PPL Annual Hours
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Age: 36
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPL Annual Hours
I have a few questions about how to keep my UK PPL current. I've lloked through the relevant section of the Lasors and couldn't find what i need.
1) Am i right in thinking that for the first year of having your licence you do not have to do the annual amount of hours to keep your licence current????
2) What is the amount of hours that you have to complete each year to stay valid????
Many Thanks.
1) Am i right in thinking that for the first year of having your licence you do not have to do the annual amount of hours to keep your licence current????
2) What is the amount of hours that you have to complete each year to stay valid????
Many Thanks.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming you are talking about a PPL and not an NPPL, I'm surprised your instructor hasn't made this clear.
Yes you are correct in thinking that in the first year after issue there is no requirement to fly. For the second year you need either
12 hours total (min 6 P1 ) including a minimum 1 hour flight with an instructor
or
no flying and a Skills test
But there is a difference in flying to the minimum required and being current and (hopefully) safe
At your stage, get the hours in irrespective of what LASORS says.
Yes you are correct in thinking that in the first year after issue there is no requirement to fly. For the second year you need either
12 hours total (min 6 P1 ) including a minimum 1 hour flight with an instructor
or
no flying and a Skills test
But there is a difference in flying to the minimum required and being current and (hopefully) safe
At your stage, get the hours in irrespective of what LASORS says.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My idea exactly. If you start flying the hours just to stay legally current, you're just throwing good money after bad. If you just for the sheer love of it make the hours without thinking about staying legally current, you'll have a much more enjoyable hobby.
And a Licence Proficiency Check at the end of the two-year period can normally be completed in less than an hour anyway, while the dual hour with an instructor is exactly that - a minimum of one hour. So doing an LPC may well be cheaper than doing your one-hour lesson for your revalidation by experience.
And a Licence Proficiency Check at the end of the two-year period can normally be completed in less than an hour anyway, while the dual hour with an instructor is exactly that - a minimum of one hour. So doing an LPC may well be cheaper than doing your one-hour lesson for your revalidation by experience.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 62
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just going from memory so I could be wrong - 12 hours required in the second year of license issue, including the requirement to perform 3 take offs and landings in any 90 day period before you can carry passengers.
Whilst these minimums will satisfy the authorities, individual clubs will often have their own more stringent requirements. So 12 hours may keep you current but does it keep you proficient?
Whilst these minimums will satisfy the authorities, individual clubs will often have their own more stringent requirements. So 12 hours may keep you current but does it keep you proficient?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Age: 36
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks a lot for your answers.
I did my skills test last December and just wanted to clarify the hours requirement. I'm starting my commercial training very soon so just wanted to make sure that my ppl didn't lapse before i started the training. Thanks again!!
I did my skills test last December and just wanted to clarify the hours requirement. I'm starting my commercial training very soon so just wanted to make sure that my ppl didn't lapse before i started the training. Thanks again!!
You worry me slightly ..
Ide1988
If you did you Skills test in December, I would have thought you'd have been flying your socks off in the last 11 months to reach the min hours to start your CPL (its something like 150 hours).
To be worried that your PPL will lapse, sounds like you're not flying very much.
And you need to brush up on your research skills. You should know the "12 hours in 2 year" rule from your Air Law, but with a simple google search I found the answer in seconds.
If you did you Skills test in December, I would have thought you'd have been flying your socks off in the last 11 months to reach the min hours to start your CPL (its something like 150 hours).
To be worried that your PPL will lapse, sounds like you're not flying very much.
And you need to brush up on your research skills. You should know the "12 hours in 2 year" rule from your Air Law, but with a simple google search I found the answer in seconds.
I get a bit annoyed at the perpetual "if you have to carefully count the hours to make it up to 12 in the second year, you're a) probably not safe & b) wasting money" argument, and find it highly specious.
Like a great many PPLs, my job is Monday to Friday, with little opportunity to fly during the week, so my windows for flying are restricted. I also have a family. Money is not unlimited. I have other interests. And probably most importantly, the weather in the UK has been shockingly bad since I got my PPL three years ago. The result of all this is that my planned flying has necessarily been severely limited. It's not how I intended it, but there you are. When I do fly, I do not believe that I am any more unsafe than most other PPLs. In fact, complacency is the last thing I think anyone could accuse me of.
