NPPL query
Thread Starter
NPPL query
Probably a question for BEagle:
A chap has a current SEPL rating on a licence that expires later this year, he also has an NPPL SSEA rating that lapsed in 2004. He has been flying on the basis of the SEPL rating and an NPPL medical declaration. His options now seem to be to renew the JAA licence (CAA fees and JAR medical fees) or whether to renew the NPPL rating. I believe he needs to pass an NPPL GST to renew the NPPL SSEA - is this correct?
HFD
A chap has a current SEPL rating on a licence that expires later this year, he also has an NPPL SSEA rating that lapsed in 2004. He has been flying on the basis of the SEPL rating and an NPPL medical declaration. His options now seem to be to renew the JAA licence (CAA fees and JAR medical fees) or whether to renew the NPPL rating. I believe he needs to pass an NPPL GST to renew the NPPL SSEA - is this correct?
HFD
On the basis of a valid SEP rating all he needs is to have done his hour with an Instructor and 12 hours experience in the last 24 months. No need for a test. It can be signed at any time as long as he has 6 hours in the previous 12 months.
If the JAR-FCL PPL is due to reach the 5 year re-issue point, it cannot be re-issued without a valid JAA Medical - the 'NPPL' medical declaration cannot be used for JAR-FCL re-issue.
When is the SEP Class Rating due to expire?
If his SEP Class Rating is current and valid in all respects, I suggest that he sends a copy of it to the nice people at Gatwick, plus his NPPL, plus logbook proof of having flown 12 hours in the last 24 months, including 12 take-off and landings as PIC of which 8 must be have been as PIC and an accumlated total of 1 must have been with an instructor. Of the total 12 hours, 6 must have been in the last 12 months. In other words, if he can prove that his SEP flying in the last 24 months was exactly equivalent to the requirements for revalidating an SSEA Class Rating, he would have a reasonable case for making such a request. This may attract a 'Rating Variation fee', but is probably the cheapest way for him to sort out his NPPL.
Your chap is in this position as he let his NPPL SSEA Class Rating lapse. Normally he would be required to fly a GST, but as he was flying on a JAR-FCL licence at the same time, he has actually maintained current flying practice. So I would hope that the CAA will take a pragmatic view as I've suggested.
Keep us posted!
When is the SEP Class Rating due to expire?
If his SEP Class Rating is current and valid in all respects, I suggest that he sends a copy of it to the nice people at Gatwick, plus his NPPL, plus logbook proof of having flown 12 hours in the last 24 months, including 12 take-off and landings as PIC of which 8 must be have been as PIC and an accumlated total of 1 must have been with an instructor. Of the total 12 hours, 6 must have been in the last 12 months. In other words, if he can prove that his SEP flying in the last 24 months was exactly equivalent to the requirements for revalidating an SSEA Class Rating, he would have a reasonable case for making such a request. This may attract a 'Rating Variation fee', but is probably the cheapest way for him to sort out his NPPL.
Your chap is in this position as he let his NPPL SSEA Class Rating lapse. Normally he would be required to fly a GST, but as he was flying on a JAR-FCL licence at the same time, he has actually maintained current flying practice. So I would hope that the CAA will take a pragmatic view as I've suggested.
Keep us posted!
To have his PPL reissued for a further 5 years it will cost £70 + medical. To have a NPPL Issued it will cost £49 and probably last till 2012 when it may have to align with EASA and become a LAPL at extra cost! http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/241PLS.pdf Acording to ORS 756 he may exercise NPPL privileges on the basis of a SEP Class rating so there is no justification for charging anything other than a licence issue fee.
The NPPL does not need to be issued as the chap already has one. It merely needs PLD to agree that, since the SEP Class Rating in his parallel JAR-FCL PPL(A) is still valid, the SSEA Class Rating may be renewed without the need for a GST.
The fee for renewal of a rating included in a NPPL will be £37 w.e.f. 1 Apr 2010.
Hopefully this will be accepted by PLD and will take a couple of minutes with a Gatwick biro to effect.
