Is the NPPL safe under the plans of EASA?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Northampton Sywell
Age: 35
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the worst day
The worst day was when I had my class 2 medical taken away :-( Sucks that I can't carry pax on my NPPL. Yet if I lived in the USA with a FAA PPL and class 3 I could carry paz :-( Unfair. Still don't know if I should go and complete my NPPL just to get it more restricted or taken away :-(
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where EASA is concerned - be afraid - be very afraid.
Just like all the UK glider pilots/owners
Just like all the UK glider pilots/owners
EASA executive policy is not the problem here. The "problem" with EASA is that we have yet another set of committees on which one bit of GA is happy to shaft the others, just to get easier licensing and medicals for their own group.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Witney
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO 540
Effect of EASA so far on UK gliding:
a) Register all gliders with CAA instead of BGA (ok Annex II a/c excepted)
b) Paint G - REG numbers on all gliders instead of BGA regs
c) Register ownership with CAA
d) Fit fireproof reg plate to all gliders (ever hear of a glider crashing & burning??)
e) Transition maintenance paperwork from BGA to EASA for "EASA" CofA - nightmare
It just cost a mate of mine £1800 to have all the above done professionally on his glider. Doing it yourself with a friendly Glider Inspector will be less but very time consuming
Net benefit to safety - absolutely F*** all. Net benefits to taking glider to Europe - very slight - we can do it already. Net benefits of selling glider into Europe - possible but most gliders get imported from Europe in reality.
And they havn't started on glider pilots licenses & medicals yet!
As I said - be afraid re NPPL
Effect of EASA so far on UK gliding:
a) Register all gliders with CAA instead of BGA (ok Annex II a/c excepted)
b) Paint G - REG numbers on all gliders instead of BGA regs
c) Register ownership with CAA
d) Fit fireproof reg plate to all gliders (ever hear of a glider crashing & burning??)
e) Transition maintenance paperwork from BGA to EASA for "EASA" CofA - nightmare
It just cost a mate of mine £1800 to have all the above done professionally on his glider. Doing it yourself with a friendly Glider Inspector will be less but very time consuming
Net benefit to safety - absolutely F*** all. Net benefits to taking glider to Europe - very slight - we can do it already. Net benefits of selling glider into Europe - possible but most gliders get imported from Europe in reality.
And they havn't started on glider pilots licenses & medicals yet!
As I said - be afraid re NPPL
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sedbergh
The UK gliding community lost out big time with EASA. However this came about because we had a relatively relaxed approach compared with our European friends. In looking at recreational pilots license comparison we have one of the more restrictive approached than Europe. IO540 is quite right that there is a long way to go, but the initial indications are that the European lobby for a “sensible” VFR recreational license is strong and the proposals are likely to reflect this. ( the UK GA Alliance is very involved)
The problem which may happen is the group which sits just above the “VFR for fun” group. A recreational license is essentially a flying for fun license. The JAA PPL is not, it allows pilots to move on to commercial licenses, and it allows a full IR. It is the split of the JAA PPL into recreational and other which is the potential threat. The up side of this is that the numbers of pilots impacted is likely to be a few 100, but if you have got an IR and spent £100k on an IFR aircraft and you get shafted by EASA you are not going to be happy, and I can see why.
From the VFR point of view we are likely to get a less expensive license with a sub JAA medical and comparatively low cost training. I understand the likely implementation is mid 09, so this is actually not very far away.
Rod1
The UK gliding community lost out big time with EASA. However this came about because we had a relatively relaxed approach compared with our European friends. In looking at recreational pilots license comparison we have one of the more restrictive approached than Europe. IO540 is quite right that there is a long way to go, but the initial indications are that the European lobby for a “sensible” VFR recreational license is strong and the proposals are likely to reflect this. ( the UK GA Alliance is very involved)
The problem which may happen is the group which sits just above the “VFR for fun” group. A recreational license is essentially a flying for fun license. The JAA PPL is not, it allows pilots to move on to commercial licenses, and it allows a full IR. It is the split of the JAA PPL into recreational and other which is the potential threat. The up side of this is that the numbers of pilots impacted is likely to be a few 100, but if you have got an IR and spent £100k on an IFR aircraft and you get shafted by EASA you are not going to be happy, and I can see why.
