Does anyone have more recent info or views on the validity of the UK NPPL in an N-reg?
It seems clear from the above discussion that it does comply with FAR 61.3.
But is there any restriction in UK law on the NPPL itself e.g. limiting it to a G-reg? I can’t find any. Obviously it is limited to UK airspace, but that would be the case anyway under 61.3 (can fly only on papers issued by the airspace owner).
Useful data point for 61.3 here (as if it was needed) – local copy
But is there any restriction in UK law on the NPPL itself e.g. limiting it to a G-reg?
How can a UK law restrict something over which UK Law has no jurisdiction?
The UK can offer you the privilege to operate G Reg; thereafter any other State may allow you to fly their aircraft using whatever licence/certificate/privilege they consider appropriate.
The above NPPL/N-reg privilege appears to have ended in April 2018
one key change is, as noted previously, that before April 2018 the NPPL (with a Class 2, or with a medical self declaration) was good for any aircraft reg, but after April 2018 it is limited to a G-reg (regardless of whether the G-reg is certified or not).
After April 2019, or sooner if EASA bring out their intended ruling sooner, an NPPL will be good only for uncertified aircraft (“non EASA aircraft”) – this will ground a large number of pilots so I expect the UK CAA will resist it, as they obviously should.
The LAPL, I have no idea.
How can a UK law restrict something over which UK Law has no jurisdiction?
The UK can offer you the privilege to operate G Reg; thereafter any other State may allow you to fly their aircraft using whatever licence/certificate/privilege they consider appropriate.
@tumbleweed if a license has a limitation on it, can the State of Registry still allow the use of that license?
There is an interesting complication here, in the area of PA46 type ratings, where the FAA Chief Counsel ruled in favour.
The above CAA notice is probably not legal. I got the following from one specialist:
In order to prevent usage of NPPLs on non-UK-registered aircraft the UK CAA would need to give a “direction.” This condition is made in the Air Navigation Order at article 148(3)(b) which, in the absence of such a direction, permits the use of a licence issued (or validated) by the state of registry OR under the ANO. If a US restricted foreign-based private pilot certificate were to be issued on the basis of a UK NPPL then the ANO would need to interpret such a certificate as a “an appropriate licence granted or rendered valid under the law of the country in which the aircraft is registered” (without the CAA needing to confuse itself over the fact that such restricted US certificates are NOT licences that are “rendered valid”). Art 148(3)(b) supports ALL licences that can be granted or rendered valid under the ANO itself (in respect of non-UK registered aircraft) which means that UK NPPLs, UK PPLs, and UK-granted Part-FCL licences, are all valid. Unless CAA gives a direction to the contrary, which it has not
So the NPPL remains valid for N-reg, and that should include flying with the medical self declaration.
Just as well since the LAA still says so
Peter wrote:
if a license has a limitation on it, can the State of Registry still allow the use of that license?
When an operation occurs wholly within the airspace of the state of registry the Chicago Convention does not apply except to the extent that states have undertaken by ratifying or acceding to the convention not to contravene its aims. That is, international traffic may expect at least the measure of protection intended for its enjoyment by the convention.
States are not required by the convention to recognise a licence failing to conform to the minimum personnel licensing standards made in ICAO Annex 1. The relevant articles are:
Article 33
Recognition of certificates and licenses
Certificates of airworthiness and certificates of competency
and licenses issued or rendered valid by the contracting State
in which the aircraft is registered, shall be recognized as valid
by the other contracting States, provided that the requirements
under which such certificates or licences were issued or
rendered valid are equal to or above the minimum standards
which may be established from time to time pursuant to this
Convention.…
Article 39
Endorsement of certificates and licenses
a) Any aircraft or part thereof with respect to which there
exists an international standard of airworthiness or perform-
ance, and which failed in any respect to satisfy that standard at
the time of its certification, shall have endorsed on or attached
to its airworthiness certificate a complete enumeration of the
details in respect of which it so failed.b) Any person holding a license who does not satisfy in
full the conditions laid down in the international standard
relating to the class of license or certificate which he holds
shall have endorsed on or attached to his license a complete
enumeration of the particulars in which he does not satisfy such
conditions.Article 40
Validity of endorsed certificates and licenses
No aircraft or personnel having certificates or licenses so
endorsed shall participate in international navigation, except
with the permission of the State or States whose territory is
entered. The registration or use of any such aircraft, or of any
certificated aircraft part, in any State other than that in which
it was originally certificated shall be at the discretion of the
State into which the aircraft or part is imported.
Peter wrote:
There is an interesting complication here, in the area of PA46 type ratings, where the FAA Chief Counsel ruled in favour.
The interpretations to Krausz (2012) and Henning (2014) are not relevant to the UK NPPL because a restricted US private pilot certificate cannot be based on a foreign licence which does not conform to ICAO Annex 1 standards. See 14 CFR 61.75(b)(2).
Operations done in UK airspace by UK nationals could always be dealt with via article 32 of the Chicago Convention, ie UK could simply deem a flight to have been done under a UK licence instead of a US foreign-based one.
This post is highly relevant to this thread:
The FAA doesn’t appear to care about this distinction when the flight occurs in the state issuing the sub-ICAO rating. See the interpretation given 15 Jun 2015 to Cliff Whittaker (UK CAA SRG) by Lorelei Peter, Deputy Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. Para 2:
A “sub-ICAO” pilot license, as you describe it, is a pilot license issued by the UK and therefore meets the FAA’s regulatory requirement. Under§ 61.3(a)(l)(v), it is immaterial whether the pilot license of the foreign country where the US registered aircraft is operated meets ICAO standards, provided it is only operated within that
country.
The LAA has changed its page above to say the opposite
but they got it wrong because it is nothing to do with that. If the FAA is happy with the NPPL meeting FAR 61.3 (which it is – above) and the NPPL is not explicitly limited to G-reg only then it is valid.
So the main Q is whether the NPPL is now restricted to G-reg only, and it appears to be thus since April 2020 but I can’t find the reference.
