PPL or NPPL: when do you have to decide?

[newfoundglory]

I want to know at what point on a flying course do you have to decide whether you want to do the PPL or the NPPL course?

It seems rather silly to me that you can solo with either a GP certificate vs class 2 medical, depending on what you choose.

Is it going to be easy to upgrade from a NPPL to a PPL with the EASA licenses?

[FleetFlyer]

I'm not sure about the upgrade path requirements but I do know you should think very carefully about what you intend to use your license for. Only go for the full PPL if you're adamant you will be going professional within a few years, or will be going for your IMC or IR rating.

I only have the NPPL and it does me just fine. I rarely find myself grounded through weather and have never been weathered in away from base. You can add ratings for tailwheel, retracts, VP prop, etc to the NPPL and fly anything up to a Rockwell Commander 114 on it so you're not exactly heavily restricted with an NPPL.

[Whopity]

You need to look at where the advantages of the NPPL lay. In the main it has allowed those who can't obtain a Class 2 medical to continue flying, in some cases it has reduced the cost of medicals for older pilots. It has also allowed easier conversions from gliders microlights etc. The original concept of the NPPL was to produce a cheaper PPL, achievable in less hours; but this has not proved to be a realistic concept for the majority of ab-initio students, who lets face it are relatively small in numbers. From an examiners perspective, the test standard is the same and achieving it will cost the same whichever route you take. Subsequent conversion will inevitably lead to increased cost and negate any small saving you might have made.

Realistically, if you are training on SSEA, you can leave the decision right up to the point of the qualifying cross country, for the NPPL you will have to take the NST first, for the JAA PPL you will not. Provided you have trained with a JAA qualified FI, conversion is relatively simple and amounts to little more than retaking the Skill Test; if you train with a non JAA FI (SLMG Microlights etc) conversion will cost much more as you have to fulfil the instructional time with a JAA FI.

There will also be a conversion to the EASA LAPL at some stage and will probably be essential.

[patowalker]

Only go for the full PPL if you're adamant you will be going professional within a few years, or will be going for your IMC or IR rating.

...or if you want to fly abroad.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by patowalker

...or if you want to fly abroad.

I thought that those problems were largely solved now, and it's mostly a case of faxing a few documents to the relevant authority?

G

[pulse1]

Personally, unless you have an age/medical issue, I would advise that you go for the PPL. The actual cost of getting it is no different to the NPPL. Once you have your PPL and have a better idea of what you want to do and, more importantly, will see exactly what kind of mess EASA has left us in, you can easily downgrade but will always have a full lifetime PPL which can be re-validated at any time with the equivalent of the Class 2 medical.

In other words, keep your options open as long as you can. In aviation, as in life, you never know what opportunities may come your way.

[Intercepted]

Only go for the full PPL if you're adamant you will be going professional within a few years, or will be going for your IMC or IR rating.

I have to disagree completely with this statement.

If you can get a class 2 medical, the full PPL is a no-brainer. The training and price difference is minimal and in reality you will usually end up spending the same time and money on both alternatives.

It's all about keeping your options open. When I trained for my PPL I didn't think I would need or want an IMCr, but UK weather had me to change my mind fairly quick.

I rarely find myself grounded through weather and have never been weathered in away from base.

I rarely found myself grounded pre-IMCr either, but the reason for this was that I didn't fly too far from base, or didn't fly at all, on a lot of days that I'm now happy to fly in.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Broadly, I think that you are right. If you are going "group A" from scratch and can get a JAR PPL, that has to be the preferred route and the cost penalty is small since you basically still have to learn the same stuff in the same aeroplane.

Reasons to go for NPPL? - well obviously medical, but also if you are an existing NPPL(M)/(SLMG) holder with any significant hours, then the SSEA conversion is much cheaper than the JAR/SEP course if you don't specifically want night/IMC capability.

If you hit a medical issue later, moving from JAR-FCL PPL(SEP) to NPPL(SSEA) is pretty trivial. Similarly, if you plan to fly SSEA/SEP and something else, then SSEA/SEP is usually the easiest baseline, then add differences training to the other aircraft classes.

G

[enq]

I'm intrigued by the references to the use of the NPPL abroad - does this mean it is accepted by the FAA for the issue of a based on licence?

[Jim59]

I want to know at what point on a flying course do you have to decide whether you want to do the PPL or the NPPL course?

Really before you start, otherwise you may find the hours you have flown with an instructor may not count towards the licence you finally decide on - an expensive mistake..