From the VFR point of view we are likely to get a less expensive license with a sub JAA medical and comparatively low cost training. I understand the likely implementation is mid 09, so this is actually not very far away.
Rod1
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The up side of this is that the numbers of pilots impacted is likely to be a few 100, but if you have got an IR and spent £100k on an IFR aircraft and you get shafted by EASA you are not going to be happy, and I can see why.
And there are many more UK pilots who get the IMC Rating and fly IFR in Class G. The "sports" pilot can of course do the same but illegally while enroute, and they cannot fly instrument approaches short of declaring a Mayday first.
There are also other angles on this. I know that you and others think that GA can happily exist flying homebuilts/sports/whatever from grass strips etc, but the economic fact is that the GA infrastructure in the UK and Europe does need the training business for a PPL which leads to commercial flying.
If flight training was restricted to sports pilots (as usual I use the term loosely but you know what I mean) the numbers would be much lower and many GA airfields would close.
As it stands, even the busiest GA airfield, with a bunch of schools, cannot make ends meet on landing fees, fuel sales, and chocolate cake sales. If you take out the "PPL leading to commercial" route, there won't be much left. Look at the condition of most of them - Elstree is a pretty good example. Property development is the only way.
Of course the grass strip operators won't be concerned about any of this - why should they be?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“Of course the grass strip operators won't be concerned about any of this - why should they be?”
That is a little harsh, I fly from a strip and have an IMCR, and we both know of people with IR’S that do the same. The LAA have a significant number of members who have IMCR, and C of A aircraft so it is not just about home built aircraft. We all want to fly into as many places as possible, but all of GA is being forced out of regional airfields. The CAA are vastly increasing the charges to the smaller licensed GA fields which are all struggling. By comparison the strips and the micro training are going very very well. If the new rules allow training to be done on unlicensed strips then many small GA airfields will downgrade to unlicensed and probably see a big hike in numbers. Popem is a good example of an unlicensed “strip” which is a hive of activity compared with most licensed GA bases. I would rather see more busy strips than more deserted, crumbling licensed airfields.
I understand the problem, the issue is if you devolve control of “sport aviation” to groups like the LAA, both on the aircraft and the pilot licensing side then EASA can walk away. This could well create a very positive environment for sport aviation, but what happens to the tear above. Unfortunately the JAA PPL has been a disaster from everyone’s point of view. At least if we get the “light” end sorted part of the system will work and we may be able to do something about the tear up. I am not aware of any planes to touch the CPL/IR end of the spectrum, are you?
Another “hot potato” is the upgrade path. When I did my CAA PPL I never intended to fly commercially, but it was the only game in town. If the new license is the same as the NPPL but Europe wide I will switch straight across as it will give me what I need, hopefully at reduced medical costs. I, and the vast majority of the sport flyers would not care if there was no upgrade path, but some are very adamant that there must be. There is no right or wrong answer to this one.
Rod1
That is a little harsh, I fly from a strip and have an IMCR, and we both know of people with IR’S that do the same. The LAA have a significant number of members who have IMCR, and C of A aircraft so it is not just about home built aircraft. We all want to fly into as many places as possible, but all of GA is being forced out of regional airfields. The CAA are vastly increasing the charges to the smaller licensed GA fields which are all struggling. By comparison the strips and the micro training are going very very well. If the new rules allow training to be done on unlicensed strips then many small GA airfields will downgrade to unlicensed and probably see a big hike in numbers. Popem is a good example of an unlicensed “strip” which is a hive of activity compared with most licensed GA bases. I would rather see more busy strips than more deserted, crumbling licensed airfields.
I understand the problem, the issue is if you devolve control of “sport aviation” to groups like the LAA, both on the aircraft and the pilot licensing side then EASA can walk away. This could well create a very positive environment for sport aviation, but what happens to the tear above. Unfortunately the JAA PPL has been a disaster from everyone’s point of view. At least if we get the “light” end sorted part of the system will work and we may be able to do something about the tear up. I am not aware of any planes to touch the CPL/IR end of the spectrum, are you?
