Which licence

[chipsto]

It's been a while since the last time I properly looked into pursuing a private licence, and things seem to have become quite a lot more confusing. So I was looking for a little help.

It's probably best if I describe the type of flying I want to do, then perhaps some of you could make some suggestions as to which licences I should be looking at?

My end goal at the moment is to own a small 2 seater capable of having floats fitted. It could be a 3 axis microlight or a similar plane that is not classed as a microlight. It would also be useful to be able to fly a 4 seater when the need arose. I'm not sure I need to be able to fly in other countries, I just really want to fly in the highlands of Scotland.

I'd rather not have to maintain a full PPL, so I'm assuming an NPPL or LAPL are the licences I should be looking into? Can they both have a float rating added?

[BEagle]

At the moment, the LAPL does not include floatplane operation, but that is high on the list for change; IAOPA has just pressed EASA about this (again) as the working group hadn't yet come up with any proposal. It will now be dealt with by another rule making task force.

LAPL floatplane operation is also a strong wish from certain Nordic countries, so we will continue to nudge EASA to come up with a solution.

The UK CAA has amended the regulations, so that any licence with single engine piston privileges may be used to fly microlight aeroplanes, provided that the pilot has received the relevant differences training

The NPPL can include floatplane operation for both microlight and SSEA aeroplanes, but it may not be used to fly 'EASA' aircraft after Apr 2018. To fly both SSEA and Microlight aeroplanes requires separate class ratings, but hours on either type may count towards revalidation of both ratings.

[Mach Jump]

It would also be useful to be able to fly a 4 seater when the need arose.

As most 4 seaters are EASA aircraft, then a LAPL is the one to go for.

This will also have the advantage of being accepted all over Europe, should you want to go outside the UK.



MJ

Ps. BEagle beat me to it, but the LAPL should soon have the facility to add seaplane privileges, so this will probably be in place by the time you get your Licence.

[chipsto]

Thanks chaps.

Would I be able to fly something like a Kitfox or Rans on an LAPL? What would be the best route to being able to fly something like that in the UK?

[Whopity]

In terms of the cost of getting it, I doubt that a LAPL has any advantage over a PPL. In terms of what you can do once you have obtained it, then the PPL offers more possibilities and you will not incur the additional cost of having to upgrade from one to the other. A microlight licence will be cheaper than an EASA PPL but it will not cover all the things you mention and some of the conversion routes will close meaning you could finish up paying a lot more.

[xrayalpha]

Hi,

Your choices for aircraft are:

A) Microlights B) Kit/plans built light aircraft (ie Light Aircraft Association - LAA - types) or C) Factory-built light aircraft ie Cessnas, Pipers Katanas, Robins etc.

Your licences are:

a) Microlight (NPPL M) b) Light Aircraft (NPPL SSEA) - from B and C above, until April 2015, and after April 2017 only from B c) Light aircraft (LAPL) - covers B & C, but only in Europe and d) EASA SEP - covers A,B &C

As has been mentioned:

if you don't have a Microlight licence you may need differences training to fly a microlight.

if you want to fly a four-seater, you need a licence other than an NPPL (M).

while there is a four-seat Jabiru from B above, all the other four-seaters are in category C. So, in general, to fly a four-seater after April 2017 you will need a LAPL or EASA SEP.

if you want to hire an aircraft, it must be factory-built, so some in A (some microlights are factory-built) and those in C. So to hire a four-seater you are looking a licence for C, which will be, after April 2017, LAPL and EASA SEP

Now we get on to floats!

There are no airworthy microlights approved for floats at the moment. Of some old types that flew, MWs and Eagles, I think there are none left.

There was a light aircraft Kitfox on floats, so a B aircraft. Based on that, it might be possible to get a microlight Kitfox approved, but welcome to the world of aviation paperwork!

There is a Cub on floats (don't know if it an LAA-type or a factory-built C of A type) and, of course, G-DRAM - a Cessna.

We have a chap here trying to get a seaplane rating on a NPPL (M). He has passed the written seamanship exam, but is no in a Catch 22 with the CAA: there are no microlight seaplanes and no microlight seaplane instructors. So he cannot get a rating!!!

My advice?

If you really want to fly a three-axis aircraft on floats:

Learn to fly a C42 Ikarus microlight. then spend £1500 at Bournemouth to add a SSEA rating to your NPPL and also get a LAPL.

Then do a floatplane rating on your NPPL (SSEA). By then, there may be a LAPL (floats).

If not, your LAPL is valid for life anyway and you keep flying on the NPPL.

In the meantime, to fly a float equipped aircraft you can buy a Kitfox, equip it with floats and use your NPPL (SSEA) to fly it. Since it is a LAA aircraft, your NPPL will keep being valid after April 2017.

Should you win the lottery and be able to buy a Cessna on floats, then you can use the LAPL - hopefully!

