NPPL ( SEP )

[tangovictor]

Im confused, having just about decided, i'd go for the nppl licence, Im told by some, that a holder can fly to France, however, the AOPA FAQ section
clearly states, UK airspace only !
Can anyone throw some light onto this ?

[Mike Cross]

The FAQ's on the NPPL Web Site say:-

Q Can I fly in the Channel Islands with a NPPL?
A Not at present, but it may become possible in due course.
Q Do you think I will ever be able to use my NPPL in France?
A Given time, it may become possible through mutual agreement between France and the UK.
Q Can I fly my 'N' registered aircraft on my NPPL?
A No. This is because the NPPL is a sub-ICAO licence, and the usual reciprocity with the USA and other ICAO contracting states does not apply. As the holder of a UK NPPL, you may only fly in UK airspace in a UK registered aircraft.
Q Can holders of the NPPL with Microlight rating fly abroad like holders of the pre - NPPL Microlight Licence?
A The NPPL is a day only UK VFR licence and confers no automatic rights to fly abroad. However the UK PPL (A) Microlight was a sub-ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) Licence which also conferred no automatic rights to fly abroad. While the French have given a blanket exemption that allows UK microlight pilots to fly in France provided certain conditions are met, (see the BMAA Website at www.bmaa.org for details), all other countries require you to obtain permission in advance.

Mike

[BEagle]

The NPPL with SSEA Class Rating restricts holders to Day, VFR, UK airpsace only, except with the permission of the competent authority for the airspace in which you wish to fly. That's because it's a sub-ICAO licence.

So, if you can secure the approval of the French authorities, you might be able to fly there on a specific occasion, but it'll be entirely down to you to contact them.

[Rod1]

I am under the impression that a holder an NPPL (M) is allowed to fly in most of Europe. Are we saying that an NPPL (M) is not an NPPL? If you want to get an NPPL go do, stick to the M version and avoid the restriction.

Rod1

[tangovictor]

thanks for the info, Rod what "m" stand for ?
I also read the UK restriction, but on the same site, theres a download
pdf, telling you how to fly to Europe,
and I thought, the nppl was brought in to unravel confusion

[dublinpilot]

The M is for Microlight

[tangovictor]

ok I got nppl "m", uk airspace only VFR, but you can fly to "europe" which isn't uk airspace, and I can't fly to the channel islands, !!!!!!!!
what if I fly to france, then to the channel islands from there !!!!!!!
what about the i.o.man ? or Northern Ireland ? is that uk airspace ?
just when I thought, I was getting an understanding of this I get totally confused again

[DFC]

Get a JAA PPL.

You will get the same training at the same price form the same club at the same airfield and sit the same exams and be required to be at the same standard for the same flight examminer to get the licence.

Unless you have a medical restriction or want to only fly microlights - forget the NPPL.

Regards,

DFC

[tangovictor]

Hi DFC
I do have to take medication, that the CAA are non to keen on, I've looked into changing, but, its not an easy thing, So nppl m is probably the only way I will get to fly

[Whopity]

Technically the NPPL(M) has the same restriction as the SSEA version when it comes to operating in Europe however; microlights have been given permission in the past to cross borders and there is a general acceptance of microlight licences around Europe. Some States don't even require a licence to fly a microlight as did the UK back in the 70s.

To add to the confusion the PPL SLMG used to be an ICAO licence but now that its an NPPL it may not be (40 hours required to be ICAO compliant).

The NPPL was introduced by one person in the CAA who wanted to impress the chairman; it got him promoted, and produced the biggest load of Beaurocratic Garbage in aviation history. All that was required was a two tier medical system, that allready existed for microlights, and no ANO amendments!

[BEagle]

Another nom de PPRuNe, eh?

The NPPL came in on 30 July 2002 because Industry said they wanted it. But the CAA cocked up the ANO at the time and we've been trying to unbugger it ever since. In fact I provided the latest clarification just yesterday....

If all you want to do is to fly light aeroplanes on nice days in the UK, then really there is no reason to go for a JAR-FCL PPL - the NPPL requires not less than 32 hours plus 2 x 1.5 hour tests, whereas the JAR-FCL PPL requires 45 hours including a single test of 2.5-3 hours. The NPPL is issued for life, the JAR-FCL PPL for only 5 years. Ratings, however, have also to maintained on both licences.

Medical requirements for the NPPL are simpler and cheaper.

The whole rationale was to make learning to fly and maintaining a licence simpler and cheaper. Hopefully the eventual ANO amendments currently being worked on will finally achieve this original aim.

NOTE - in this context:

'Light aeroplane' means a single piston engined aeroplane (not being a microlight or SLMG) with a maximum permitted weight of 2000 kg, in which not more than four people (including the pilot) are carried. This is termed a 'simple single engined aeroplane' (SSEA)

'Nice days' means day, VFR, not less than 5km in-flight visibility, clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.

[LysanderV8]

Am I correct in thinking that the holder of an NPPL is not able to carry passengers, unless, of course, he is accompanied by a PPL or above who would be P1 ?

Lysander

[BEagle]

Nope - that's total nonsense.

