BEagle

MANY many thanks to you for the updates, and also to all of you who have answered the thread. I am much more aware now of what is going on and also what prejudices some might have if I ever pass the test and land at their airfield and meet up with them. Does one say Hi, Im a PPL holder with an IMC etc or do you just meet and exchange greetings and pleasantries ?

To all of you, I want to be as good and as safe as you are, and I WANT to learn to fly with a passion. Im loving the lessons and just wish work didnt get in the way of them !!!

Looking forward to the continuing dialogue(s) with you all.:)

BEagle

I'm interested/confused (not difficult on a Friday morning!); when I originally read about the NPPL, it was going to be a completely separate licence, no crossover with JAR-PPL, no route to upgrade, etc. Has this changed now?:confused:

notice does seem to be grinding a bit of an axe, I would say from his posts he went to the WRONG flying school.
Personally I think we have missed a great opportunity with the NPPL, as it is it really only benifits those who can't get the class2 medical and as it stands we might as well have left the PPL as it was and said those who can't get a class2 can have a licence issued as a National licence but not JAR. The REAL hours to do a licence could have been brought down by having the privelages restricted, yes, lowering the standard, but you would then let someone fly with pax., supervised by an instructor within a set range of the airfield, thereby reducing the nav and IF instructing to a bare minimum, this after all is all a lot of PPLs do initially and when most instructors send a student solo into the local area they believe they are doing this safely - what is the difference if after a few more hours and a test they do this with pax. You could then have an upgrade course to extend your privaleges.

The JAR PPL requirements include (if memory serves) minimum 25 hours dual and 10 hours solo, with the balance to 45 hours (or the required standard if longer) being either solo or dual. Is a similar split specified for the NPPL? What are the currency & renewal / C of E requirements?

Having done the JAR PPL myself in about 50 hours over the course of a year with a couple of longish breaks, I could see that it might be possible for someone with the right attitude (ie a pilot's licence of any sort is a licence to learn) and a good level of skill to get to the required standard in 35 hours, providing the course is completed over a shorter period. If the examiners apply high enough standards, there is no reason why the skies should suddenly fill with dangerours NPPL holders.

One thing that worries me is the lack of IMC and radio nav. The JAR course isn't exactly overflowing with either subject (less than the CAA one was I believe), just enough to give you a healthy respect for IMC (as BEagle said). The lack of radio nav will doubtless further encourage people to fly around blindly relying solely on a handheld GPS, and they'll be stuffed when the batteries run flat. Ask a controller how many pilots bust controlled airspace and claim "but I was just following the GPS"

It seems to me that the primary driver for going for an NPPL for many people is the reduced medical, which I applaud wholeheartedly. A better idea might have been to complete the JAR course, but issue a UK licence on the basis of a reduced medical.

Trouble is I can't really see how the NPPL will save anyone much money. Ok, it'll encourage people to fly who couldn't have done due to medical restrictions etc, but this could have been solved by simply the 'national medical' idea suggested earlier. Besides, most people failing a JAA Class 2 will probably pass the FAA Class 3 ("hop on one leg 20 times, lets listen to your heat, yep you're fine"), so you could theoretically still fly in the UK in an N Reg plane.

You may save 5 hours training over a JAA PPL, your medical may cost £25 instead of £100 for the initial, and the admin fees may be say £50 as opposed to £150 or whatever the JAA issue fee is, and exam fee's may be £100 cheaper. So now you've saved £600 or so, on training costs. Now what? You can't go and rent a PA28 for a discounted rate as you hold a NPPL. So in the grand scheme of things, and especially where flying is concerned, £600 doesn't go a long way.

What really needs to happen is for serious savings to be possible to make it worth while. If a prospective student could save £2000 over a JAA PPL then it may be worth doing. For example, make use of 'free' PPL instructors, so no instructors fees would be payable during training. I'm sure there are many JAA PPL's out there who would love to instruct NPPL's for free, though of course this would **** off the regular FI's.

Trouble with the NPPL is once you get it, you're stuck to flying in the UK, which to be honest is not the cheapest place to fly. If you love flying and want to get good without paying through the nose, then the States, SA etc are all very good places and with the NPPL you can't fly here.....

Cheers
EA

If you don't think that £600 is much in the grand scheme of things, then please contact me and I will tell you how to send a cheque for £600 to PPRuNe Towers. It isn't much in the grand scheme of things, is it..............

NPPL
 

For all those who have never fallen foul of the CAA Medical Division think yourself lucky ! I stupidly in hindsight remarked at something during my medical renewal which eventually got picked up by the jobsworths at ivory towers, Gatwick. Result medical revoked with little chance of appeal and had to sell my share of the aircraft. I'm also a self certified glider pilot and since then I've done something over100 hours and got all three diamonds (300k goal flight,500K and 22000 feet height climb. So who was right ,the couldn't possibly allow you to fly jobsworths or myself who had the backing of his GP,AME etc ?

...well £600 is ****** all when you're talking about planes or boats (and some women:p )......

£600
 

I really didn't want to get drawn into the money side, but.....

( now please consider before I begin - there are always two side - I am not elitist :p )

I have banged on about IMC and R Nav in this thread, and the extra costs involved. englishal makes a similar point, in my humble. £600 in flying terms, over the license lifetime, is sod all compared with the price of hiring - Unless ....

