Best MCC for the money?

[skyman68]

Hello Dear PPruner,

I am looking for the best MCC. an MCC on JET and no on turboprop.
I have looked at Oxford, and the 737 seem terrible.
Bournemouth have a lockheed, any idea?
or any MCC in Ireland, I have never been in Ireland.

I am not interested by flight safety in the US and not interested by a sim kind of PT6 Beech xxxx or videogame. It must be a jet., and it must be approved by the CAA.

Thanks for your help and good luck to all of you who want be a pilot.!

:ok:

[moku]

Skyman,

I used the L1011 at Bournemouth and was very impressed by both the sim and the instructors.

Pm me if you need contact details.

moku.

[redsnail]

Have you tried CTC?

[parris50]

I did the Tristar at Bournemouth with EPTA. Excellent course.

[GASH !]

Did mine at The Flight Centre Wolverhampton, cost was £1850 which was the cheapest in the country I believe, at the time.

Sim was really good, instructors were excellent, would highly recommend them.

Cheers

Oops, just re read your post and it HAS to be done on a jet, forget Wolverhampton then!

[PicMas]

Pardon me for asking, but why does it HAVE to be jet?

[Cat IIIC]

OXFORD OXFORD OXFORD ALL THE WAY

I didn't do any training at Oxford because I thought they are too expensive but after doing my MCC with them I found out why.

It was the most professional, well run flying course I have ever been on and was lots of fun. The Sim is fantastic and the Instructors are even better.

I've since recomended many of my friends to OATS and they've loved it too.

I'm not associated with Oxford in any way.

[arfur-sixpence]

If it must be a jet, then Flight Training Europe at Jerez have an 125-800 sim.

The sim is great, the campus is nice, the beer is cheap but the sim manager is a bit of an arse.

However, it does not affect your licence one jot if you do it on a turboprop - unless you have a job offer that specifies jet MCC as a condition. The standard of instruction counts for more than anything else.

[michaelknight]

The Hawker sim in Jerez is a tarted up FNPTII, and all you'll do is fly the TALLA 5D with the autopilot.

Do yourself a favour and do the MCC in a clocks and dial aircraft. Good for the scan and it will keep you on your toes.

PARC aviation in Ireland provied MCC courses on the B737-200. The 300/400/500 has been sold to CTC at Southampton. The -200 is CAA approved.

MK

[VFE]

Tarted up FNPTII? When I was there it was an all singing all dancing full motion sim.

VFE.

[arfur-sixpence]

michaelknight - the "sim" at Jerez, whilst officially qualified as an FNPT2 (MCC) is actually a full flight simulator - a qualification which the "sims" at Oxford and most other schools would not be able to attain. The kit you saw in front of you as you were "flying the Talla 5D SID with the autopilot engaged" is almost all actual aircraft kit (EFIS etc), not replicas.

Motion is not required for MCC - so few sims have it. Full systems fidelity is not required for MCC - so few sims have it.

As for the autopilot bit - have you any idea what the MCC is about? It is about working as part of a crew and the CAA/JAA require you to operate as much as possible with the autopilot engaged - the instructors are not actually supposed to teach you to fly it!!

Got personal experience of PARC have you? If so, why did you also do an MCC at Jerez?

I said before and I will say again - it is the instructors that count more than the kit. What a pity that FTE chose to get rid of the best two instructors when they needed to reduce numbers.

[duece19]

Alright dudes

I suggest u go for SAS flightacademy in Stockholm

Mcc on Fokker 28, (dials and clocks). Lots of courses and really good instructors. All instructors are pilots with SAS or something similar. Two week course with 20 h FFS.

Dunno the exact price but mail to sasfa and have a look.
www.sasfa.com

I dont regret my choice...


Duece

[mad_jock]

MCC is a tick ina box so unless its done to the company's SOP's you are joining it could pretty much be done in a FNPT 1.

The pre sim lectures actually carry more info than you realise and ists only after a couple of months on the line you remember and suddenly realise its not bollocks after all.

As for the flying crap if you haven't flown something that fast before you will be well behined the machine. And if its 2 wannbies together if you concentrate on the flying you will be so far behined the machine you won't get the points of the course across.