With the NPPL, you have a simple medical. With a LAPL a slightly more complex process and with a EASA SEP you have a Class Two aviation medical.

Finally, out-of-the-box? Get a US licence and fly a N-reg floatplane?

[chipsto]

Xrayalpha, that was extremely helpful, thank you very much.

So am I right in thinking that I can get an NPPL up until 2017, after which I can keep it AND add an LAPL?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Should you win the lottery and be able to buy a Cessna on floats...

Nah, you want one of these if you've got a lottery win to pay for it


<===

[Whopity]

Finally, out-of-the-box? Get a US licence and fly a N-reg floatplane?

Not a lot of use!

I just really want to fly in the highlands of Scotland.

After April 2016 you will need an EASA licence as well.

[xrayalpha]

Hi Whopity,

Don't understand the EASA licence to fly in the Highlands after 2016?

Care to explain?

[airpolice]

Whopity, I think that you mean, in order to fly some types of aircraft in the Highlands, if the rules don't change again, which they might.

[xrayalpha]

Airpolice,

Still confused!

After next Easter, can I still fly my microlight in the Highlands - yes, I think.

Can I still fly a light aircraft in the Highlands - yes, I think.

Will I have greater freedom to fly in the Highlands - yes, thanks to the changes to the restricted areas, I think.

There have been a few changes to Highlands airspace in the last few months - Class E and the HRA come to mind. Both were a bit of a surprise!

Hence me - being just south of there - a little worried about future changes that I know nothing of!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Originally Posted by chipsto

It's been a while since the last time I properly looked into pursuing a private licence, and things seem to have become quite a lot more confusing. So I was looking for a little help.

It's probably best if I describe the type of flying I want to do, then perhaps some of you could make some suggestions as to which licences I should be looking at?

My end goal at the moment is to own a small 2 seater capable of having floats fitted.

The number of aircraft you can do that to easily is small - on the whole however I'd go with microlights, because almost certainly the BMAA will be the most user-friendly organisation to get a mod like that through.

DO NOT underestimate the very considerable cost and complexity of getting a floatplane mod approved through any organisation however.

It could be a 3 axis microlight or a similar plane that is not classed as a microlight.

This is a theoretical possibility for many 3-axis microlights, and many light aeroplanes. Unless you can trace an existing approved mod, stick to Permit-to-Fly aeroplanes, as either BMAA or LAA will be several times easier to get these mods through than EASA.

It would also be useful to be able to fly a 4 seater when the need arose.

Easiest to have a light aircraft licence + microlight differences then.

I'm not sure I need to be able to fly in other countries, I just really want to fly in the highlands of Scotland.

NPPL is cheapest to get in theory, and is fine within the UK. If not, starting from scratch, you may as well just go for a full EASA PPL, which you can add more ratings onto and in reality - the hours to learn to fly are the hours to learn to fly, the class of licence is pretty much irrelevant.

I'd rather not have to maintain a full PPL, so I'm assuming an NPPL or LAPL are the licences I should be looking into? Can they both have a float rating added?

There's no significant difference in the cost of maintaining an EASA PPL, NPPL or LAPL. If you are going with single engine light aircraft, they'll all cost about the same to obtain as well.

The cost of getting an NPPL(M) will be cheaper.

G

[airpolice]

Genghis, I can honestly say that I am stunned to be expressing an opinion that is at odds with yours.

You know how much I value your input to this forum, based on your extensive experience of GA, but I must point out a little flaw in your last post.

There's no significant difference in the cost of maintaining an EASA PPL, NPPL or LAPL. If you are going with single engine light aircraft, they'll all cost about the same to obtain as well.

Actually there is a difference that amounts to a few hours flying each year for some people. A Pilot who gets and maintains an NPPL (like as what I does) can do so for the price of taking his, or her, GP for a jolly once every five years. Or pay the £25 for a signature. To get a Class2 Medical every year to support the PPL is going to cost more, a lot more.

Not to mention the cost of the original medical.

That was the thinking behind my decision in 2008 to go for the NPPL and I have stuck with it. Having done most of my flying from Leuchars and Cumbernauld, with trips to England & Wales along the way, the NPPL has been fine for me.

I did consider changing to the LAPL for a night rating a few years ago, but gave up on that when the CAA changed the rules and continued to accept the NPPL for a few more years yet. I remain hopeful that they might extend it again, and I can see how I might never need another licence to fly the DR400, C182 and PA28 in Scotland.

AP

[chipsto]

Decision made :)

Thanks for all the replies, folks.

After taking I to account the comments here and talking to a few different schools and clubs, I've decided to go down the route of NPPL(M), adding NPPL(SSEP) rating and then convert it to an LAPL before the April 2018 deadline.

