NPPL(SSEA)/(M) to NPPL(A) licensed field?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NPPL(SSEA)/(M) to NPPL(A) licensed field?
Hi all,
If you were taking someone from a NPPL(M) or a NPPL VLA to a NPPL(A), would you need to be training from a licensed airfield as per JAR PPL instruction?
Does upgrading a microlight or VLA licence to a Group A licence count as ab initio training?
If it doesn't, why don't more microlight clubs have a single Grp A machine for four seat hire and NPPL(A) upgrades? Seems to me to be a cost effective way of getting a NPPL(A) rather than doing the full course on a traditional C152 etc. Or even an upgrade to a JAR PPL.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks
SP6
If you were taking someone from a NPPL(M) or a NPPL VLA to a NPPL(A), would you need to be training from a licensed airfield as per JAR PPL instruction?
Does upgrading a microlight or VLA licence to a Group A licence count as ab initio training?
If it doesn't, why don't more microlight clubs have a single Grp A machine for four seat hire and NPPL(A) upgrades? Seems to me to be a cost effective way of getting a NPPL(A) rather than doing the full course on a traditional C152 etc. Or even an upgrade to a JAR PPL.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks
SP6
The UK law requires that all training for a licence or aircraft rating be conducted from a licensed aerodrome. ANO Article 126. This is a UK requirement and has nothing to do with the JAA.
Microlight aircraft, and SLMGs operating under the auspices of the BGA, operate from unlicensed aerodromes under a blanket exemption to Article 126.
Therefore, if your are training for a SSEA; TMG; or SEP rating you must comply with Article 26. If the training is for a new licence or aircraft rating it is effectively ab-initio. Not sure what a VLA licence is, VLA would come under SSEA or SEP. Group A has not existed for over 8 years now!
Thats why they don't do it!
One wonders if the rules will change under EASA.
Microlight aircraft, and SLMGs operating under the auspices of the BGA, operate from unlicensed aerodromes under a blanket exemption to Article 126.
Therefore, if your are training for a SSEA; TMG; or SEP rating you must comply with Article 26. If the training is for a new licence or aircraft rating it is effectively ab-initio. Not sure what a VLA licence is, VLA would come under SSEA or SEP. Group A has not existed for over 8 years now!
Thats why they don't do it!
One wonders if the rules will change under EASA.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whopity thanks for that. I was under the impression that training for a rating didn't require a licensed airfield but art 126 calls it the "inclusion" of a rating. A bit vague!
I'm still confused as to the difference between say, a Flight Designs CT, which can be a microlight at 450kg mtow - or a Light Sport aircraft at 600kg mtow, but as it isn't a certified aircraft it can't be used for JAR PPL(A) training. If you trained on the 600kg aircraft surely you could gain a NPPL(SSEA) which could then be used to hire and fly PA28's, 172's etc?
cheers sp6
I'm still confused as to the difference between say, a Flight Designs CT, which can be a microlight at 450kg mtow - or a Light Sport aircraft at 600kg mtow, but as it isn't a certified aircraft it can't be used for JAR PPL(A) training. If you trained on the 600kg aircraft surely you could gain a NPPL(SSEA) which could then be used to hire and fly PA28's, 172's etc?
cheers sp6
Conversion from a NPPL A (Microlight) to a NPPL A (SSEA) is not ab-initio and can be done by a CRI, a FI is not needed.
Last edited by Whopity; 10th Sep 2008 at 07:22.
sp6
If the aircraft is below 450 Kgs then you only need the Microlight licence. To fly the same aircraft that weighs over 450 Kgs then you need either a NPPL SSEA rating or a JAA PPL with SEP. You cannot receive JAA PPL training on an aircraft that does not hold a C of A (JAR-FCL 1) so it it would not be possible to train on the 600 Kg version. In order to do SSEA training you would need to read the permit to see if Aerial Work (flying training) is permitted. The ANO Art 157 requires that any aircraft leased for flying training be maintained to public transport standards
As you say once you have the SSEA you can go fly a Piper Saratoga if you wish, as long as you leave two seats empty!