[englishal]

Hi DFC
I do have to take medication, that the CAA are non to keen on, I've looked into changing, but, its not an easy thing, So nppl m is probably the only way I will get to fly

Depending on what medication you are on, I would consider looking into the USA (FAA) PPL.

They have more realistic medical standards and you may find your medication does not prevent you gaining an FAA medical certificate and the FAA PPL IS indeed an ICAO licence. This allow you to fly G registered (UK) aeroplanes in the UK, G registered aeroplanes many placed abroard (France / Channel Islands, NI, Germany, Denmark for certain), G registered aeroplanes but not limited to DAY flying, N registered (american) aeroplanes world wide.

There are some friendly US certified aviation medical examiners who browse Pprune or Flyer who may be able to advise you.

[LysanderV8]

Thanks BEagle. I shall advise my misinformed informant !

Cheers

Lysander

[J.A.F.O.]

Now hang on, chaps and chappesses.

I have an NPPL (SSEA) and the reason I got it is quite simple - it's a bit easier and cheaper to keep current. Not a lot, I grant you, but a bit.

It's issued for life, I don't need another medical for several years and as long as I've done the hours it's legal.

The money I save on the medical pays for the hour with an instructor.

I only wish to bimble about in nice weather either solo or with one or two friends.

If it ever doesn't suit then I'll change but for the time being, why not?

[tangovictor]

Hello people
J.A.F.O I don't think anyone was having a go, re nppl ?
Thanks englishal & BEagle for the info,
I must admit to still being confused, re the UK airspace flying
but most of Europe is OK ???? J.A.F.O have you flown to Europe
with your nppl ?

[DFC]

Originally Posted by BEagle

If all you want to do is to fly light aeroplanes on nice days in the UK, then really there is no reason to go for a JAR-FCL PPL - the NPPL requires not less than 32 hours plus 2 x 1.5 hour tests, whereas the JAR-FCL PPL requires 45 hours including a single test of 2.5-3 hours.

BEagle,

The reason why there is so much confusion is that proponents of the NPPL have to incorrectly describe the actual situation in order to make the NPPL more attractive.

1. The NPPL requires 32 hours, the JAA PPL requires 35 hours training. (all they did was shave some time off certain exercises).

2. The JAA skill tests can be conducted as a single test or as two tests of about 1.5 hours each as you describe for the NPPL.

How many students do you know who passed the NPPL test(s) with 32 hours or the JAA PPL test(s) with 35 hours. I believe the average is in the 50 to 70 hour bracket these days.

When you are completing a skill test, will you accept a generally lower standard of operation and poorer standard of navigation from an NPPL candidate?

----------

Tangovictor,

When you say the CAA are "not keen on it". Are you saying that they have told you they will not issue a medical or that they will have to look into it?

To get either licence you are going to have to put some efort in and a large amount of money. Changing medication will probably be a minor blip on what can be a 2 year period of highs and lows.

Regards,

DFC

[Rod1]

I would not criticise the NPPL concept too much as what we have at the moment is not what was originally planed. EASA are interested in copying a lot of the original NPPL idea and incorporating it into an RPPL (R = recreation) which will be accepted Europe wide. If the RPPL or the NPPL get accepted in Europe it will be the JAA PPL which will become the minority option as most pilots would find the recreational licence the way to go.

Rod1

[IO540]

I would agree that IF one wants to stay in the UK then there is no point in a full PPL.

But take the wider picture: something like 80-90% of new PPLs chuck in flying for good within a couple of years. Is this a good thing? Of course not.

It depends on how cynical one wants to get but on the one hand the flight training business has no reason to care what people do after they graduate; the school has had its £8000 by then and apart from Night/IMCR there is little more to be extracted.

But the GA scene in the UK - operations from freehold farm strips excluded - is largely propped up by sales of fuel, landing fees, tea and chocolate cakes, to pilots doing what the Americans call "burger runs".

A good way to speed up the decline, and make airports take on more and more industrial-unit tenants and eventually sell up whole, is to give lots of people a license which prevents them going somewhere they can't drive in a similar time.

I know this is going to sound like an attack on the low-end GA community but it isn't meant to be. Everybody should be able to co-exist, but there is a lot of cross-subsidy in this game, and an occassional microlight popping into say Goodwood isn't going to keep Goodwood Airfield Ltd (or whatever it is called) in business.

IMV the NPPL was pushed by the flight training business, to introduce an item which would appear cheaper on their price list than the JAA PPL. This was futile because it takes a similar # of hours to reach the required standard. There was no will inside the CAA to prune down the ground school syllabus - just like there is no will among the JAA committee delegates to prune down the JAA IR syllabus.

So, what has actually happened is that most (about 60-70%) NPPL holders are previous PPL holders who have done it for the easier medical. Of course the NPPL could have never been pushed for that reason - arguing for an easier medical in the dinosaur world of aviation is like arguing that Myra Hindley should be able to exercise her human right to become a schoolteacher.

The cost saving is miniscule on the scale of a realistic VFR minimum currency budget which is perhaps £2000/year (20hrs of self fly hire).

EASA is making interesting noises on deregulation of VFR GA but everybody else is quite worried they are going to shaft IFR GA in the process. Which would be a shame since a large chunk of "purpose-full" flight is for business and similar stuff, and eventually most of those realise they need an IR.