JAR-PPL or NPPL(M)

[Adamant]

I'm wanting to get flying - but being young (22) my finances are seriously limited!

I can afford to do my NPPL(M) now (as much as you can afford to do anything to do with flying! ) or would it best to wait a few years and do my JAR-PPL then?

I'm pretty eager to get up in the air as soon as possible so I'm tempted to just go for my M and then I can always do my JAR-PPL if I find it's not enough.

Ideas anyone?

[Blinkz]

perhaps consider gliding? its a great introduction to flying and pretty cheap. If your at uni check to see if they have a club, thats where I learnt to fly!

[BEagle]

Do an NPPL Microlight Rating now - then add a SSEA Rating when you can afford it later. Eventually convert it to a JAR-FCL PPL in a couple of years time, perhaps?

Come join the noble band of brother aviators.....NOW!!

[Adamant]

I'll have to look at Gliding - kind of discounted at as it didn't seem like "real flying"

Just left uni unfortunatley, guess I'll just have to start saving as best I can! I'm just so impatient - and this site only makes me less patient!

Do an NPPL Microlight Rating now - then add a SSEA Rating when you can afford it later. Eventually convert it to a JAR-FCL PPL in a couple of years time, perhaps?

That is probably the most sensible option, it gets me up in the air now and leaves me room to progress onto bigger and better things.

Now, to find the best place to learn!

Come join the noble band of brother aviators.....NOW!!

Everyone clear the skies - I\'m coming up!

[Flying_Anorak]

"I'll have to look at Gliding - kind of discounted at as it didn't seem like "real flying"

Sorry, but I've gotta take exception to that comment!

I took up gliding about thirteen years ago as what I thought was a cheap route to real flying and suddenly realised that gliding is real flying and power is more akin to driving to and from work!

Ultimately I still hope to convert my gliding Licence and hours to either a JAR PPL or NPPL but in the meantime I honestly believe that whilst it is not as procedural, gliding teaches you much more about airmanship and handling skills than any other form of aviation. A view incidentally that was expressed by a CAA representative at a safety evening I went to a couple of years ago where he commented on how many power pilots ever truly flew their aircraft to the edge of the envelope, stalled or spun them regularly!

Try being miles away from home at the end of the day when the lift is dying and you are using every ounce of skill and technique to get you home - thats REAL flying!

I honestly believe that ex-glider pilots make better power pilots!

[MizzFlyer]

me room to progress onto bigger and better things.

Bigger doesn't always mean better.

Ask yourself what you want from your flying before passing judgement.

Even better try out every form of flying you can afford, then decide.

[Big Cheese1]

Hi all,

Sort of going on a bit of a tangent here but i didn't think it justified it's own thread.

I'm hoping to finish off my PPL sharpish, after completing 20 hours on a flying scholarship a few years back.

Now I could get flying fairly soon I'd imagine if I simply went for my NPPL first and progressed from there. My other option was to finish the JAR PPL in the states. Does anyone think it's worth going for the NPPL and going from there - as with many money isn't exactly falling from the sky!

Also, with an NPPl can you take passengers etc?

Thanks in advance guys and gals

BC

[veetwo]

Big Cheese,

Yes, you can take pax with a UK NPPL but your licence will only be valid in the United Kingdom, during daylight hours and in VFR conditions. You cannot add night or IMC ratings to an NPPL (nor can it be used as a foundation for a CPL or IR if you decide you want to do these modules).

You can, of course, upgrade your NPPL to a JAR-FCL PPL (the written exams are exactly the same, or they were when I was training not so long ago) and I believe you can count about 30 hours of your NPPL training towards your JAR-FCL licence. Thus, you'd need to do another 15 or so to get to the JAR minimum of 45.

I considered doing this myself at the start of my training, but finally decided to do the full JAR-FCL licence. One of the main reasons for this is that I had no desire to sit 2 separate skills tests (its actually 3 tests, because the NPPL test is broken down into Gen handling and Gen Navigation and I believe these are flown separately). Unfortunately, its not just a case of flying the extra 15 hours and "hey presto" you're done. You have to sit another skills test. If that doesn't bother you... or you intend to leave a couple of years between licenses.. then the NPPL might be a better option.