If the aircraft is below 450 Kgs then you only need the Microlight licence. To fly the same aircraft that weighs over 450 Kgs then you need either a NPPL SSEA rating or a JAA PPL with SEP. You cannot receive JAA PPL training on an aircraft that does not hold a C of A (JAR-FCL 1) so it it would not be possible to train on the 600 Kg version. In order to do SSEA training you would need to read the permit to see if Aerial Work (flying training) is permitted. The ANO Art 157 requires that any aircraft leased for flying training be maintained to public transport standards
As you say once you have the SSEA you can go fly a Piper Saratoga if you wish, as long as you leave two seats empty!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is an assumption that a CRI may teach for a National qualification but would you like to tell us where this privilege is documented?
It states:
Carry out such SSEA conversion training as is judged necessary by the FI(A) or CRI(SPA)
conducting the training to achieve the required standard for the applicant to take the NPPL
NST and GST in a SSEA. This training must include:conducting the training to achieve the required standard for the applicant to take the NPPL
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sp6,
Welcome to the wonderful grey world of flying training in modern aircraft like the CT!
But to answer your orginal question.
As a microlight school proprietor - on the C42 Ikarus (whose microlight and light aircraft versions have an identicl airframe) - I have looked at your scheme.
The hiccup is the requirement for a licensed airfield. However, the consultation is coming to an end and it looks as though this Uk requirement is about to be abolished.
Then, all we need is a light aircraft FI. At the moment, for money to change hands - although since I own the airfield in a seperate business, I can set landing fees at 50 quid each for light aircraft traiing flights! - the FI has to hold a CPL. Again, this is out for consultation and may be about to change. (of course, I could get an FI rating and then not charge for my instructing when wearing my light aircraft FI hat!)
But at the end of the day, all this gives you is a VFR only licence.
If you want that, most people are happy with a NPPL Microlight which also allows you - through the kindness of their national CAAs - to fly abroad.
The NPPL SSEA doesn't, since the foreigners want to know why you don't have a JAR license!
My contention, from business analysis of the training figures and licences as published in Flight Traiing news etc, is that the majority of JAR PPL courses are undertaken by people thinking they may eventually go for a CPL.
So, for a sport flyer - NPPL and fly at a low cost per hour (as little as £35 an hour in our C42 syndicate).
It seems to be working ;-)
very best,
XA
Welcome to the wonderful grey world of flying training in modern aircraft like the CT!
But to answer your orginal question.
As a microlight school proprietor - on the C42 Ikarus (whose microlight and light aircraft versions have an identicl airframe) - I have looked at your scheme.
The hiccup is the requirement for a licensed airfield. However, the consultation is coming to an end and it looks as though this Uk requirement is about to be abolished.
Then, all we need is a light aircraft FI. At the moment, for money to change hands - although since I own the airfield in a seperate business, I can set landing fees at 50 quid each for light aircraft traiing flights! - the FI has to hold a CPL. Again, this is out for consultation and may be about to change. (of course, I could get an FI rating and then not charge for my instructing when wearing my light aircraft FI hat!)
But at the end of the day, all this gives you is a VFR only licence.
If you want that, most people are happy with a NPPL Microlight which also allows you - through the kindness of their national CAAs - to fly abroad.
The NPPL SSEA doesn't, since the foreigners want to know why you don't have a JAR license!
My contention, from business analysis of the training figures and licences as published in Flight Traiing news etc, is that the majority of JAR PPL courses are undertaken by people thinking they may eventually go for a CPL.
So, for a sport flyer - NPPL and fly at a low cost per hour (as little as £35 an hour in our C42 syndicate).
It seems to be working ;-)
very best,
XA
VG
Unfortunately the NPPL Website has no more authority than pprune to grant privileges to instructors. On what written authority have they based this statement? I can find nothing to support it.