It seems rather silly to me that you can solo with either a GP certificate vs class 2 medical, depending on what you choose.

You are not alone in having that thought!

Is it going to be easy to upgrade from a NPPL to a PPL with the EASA licenses?

The CAA have published preliminary guidance. There will be two EASA licenses, one equivalent to our existing PPL needing a class 2 medical or higher and the other nearer to the NPPL with a GMP medical as an option in the UK.

• For holders of full JAA PPLs they will get a PPL.
• For holders of earlier UK PPLs they will need to demonstrate the use of radio aids and have >70 hours to get an EASA PPL.
• For NPPL simple single engined aircraft (SSEA) and SLMG ratings they are thinking Light Aircraft Pilots Licence LAPL - but have to do more work to see if further training/experience required (a conversion report to be approved by EASA to be prepared).
• For NPPL with microlights only they will be able to remain with the UK NPPL (M).

See The Expected Effects On The Licensing of Pilots in the UK dated May 2011. I'll let you search for it on the CAA's web site!
If you end up with an EASA LAPL it will be possible to upgrade to an EASA PPL. You will need the higher medical (Class 2) and almost certainly additional training. The final details will come out later this year (from EASA) after EU legislation is made.

[BEagle]

Firstly, there is no such thing as 'Group A' and hasn't been for over a decade. A regrettable change introduced at the time of JAR-FCL....

The NPPL (SSEA) allows someone to obtain a licence in less time than is required for a JAR-FCL PPL, but only if they meet the required standard. Someone with some glider time / daddy's aeroplane time etc. won't have to go through the entire JAR-FCL PPL syllabus, but will be able to take passengers flying with less expense as a result if they meet the requirements. Incidentally, €ASA has sneaked in a proposal which means that LAPL(A) holders won't be allowed to take passengers flying until they've gained an additional 10 hrs PIC since licence issue....

Most of industry considered the JAR-FCL PPL Skill Test to be far too daunting for the average bear. Also, to fly the Q X-C without having demonstrated adequate proficiency to an Examiner first seemed daft. So, for the NPPL, we decided on the NST, then Q X-C, then GST route which works very well.

Another point to remember in the 'NPPL or PPL' debate is that, if you wish to fly an aeroplane >2000 kg MTOW and/or with >4 PoB, then may not do so with a NPPL(SSEA).

There is an 'upgrade' route to the JAR-FCL PPL(A) from NPPL which I agreed with the CAA when the NPPL was first introduced - you can find it in LASORS. Someone from the CAA has clumsily added a clause stating that the additional dual training

must include instruction in those elements from the syllabus of flight instruction for the JAR-FCL PPL(A) not found in the syllabus of flight instruction for the NPPL(A) rated for SSEA.

Most people will already have plenty of dual time; this requirement is merely to ensure that you would be able to pass all elements of the JAR-FCL PPL(A) Skill Test. However, you can be credited with dual training carried out in, for example, the USA for a NPPL, but it won't be allowable towards a JAR-FCL PPL(A) unless it was conducted by a JAR-FCL FI. We decided not to be quite so bone-headed as JAR-FCL and to allow the UK FI to make a reasoned assessment; at the end of the day the Skill Test is the decider!

Similarly, if you've already flown a Q X-C for your NPPL which was of sufficient length to meet the JAR-FCL PPL(A) requirements, you won't need to fly another.

If money is tight (when isn't it...), you can start with an NPPL(SSEA), then upgrade once you've got the experience under your belt as you see fit, provided that you can hold a JAA Class II Medical Certificate.

Regrettably, much of the flexibility we have secured for the NPPL (with the CAA's approval) is likely to be swept away on a tide of bungling €urocracy, thanks to the Kölunatic nonsense of EASA part-FCL. But, unless the CAA change things, you will be able to continue to use a NPPL (SSEA) on both 'EASA' and 'non-EASA' aeroplanes until Apr 2015. The CAA will have to come up with a 'conversion report' to allow NPPL (SSEA) holders to convert to the LAPL(A) before then - and I've no idea how they'll tackle the concept of converting a NPPL(Microlight) to a LAPL(A). They dug the hole, they'll have to fill it!

I'm intrigued by the references to the use of the NPPL abroad - does this mean it is accepted by the FAA for the issue of a based on licence?