Remember the MCC is a complete **** up of a course which people are skinning wannabies for. It was meant to be a pre type rating course to break you into multi crew flying but they way the CAA worded the regs it meant that you needed it to start a type rating when it should really be a precourse with the company. Then loads of FTO's bought in the hardware to satisfy the requirments. When the CAA realised that the MCC wasn't being treated in the manner it was meant there was a huge legal problem because if they changed the reg several companys were going to be nearly half a mil down after the investment in FNPT II's. So we now have the usual **** up that wannabies need abit of paper for 2 grand plus but its no use to man nor beast in the real world.

My advice would be get the cheapest bit of paper possible. if you want to go and do the jet thing sort it out seperatly.

MJ

[caramel]

From the captains, instructors and examiners that I have spoke to about the mcc, is that doing it on a jet sim DOES look alot better on your cv than a turbo prop sim!

That just leaves the question would I do a full motion sim or a FNPT 2 jet trainer!!!

Glass cockpit or lots of dials? more modern aircraft are glass cockpit but BA are using an old sim for there interviews!!!

have you still got £5k left or are you sleeping at the banks doors begging to give you a little more money?

personally even though I couldn't afford to have the name oxford on my cv I'll try and beef my cv as much as possible even if it means spending an extra 1.5k on it

Does it matter where we go? in 5 years time it probably not.

more airlines seem to be using computerised application forms asking if you hold an mcc. to them it doesn't seem to matter as long as you tick the box, remember when you do a type rating you'll probably be put through another mcc then.

At the end of the day they want to know do you hold an mcc yes or no. It might help if the people running it have endless contacts to help you as well. ask.

If you have the money then I'd go for something fun whatever you want dials or glass cockpit.

No one who I've spoke to have been disappointed from there experience which have included oxford, lgu, epta, parc and jetlinx.

Just do what you feel would be the right thing we're not all pre cogs so use the force?

[michaelknight]

arfur-sixpence

Flying an MCC on the autopilot is a waste of time. You should get some time flying manually and getting an appreciation of pitch & power = performance. You don't get that with the autopilot engaged. 'The sim is great' is a bit of an over statement compared to some of the other sims that you can do MCCs on. Most people go from an MCC on to a sim assesment, where the aircraft has to be flown manually with no AP AT or FD.

"Got personal experience of PARC have you?" WHOOOAH hand bag's really flying now :ouch: , PARC do more than MCCs!

"it is the instructors that count more than the kit. What a pity that FTE chose to get rid of". What are you on about? They got rid of people becuase they we not needed. Proper order. What's the point in paying a salary to guys that do some work every second month?

"the sim manager is a bit of an arse" Did he/she piss you off or something? :}

VFE, I take it you've never seen a proper sim. :E

MK

[Groundloop]

"Flying an MCC on the autopilot is a waste of time. You should get some time flying manually and getting an appreciation of pitch & power = performance. You don't get that with the autopilot engaged."

The above is NOT what an MCC is designed for! It is not designed to teach you how to fly a particular aircraft, it is for teaching you how to work TOGETHER as an airline crew, and as most airline flying now is by using autopilot, FMC, etc experience of hand flying is generally irrelevant. All that is required is initial rotation and climb and last few hundred feet on finals.

If you are getting a lot of time flying manually and getting an appreciation of pitch and power etc then the MCC instructors are NOT doing their job properly.

[Send Clowns]

I have just flown the MCC. It was a course just being approved (I understandthey didn't need approval until this year, and that this was the first approved course in the country, as the rest are all working on grandfather rights) by the CAA. The CAA inspector did not say anything while we were being encouraged to fly the whole thing on autopilot for the very reasons suggested above.

As groundloop implies hand flying the aircraft takes a lot of effort and concentration if you are not used to large, fast aircraft and so takes away from the purpose of the MCC. This is not a type rating!

As for any connection with a sim check, remember that sim checks should be testing your rate of progress under instruction, not your ability initially to fly an aircraft of a type you have never flown before. OK, so it is probable worth practicing, because it is hard for people to keep objective, but I would more suggest you do so by practicing procedures at a similar speed, leave the type-specific handling to the check itself, and show how much you can learn there without mistaking the procedures for which you are conveniently current.

