UK NPPL to France

[bern444]

Wow - thanks for that very terse post.

Can I assume that this lady is the correct person to ask, and that if I email her with a scan of my licences, she will maybe let me in?

Thanks for the reply

B

[robinmincik]

Yvette is the right person to contact, although on last contact she implied that they think the European LPPL is imminent, so may advise you to wait.

[bern444]

Thanks again, you've saved me much effort. I'll give it a try and see what happens.

[mixture]

a couple of years ago to save money on yearly medicals

I don't see where .....

stupid bureaucracy has always angered me

comes into it.

Surely "a couple of years ago", you must have done your homework and found out about the limitations of an NPPL.

If you don't like the limitations of the NPPL, then the PPL remains available, and the "stupid bureaucracy" of not being able to fly abroad suddenly disappears.

Sorry, but I don't see why you should have the best of both worlds. The CAA introduced the NPPL to enable people like you to save a bit of cash here and there, and in return I think it's only fair that the license should have the restrictions it does. Otherwise keeping the PPL license scheme running would be pointless, because everyone would just get an NPPL to save a bit of cash.

[bern444]

Sorry, but I don't see why you should have the best of both worlds. The CAA introduced the NPPL to enable people like you to save a bit of cash here and there, and in return I think it's only fair that the license should have the restrictions it does. Otherwise keeping the PPL license scheme running would be pointless, because everyone would just get an NPPL to save a bit of cash.

What a strange way of looking at life. The only point of any regulation is safety - all else is just lining the pockets of bureaucrats. If you employ people to make rules - and I'm strongly in favour of good rules - they tend to make some rules, then, in a fairly stable world like aviation, they have nothing to do when they turn up at work each day. So in order to avoid being laid off, they make more rules. That's it - that's the way life works.

So, some sensible people saved a few of us from a bad regulation - or did they just get annoyed that someone else made a regulation that they weren't in control of? Either way, there's a NPPL, and they have them in other countries in the EU for the same reason - the JAA licence is over-regulation for the average private pilot. And surprise - EASA appears to agree, so there's almost certainly going to be a Europe-wide version of the NPPL very soon, and everyone who doesn't want to be a 747 captain will be able to have an NPPL, just to save a bit of cash. Hooray.

B

[DFC]

Sorry, but I don't see why you should have the best of both worlds. The CAA introduced the NPPL to enable people like you to save a bit of cash here and there, and in return I think it's only fair that the license should have the restrictions it does. Otherwise keeping the PPL license scheme running would be pointless, because everyone would just get an NPPL to save a bit of cash.

Flying outside the UK on an NPPL is not having the best of both worlds.

The NPPL does not have a limitation prohibiting flight outside the UK - the limitation is that permission must be obtained before flying in any airspace outside the UK.

The ICAO PPL does not have that requirement.

Please explain why microlight pilots should not be allowed to fly outside the UK if they obtain the required permissions / exemptions?

Regards,

DFC

[mixture]

The NPPL does not have a limitation prohibiting flight outside the UK - the limitation is that permission must be obtained before flying in any airspace outside the UK.

Indeed, hasty post, should have double checked ....

The ICAO PPL does not have that requirement.

Yes, that's the point I was trying to make .... either you save money, knowing full well that you're getting a restricted license, or you pay the difference in training costs and get an ICAO recognised JAA PPL.

Please explain why microlight pilots should not be allowed to fly outside the UK if they obtain the required permissions / exemptions?

I don't know enough about microlights to comment, however a quick perusal of the ANO would suggest you are mistaken re NPPL microlighters :

"he shall not fly :
(a) such a SSEA or a microlight aeroplane outside the United Kingdom except with the permission of the competent authority for the airspace in whch he flies"

If you're mad enough to want to cross the channel (or an other expanse of water) in your microlight, then good luck to you ....but if you take it accross the by other means, then it looks like there's not much stopping you except the slight planning required to write a nice letter to the local authorities prior to setting out, which in the scheme of planning for an average international flight, should not be much of a problem I would think...

[DFC]

mixture,

You missed my point.

The NPPL is a licence.

That licence has various restrictions placed on it.

Various ratings can be included in that licence of which 1 is SSEA.

Many pilots obtain their NNPL on an aircraft other than an SSEA and have no intention of flying an SSEA.

Should they have the option of staying in the UK or getting a JAA PPL in a C172 (which they don't want to fly)?

The territorial restriction on the licence simply provides for the fact that the licence is sub-ICAO and before flying outside the UK, the authorities of the airspace within which the pilot will fly must have the option of not permitting such flight.