No. The only accepted use of the NPPL(SSEA) outside the UK is in the Isle of Man, Channel Islands (with an additional training proviso) and in France (if the 'ICAO equivalence' certificate is held, as well as an ICAO Class 2 Medical Certificate). The purpose of the 'ICAO equivalence certificate' - as agreed with the DGAC - is to prove that the pilot has the met the same training and experience requirements as a JAR-FCL PPL(A) holder, without the need to hold another licence. Whether any other nation would accept it is up to the holder to find out for him/herself beforehand - as is clearly stated in the certificate and its accompanying guidance notes.

[Whopity]

It seems rather silly to me that you can solo with either a GP certificate

That is the main point of the NPPL, the Medics have argued that holding a Class 2 medical guarantees nothing more, and there are no statistics to prove otherwise. Once qualified you may carry up to 3 passengers on the basis of the same certificate so going solo is of no consequence.

otherwise you may find the hours you have flown with an instructor may not count towards the licence you finally decide on

There are no non JAA qualified FIs teaching on SSEA in the UK.

[BEagle]

otherwise you may find the hours you have flown with an instructor may not count towards the licence you finally decide on

Possible, but not that likely. Because, as Whopity says:

There are no non JAA qualified FIs teaching on SSEA in the UK.

However, if someone started an FAA PPL and couldn't finish it, but had suitable evidence to show to the NPLG assessor, that training could be credited towards an NPPL - but probably not towards a JAR-FCL PPL(A) unless the CAA granted it at the time.

Thus a NPPL with only, say 10 hours of JAR-FCL FI dual instruction (the rest being FAA), would probably need more 'top up' JAR-FCL FI time towards a JAR-FCL PPL(A) than a NPPL with exclusively JAR-FCL FI dual time would.

[kevkdg]

There are plenty though teaching SLMG. So adding an SSEA rating to NPPL is simply differences training with an instructor. But then upgrading to JAR PPL would be difficult.... but who checks who your old FI was. Do the CAA ask for your log book/training record when you attempt to upgrade.

Once we move to EASA FCL, and then opt for the upgrade path, will the same requirement still be in place I wonder.

[Miroku]

I thought that those problems were largely solved now, and it's mostly a case of faxing a few documents to the relevant authority?

Genghis posted this in reply to someone who wanted to fly abroad on an NPPL. I understood that this was still not possible without a class 2 medical. Could someone confirm the present position please?

[BEagle]

Genghis was wrong. See NPPL Fees (ignore the meaningless short cut description, just click on it!).

No other countries currently accept the 'ICAO Equivalence Certificate'. An ICAO Class 2 Medical Ceritifcate is also required for France, not an NPPL Medical Declaration.

[Whopity]

but who checks who your old FI was

Its not that difficult to check. 25 hours dual on a SEP is required to get a JAA PPL. All instruction on such aircraft will be with an appropriately qualified instructor whereas hours on a Microlight or SLMG most likely won't be, so the aircraft type is the clue. It is the applicants responsibility to present the relevant evidence and is subject to a large fine if they deliberately falsify the evidence.

[Jim59]

otherwise you may find the hours you have flown with an instructor may not count towards the licence you finally decide on

There are no non JAA qualified FIs teaching on SSEA in the UK.

otherwise you may find the hours you have flown with an instructor may not count towards the licence you finally decide on

Possible, but not that likely. Because, as Whopity says:

There are no non JAA qualified FIs teaching on SSEA in the UK.

The original poster did not mention SSEA and the hours may not count if they start with say SLMG. I did not assume SSEA/SEP and should have made my comment clearer.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by BEagle

Genghis was wrong. See NPPL Fees (ignore the meaningless short cut description, just click on it!).

No other countries currently accept the 'ICAO Equivalence Certificate'. An ICAO Class 2 Medical Ceritifcate is also required for France, not an NPPL Medical Declaration.

I've been wrong before, doubtless I'll be wrong again!

G

[mrmum]

if someone started an FAA PPL and couldn't finish it, but had suitable evidence to show to the NPLG assessor, that training could be credited towards an NPPL - but probably not towards a JAR-FCL PPL(A) unless the CAA granted it at the time

LASORS C1.2 In circumstances where previous flying training towards an ICAO PPL(A) (non-JAR-FCL) has been conducted but no licence has been issued, PLD will consider the crediting of such flight time towards the issue of a JAR-FCL PPL(A). In all cases, applicants must apply in writing to PLD enclosing appropriate training records and flying logbooks for the PPL training received. PLD will review the training records to establish a course of training and advise the applicant accordingly

We had this exact situation a couple of years ago and all the US training was allowed, the person at the CAA we dealt with, said that while each case was assessed on it's individual circumstances, they were not aware of any request (with FAA training) that had not been approved.