Furthermore, I would hazard a guess that my situation is probably far from unique for the majority of PPLs.
So please, enough of this fallacy that you should be flying at the drop of a hat, piling up the hours, and making the 12 required every second year a straighforward task. It just ain't like that in real life.
Like a great many PPLs, my job is Monday to Friday, with little opportunity to fly during the week, so my windows for flying are restricted. I also have a family. Money is not unlimited. I have other interests. And probably most importantly, the weather in the UK has been shockingly bad since I got my PPL three years ago. The result of all this is that my planned flying has necessarily been severely limited. It's not how I intended it, but there you are. When I do fly, I do not believe that I am any more unsafe than most other PPLs. In fact, complacency is the last thing I think anyone could accuse me of.
Furthermore, I would hazard a guess that my situation is probably far from unique for the majority of PPLs.
So please, enough of this fallacy that you should be flying at the drop of a hat, piling up the hours, and making the 12 required every second year a straighforward task. It just ain't like that in real life.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hamish
I take your point, but
One of my group flew once a month only because of similar issues, and never really made the best of his membership. I watched as his airmanship fell through the floor and he became positively dangerous.
He left the group because he couldn't afford to be a member, even though it cost him less than flying club rates.
I now find he is flying at a local club, once a month for 1/2 hour or so, paying for his flying on a credit card.
Apart from the problem of repaying the card payments, he just has time to leave the circuit, bang in a few landings. In the past year he has not landed away or even had to change radio frequencies.
Yes, he is still getting airborne, but I'd contend he'd be better off giving up for a time until he can afford to do it properly and, yes, safely
I take your point, but
One of my group flew once a month only because of similar issues, and never really made the best of his membership. I watched as his airmanship fell through the floor and he became positively dangerous.
He left the group because he couldn't afford to be a member, even though it cost him less than flying club rates.
I now find he is flying at a local club, once a month for 1/2 hour or so, paying for his flying on a credit card.
Apart from the problem of repaying the card payments, he just has time to leave the circuit, bang in a few landings. In the past year he has not landed away or even had to change radio frequencies.
Yes, he is still getting airborne, but I'd contend he'd be better off giving up for a time until he can afford to do it properly and, yes, safely
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hate to join in Hamish - but why are you bothering to keep the licence if you only put in 12 hours in 2 years? It cannot be worth the trouble.
IIRC you can let the whole thing lapse for up to 5 years and re-validate with a flight test so why waste a couple of days a year going around the circuit?
It has to be said that with low total hours, flying infrequently means you are not learning much, you are simply trying to catch up with where you were........
IIRC you can let the whole thing lapse for up to 5 years and re-validate with a flight test so why waste a couple of days a year going around the circuit?
It has to be said that with low total hours, flying infrequently means you are not learning much, you are simply trying to catch up with where you were........
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
because he is doing the usual modular commercial tight on money gig.
To be able to start your ATPL ground studies you need a PPL.
So you do it. (45hours total)
You then get the box of books through and start studying. 6 to 12 months later you sit the exams then head off to where ever is cheaper and burn 40-50 hours.
You get the next box of books through and repeat the above apart from you don't go off hour building until you have got all 14 passes. When you have decided when you are going to train you burn the rest of the hours off a couple of weeks before you start with 150 hours on the dot.
It really is a very common way of doing it for wannabies myself included. You only realise that you have learn't jack **** in 145 hours about flying when you do your instructors course.
To be able to start your ATPL ground studies you need a PPL.
So you do it. (45hours total)
You then get the box of books through and start studying. 6 to 12 months later you sit the exams then head off to where ever is cheaper and burn 40-50 hours.
You get the next box of books through and repeat the above apart from you don't go off hour building until you have got all 14 passes. When you have decided when you are going to train you burn the rest of the hours off a couple of weeks before you start with 150 hours on the dot.
It really is a very common way of doing it for wannabies myself included. You only realise that you have learn't jack **** in 145 hours about flying when you do your instructors course.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And just to be a little controversial - having learnt a small amount about flying an aircraft, but having been nowhere and done nothing, they then start to teach..................