Want to ensure that they can't say no then get an ICAO PPL and fly an aircraft with a C of A etc.

Willing to risk being restricted to the UK - then NPPL and non-certified aircraft.

If you want to argue the money side then it is comensation for the risk of being kept in the UK rather than actually being kept there.

Regards,

DFC

[mixture]

DFC,

Not entirely sure I know what you're trying to get at ?

My original question still stands :

If you want an NPPL holder to have the same rights as a JAA PPL holder, then what's the point of running the two tier system ?

AFAIK, the CAA introduced the NPPL for the average "weekend flyer" ... man/woman who wants to fly themselves and perhaps a couple of friends around the UK for pleasure. The CAA looked at the JAA PPL syllabus and said, "fine, we'll make it easier for you to get a license".

However to reduce the licensing cost, they've taken a scalpel to a few bits of the syllabus and introduced a few, very reasonable, restrictions.

I still don't see what the problem is !

And to the person who said the JAA PPL is over-regulated, I don't see where ?! Over-regulation comes with the commercial stuff ....

[homeguard]

NPPL

The NPPL came about because the CAA cocked it up in rushing into the JAA scheme of things without much thought to GA and private flying.

Having persuaded the Dept. of Transport to rewrite the ANO to comply with the JAA thing, they found themselves in a bit of a pickle. Just about all differences between NPPL and JAA PPL are phoney, deliberately designed to appear to be different. The NPPL was the CAA way of getting themselves off the hook by asking for yet another rewrite of the ANO. The most sensible thing of course is the NPPL medical which makes much more sense for the private pilot than a JAA medical without history, done by a stranger to you. Some value I believe will come from this innovation.

It is not surprising that the EASA committees are struggling to come up with a new name for the Private Pilot Licence. 'Leisure' pilot, 'Recreational' pilot and maybe yet another name is being concocted as we write, in fact we know it is!. It is all such nonsense and it is no wonder that the pragmatic french have no problem approving an NPPL to fly into France. Liberte', Egalite' et Fraternite', we could do with some that over here rather than resorting to the attacking of NPPLs as being cheapskates.

[DFC]

DFC,

Not entirely sure I know what you're trying to get at ?

My original question still stands :

If you want an NPPL holder to have the same rights as a JAA PPL holder, then what's the point of running the two tier system ?

Microlights are outside the JAA system

The NPPL is the only way for a microlight pilot to fly (unless they are round since before the UK stopped issuing national PPLs).

IS your complaint that NPPLs are not restricted to the UK or that the SSEA rating is available for the NPPL?

Perhaps you want a 3 tier system

JAA PPL

NPPL - microlights, SLMG - can ask for permission to fly outside the UK

xPPL - SSEA restricted to UK

Regards,

DFC

[bern444]

If you're mad enough to want to cross the channel (or an other expanse of water) in your microlight, then good luck to you ....

A holder of an NPPL(M) in a microlight can fly across the channel without special permission as there's a blanket agreement for microlights, but an NPPL(SEP) can't.

So take one TeamEurostar and register it as a microlight and get an NPPL(M) and you can go where you like. Buy the same TeamEurostar, register it as Class A and get an NPPL(SEP) and you can only fly in the UK. That is what I called further back up this thread "stupid bureauocracy". Just writing down annoys me. Roll on some common sense......

B

[Rans Flyer]

I've got an NPPL and my Jabiru was registered as an SP-450 (A - License).
I want to fly to France, so it's be re-registered as a microlight.
No change to the plane, same weight limits etc.
The only difference is that I can now fly to France and my landing fees have halved

ex Rans Flyer.
www.FlightForLife.co.uk

[mixture]

It is not surprising that the EASA committees are struggling to come up with a new name for the Private Pilot Licence

It's not just all in the name !

The PPL is 45 hours, the NPPL is 32 hours ..... do you honestly think people on the PPL course are throwing money down the drain for those extra 13 hours of flight time ?

There is a difference !

attacking of NPPLs as being cheapskates

Never said they were. I love flying, I'm all for more people learning to fly and catching the flying bug. I think it's a great thing that there is a cheaper option, but I don't see why NPPLs should expect the same rights and privileges as those who have invested the extra time and effort into a full PPL.

[moggiee]

Originally Posted by homeguard

we could do with some that over here rather than resorting to the attacking of NPPLs as being cheapskates.

It was the original poster who mentioned that he switched to an NPPL to save money.