It was great to do on a large, complicated aircraft. I will probably never fly a wide-bodied jet with a clockwork cockpit, so it was great to get the experience on the Tristar.

[Delta Echo Bravo]

Jet, turboprop, bathtub, makes no difference. If you're a low houred Piston pilot with no turbine time to speak of, doing 20 hours in a jet sim does nothing more to your desireability than 20 hours in a turboprop sim. If you have respectable ammounts of turbine time, then the 20 hours of sim will make no difference anyway, so long and short is, it really doesn't matter. Not only that, you get almost no type training, and it is about the CREW and people aspect, not the aircraft. Do it cheap It's only a bit of paper.

Also a tip that caught me out. Try and get the term CRM added to the certificate. CRM is a different course apparently not related to MCC that I ended up buying in order to get a job. Only thing is the material is identical, so save some money and get it included.

I reccomend multi flight at leeds. Good instructors. Fun atmosphere, you're given lots of respect and you can also do some psychometric tests or something which are excellent. It's also cheap.

[BillyFish2]

A post from michaelknight explaining his background:

Posted 9th July 2003:

....."I am basing these opinions from my experience working in the airlines as a pilot and have in the past been directly involved in the recruiting process myself".....

So watch out chaps!

[Ojuka]

Strongly advise you to do it on a jet sim, but only if you can afford it. As well as gaining the MCC qualification, you can enter 20 hrs jet sim on your CV. This gives a good introduction to anticipation of speed and inertia regardless of how inexperienced you are. In the old days many recruiting companies liked to see what they called "Jet LOFT" sim time (a bit like an MCC course). Even if you felt your handling was dreadful it makes for less of a shock when you get your interview sim check.

And remember, you are not being examined on your personal handling skills on an MCC course.

Find the cheapest jet sim you can. I did mine on an ancient HS125 sim with no motion and no visuals. It DID make the difference when it came to getting my first job.

[caramel]

Don't forget if you do it on an approved full motion sim it goes towards unfreezing the ATPL as 100 hours can be used on a simulator and no more than 25 on a FNPT.

just a thought

[November Whiskey]

Did mine with Jetlinx a couple of weeks ago on the A320 at BA's Cranebank facility...

I thoroughly enjoyed the course. The groundschool was well pitched, interesting and concise. The sim phase was fantastic!
Really enjoyed the A320 and feel I have gained a useful insight into working on an advance jet using MCC principles and SOP's.

My 'Sim Buddy' for the week was a Jaguar Pilot (an interesting flight deck experience gradient!) but we worked well as a team within the SOP's which I guess is just what they're there for!

I do appreciate what people are saying about "do the cheapest course, don't worry about the aircraft type" but with hindsight, I wouldn't change my choice.


Thumbs up to Cam, Keith, Stuart and Co.

:ok:

[redsnail]

I would definitely get clarification on that point from the CAA.
From reading LASORS, Section G1.2 Notes, you're right about the 100 hours in a Flight Simulator however, that is usually referring to time spent on a conversion course for an aircraft type rating.

An MCC isn't a type rating. An MCC is teaching folks how to behave/communicate in a two or more crew situation. It isn't teaching you how to fly that aircraft. From LASORS Section F MCC, you can get a reduction of the amount of hours required if you are using the same flight simulator for both the MCC training and the type rating training. This must be done within 6 months.

[Hufty]

I did mine on a jet and am very glad I did - when it came to a jet simulator assessment I was much more comfortable with the environment than I think I would have been. It probably made the difference between getting through or not getting through.

Bournemouth on the L1011 Tristar - great fun and a good opportunity to "fly" a classic old airliner that you'll certainly never get to fly for real. Doing it on an FMS equipped sim though might help you in your type rating training.

[BillieBob]

caramel - redsnail is quite right, modular MCC training does not count towards the requirements for ATPL issue, or anything else apart from the MCC requirement. Only if the MCC is integral with the type rating course do the hours count.

send clowns - Quite correct. With a few notable exceptions (take-off, landing, emergency descent, etc.) all MCC training should be done with the autopilot engaged, the CAA inspectors are most insistent on this point.