Another “hot potato” is the upgrade path. When I did my CAA PPL I never intended to fly commercially, but it was the only game in town. If the new license is the same as the NPPL but Europe wide I will switch straight across as it will give me what I need, hopefully at reduced medical costs. I, and the vast majority of the sport flyers would not care if there was no upgrade path, but some are very adamant that there must be. There is no right or wrong answer to this one.
Rod1
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The comment may be harsh to the individual but it reflects the reality of GA representation on committees tasked with drafting the regs. The delegate will vote as he is told by the organisation he represents; sod the rest.
Popham is an unusual case. It has an excellent catchment area in a high net worth part of the country. And PPL instruction is easily done from there by flying to a licensed airfield first, and pretending the lesson starts there.
Popham got set up c. 1978 but it is about the last significant GA base that got planning permission from scratch in the UK. I would estimate the budget just for the planning application at best part of £100,000 in today's money. Then you have to build the runway - a few hundred k minimum.
Personally I don't care for the commercial route at all, but I do think of other pilots and IMHO without the extra activity GA would shrink to the freehold farm strips.
If one could set up GA airfields like Popham in open countryside, the whole picture would change beyond recognition. And if GPS approaches were authorised without ATC that would complete the picture - IFR capability with near zero cost to the airfield (decent runway lights perhaps). But this is dreaming.
If I had my own strip I would be personally secure but would still say the same things because one has to see the whole picture.
It's really pretty easy to work out a route forward, but it immediately gets stuck in political dogma. It's going to take many years to change anything.
Popham is an unusual case. It has an excellent catchment area in a high net worth part of the country. And PPL instruction is easily done from there by flying to a licensed airfield first, and pretending the lesson starts there.
Popham got set up c. 1978 but it is about the last significant GA base that got planning permission from scratch in the UK. I would estimate the budget just for the planning application at best part of £100,000 in today's money. Then you have to build the runway - a few hundred k minimum.
Personally I don't care for the commercial route at all, but I do think of other pilots and IMHO without the extra activity GA would shrink to the freehold farm strips.
If one could set up GA airfields like Popham in open countryside, the whole picture would change beyond recognition. And if GPS approaches were authorised without ATC that would complete the picture - IFR capability with near zero cost to the airfield (decent runway lights perhaps). But this is dreaming.
If I had my own strip I would be personally secure but would still say the same things because one has to see the whole picture.
It's really pretty easy to work out a route forward, but it immediately gets stuck in political dogma. It's going to take many years to change anything.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with IO540 and the status quo is certainly not fine ... It's a bl@@dy mess!
The trouble is, what kind of mess will it be replaced with????
SS
The trouble is, what kind of mess will it be replaced with????
SS
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Summary please!
Just to clarify!
Can someone please explain in summary what are the plans, published or otherwise for the future of the "UK" NPPL? Is there aleady an equivalent "recreational flying" licence issued by other States in Europe? If that is the case, why cannot a "UK" NPPL fly an aircraft in one of those States. I'm not talking of actually flying accross international boundaries as PIC, but to hire and fly an aircraft once in the destination State under the same licence priviledges as here in UK?
Is there an equivalent to NPPL issued in the USA?
Just to clarify!
Can someone please explain in summary what are the plans, published or otherwise for the future of the "UK" NPPL? Is there aleady an equivalent "recreational flying" licence issued by other States in Europe? If that is the case, why cannot a "UK" NPPL fly an aircraft in one of those States. I'm not talking of actually flying accross international boundaries as PIC, but to hire and fly an aircraft once in the destination State under the same licence priviledges as here in UK?
Is there an equivalent to NPPL issued in the USA?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anybody knows what will happen under EASA because it is a more or less entirely political process.
The NPPL is not an ICAO compliant license and this is why it is valid only in the UK.
EASA looks likely to introduce a pan-european version and it is reasonable to assume that NPPL holders would be grandfathered into that, at the appropriate time.
Whether an NPPL is worth doing is a separate argument. IMHO it is a waste of time - unless you cannot get the CAA Class 2 medical. In terms of flying skills you need the same amount of training to reach a certain level, no matter what license you get, and if you go for the JAA PPL then you have a worldwide-usable piece of paper.
