A375 the 'one man band' stuff that I was alluding to that is inappropriate to multi pilot ops is the need to read and do checklists on one's own, tune navaids, feather engines, operate gear and flaps etc while flying. If trainees go straight from this environment to airline flying and try that on they will get severely slapped down, so why spend big bucks teaching them to do it that way?
Basic hand flying ability SHOULD still be part of the MPL syllabus, and I would hope that it will be tested at every stage of training via system failures etc. Realistic system failures can reinforce the need to maintain basic skills and will have something they can relate to. Endless steep turns or hand flown ILS approaches achieve bugger-all once the basic motor skills are mastered. If we want to develop survival skills, a solid hour in the simulator with all the electrics failed or degraded hydraulics beats 10 hours in a twin droning around on NDB work, knowing that nothing can really be allowed to go wrong because it can't be set up realistically or safely. Even so-called engine failures in a light twin are a non-event because we don't do them right at V1 (because it doesn't exist), at limiting weights, or at night, or in fog etc.
But as well as the basics, MPL will develop the whole team approach from early on. For where most of these guys will be headed - ie straight to the RHS of an advanced transport type - there is simply no point in flogging around in a light twin when for the same cost at least 10 times the amount of exposure via good simulators can be bought. And of course all this is cost-driven, so it's a case of doing the best we can for the dollars available.
As it stands, the Aussie training scene is falling behind the times with many schools running 40 year old analogue aircraft (what a disgrace) and will get further behind if it does not get off its collective bum and embrace MPL with modern glass cockpits and simulators.