There's are 3 main reasons why I'm doing it this way. The first is cost; for the NPPL(M) at Perth, tuition in an EV97 is £125 an hour. The second is that going this route will give me experience on more aircraft; EV97 first, then onto the more traditional PA38 or C152 for the SSEP rating. The third is my proximity to Perth. I can drive there in about an hour.

I spoke to Jim at Alba Airsports who seems like a great guy to learn from. The club at Perth also seems like a great community of flyers.

So, hopefully I'll be starting soon!

[FleetFlyer]

I reckon its the right decision as well. I went via that route and I'm certain that the greater variety of aircraft I've flown along the way has made me a better pilot. I also feel that during microlight training there is more of a bias towards teaching a pilot self reliance. For instance being prepared to make a precautionary landing and then being taught really solid soft field techniques etc in order to fly it out again, whereas in what used to be known as group A machines I felt the attitude was more one of, if you have to put it into a field consider the aeroplane as belonging to the insurance company and don't worry about needing to fly it out. (I know this sounds like I've confused precautionary landings with full on engine failures, but I have taken this into account)

I'm now a taildragger strip flyer and I consider myself to straddle both camps, with more in common with microlighters than spam can drivers.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Genghis, I can honestly say that I am stunned to be expressing an opinion that is at odds with yours.

You know how much I value your input to this forum, based on your extensive experience of GA, but I must point out a little flaw in your last post.

I on the other hand, am always surprised when anybody at-all agrees with me.


There are swings and roundabouts here of course. Yes, you're quite right that an NPPL holder doesn't need to pay for a class 2 medical.

On the other hand - I'm just helping out a husband and wife who have jointly bought a microlight. The wife who holds an EASA PPL will only need differences training. The husband, who for historical reasons holds an NPPL(SSEA), will need a microlight skill test - so for him, in this instance, having an NPPL will be much more expensive as differences training doesn't require the instructor to train somebody to pass a skill test again, nor is there the cost of a skill test.


But, back to the cost of learning again. For an ab-initio student over, say, 30 - it's unlikely that anybody will get from zero to light aircraft pilot under 45 hours, and so the two licences will (medical aside) cost the same to obtain for all reasonable purposes.


chipsto - you've stumbled in my opinion upon one of the major advantages of going with microlights, which is the sheer level of enthusiasm for their flying you'll find at all levels. Don't lose that! The Eurostar's a nice training aeroplane which I'm sure you'll enjoy as well and much newer and shinier, with at least as good performance, as most light training aeroplanes you're likely to come across.

For what it's worth, I started on microlights, flew those for half a dozen years, then did a light aircraft licence and carried on flying both. That's worked for me so far. Yesterday I flew an X'Air, this afternoon I shall fly an AA5, and actually - the X'Air is more fun, as well as costing a fraction to run (just goes rather slower!).

G

[xrayalpha]

Chipsto,

Say hi to Jim and get him to bring you here on a cross-country.

[Heston]

Genghis, you said "...differences training doesn't require the instructor to train somebody to pass a skill test again..." but it does require the training to "a level of competence appropriate to the holder of an NPPL M", which amounts to the same thing - in other words the instructor must train to the level at which they are confident that if the pilot were to be assessed by skills test then they would pass it.


Having said that I reckon that about 25% of pilots that I take for their bienniel training hour couldn't pass the skills test if they took it again. But that's another can of worms entirely.


FWIW I agree that the route to licences starting with the microlight NPPL M is a good one. I know plenty of folk who have gone that way and surprised themselves by finding they didn't need or want to go any further when it came to it - because they could do all they wanted to do with a microlight.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Well the main question's been answered, so we're clearly into interesting thread drift now

Now there's an interesting question.

Of course, I'd expect microlight differences training to cover handling, basic emergencies, and the airmanship to be adequate. I'd also cover micro-meteorology, and low level flying, microlight check mnemonics, PtF rules - all the stuff that's specific to microlights.

But, for example, a skill test includes DR Nav on a diversion. Particularly given that most pilots nowadays use other means than old fashioned DR/PLOG to get around and seem to cope - it doesn't seem to me that in differences training I should be training somebody back to skill test pass standard in nav again, when I know damned well they're not going to do it that way?

Similarly, if I'm doing tailwheel differences for somebody - I clearly will be doing lots of take-offs, landings, taxiing. But their ability to fly a PFL: however important I think it is (and I might also include that, for example, in a syndicate checkout where the syndicate want a minimum overal standard of flying), doesn't really change with the tailwheel beyond the last 20 feet that I'm covering circuits anyhow. Ditto navigation. I'd need that at a minimum standard for the skill test, but don't see why I should be covering that - or even looking into it - in tailwheel differences training?

And EFIS differences training? Do their landings need to be up to skill test standard? Well it's a good thing, but it's not my job if I've just been asked to train somebody how to use a Garmin 1000.

I might point out that somebody has weaknesses and suggest they get training in that area, but if we allow too much mission creep, the poor folks will never get to fly on their own!

G