The NPPL is not an ICAO compliant license and this is why it is valid only in the UK.
EASA looks likely to introduce a pan-european version and it is reasonable to assume that NPPL holders would be grandfathered into that, at the appropriate time.
Whether an NPPL is worth doing is a separate argument. IMHO it is a waste of time - unless you cannot get the CAA Class 2 medical. In terms of flying skills you need the same amount of training to reach a certain level, no matter what license you get, and if you go for the JAA PPL then you have a worldwide-usable piece of paper.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should be in no doubt GA in the UK is a financially marginal occupation.
I doubt whether there are any FBOs which make a reasonable profit. The same is true of licensed airfields, unless they have a significant level of commercial operations.
Moreover, over the least few years FBOs have seen their costs increase at a record level starving them of the capital to reinvest in a fleet already far beyond its best. Moreover the current credit squeeze will make it even more difficult to fall back on lease and hire purchase funding in a market place that will be hardest hit by recession given that the majority of punters consider flying a luxury.
Strip flyers are far from immune. How many strips are there with fuel or maintenance? The majority of strip flyers rely on these services being available form near by licensed fields.
FBO of course provide the majority of the income to licensed operators. Their operations are sufficiently marginal already that if you remove a layer of their training it may well make the difference between them surviving or not.
Private ownership will continue to fall as relative costs increase and owners are not prepared to “invest” in old aircraft with their associated unreliability and high cost of maintenance. Buy a new basic Cessna and fly the aircraft yourself around 50 hours a year and the hourly cost will already be nearly £500.
Contrast the UK with France and a very different picture emerges. FBO and local airports receive significant subsidies from local government. They are considered to provide a focal point for the local community. Whilst costs are high the need to realise profits is not as pronounced as in the UK.
It is a gloomy picture. Sad to say I wonder how much GA will exist in this country in ten years time.
There will be a pronounced shift to ULs operating on MOGAS, without the same demanding service regimes as GA. In the mean time we have to work together to preserve the income FBOs so vitally need to maintain their businesses whether we ourselves operate form a grass strip, have a share in a group owned aircraft or rent because each is dependant on the other.
So the IMC rating, the NPPL, a relaxation of the overly regulated fly training market and of maintenace are all vital components to the survival of GA in the UK. Each is as important as the other.
I doubt whether there are any FBOs which make a reasonable profit. The same is true of licensed airfields, unless they have a significant level of commercial operations.
Moreover, over the least few years FBOs have seen their costs increase at a record level starving them of the capital to reinvest in a fleet already far beyond its best. Moreover the current credit squeeze will make it even more difficult to fall back on lease and hire purchase funding in a market place that will be hardest hit by recession given that the majority of punters consider flying a luxury.
Strip flyers are far from immune. How many strips are there with fuel or maintenance? The majority of strip flyers rely on these services being available form near by licensed fields.
FBO of course provide the majority of the income to licensed operators. Their operations are sufficiently marginal already that if you remove a layer of their training it may well make the difference between them surviving or not.
Private ownership will continue to fall as relative costs increase and owners are not prepared to “invest” in old aircraft with their associated unreliability and high cost of maintenance. Buy a new basic Cessna and fly the aircraft yourself around 50 hours a year and the hourly cost will already be nearly £500.
Contrast the UK with France and a very different picture emerges. FBO and local airports receive significant subsidies from local government. They are considered to provide a focal point for the local community. Whilst costs are high the need to realise profits is not as pronounced as in the UK.
It is a gloomy picture. Sad to say I wonder how much GA will exist in this country in ten years time.
There will be a pronounced shift to ULs operating on MOGAS, without the same demanding service regimes as GA. In the mean time we have to work together to preserve the income FBOs so vitally need to maintain their businesses whether we ourselves operate form a grass strip, have a share in a group owned aircraft or rent because each is dependant on the other.
So the IMC rating, the NPPL, a relaxation of the overly regulated fly training market and of maintenace are all vital components to the survival of GA in the UK. Each is as important as the other.
