Edward Bellamy wrote:Irv I was merely questioning (leaving aside historic privileges etc, which should be preserved) whether there is any real utility to be gained from having the LAPL(A) and NPPL(A)+SSEA as a separate licence from the PPL if it were possible to have a PPL with a PMD. The LAPL has the appearance of being a simpler/cheaper licence to get but in reality does it make any difference? Whenever someone asks whether they should do the PPL(A) or LAPL(A) the answer always seems to be there is little saving from the latter since the basic competencies required are the same and since they tend to be taught on similar aircraft the training required is likely to be similar. But perhaps not everyone would agree?
I agree for students started from scratch - if they can get a class 2 medical, the chances are they would be better off going ppl - of course their club mighy only have lapl instructor capacity so there might not be a simple choice anyway. My point is not about new starters, it is needs sensible progression uninterrupted paths for existing pilots to fly G reg part 21 and non part 21 aircraft,
At moment, an existing experienced nppl-m flying a Eurostar wanting to chug around in a C150 requires a FULL licence course, a new medical, exams and all, plus flight test The same guy can leap into a fast RV and speed round the UK after very little extra training, 2 ground exams, and a flight test. Why can't he/she chug around in a C150 without many £1000s spent, months of time, and loads of ground exams and a new medical?
Irv Lee - (R/T & Flight Examiner)
Deconfusion & Preflight Aide-Memoire: http://tinyurl.com/pilotpal
UK GA Twittering not Tw@ering: @irvleeuk