It is a poor way to put any level of expertise into PPLs. The least experienced population of CPLs 'teach'.
You almost could n't make it up.......
It is a poor way to put any level of expertise into PPLs. The least experienced population of CPLs 'teach'.
You almost could n't make it up.......
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Usual holier than thou rantings from those who have the money and inclination to spend every available minute in the air, whist pontificating about how unsafe all the others are . Hamish and the half hour per month flier have every right to pursue their hobby within the legal constraints put upon them, and God knows there are enough of those doing their best to obliterate GA from the face of the earth . If the club don't consider the half hour flier to be safe they can stop him from going or check him out, and if he gets his fun from local bimbles then good luck to him.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree (if he does not carry passengers).
There is a very slight problem however.
He can carry passengers.
There is one other slight problem.
They expect he knows what he is doing.
Which, on a flight every few month, he might do. Or he might not.
There is a very slight problem however.
He can carry passengers.
There is one other slight problem.
They expect he knows what he is doing.
Which, on a flight every few month, he might do. Or he might not.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: under papa 600
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting arguement and I guess your take on it depends on which side of the dividing line you fall.
I think a large number of PPL's are in the position of Hamish. If you consider that this year 30-40% of planned sorties out of ABZ have been cancelled due WX, I also have a job that largely eliminates midweek flying and then there are 11 of us scrambling for bookings of the group aircraft at weekends you can see how accumulating hours starts to become an issue.
The question is - does that make the lower hours pilots less safe? .... my question is why would it?
If anything I find that preparation and planning is more thorough and attention to detail meticulous if you have not flown for a while. Do a walk around with someone who has not flown for 6 weeks and someone who flies twice per week and you will see what I mean. In fact I would even say there is as much chance that complacency and over confidence in a frequent flier could compromise safety.
I think a large number of PPL's are in the position of Hamish. If you consider that this year 30-40% of planned sorties out of ABZ have been cancelled due WX, I also have a job that largely eliminates midweek flying and then there are 11 of us scrambling for bookings of the group aircraft at weekends you can see how accumulating hours starts to become an issue.
The question is - does that make the lower hours pilots less safe? .... my question is why would it?
If anything I find that preparation and planning is more thorough and attention to detail meticulous if you have not flown for a while. Do a walk around with someone who has not flown for 6 weeks and someone who flies twice per week and you will see what I mean. In fact I would even say there is as much chance that complacency and over confidence in a frequent flier could compromise safety.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that to hang in something that costs money one needs to have a decent incentive.
One incentive is the fun of flying.
Another one is "required currency".
The rather strange JAA rule that no hours need be flown in the first of the two years is claimed to be responsible for a lot of people giving up. They get their PPL, have little money left, and once they find out they don't need to fly for 23 months, they decide to "take a bit of time off". After a year has gone by, they have lost interest.
Nothing wrong with that - it's their money - but it is a shame for all involved. The individuals lost maybe £10k and a year's hassle in getting the PPL, but the whole PPL scene suffers because nearly everybody leaves nearly right away, leaving more or less just the same old crowd hanging in there. The training business (which de facto owns the primary "scene" at most GA airfields) doesn't exactly discourage this though, by not wanting ex customers around.
One incentive is the fun of flying.
Another one is "required currency".
The rather strange JAA rule that no hours need be flown in the first of the two years is claimed to be responsible for a lot of people giving up. They get their PPL, have little money left, and once they find out they don't need to fly for 23 months, they decide to "take a bit of time off". After a year has gone by, they have lost interest.
Nothing wrong with that - it's their money - but it is a shame for all involved. The individuals lost maybe £10k and a year's hassle in getting the PPL, but the whole PPL scene suffers because nearly everybody leaves nearly right away, leaving more or less just the same old crowd hanging in there. The training business (which de facto owns the primary "scene" at most GA airfields) doesn't exactly discourage this though, by not wanting ex customers around.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are lower hours pilots less safe?
It must all depend. But the whole aviation industry values experience. It is seen as a major input into pilots having the 'developed' values which safe transport needs.
