be able to agree with you about instructor understanding. Yes I would like to see a lowering. In fact I believe that an instructor’s understanding of much of the APTL theoretical knowledge should be lowered to zero.
[ 09 September 2001: Message edited by: dah dah ]
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK/Spain
Age: 62
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay dah dah, partial retraction if you thought it was a general attack on those with grandfather rights but here are two specific instances which came to mind.
An instructor of that ilk told a student who had abandoned a cross country flight because his carburettor heater wasn't working, that he needn't have done because you can't get carburettor ice with an OAT of 14 degrees. Second instance was a statement from an instructor of that ilk that with the exception of Fowler flaps, flaps only create drag and no extra lift. Same instructor for some reason teaches students on PA28s to take off with 10 degrees of flap, contrary to POH.
And you still want to see a reduction in Instructor understanding ?
It doesn't take much scouting around to realise that the attraction of the NPPL is that it will be 'good for business'.
No I will not defend the present system. I will not defend JAA. I will not defend any 'Euro' concept. We used to have a perfectly workable national CAA system but it was still full of whingers however I will defend it to the hilt.
I assume that when voting you have always ensured that prospective candidates have held no pro European views whatsoever before voting for them ?
A further thought on the NPPL. Perhaps until some consistency of standards has been established all skill tests should be carried out by independent examiners thus removing from School owners/CFIs the privilege of being able to hand out PPLs within their school. Does it still seem as attractive ?
An instructor of that ilk told a student who had abandoned a cross country flight because his carburettor heater wasn't working, that he needn't have done because you can't get carburettor ice with an OAT of 14 degrees. Second instance was a statement from an instructor of that ilk that with the exception of Fowler flaps, flaps only create drag and no extra lift. Same instructor for some reason teaches students on PA28s to take off with 10 degrees of flap, contrary to POH.
And you still want to see a reduction in Instructor understanding ?
It doesn't take much scouting around to realise that the attraction of the NPPL is that it will be 'good for business'.
No I will not defend the present system. I will not defend JAA. I will not defend any 'Euro' concept. We used to have a perfectly workable national CAA system but it was still full of whingers however I will defend it to the hilt.
I assume that when voting you have always ensured that prospective candidates have held no pro European views whatsoever before voting for them ?
A further thought on the NPPL. Perhaps until some consistency of standards has been established all skill tests should be carried out by independent examiners thus removing from School owners/CFIs the privilege of being able to hand out PPLs within their school. Does it still seem as attractive ?