I agree that it is nice to have a civilised discussion here.
If you go through my posts on this thread, you will see that I am not negative about the MPL. I will never say that an MPL cadet is less of a pilot or question his/her ability. I believe that the MPL has its advantages and is more relevant to airlines.
You should all know my stance by now - that is I am concerned for current CIA non-sponsored cadets AND those who are joining CIA now or in the near future (is CIA still taking 20 +cadets each month - anyone have latest intake figures?).
The quoted text below highlights my concern:
For example, MPL holders cannot exercise the privileges of a CPL and instrument ratings on single pilot aeroplane without meeting specific actual flight time and flight instruction requirements.
Like I have said from the start, any one who has an MPL and is not sponsored by an airline will need to build hours in order to become attractive for when an airline decides to recruit. An MPL pilot can not build hours unless they gain
specific actual flight time and flight instruction requirements
.
If you can afford the extra flight time and tuition, then this is not a problem. To answer your question Traveller 93, yes the MPL hours can count (perhaps even 100%) to the CPL. The requirements are a minimum 150 hours - just like any other CPL course. I see no reason why the MPL hours you have built can not go towards the CPL but you do need to meet the 150 hours (or so) in order to satisfy the CPL license. I do not not know if you need to resit the 170a or whether the MPL covers that already.
Either way, there will still be a lot more hours to build in order to be able to fly General Aviation to build hours. And this costs money. As it stands, I would never recommend the MPL to anyone who is not sponsored. It is too big a risk. Of course in 1-2 years time things may be different but do you really want to risk PHP4m of your family's money in the hope that the generic MPL is adopted by every airline?