Talk:Pilot licensing in the United Kingdom

message: Helicopters are neglected here.
Rather than trying to repeat all the CAA rules better to have links to the rules?
Paul Beardsell 11:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

message: I've found it really difficult to accumulate information about the NPPL specifically and would like to see this available in a single place. Although the CAA does provide some documentation, there's still potential confusion here and scope for suggestions/differences between PPL and NPPL. This would help the reader determine what it takes to achieve an NPPL versus PPL, and whether this is a sensible step in a private pilot's career.
For example:
 - Can be used in UK including Channel Islands and Isle of Man
 - Medical requirements (DVLA Group 1 and 2), 5 year validity or more, singled off by GP
 - Can be rated on other aircraft types
 - Can't be used abroad or for non-UK registered aircraft
 - Ground exams same as for PPL (although might change in future)
 - Navigation Skills practical Test is shorter than for full PPL, but worthwhile doing the same 150nm so that could count towards PPL should you decide to upgrade in the future.
 - Requirements to be current (6 in 12 and 12 in 24), 1 hour with instructor per 2 years
 - Can't be upgraded to include night flying or Instrument ratings
 - 30 hours of the training can be used towards PPL
 - European licensing scheme may supercede NPPL (or affect it) in 2012, possibly allowing use within EU
So for bimbling around in VFR conditions, this might suit many newcomers - especially since the cost should be around 35% less than for PPL.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mobilesense (talk • contribs) 13:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it deserves a section of its own, but do think that the section of this article could be expanded to include the history of the licence, the number of pilots using it, together with some of the points mentioned above (properly sourced, of course). --Simple Bob (talk) 19:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPPL - Could/should it have its own page 

message: I don't support having a separate page for National Private Pilot Licence and am therefore proposing that the content of that page be merged into this one. --Simple Bob (talk) 14:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Although new to wikipedia editing, the reasons I'd prefer to retain a separate page are that (a) there's a lot of additional detail in this new article which would either be lost or would make the current article unbalanced towards NPPL and (b) I found it difficult to unearth the various rules and information about the NPPL, hence wanting to have this in one place/article. Thanks for tidying up the spelling/formatting errors and suggesting  additional content.  Mobilesense (talk) 14:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPPL merge discussion 

message: The article references the LASORS publication by CAA, claiming this is published annually online and in print. The reference states the year 2007, but links to an edition for 2008. A search on the CAA site finds no online version for 2009 or later, although it does appear to be sold in hard copy for 2009 elsewhere. Therefore I think the reference should be updated, first to remove the 2007 (so it will always be current) and secondly to remove the statement that it's updated annually online (which it hasn't been).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mobilesense (talk • contribs) 15:03, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what your point is. LASORS 2008 was the last version published and is available online and in print. The next version, LASORS 2010 is expected in July 2010. --Simple Bob (talk) 15:16, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, now I see what you were on about. I updated the reference date to reflect the 2008 title. When 2010 comes out we can update the reference again. --Simple Bob (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  LASORS date 

message: I was looking for additional references to improve this article, as suggested in the header. Other than the LASORSS on the CAA site, I'd suggest adding reference links to JAA and EASA. For example, the sentence "Each member nation in the EU has responsibility for regulating their own pilot licensing." could reference the [FAQ Section C.1]. There's also a potential confusion by using both terms JAA and JAR in the article. Would these benefit from minor clarification? There is a already a link to the Wikipedia JAA page at the top, so this would just be to confirm where UK CAA, JAA and EASA fit together. This could include a link to [JAA site] which confirms the organisation was disbanded in June 2009. The JAA ceased to exist (other than as a training organisation) at that date, which might otherwise confuse readers when explaining JAA licences. The page on the Joint Aviation Authorities also needs updating to reflect their demise (it currently talks about transition stage only).
Mobilesense (talk) 10:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  More References 

message: The introductory remark, "[t]he principal reference for flight crew licensing in the UK is LASORS, which is published by the CAA on paper and online", may lead readers to believe the stated document to be a UK regulation. This document through its various amendments has proven to be in some instances contradictory, incorrect or misleading. I would therefore propose amending the sentence to put greater emphasis on its status as a mere guidance document and would be grateful for suggestions or criticisms before doing so. (Weirpwoer (talk) 08:38, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  LASORS 

message: Should this page have some more material on Microlights and the British Microlight Aircraft Association?  Arrivisto (talk) 15:58, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Microlights