When I placed my first post "Is MPL Mickey Mouse" back in 2007, I found myself arguing FOR the MPL. I really wanted to do it. 12 months in Philippines, $70000 which equalled £38K at the time - straight into an A320 - Job Done!!!!
All I got back were posts from old-schoolers saying that with 70 hours, they would only let me operate the flaps! I argued against these derogatory with (in hindsight) naive comments:
I argued that you wouldn't pass the TR if you weren't good enough! So you pass it hence you can fly!-Whats the problem? What would an extra 180 hours give me? If I managed to fly an A320 after 70 hours and pass the TR, there would have been no need to do a 250hr fATPL! No expereince of command decisions?-I'll learn that in time, I'm not the captain just yet!
Now do my assumptions still hold true? If they do, then perhaps there is nothing wrong with the MPL and nothing "Mickey Mouse" about it.
Just playing devil's advocate here.
I'll be doing my fATPL the old fashioned mod way