As someone who has trained and tested CRIs I know they have received no training in preparing a student:
Without such training how will they know if the candidate meets the required standard?
Unfortunately the NPPL Website has no more authority than pprune to grant privileges to instructors. On what written authority have they based this statement? I can find nothing to support it.
As someone who has trained and tested CRIs I know they have received no training in preparing a student:
to take the NPPL NST and GST in a SSEA
Last edited by Whopity; 10th Sep 2008 at 10:03.
Guest
Posts: n/a
How can a JAR-FCL FI(A) teach NPPL then?
I would argue against your assertion that CRIs are not equipped to do the training - the whole point it to teach the differences of SSEA as opposed to three-axis microlights, not the actual basics of the flying exercises. Lets not make up barriers where there doesn't need to be any.
I would argue against your assertion that CRIs are not equipped to do the training - the whole point it to teach the differences of SSEA as opposed to three-axis microlights, not the actual basics of the flying exercises. Lets not make up barriers where there doesn't need to be any.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting replies all. Whopity thanks for clarifying the 600kg question. Given Xray Alpha's comment about a NPPL(SSEA) not being recognised in Europe, but an NPPL(M) allowed by individual legislators; plus a 600kg machine needing a Public Transport maintenenace schedule, it seems that NPPL(M) training ona 450kg machine is the way ahead.
I've already done a successful NPPL(M) to NPPL(SSEA) upgrade for a student, so if I had an agreement with a local FTO or RTF where I could do the "training as required" on their C of A aircraft from their licensed airfield - then I could teach zero to NPPL(M) on a microlight, and then convert the same student to a NPPL(SSEA).
It would mean 2 different aircraft but one instructor and theoretically a more cost effective NPPL(SSEA) at the end. I bet 24 months down the line from a skills test, such a NPPL(M)+(SSEA) would be a better pilot and less likely to jack flying in if they could fly an Ikarus for peanuts for fun flying, and hire a 4 seater for longer trips and to keep the SSEA valid.
IMHO most microlight pilots have far better airmanship than most PPL's for the simple reason that they fly far more hours a year
(awaiting flak...............now!)
I've already done a successful NPPL(M) to NPPL(SSEA) upgrade for a student, so if I had an agreement with a local FTO or RTF where I could do the "training as required" on their C of A aircraft from their licensed airfield - then I could teach zero to NPPL(M) on a microlight, and then convert the same student to a NPPL(SSEA).
It would mean 2 different aircraft but one instructor and theoretically a more cost effective NPPL(SSEA) at the end. I bet 24 months down the line from a skills test, such a NPPL(M)+(SSEA) would be a better pilot and less likely to jack flying in if they could fly an Ikarus for peanuts for fun flying, and hire a 4 seater for longer trips and to keep the SSEA valid.
IMHO most microlight pilots have far better airmanship than most PPL's for the simple reason that they fly far more hours a year
(awaiting flak...............now!)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whopity: NPLG Ltd approve the license application and request the CAA to issue it. So you follow their rules I guess. That's how it wored in my case 
sp6: One of the nice things about the latest currency requirements are you can use your microlight hours to keep the SSEA valid.
Vince
sp6: One of the nice things about the latest currency requirements are you can use your microlight hours to keep the SSEA valid.
Vince
Whopity, as you very well know, your erstwhile employers at the Belgrano agreed that a CRI could conduct the relevant training for those who already held a valid NPPL.
They also reviewed the content of the NPPL cross-credit document on the NPPL website; had they not agreed then the CRI references would have been deleted.
Information on the NPPL website has all been approved by the CAA!
They also reviewed the content of the NPPL cross-credit document on the NPPL website; had they not agreed then the CRI references would have been deleted.
Information on the NPPL website has all been approved by the CAA!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sp6: One of the nice things about the latest currency requirements are you can use your microlight hours to keep the SSEA valid.
cheers SP6
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or to put it bluntly nobody with any relevant knowledge ever looked at it!