However, quite wrong about your course being the first in the country to be approved, on the contrary, it is currently the last. There are no grandfather rights for the MCC course since it was not a requirement until the advent of JAR-FCL 1. The first courses to be approved would have been those of the integrated schools, OATS, BAe, etc.

If there is any advantage to doing the MCC course on a jet, which I doubt, it is more likely to come from familiarity with the modern flight deck, not from something unrepresentative like the L1011, however jolly it was to fly.

[Send Clowns]

I understood that the MCC although a certain standard of sim and instructor was required, and a certain syllabus had to be covered, was not itself an approved course until 1 Jan 2004. Hence grandfather rights came for those in operation before this time. I may be wrong, I work on ATPL groundschool not MCC.

[caramel]

redsnail - You are right got a bit ahead of myself. It was a discussion on another topic I posted logging sim hours as flight hours and I found out from the CAA that you can log the hours if on a type rating course but not on a MCC

my bad

[arfur-sixpence]

A post from michaelknight explaining his background:

Posted 9th July 2003:

....."I am basing these opinions from my experience working in the airlines as a pilot and have in the past been directly involved in the recruiting process myself".....

So watch out chaps!

then he should have a better idea of what MCC is about. The CAA would have you fly everything on autopilot if possible - including take-off and landing. You DO NOT have to fly the aeroplane with an MCC - you are in fact actively discouraged from doing so - because you are supposed to be learning how to work together as part of a crew using a airline-type SOP.

If you want to fly the sim, then hire it for some extra hours. In fact, for anyone going on to do an interview I would reccommend doing just that.

Another thought - if you do your MCC as part of an integrated course you only need to do 15 hours. If you do a modular one it is 20 hours. Those extra 5 hours make a HUGE difference.

MK - the sim manager at Jerez manages to piss of EVERYONE - especially those students who fly with him!

I stand by what I said before - the instructor counts for more than the sim.

[PPRuNe Towers]

arfur's final sentence admirably sums up PPRuNe policy on this. Word of mouth will bring you the names of those conducting MCC training with a stellar reputation.

Not the company, not the sim. The human being in the cab with you.

If doubtful buy a tame professional pilot a pint, those with many, many sim sessions signed up over the years in the same, identical sim. Each experience is made utterly different by the person behind them. They value they gained from each sim detail is entirely dependent on that person alone.

Rob Lloyd

[arfur-sixpence]

Ojuka,

Find the cheapest jet sim you can. I did mine on an ancient HS125 sim with no motion and no visuals. It DID make the difference when it came to getting my first job.

very interesting - that will be hard to justify to the CAA/JAA as a JAR approved visual system is one requirements for an FNPT2 (MCC) qualification for the device.

Hope your employers don't mind your MCC certificate being invalid!!!

[Ojuka]

Please re-read my post.

I never had a requirement to sit an MCC course.

And hence do not hold an MCC certificate.

[arfur-sixpence]

And remember, you are not being examined on your personal handling skills on an MCC course.

Find the cheapest jet sim you can. I did mine on an ancient HS125 sim with no motion and no visuals. It DID make the difference when it came to getting my first job.
not a very clear post - it would intimate that you did an MCC on a non-visual equipped sim. Not to worry, misunderstanding now cleared up.

The point remains that as long as the device is suitably qualified, it doesn't matter what it is (for the purposes of regulation).

I can fully understand a sponsor airline requiring a jet FNPT2 if their sponsored cadets are going on to jet aeroplanes - mainly because in those cases the courses are usually longer than the minimum MCC (i.e. Jet Orientation Courses) andf the extra time is used to hone the handling skills and REALLY polish the SOPs.

For a normal MCC there is some merit in using a jet sim, as long as the students are up to dealing with the extra speed , as the extra challenge will stretch you mentally and then you may gain more from it. But for an average to low average student then this may actually have a negative effect - the aircraft workload may well detract from theMCC skills training.

For michealknight, this is why the auotpilot is used - to free up capacity to actually "operate" as opposed to just "fly".

[BillieBob]

I understood that the MCC.....was not itself an approved course until 1 Jan 2004. You may be thinking of the MCC Instructor course, which was introduced in Amendment 3 to JAR-FCL 1. MCC courses have been approved ever since JAR-FCL 1 was first implementd