Another thing to consider. I know very well that at 32 hours of training I was NOT ready to be an (unsupervised) PIC with pax. I eventualy passed my JAR-FCL license on minimum hours. I dont claim to be a fantastic pilot (I believe I'm safe) and I am quite sure there are those out there with more ability than I have, but I do think you'd need to be an exceptional candidate to get through a flying license and pass in 32 hours.

I guess what Im saying is.. if you're going to spend more like 40/45 hours on passing an NPPL anyway (your INS will only put you in for a test when he/she thinks you are ready) it is probably worth doing the JAR-FCL course!

I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the main reason for choosing an NPPL over the JAR-FCL course was inability to satisfy JAR medical requirements. So, if you can pass a class 2 medical, I'd advise you to stagger the cost of the course (I took a year over mine) and go for the JAR licence. Realisticly, if you do it in this country it could take you that long anyway, thanks to British weather. If you want to go to America, thats another matter all together, but remember that when you get back here, you'll have to get checked out with a club and be able to pay the British self-fly hire prices (which do NOT make good bed time reading).

One last thing. If your 20 hours were a few years ago and you haven't flown since, I would guess you might have to revise an awful lot of what you learnt back then. That alone will mean you would probably overshoot the 32 hour requirement for an NPPL.

Good luck whatever you decide!

V2

[Genghis the Engineer]

Adamant,

Firstly, I'm pretty certain that if you're in Kent the nearest place to learn to fly microlights is here. I know some of the people there, and they're a good friendly club.

Secondly, for what it's worth I fly 3-axis microlights, flexwings, and light aircraft. I'd hate to give any of them up and certainly wouldn't talk you out of any particular route. For sheer fun (if not practicality), flexwing wins every time; for the joys of long trips by air in comfort with baggage I use a light aircraft. 3-axis microlights lie somewhere in between but have their own pleasures.

If you want to fly and money is limited, then I'd strongly recommend going the microlight route. The day-VMC-UK limitation is irrelevant since no cash-strapped PPL is ever properly current in night-IFR anyhow, and there is no particular problem flying outside the UK (I know that the microlight club I've linked above nip over to France regularly).

For long distance flying - it's possible, a review of any of the high street flying magazines will sooner or later throw up articles along the lines of "how I flew to Iceland in my 3-axis microlight", or "how I went to Finland and back in my flexwing". It'll take longer, but that just means more flying - I see no problem there.

Costwise learning 3-axis or flexwing microlighting will be similar. Subsequently however £3k will buy you a reasonable second hand flexwing, £6k is the starting point for a 3-axis (there are options to rent, syndicate, etc. but most of us like to own). For a serious 2-seat touring microlight you are looking for £15k+, but in a syndicate that's not much each.


My advice, go along to Medway, do a trial lesson in each of 3-axis and flexwing, and take it from there. But don't hold on for a couple of years to get an expensive licence that you might not then be able to afford to use anyhow.

G

[B Fraser]

NPPL v JAR FCL PPL..... good question. I reckon that I'll have clocked enough hours to get the full PPL ticket by the time I am ready for my GFT.

I don't have any plans to go international, at night or in IFR weather so there is no great incentive for the full PPL however I believe the exam papers are the same for either course and I would expect the GFT to be to the same standard. Some of the written questions have more to do with English comprehension but that's just my personal gripe at missing a couple of points in Air Law.

Can anyone confirm there are no differences in standards that apply to the tests or is it a case of doing enough hours and a 2 hour GFT ?

[IO540]

My opinion is to forget the NPPL. One of the great bits of fun in flying is flying abroad.

The NPPL has been mostly gone for by existing PPLs who cannot any longer pass their CAA Class 2 medical.

Any financial saving is going to be insignificant by the time one reaches a standard adequate for flying from A to B in UK airspace.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I thought that most of the problems about flying abroad on an NPPL (and certainly an NPPL(M)) were dead and buried?

G