Originally Posted by bern444

I switched to the NPPL a couple of years ago to save money on yearly medicals,

My point (and the same point is made by others) is that if the financial considerations were all that mattered, then the trade off is the restriction of privileges compared to a full PPL. Life's like that - swings and roundabouts - and where an NPPL holder can save 13 hours training towards licence issue and have lower recurrent costs, they have to accept that there are restrictions.

This is not attacking NPPL holders, especially as they knew the situation when they got into it. I'm not saying that they rules make sense, but those are the rules and no-one should be surprised that they find themselves restricted by their NPPL.

It's similar to getting an "automatic only" car licence - it takes less training, saves money and gives you an easier test. However, you can't drive a manual car until you pass a full test.

I have sympathy for someone who, for medical reasons, is unable to obtain a full PPL, although it could be argued that if it wasn't for the NPPL they would have nothing.

[homeguard]

Mixture & Moggiee

Explain the difference in the flight training for a NPPL and a JAA/EASA licence, that matters.

The mandatory training for the JAA is 35 hours, the other ten hours can be anything and include the Skill Test. The NPPL is 32 hours but dosn't include Radio Navigation, so what, Rad. Nav. wasn't required prior to JAA.

Other than a cursary look at Radio Nav, the sum of the tests JAA v NPPL are exactly the same. The written exams are exactly the same. The QXC is a tad longer for the JAA candidate but an extra few minutes enroute matters little. The NPPL is required only to have 4 hours solo nav (same as the old UK) but does the JAA extra hour total up, to mean much. The dual nav required is exactly the same for both JAA and NPPL.

By the way, why don't either of you consider yourself free men in a free country? Restrictions shouldn't be automatic based on the price you pay. A first class or second class seat. The idea might work for an airline or train journey to grab a few bob but should the same principles be applied to your freedom to hold a pilots licence. If you pass the same tests then you should have the same freedoms whatever the cost.

[mixture]

It's similar to getting an "automatic only" car licence - it takes less training, saves money and gives you an easier test. However, you can't drive a manual car until you pass a full test.

What an excellent comparison !!!!!

I have sympathy for someone who, for medical reasons, is unable to obtain a full PPL, although it could be argued that if it wasn't for the NPPL they would have nothing.

Indeed. I too have sympathy for those unable to get a class 2. But at the same time, I would argue that we should be careful in relaxing the medical requirements too much, afterall, it's not like you can stop by the side of the road if you're feeling a little ill.

[mixture]

Explain the difference in the flight training for a NPPL and a JAA/EASA licence, that matters.

I believe (don't quote me) .....

Less instrument time
Less cross-country navex time
Shorter qualifying cross country.

Probably more, but I don't have the time to look it up at the moment, it's unlikely that the 13 hours is just padding !

Restrictions shouldn't be automatic based on the price you pay. A first class or second class seat. The idea might work for an airline or train journey to grab a few bob but should the same principles be applied to your freedom to hold a pilots licence.

Going by this argument, you would probably say ... "I've learnt to fly, I've got a PPL, I can call myself a pilot .... so let me fly this Boeing and have the same rights and privileges as someone who spent a lot of money on CPL/IR/ME".

[homeguard]

The Difference

Mixture

I won't qoute you I promise. I teach both NPPL and JAA and i've been a Flight Examiner for 20 years. You appear to be making assumptions but are not asking questions while you admit you do not know.

The instrument training is the same for both JAA and NPPL. I explained the nav differences in my previous post. With the exeption of Radio Nav all other training is exactly the same. The same standards are met on test including the writtens.

The automatic v manual has no bearing at all and is a poor example. As already explained to you there are no material differences in the requirements of both.

The DVLA medical requirements are just as stringent as the JAA with regard to many deseases such as Epilepsy, Diabetes, etc and of course the many heart conditions. However even on all of those the NPPL's own Doctor is able to make a real assessment from the knowledge of the patients full medical records. The JAA medical standards are a rigid set of rules and you fall on the good side or the bad. When will the doctor produce the highest level of safety? Is it during normal surgery hours assessing a NPPL applicant (his patient) with reference to the full medical records or when he is an AME later that evening doing a JAA medical on a stranger without any records at all.

[S205-18F]

I must say that although the hours are less I dont know anyone who has completed the NPPL in the minimum 32 hours!! Granted that the instrument training and the Xcountry requirement is less, I did a Xcountry well in excess of the required even for the PPl and did a lot more instrument training so I dont think that can be an issue!
Now the point is that if you chose an NPPL then you know the restrictions and you must live with them! I for one cant see the point in going for a PPL as I can do all I want with the NPPL!