MCC: Oxford vs Jetlinx

[flying_saucepan]

Am about to do an mcc course and choosing between Oxford and Jetlinx. Jetlinx seems to have the nicer toys with a full motion b757 sim, while Oxford seems to have a good reputation. Guy at Oxford told me that they have a full motion FNPT II; which part of it is full motion, the whole sim or just the seats? At Jetlinx they told me that they also focus on jethandling; something which I considder a pro, though the price is somewhat higher than Oxford........all usefull comments appreciated,

cheers

[MJR]

Oxford have a generic full motion 737 EFIS Sim. Check the website.

[flying_saucepan]

I thought that a FNPT II was a static sim, if it is full motion, what is the major difference then between a full motion FNPT II and a full motion sim? and does this difference add anything to the course?

thanx

[Tinstaafl]

The difference is in the fidelity. A flight sim models a particular a/c type & model. Inside it looks like and, to different levels of success, feels like the real thing. Motion & visuals are a requirement, AFAIK. As an approved flight sim the time can count towards a type rating, type recency etc

An FNPT device (JAR speak) or equivalent doesn't necessarily have to model any particular a/c. It might on the surface look like a King Air or Seneca however it need only fly like a generic aircraft. Motion is not required but may be present. Visuals may be a requirement depending on the class of FNPT approval. FNPT experience generally only counts to meet some of the IF time needed for an IR or whatever.

[FougaMagister]

Flying Saucepan - the 737-400 FNPT II at Oxford is as realistic as they get; full visuals, full motion (yes, like the airline sims), and you do get to do some jet handling as well. The only thing it won't do (because of computer limits I suppose) is VNAV; but you get around it by using V/S or LVL CHG instead. I used it for MCC in Jan and really loved it (I wasn't a big fan of sims before, having only sampled a fixed-based Beech200 FNPT II for the IR). I spent ages on 737-500s flight decks when cabin crew last century, and the 737-400 sim looks exactly the same. By saying it's generic, they mean it's not "taylor-made" to any airline's specific requirements in particular as far as flight deck details are concerned.

I also researched Jetlinx at the time, but while the 757-200 sim at Cranebank looks great (it's one of BA's own), they are about £700 more expensive and only do one MCC course/month. Jetlinx, however, comes highly recommended.

Cheers

[Maximum]

flying_saucepan,

what FougaMagister says is incorrect I'm afraid. An FNPT II sim is not "as realistic as it gets". This is why it's an FNPT II !!

The visuals and motion are much simpler than a full up-to-date airline sim, therefore giving less realism.

The main difference though will be in handling - the FNPT II is not required to have anywhere near the fidelity of a full sim in terms of handling. This can result in some strange handling characteristics which will be very much less than realistic.

I don't mean this in any way as a criticism of any FTO's product, simply to point out the differences between a flight training device and a full sim. The FNPT II is an excellent training tool when used for the correct purpose, but it's important for you as the customer to understand what it is and what it isn't.

[FougaMagister]

Maximum - you misread me: I wrote "as realistic as THEY get" - i.e. as FNPT IIs get. I agree it's not exactly the same as an all-singing, all-dancing airline sim, but it still has full motion and visuals. The airport scenes might be a bit less accurate, but once in flight, it doesn't make much of a difference. You mention that the motion system might feel a bit different; personnaly, I found it quite impressive, and very close to the handling qualities I later experienced on the DC9-32 airline-standard sim at Flytsim.

It's all a matter of personnal choice (and Jetlinx was recommended to me by an airline TRI/TRE friend of mine, but at some point I had to make a financially-motivated choice).


Cheers

P.S.: I'm not trying to rate one versus the other, and I'm not in the business of helping Oxford Aviation's marketing dept.

[Hulk]

I would definitively opt for the B757(what is the level, B, C or D???).
at least you will have a good idea how to use the FMC, autopilot on a Boeing.and the 757, is not a massage chair!:p

[BillieBob]

Flying Saucepan - Here is the objective comparison. Which, if any of the following are of importance to you, only you can judge.


Jetlinx -
British Airways Boeing 757 Level D Flight Simulator qualified under JAR-STD 1(A)
Instruction given by current airline training captains (BA and Virgin)
Instruction given in an airline training environment (BA Cranebank training center)
Cost slightly more than OAT

OAT -
Generic twin jet FNPT II(MCC) configured as a Boeing 737 qualified under JAR-STD 3(A)
Instruction given by retired airline pilots
Instruction given in a flying school environment
Cost slightly less than Jetlinx

Both organisations are approved by the CAA under JAR-FCL 1 to exactly the same criteria and the bit of paper you get at the end is of equal value from either place.

[Hulk]

not totally right billy boy,

Level D sim can be logged as real flight hours (under FAA).
Once again,I will definitively go on the 757

[G-SPOTs Lost]

Why bother with Either

Save a bundle of cash and do it at Multiflite.

All MCC Courses are obliged to tell you that they are NOT offering any sort of type training. Its about MCC not about Jet Handling.

If you are doing the job properly you should have the autopilot in by flap retraction anyway. Its about resources and your understanding of how they can help you, the AP flys the ac the crew run the checklist and make the aircraft safe either in the air or on the ground.

Save the money, I have had mixed stories about multiflite however I must say that the MCC course was very good and the simulator was very very good (Kingair 200 good visuals and the ability to make all sorts of bits drop off at all the wrong times!)

It must also be said that its much more likely that you will be flying that genre of aircraft with your first job so its also a little bit more relevant.

The course is £1850 plus VAT and only lasts 8 days instead of the more common 10-12. All instructors are Current airline pilots or Ex Caafu examiners

You pays your money..........

[TFG]

I have recently completed an Mcc Course with Jetlinx and cannot recommend it highly enough. My course was run by a guy called Cameron Mackay who is a BA 777 f/o and my other instructor was Steve Coombes also a BA 777 f/o. Both of them are ex RAF fighter pilots. The level of instruction was outstanding. Not only their knowledge and teaching techniques but the enthusiasm of these guys was what struck me. They expected 100% and in return gave 110%!. The course is on the two BA 757 sims at Cranebank(Heathrow) and although this is an Mcc course as much emphasis was put on jet handling as Crm and British Airways SOP's followed to the letter.
If you want to just turn up and get your certificate (cause Mcc is not pass or fail) then this is not the course for you.If you want to walk away having flown a 757 sim for 20 hours under the best instruction that I have had during my flight training feeling like you have learnt more than you could have wished for and being really pi**ed off because the course is over then this is the place for you.
The only downside are the sim times which for me 2 were at 2300-0300.
I have no connection with this company financial or otherwise

[witchdoctor]

My MCC was completed at OAT, but as an integrated student I didn't exactly have much choice in the matter as it was included in the price.

Having said that, I reckon it was by far and away the best part of the entire course. The instructors are all top blokes, mostly ex-RAF and corporate pilots. The kit they use is a lot of fun, and unless you are a complete spotter, more than real enough to get the job done. The procedures are all based on bmi 737-400 ops for those that really want to know these things.:8

For what it's worth, if you are looking to do this as a stand-alone piece of training, go visit these places, check out the kit, the training manuals and talk to the instructors about their experience. But remember, it is to get you an MCC certificate and to experience the skills involved, not to teach you how to fly jets. Look forward to some feedback once you've got the certificate in the bag.

[flying_saucepan]

Thanks for the info folks, I went for Jetlinx and will start with the groundschool soon.Once I've been through the motions I'll post some feedback.

cheers