If you are barely going to leave the circuit and always operate in a club environment then a low hours pilot is 'adequately' safe. Somewhat better than when he was soloing under tuition but how much?
I have the same argument with collegaues at work - they all claim to be golfers - they are nearly universally crap - they have high handicaps and getting the little ball into the little hole is difficult for them. Why? because they do not practice very much and do not have much experience to sustain their judgement.
Noe a lot of flying related skills are somewhat cerebal, so I'm more than prepared to admit that thinking about these things will help. But in pure dealing with issues, making decisions and aircraft handling, pilots who do not fly regularly cannot have the same skill levels.
It must all depend. But the whole aviation industry values experience. It is seen as a major input into pilots having the 'developed' values which safe transport needs.
If you are barely going to leave the circuit and always operate in a club environment then a low hours pilot is 'adequately' safe. Somewhat better than when he was soloing under tuition but how much?
I have the same argument with collegaues at work - they all claim to be golfers - they are nearly universally crap - they have high handicaps and getting the little ball into the little hole is difficult for them. Why? because they do not practice very much and do not have much experience to sustain their judgement.
Noe a lot of flying related skills are somewhat cerebal, so I'm more than prepared to admit that thinking about these things will help. But in pure dealing with issues, making decisions and aircraft handling, pilots who do not fly regularly cannot have the same skill levels.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree. But they do't need higher skill levels.
I have friends who fly infrequently who simply wouldn't consider flying in weather/wind conditions that don't trouble me. And when they do fly, they plan it very carefully, even though it may only be a simple flight in good weather from one airfield to another 50 miles away.
I have friends who fly infrequently who simply wouldn't consider flying in weather/wind conditions that don't trouble me. And when they do fly, they plan it very carefully, even though it may only be a simple flight in good weather from one airfield to another 50 miles away.
Unfortunately I do know others who fly on the edge of safety. In order to avoid supervision by instructors fly once a month and venture out in cr*p weather on the limit of their ability.
Similarly, I know of experienced pilots who do the same.
My own view is that if you just bang in a couple of circuits once a month and you get caught out by unexpected circumstances, you have less in your armoury to help you get safely back.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Timbuktoo
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WR
I agree. But they do't need higher skill levels.
a) complacency, I agree the more experienced may well suffer more from it.
b) actual flying ability, now with this I think we all agree that the more hours flown will generally result in better skill levels, albeit that they may come with increased complacency.
IMHO the issue here is not whether the pilot flying minimum hours to keep the licence develops skills, or not, it's a case of whether the skills diminish to an unsafe level. I acknowledge this is a generalisation, however in the context of the thread not many fresh ppls' stopping flying after the skills test are going to retain the necessary skills levels on minimum hours.
If, on the other hand someone with 10 000 hrs drops to minimum it is likely they will retain a more than adequate level of skill (assuming they had it initially).
I certainly wasn't arguing that minimum legal hours is the same as flying hundreds of hours. What I was simply pointing out is that even doing the minimum is, for various reasons, not quite as straightforward as it seems.
If the minimum legal requirement is all I can achieve for the time being, then so be it. I'll do what I need to do to maintain my licence. However, at some point in the future, I hope I'll be able to do an IMC rating, have more money and time, and do those big trips (South of Spain, round Britain, Italy) which I dream about.
But right now, getting airborne is not easy. I've booked my club's plane for Saturday. Perhaps a chance for a first visit to Biggin Hill - but the weather does not look like it's going to be sufficiently good (plus ca change!). I suspect that I'll be watching the rugby on telly instead of flying this weekend. Again.
If the minimum legal requirement is all I can achieve for the time being, then so be it. I'll do what I need to do to maintain my licence. However, at some point in the future, I hope I'll be able to do an IMC rating, have more money and time, and do those big trips (South of Spain, round Britain, Italy) which I dream about.
But right now, getting airborne is not easy. I've booked my club's plane for Saturday. Perhaps a chance for a first visit to Biggin Hill - but the weather does not look like it's going to be sufficiently good (plus ca change!). I suspect that I'll be watching the rugby on telly instead of flying this weekend. Again.