Airborne_Again wrote:
That’s how it works in Sweden, too…
I didn’t mean to imply that all of Europe has horrendous systems for theoretical examination. Point was it’s so convenient it shouldn’t be a factor.
Martin wrote:
You just sit at a computer in one of the numerous test centers with seats available at short notice.That’s how it works in Sweden, too…
172driver wrote:
It’s not Santa Monica, but Brown Field near San Diego.
It would be a rather more down to earth experience 
Brown is about a mile from the Mexican border, with all the luxury and schicki-micki that implies. You’d probably have a hard time getting the instructor to fly as much as a European student would need to knock out a PPL fast. There’s a reason why some places are cheap and others expensive, but its not mandatory to spend the greater amount, particularly for the US based student.
172driver wrote:
You do like your classics, don’t you, Silvaire
I think flying the Champ for 20 hours would be a great start for a new student, followed by transitioning into a C172. In that sense I do indeed like my classics…
PS @Peter the FBO at my base just lowered the Avgas price to $3.99/USG, or 0.78 £/litre. I don’t know if that’s high in comparative historical terms but that number doesn’t dominate the aircraft rental price.
boscomantico wrote:
Wonder how that is possible, at a place like Santa Monica.
It’s not Santa Monica, but Brown Field near San Diego. As I said in my original post, I’m sure there are cheaper options out there, but the days when getting a PPL in the States was cheaper by a factor of three are gone.
Actually, even in KSMO you can have it much cheaper, but that involves joining a club / syndicate. Not really an option for an overseas student.
You do like your classics, don’t you, Silvaire
Wow, these are indeed very very cheap rates. Wonder how that is possible, at a place like Santa Monica.
At the other end of the spectrum from Santa Monica you have places like First Flight, where an Aeronca Champ with instructor totals $110/hr total wet (the plane is $65/hr wet). A Cessna 172 plus instructor is $130 total wet. If it were me I’d fly the Aeronca for a while, then transition into the C172. That would teach you how to fly (better) for substantially less than $10K.
At those rates and including an extra $500 for the examiner plus miscellaneous costs totaling another $500, you could estimate about USD $7,000 total assuming 35 hrs dual in a combination of both planes plus 20 hrs solo in the C172 (55 hrs total to private certificate). At today’s exchange rate that’s €6222 or £5212 
Silvaire wrote:
I’d guess it’s schools doing training mostly for overseas students, often at a different and fixed price, who can’t be bothered with individuals looking to satisfy individual needs.
Nope, that’s what I read and hear around KSMO. With the possible exception of American Flyers, not too many overseas students. I’m sure there are cheaper options out there, but – at least from what I see – the huge price differences EU/US seem to be a thing of the past.
172driver wrote:
What surprises me a bit here is that the price difference between Europe and the US appears to have largely vanished, at least here in SoCal. Training here used to be about 30-40% of what it would cost in Europe, but reading the figures in this thread, there is hardly any difference. Most schools here quote IRO USD 10k for the PPL. Wonder why that would be the case.
I’d guess it’s schools doing training mostly for overseas students, often at a different and fixed price, who can’t be bothered with individuals looking to satisfy individual needs. So they quote a high enough price to keep non-contract students disinterested. There are less expensive and more flexible options.
Peter wrote:
My point was that a prudent candidate will get his/her ducks in a row before going to the USA, because the exams are not trivial (despite what some say)
I personally would’t bother going to the US on a separate trip (now) before doing the practical part: You can study here, read the book once, cram the question bank, and when you get consistently >90% you basically know you’ll pass once you take the real test.
They are not per se less difficult than the EASA ones, but since large number of questions on all subjects instead of several tests on specific types of questions, you can even afford putting much less effort in some questions than in others / know the more exotic ones.
If you do enough question bank, you can do the test really quicky. When I did my IFP, I think I had seen pretty much all questions, and was done in something like 30/40 min with 100%
