Firstly, Hello to everyone on the Forum. Just the place ive been looking for..
After over 35 years of being an aviation fan and flying RC model planes. Ive decided its high time i took the leap and do my PPL!
The big question is .. JAR PPL or NPPL?? What are the advantages of the JAR PPL.. Apart from the less stringent medical and 13 hours less min flying time of the NPPL.
I recently completed my medical for my JAR PPL, which prior to my visit, I was concerned that I wouldn't pass.
During this medical I discussed with my AME about the NPPL and its medical requirements. I thought that the CAA medical checked everything that I would say, allowed me to fly safely anywhere and with passengers. I wouldn't have approved myself with any less examination and thought it was perfectly satisfactory. The NPPL medical requirements, put some worry into my mind when sharing the skies over Blighty. The fact that your GP just signs to say he agrees, when you say you are medically fit to drive an Heavy Goods Vehicle based on medical history. Flying puts a lot more factors on the human body than driving, and personally I wouldn't have allowed myself to continue my PPL without having a full CAA medical, just because it makes sense to me at the age of 24.
I suggest you go for the full JAR PPL - because yes the minimum hours requirement is less but as most will tell you, its very rare that pilots pass within the minimum hours anyway. NPPL limits you to flying in the UK only, where as JAR-PPL entitles you to fly in the whole of Europe.
First step - do some research and get yourself a trial flying lesson at a good local club. See if you actually enjoy flying yourself around the fluffy stuff! Then after that, speak to the club about continuing your PPL and ask about the local AME's and how to get in touch to book your medical.
Sorry it was so "Medical" based, but when the NPPL/JAR-PPL question comes up - that's really what goes through my mind!
Everything else is all about you, your passion for aviation and determination to earn your wings. I think you will agree with me that once you are up there, its the only way to actually see Peace.
I don't know about the future of the JAR licence since the JAA no longer exists.. The CAA say they will continue to issue JAR licences but don't give any information on renewal. So I guess we will see in the future what they do with it.
On the subject of the NPPL, medical is cheaper and easier to obtain. Training hours will roughly be the same as the syllabus is pretty much the same and in 2012 there are talks of it being EASA apprived and therefore becoming european meaning you will be able to fly with it in other countries.. It has it's limitations at the minute though e.g you can't add extra ratings to it and you can only fly Simple SEP aircraft.
The choice is yours but personally i'd go the JAR route.
I don't know about the future of the JAR licence since the JAA no longer exists.. The CAA say they will continue to issue JAR licences but don't give any information on renewal. So I guess we will see in the future what they do with it.
On the subject of the NPPL, medical is cheaper and easier to obtain. Training hours will roughly be the same as the syllabus is pretty much the same and in 2012 there are talks of it being EASA apprived and therefore becoming european meaning you will be able to fly with it in other countries.. It has it's limitations at the minute though e.g you can't add extra ratings to it and you can only fly Simple SEP aircraft.
The choice is yours but personally i'd go the JAR route.
Regards
It still seems strange to me that a license with less stringent safety requirements (medical) may have equal rights to the existing JAR-PPL license which people have paid huge amounts of money to maintain compared to just a UK National License. I guess thats Politics eh? You must wear a yellow jacket when you go airside at this aerodrome, but this guy over here can drive a HGV and has equal rights on his license to the AME approved pilot over here?
Personally I don't understand why there is a difference between medical requirements. Surely you are either fit to be P1 or you are not?
I think from a personal responsibility point of view I would have a a CAA medical either way. If I hadn't passed it I think I would have had to wonder whether I should be flying at all.
Personally I'd go JAR (if fact I am going JAR!). As said above the flying parts are quite similar, and it's just a little less restrictive if you end up deciding you want to take it further to multi-engine or even commercial.
Personally I don't understand why there is a difference between medical requirements. Surely you are either fit to be P1 or you are not?
I think from a personal responsibility point of view I would have a a CAA medical either way. If I hadn't passed it I think I would have had to wonder whether I should be flying at all.
...
Timmy - you literally repeated my words to the AME, word for word. I completely agree!
