I think Richard Bach had a short story on a renegade flight school where the aim was excellence and there were no regulatory or commercial constraints. (Actually features twice in Gift of wings:School for perfection, and Found in Pharisee)
With this in mind, and not suggesting I would not wash out, my training would be:
Basic handling in a Chipmunk with a high standard in PFL, precision glide approach and stall/spin. Normal training to solo is around 15 to 20 hours dual, plus around 4 to 5 hours in solo consolidation. This course might take 10 hours longer, of which 2 to 3 hours of the additional time would be devoted to more thorough stall/spin awareness.
Basic Navigation in a Warrior, with more and longer routes, more navigation through complex airspace, more low level ded reckoning in poor weather with diversionary planning, more radio navigation. If the average is around 20 hours dual and 5 to 7 hours solo nav consolidation, this course might require 10 hours more dual, and 5 hours more solo – mainly because the training routes would be more varied and challenging. PPL test.
Advanced training in a SF260D. This would include complex type conversion, with an emphasis on CPL type PFL and precision glide approach standards, basic IR including reaching a good standard in ILS, GPS approaches, and limited panel non precision approaches. Upset recovery training and basic aerobatics, including eyes inside spin recovery. Night rating. The routes and flight planning would be more complex and training would be around 60 hours, plus simulator and ground school to get an IR. One of the exercises would be a PFL in IMC using limited panel and GPS to a pre selected emergency airport, ‘breaking’ out into a VMC bad weather circuit at 1,000’ for a glide approach and landing…at night. IR test and Aerobatic rating.
If money were no object ,I wouldn’t do any night training/flying in a single to start with… (unless parachute equipped).
If money were no object, I would ask the customer why he wants to learn to fly, and structure the course to suit that 
Currently, the PPL is good for those who want to
but it fails those who want to go a bit further. Of the above list all but aeros have a short “half life”.
Obviously a 45hr PPL is nowhere near long enough for the last category. Well, not if you are to learn the slide rule as well
Sorry Peter but I couldn’t disagree more. A properly taught PPL is absolutely fit for purpose, which is to safely operate a SEP aircraft. The problem is that there often isn’t well developed linkages to training and competence pathways beyond the PPL to build on. Long distance touring, instrument flying et al are just one pathway beyond the PPL, many are happy to never go near that stuff and stay rooted in aircraft that aren’t capable anyway. Trying to cram more advanced stuff into a PPL would be a disaster, akin to mandating off road 4X4 driving, super car handling, track driving and caravan towing in a driving test!
Actually I agree with you
The key is the missing “linkages”. With driving, the “linkage” is easy – just get in the car and drive. Most people have tons of motivation, and the marginal cost per mile is next to nothing.
Yes and I think the pilot associations perhaps need to be part of the answer. The reality is that it is difficult for training schools to bridge the gap. I run a two PA28 operation and (being honest) we generally need to keep our aircraft and instructors working hard, multiple sorties per day, quick turnarounds, to make it viable. Long distance land always for example can risk the aircraft getting stuck away and can return little hours utilisation. The best clubs have a big range of aircraft, have a social scene and retain experienced members, but they often rely on a significant investor. Take Flight at Wellesbourne is a good example where you can hire 6 sweaters and aeros etc as well.
w_n a fair point, I minimise my time at night, single engine. Accident rates increase at night, but are predominantly of the CFIT and/or loss of situational awareness variety. I don’t think I have ever seen an accident report where single engine failure at night was the cause, although am sure there are out there.
I stuck to single engine in this hypothetical course, because that is reality, the vast majority of hours in light GA are flown single engine, but also PPL training both VMC and IR may underinvest on single engine risk management in flight planning, and stall/spin awareness. The minimum 3 1/2 hours of asymmetric for the multi rating, is arguably another ridiculous minimum. Perhaps for currency purposes this might be valid as a minimum, say one hour asymmetric every quarter, minimum.
The night rating could be an optional, although the IR would confer night privileges.
@RobertL18C Well, that’s how it’s usually done, but you could, if you wanted, do the whole PPL on say a DA-42 (but then you would need 70 hours solo, assuming you would want to use it for the skill test). I guess you could do sort of a mix where an MEP would be used only for a part of the training.
The night rating could be an optional, although the IR would confer night privileges.
You can now get an IR without night privileges, IIRC.
In EASA a night rating is a prerequisite for IR although I did read somewhere that you might soon be able to obtain an IR restricted to day only.
This has been in place for quite some time now.