As for what happens in 2012 should the €urocrats inflict the absurdity of the LPL upon us, who knows. Our working NPPL system will be thrown into total confusion for nothing more than administrative convenience - I wish the CAA the best of luck trying to sort out the resulting mayhem! That is, if the CAA still has any staff left by then....
The fee for renewal of a rating included in a NPPL will be £37 w.e.f. 1 Apr 2010.
Hopefully this will be accepted by PLD and will take a couple of minutes with a Gatwick biro to effect.
As for what happens in 2012 should the €urocrats inflict the absurdity of the LPL upon us, who knows. Our working NPPL system will be thrown into total confusion for nothing more than administrative convenience - I wish the CAA the best of luck trying to sort out the resulting mayhem! That is, if the CAA still has any staff left by then....
he also has an NPPL SSEA rating that lapsed in 2004.
I doubt the CAA will have any input; sounds like another job for Claud Muddlesome!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One would assume that saying he held an NPPL SSEA meant that he held an NPPL!!!
I have just done this recently and the men at the ministry told me that if the revalidation requirements had been met and the SEP was current to revalidate the NPPL at the same time and from the current date.
I have just done this recently and the men at the ministry told me that if the revalidation requirements had been met and the SEP was current to revalidate the NPPL at the same time and from the current date.
I have just done this recently and the men at the ministry told me that if the revalidation requirements had been met and the SEP was current to revalidate the NPPL at the same time and from the current date.
A Rating expired by more than 5 years normally requires the licence and paperwork to be sent to PLD, so the solution I proposed is probably the most pragmatic unless FCL make it a formal new policy.
You can only take pedantry so far......
Isn't it interesting that the simplest licence of them all continues to generate more confusion than all the others put together. The CAA have never informed any instructor or PPL examiner anything about this licence. It was attempted at the CPL/FIE examiners meeting last October leaving them all totally confused.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Britain
Age: 74
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't be too hard on the CAA. The whole recreational flying situation is in a mess as a result of well intentioned actions to ease the burden on the sector. The burgeoning number of activities under the recreational flying umbrella has created a number of contradictions that do not sit comfortably with ICAO Annex 1 which has its roots in the days when the only options were nosewheel or tailwheel (no rating for either in those halcyon days).
BTW, I've been out of circulation for a few weeks. This forum seems to have shrunk mightily. WIHIH?
BTW, I've been out of circulation for a few weeks. This forum seems to have shrunk mightily. WIHIH?
Unfortunately the who thing is down to one person who used the opportunity for political gain and refused to listen to those who knew better. GA is now writhing in a pile of totally unnecessary beaurocracy.
The CAA have never informed any instructor or PPL examiner anything about this licence.
Unfortunately the whole thing is down to one person who used the opportunity for political gain and refused to listen to those who knew better.
What exactly is the difference with the LPL apart from the fact you will be able to instruct on it?
Eventually! but wouldn't it have been easier to stick with the ICAO 40 hours and a two tier medical that allready existed, no need for any law changes at all.
Yes, two tables, no explanation and no relevant forms.
Industry got what it said it wanted
Haven't you received your new FEH yet
Whopity, you've been banging that drum for years. What you describe isn't what industry wanted.
The main problem with the NPPL was that, after everything had been finally agreed, incorrect requirements were mistakenly written into the ANO and it has taken years of effort to correct the CAA's original errors.
bose-x, all very well to ring the CAA, but often you get different interpretations from different people. That's why anything which isn't defined in writing (LASORS, FEH, AIC etc) should be aimed at the CAA and a written response given. If for no other reason than to protect both the licence holder and the examiner.
The main problem with the NPPL was that, after everything had been finally agreed, incorrect requirements were mistakenly written into the ANO and it has taken years of effort to correct the CAA's original errors.
bose-x, all very well to ring the CAA, but often you get different interpretations from different people. That's why anything which isn't defined in writing (LASORS, FEH, AIC etc) should be aimed at the CAA and a written response given. If for no other reason than to protect both the licence holder and the examiner.