I have posted this reply before, so ignore if you've read it somewhere else.
I just thought that I would say, that there can be personal, financial, and geographical reasons for doing the NPPL(SSEA).
For instance:-
1) You may be an older person who does not wish to progress to a commecial career and just wish to use your licence for an occasional hobby pastime.
2) Funds may be such that an a medical declaration from your local practitioner when occasional flights are all that is required from your hobby.
3) You also may reside right in the centre of the country, making trips even as far as the coast cost prohibitive.
Regarding the medical. I seem to sense from a number of PPL's or budding PPL's, that a medical declaration from you general practitioner is just there for the asking. The practitioner has to be very sure that the document they are putting their name to is the result of him/her knowing your history and having checked through your records. I believe the only reason why you have to go through an AME for the PPL(A) is because it was a read-across from the days when it was all commercial, and has never been changed.
I personally know of no accident, statistic, or occurence where the cause was solely due to an NPPL having a medical problem any more than a PPL JAR.
I would say, that if you are young, fit, financially well-off, then go for the PPL(A). If, not then why not try the NPPL(SSEA) if it suits you better. Below are the NPPL(SSEA) requirements.
NPPL(SSEA) Minimum 32 hours plus the 2 Flight Tests
Consisting of :-
All 7 written exams must be passed within 18 months or you're into re-taking the ones that pop out of the time frame. After your last passed written exam, you have up to 2 years to take your flight tests.
The RT Practical Test for your FRTOL licence does not have to be taken within the 18 month time frame, but you cannot use the radio after you are awarded your NPPL licence, so it pays to take it sometime before you take the General Skill Test.
Flight Test Format:-
1) Navigational Skill Test with a Flight Examiner.
Followed by:-
2) Solo QXC of over 100 miles with 2 land-aways.
Followed by:-
3) Providing you've had 22 hours or more dual instruction, and had 10 or more hours of solo flight (including solo QXC with 2 land-aways), the General Skill Test with Flight Examiner.
4) You've done it........
DO NOT block-book, too many flying schools get into financial trouble without any notice to you. Book one or two lessons at a time but no more......
(By the way, it took me 68 hours to attain my NPPL(SSEA), usually it takes about the same as the JAR PPL(A), about 56 hours)
I think for my own personal confidence I would still obtain a CAA medical even if I was going for an NPPL. Because its not just about yourself, but about your passengers and the many people below you. Its not to say that NPPL pilots are any less fit than JAR-PPL pilots, but the medical won't delve as deep into current health as the CAA one does. In my opinion everybody should attend a CAA medical for their own personal peace of mind, and if you fail that medical, find out why. I for sure would want to know why as the CAA medical checks things that are justified.
I think I just speak from a personal feeling about health really - far be it from me to speak about medical matters and granting permission to fly.
I do understand your concerns regarding the medical requirements. All I can add, is that there can be far more in-depth checks that can be done over and above the ones of the AME class one and two medical, but it has been decided by the powers above, that the class one and two are good enough. The medical declaration for the NPPL has also been decided by the people in the know to be adequate. There have been a small number of occurances when professional pilots and private pilots have suddenly passed-away whilst flying. This has generally been through a stroke or heart-attack etc. When their medical notes and history have been examined, there has been nothing to show --- passed all the tests, and no history of problems. I know, that if you're in an airliner, you have another pilot on hand, but at least in a small aircraft, if you're not feeling so good you can look for a local local field or small airfield to land at. I think really it's horses for courses. For myself, I think I'll stick with the medical peoples judgement.
<BLOCKQUOTE><table width="85%"><tr><td class="txt4"><img src="/cs/Themes/default/images/icon-quote.gif"> <strong>RogD wrote:</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="quoteTable"><table width="100%"><tr><td width="100%" valign="top" class="txt4">I'll drink to that Chris (errr... not when I'm flying though you understand).
Of course not... You need to drink BEFORE you fly to fully enjoy it. Nothing more annoying than trying to drink and try to do those knife edge turns at the same time.... The drink goes everywhere..