If the extra ( compared to the existing ppl ) training is too expensive for an idividual, I would guess that there is a possibility that the individual would not be able to afford renting an A/C on a regular basis. :rolleyes: Does this itself not add to the problem?

I know I am generalising and presuming but the logic follows I feel.

LF

I started as a staunch opponent of the NPPL idea. I am now a total advocate.

I believe the NPPL to be just about perfect. It restores in the UK the situation we had prior to JAA. It makes being a pilot cheaper and more accessible whilst maintaining high standards. It also recognises that aviation has changed and now incorporates a lot of microlight, SLMG and other 'sport' flying.

I would like to congratulate the CAA and the NPPL steering committee for arriving at such a sensible British decision.

A class 2 is an unnecessarily stringent requirement foisted upon us by our continental cousins.

The skill test is the same (bar radio aid fixing) and the instructors will be professionally qualified. Some able students are perfectly safe at 35hrs for toodling about the UK in VMC.

To be honest the JAA PPL requirement for Navaid useage almost invites disaster. It embues some PPL's with a notion of confidence in a skill that they have received scant training in. I have seen people far too often get themselves back to front with VOR and NDB navigation.

They forget to ident, engage the wrong mode or miss-read the instrument. They would be far better off in most cases asking for either a Radar service, a position fix on 121.5 or a flicking on a GPS...

The NPPL restores us to the level of training we had from the mid 50's through to pre-JAA. It makes sensible provision for experience in other areas of aviation. It will be good for UK GA.

For all those the whinge - think on to your older age - the NPPL might extend your ability to fly by many years...

WWW

Would'nt the introduction of this NPPL have been a good time to have introduced a standard medical for all recreational pilots. This could have been the same for all Class2,glider,microlight, balloon pilots etc? A basic declaration of fitness signed by your local GP who after all knows you far better than an AME or CAA doctor.Keep these for commercial flying but not for pottering around the local area in a Cessna.

Is there going to be some sort of guidance form to be issued that could be given to the GP. I'm sure there's likely to be some pilots who probably shouldn't be flying with condictions that could be spotted by their GP but are not notified to their AME's that they probably only ever see once every two to five years.

Hello Census Boy, Fen Boy here.

You've pretty much descibed what is going to happen. The NPPL medical will be undertaken by your GP and he will be given guidance on areas and conditions which are no go. However, as you rightly say, he's going to know you and your medical history pretty well anyway.

Yea, its a good idea. Now why didn't the CAA come up with a sensible British decision a long time ago. The JAA sounds like a good idea, but in reality is a load of b@llocks. In fact lets pull out of JAA and go back to the previous system, have a ICAO recognised NPPL and we'll all be happy.

Cheers
EA

Well I for one am pleased that the NPPL is finally on the horizon - I too have eyesight which fails me for the JAR-PPL however I fly gliders quite happily and manage to see particularly well whilst doing so. This suggests to me that any "shock horror reduced fitness" arguments are slightly disingenuous. Why can I see perfectly well gliding but not in a 152? Yes eyesight is obviously important but I could hazard a guess that my corrected eyesight may be better than some flying who do not feel they need corrective lenses.

As an aside can I use any hours I have already (Powered and gliding) towards the NPPL?

Troy - you may be pleasantly surprised at the level of accreditation for previous gliding/flying/microlighting experience towards a NPPL. The accreditation document has now been completed and will shortly be with the CAA for formal approval. Hence I don't want to reveal anything here in case it has to be further refined; patience please - there'll be an announcement prior to the 1 Jul 02 launch.

BEagle - thank you for your NPPL endeavours. You played a small part in bringing about this development - for which you should be proud.

It all sounds Very Reasonable.

Cheers,

WWW

Can I echo the above sentiments?

Thank you BEagle for helping to give me the chance to have a flying licence, I, and many in a similar situation applaud your efforts.

We all appreciate it.

Yes - thanks are definitely due to BEagle and all those associated with the NPPL.
I have just recently been passed as fit again after a 3 month period of being unfit, with the very real prospect of being grounded permanently. Quite frankly whilst all (medically) about me was falling around my ears my only hope was the NPPL.

Well done to all concerned - roll on July 1st!:D

Yep - I think the NPPL is going to be a real boost for GA in this country and the knock on effects could bring benefits across the board - especially encouraging more people to get interested in aviation which can only be a good thing. Allowing people like me to get back into powered flying is pretty good too!!:)

Cheers to all involved!

To put my head on the chopping block.
I am sorry but I dont agree as yet that the NPPL is a good thing. On paper I will agree that it is. However I also believe that there should be more IMC / RNAV work in the PPL. I passed the PPL first time in 5 weeks in the minimum hours, hired a plane and then frightened myself silly. "I learnt about flying from that". Several hundred things after that.
I agree that you only learn by your mistakes...However as we are entering the season when an aircraft crashes every weekend for the next couple of months, then do we really need to be tossing around trying to decrease the hours to save 6oo quid.
Lets face it many of those at the CAA, The Comics that you all like to read and the miserable old gits - all you want to do is get one over on the JAR Regs. I personally dont agree with you, if it has to be said, and many have implied this, but not come out and said it... The NPPL is reverse snobbery and I am with Notice.
Nothing personal to anybody in particular.
I am all for increasing flying in the UK, however this has nothing to do with gliding / microlights and certainly jack all to do with road accidents.