PPL and NPPL?
 

What are the main differences between a PPL and a NPPL? Forgive me for not knowing much, but im looking to build more knowlodge and i wanted to ask here, as no-doubt there are some people here with first hand experience. From what i have read the biggest dis-advantage of a NPPL is not being able to fly abroad... or is there anything i have missed? :)

Also hope im not too confusing but the LAPL sounds like another license, is this better than the NPPL, with more advantages?

You are correct you cannot fly abroad on an NPPL and you cannot become a commercial pilot on a NPPL.

But if you have no wish to fly commercial and just fly as a hobby the NPPL is ideal. But if you wish to fly commercially go PPL

Also NPPL requires less hours to obtain the licence.

Ireland and France accept the UK NPPL, France with a Class 2 medical.

https://www.iaa.ie/index.jsp?p=100&n...nn=434&lID=843
https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv...2010_13_EN.pdf

Like the PPL, the NPPL can be a stepping stone to a CPL, albeit one further away.

Ok, thank you for the replies. Also another question i just wanted to ask is, where can you train for your LAPL license in the U.K as i cannot find anywhere that does it?

Virtually no where as you have to pay a wodge of cash to the CAA for the privilege. However I do believe a place at wycombe does.


However as its basically a paperwork exercise to get a LAPL from an NPPL. I really don't think there is any disadvantage getting a LAPL of the back of an NPPL.

There is a small difference in the the minimum hours to obtain an NPPL and PPL, 40 compared with 45 IIRC, but the actual time it takes will depend on the student's progress. Very few people obtain either licence from scratch in the minimum hours.

Don't forget the microlight NPPL...gives quite a bit of freedom in Europe and cheaper again.

Do they still do the NPPL? Thought it was the LAPL now. Probably wrong, usually am.

It is all confusing:

If you want to fly a light aircraft, starting today, you can have an EASA SEP, a LAPL and an NPPL SSEA.

After 2015, depending on the type of light aircraft you want to fly, licence requirements differ.

If you wish to fly an EASA Annex 1 aircraft - think Cessna and Piper - then you'll need an EASA licence (so SEP or LAPL).

If you wish to fly a "non-EASA" aircraft, known as Annex 2 - and basically home-built, kit-built, warbirds and microlights - then you can have just an NPPL SSEA or you can use your EASA SEP or LAPL.

If you want a LAPL, you can do it at a few flying schools (according to the CAA) who are basically having it added on to their list of courses free. Or you can - until 2015 at least - do an NPPL SSEA and convert it to a LAPL through "grandfather" rights. I know a few people who have done that, since they own Annex 1 aircraft and so have to have a EASA licence by 2015.

Many people prefer the NPPL SSEA or LAPL because of lower medical requirements - although it is very hard to find a GP willing to do a LAPL medical because of the hoops/paperwork the GP has to do.

Finally, you can get an NPPL Micro and convert it very easily to a NPPL SSEA (three hour minimum syllabus). Then the NPPL SSEA to a LAPL and the LAPL to a EASA SEP.

I don't know what the figures are on that but wouldn't it be cheaper if your eventual aim was an EASA SEP license to just do that in the first place?