Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Flying Instructors & Examiners
Reload this Page >

NPPL(M) to EASA PPL Sep(Land)

Wikiposts
Search
Flying Instructors & Examiners A place for instructors to communicate with one another because some of them get a bit tired of the attitude that instructing is the lowest form of aviation, as seems to prevail on some of the other forums!

NPPL(M) to EASA PPL Sep(Land)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 13th Oct 2015, 18:33
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NPPL(M) to EASA PPL Sep(Land)

Ok I know what's required to go NPPL(M) to NPPL(SSEA? or whatever it's called now).
But is there a way to go NPPL(M) to SEP(Land) in one go.
The guy in question has 60 odd hours on NPPL(M) C42 and Jabiru.
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 20:03
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Don't think so.

Add SSEA, convert to LAPL, then upgrade to EASA PPL.


MJ
Mach Jump is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 20:57
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 6,582
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
But is there a way to go NPPL(M) to SEP(Land) in one go.
Yes, meet the full EASA requirement, in which case the NPPL(M) is irrelevant.
Whopity is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 21:04
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's a thought.
Check logbook to asses what's missing for EASA PPL then do Skill Test.
BigEndBob is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 21:34
  #5 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 14,234
Received 52 Likes on 28 Posts
Originally Posted by Whopity
Yes, meet the full EASA requirement, in which case the NPPL(M) is irrelevant.
Not quite.

IIRC, there's a dispensation of 10% of the PiC hours in 3-axis microlights up to 10 hours off.

Also, it is possible to do the NQ within the minimum hours, so at-least taking advantage of previous learning, if not hours.

(At least, this worked for me when I went PPL(M)--> JAR PPL(SEP) in 2001, and I don't *think* it's changed.)

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 22:01
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 6,582
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Do you have a reference for this dispensation? Part FCL says:
(d) Crediting. Applicants holding a pilot licence for another category of aircraft, with the exception of balloons, shall be credited with 10 % of their total flight time as PIC on such aircraft up to a maximum of 10 hours. The amount of credit given shall in any case not include the requirements in (a)(2).
Microlight, 3-axis or otherwise is not an EASA category of aircraft!
Whopity is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2015, 23:22
  #7 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 14,234
Received 52 Likes on 28 Posts
JAR was pre-EASA of course, so I suspect that what you are referencing is the successor to the now defunct UK/JAR regs that I took advantage of.

Might be worth quoting precedent to CAA to see if they'll be helpful?

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 07:24
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,847
Received 323 Likes on 115 Posts
Simplest way is to include an SSEA Class Rating in the NPPL(A), then follow NPPL(A) to PPL(A) with SEP Class Rating conversion as described in CAP804 Part I Section 4 Part P page 33:

The holder of a UK issue Microlight licence may convert their licence to a Part-FCL LAPL(A) or PPL(A), by first satisfying the requirement to convert from a UK Microlight licence to a UK NPPL(A) with an SSEA or SLMG rating, and additionally meeting the requirements for the conversion of a NPPL(A) SSEA or SLMG to a Part-FCL LAPL(A) or PPL(A), by satisfying the conversion requirements as set out in this Part.
Genghis, it would be completely and utterly pointless to bother the CAA with a 14 year old 'precedent', now that they have only limited discretion under EU regulations.
BEagle is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 09:50
  #9 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 14,234
Received 52 Likes on 28 Posts
Possibly, although that was the working rule for quite a few years, and not just applied to me.

That said, yes, I think that the approach you have just described is probably the most efficient now. Well, least inefficient anyhow.

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 19:34
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 6,582
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
to the now defunct UK/JAR regs that I took advantage of.
JAR-FCL was more specific than EASA. 1.005 stated:
(5) Whenever a reference is made to
aeroplanes this does not include microlights
as defined nationally, unless otherwise
specified.
Whopity is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2015, 22:56
  #11 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 14,234
Received 52 Likes on 28 Posts
Problem is, it's so damned long ago that I certainly can't remember what specific rulebook was used. I am only sure that it was accepted.

G
Genghis the Engineer is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.