convert NPPL to JAA PPL ???

[C42]

The section was completed, i have done many cross-countrys as per,
It does not specify on this form that it has to be a supervised cross-country, it simply askes the date and the hours!

what was missing was the sign off page which is not mentioned in the form you pasted.

i did read on LASORS somewhere though that it had to be as per fcl 1.25 or something, but that is not what it says on that form

Dave

[BEagle]

Section 12 clearly states that you must submit your 'qualifying cross country certificate'. Did the school not draw your attention to that requirement?

[kevwal]

Hi Beagle / All

A really useful post quoting LASORS, thank you for that. May I ask a couple of questions to how that might apply to my self?

I have done an NPPL M, and recently converted that to a NPPL SSEA, and at some point in the future will look to convert that to a JAR FCL PPL, and I want to make sure any training I do between now and then will count. What if any 'gotchas' are there I need to be aware of?

As I understand it I will need:

A) 45 hours flight time, including supervised x-country and 20 hours dual with JAR Instructor.

Are there any requirements for that to be on CofA aircraft rather than Permit Aircraft? IE I will do a tail wheel conversion at some point, but that might be on a permit aircraft.

Any time boxing of those hours that I need to be aware of, ie could they be over 10 years?

B) pass the JAR-FCL PPL(A) Theoretical Exams in all subjects.

I have done the NPPL M exams, and the Aircraft (General) & Principles of Flight exam in my SSEA conversion. I thought I would need to do all exams except the NPPL SSEA one. However your statement:

so if you wish to move from NPPL(Microlight) to NPPL (SSEA) and thence to JAR-FCL PPL(A), you will need to pass the Flight Performance & Planning and Communications (PPL) exams

suggests I only need to do the two?

However many exams I need to do I appreciate that I need to do them within 18 months.

Thanks in advance
Kevin

[BEagle]

Are there any requirements for that to be on CofA aircraft rather than Permit Aircraft? IE I will do a tail wheel conversion at some point, but that might be on a permit aircraft.

Under certain circumstances, flight time in part-owned 'Permit Aircraft' is allowable for training - see ORS 4 No. 802 and 803. However, such training time cannot be used towards the initial issue of a pilot licence.

I don't see why PIC time in Permit Aircraft (except, unfortunately, Microlights) shouldn't count towards the total flight time requirement for the JAR-FCL PPL(A). I'll check with the CAA.

I'm not 100% sure about the exams - I was assured by the BMAA that the Microlight exams were 'the same' as the SLMG/SSEA examinations for everything except Aircraft (General). The NPPL P&SC looked purely at NPPL (Microlight) to NPPL (SSEA) conversion, hence secured that agreement with the CAA.

However, the Microlight exams may, in fact, be better described as being 'equivalent' to the SSEA/SLMG exams rather actually than being 'the same', strictly speaking. Check with your flying school. If that is the case, then expect to have to pass all the JAR-FCL PPL(A) examinations for your JAR-FCL PPL(A).

[BEagle]

I don't see why PIC time in Permit Aircraft (except, unfortunately, Microlights) shouldn't count towards the total flight time requirement for the JAR-FCL PPL(A). I'll check with the CAA.

The CAA have advised that such PIC time in Permit to Fly aircraft flown by the holder of a valid licence will be allowable towards the JAR-FCL experience requirements.

[kevwal]

Thanks Beagle. Any formal reference for that statement, or a name?

Thanks
Kev

[BEagle]

Yes, Cliff Whittaker, Head of Licensing and Training Policy.

[The Grim EPR]

Can you hold an NPPL concurrently with a PPL (keep them both valid over a period of years)?

The scenario being an NPPL holder upgrades to PPL due to medical improvement, but keeps the NPPL in reserve in case of relapse.

Any advice much appreciated.

[BEagle]

Yes.










.

[ifitaintboeing]

Remunerated training towards an initial licence in a LAA Permit to Fly aircraft is permissible as per Technical Leaflet 2.09

http://www.lightaircraftassociation...._Issue%204.pdf

ifitaint...

[BEagle]

That reference is out of date. See ORS4 No. 802 and 803 which give the current legal position:

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_802.pdf

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_803.pdf

A Permit-to-Fly aircraft may not be used for remunerated flight training towards intial licence issue:

Flying training excludes instruction in flying given for the purpose of becoming qualified for the grant of a pilot’s licence or the inclusion or variation of any rating or qualification in a pilot’s licence.

[ifitaintboeing]

BEagle,

You are wrong - the LAA document is up to date. A Permit to Fly aircraft MAY be used for training towards an initial licence or rating. If you wish to contact me directly, I can point you to the relevant legislation in the Air Navigation Order. I had a long meeting with the CAA Head of Policy at LAA HQ last year to clear up confusion over the matter, which led to AIC W071/2009 being issued.

ORS4 802 and 803 were issued to address the long standing problem of [remunerated] continuation training [and testing] in group owned Permit to Fly aircraft and microlights. The quote you have included only refers to that particular exemption.

ifitaint...

[BEagle]

You are correct, I concede. AIC W071/2009 does indeed state that the sole owner of an aeroplane operated on a Permit to Fly may receive remunerated flight training towards a licence, where the sole remuneration is for the provision of the pilot.

But how did the CAA exempt themselves from JAR-FCL 1.125 (b)?:

(b) Flight instruction. An applicant for a PPL(A) shall have completed on aeroplanes, having a certificate of airworthiness issued or accepted by a JAA Member State,......

It would make a lot of sense if the whole topic was re-written in plain English rather than the tortuous Sir Humphrey Appleby language of the AICs and ORS - and without all the confusing cross-references.

[ifitaintboeing]

It would make a lot of sense if the whole topic was re-written in plain English rather than the tortuous Sir Humphrey Appleby language of the AICs and ORS - and without all the confusing cross-references.

Exactly what I thought when I read through the "Draft AIC covering the re-issue of"....which I received the other day ;-)

Comments to follow via e-mail.

ATB, ifitaint..