Well said, Alex.
JOC = Jet Orientation Course - usually airline sponsored, trains cadets in the airline specific SOP using paperwork that emulates their sponsor's wherever possible. Where do you stop? When the money runs out because the more that you do at the relatively cheap FTO stage the less you spend on type training.
JIC = Jet Introduction Course - usually self sponsored and therefore working to a typical SOP, using typical paperwork etc. Unless you know which airline the cadet is going to you can only work to a generic SOP - but does this matter? MCC is not about the SOP
per se but is about the human factors/CRM skills of working
with an SOP. It is about monitoring, cross-checking, situational awareness and prioritisation, not about whether an airline calls "positive climb" or "positive rate".
What a JIC does (and what an MCC plus extra hours can also do to an extent) is expand the candidate's situational awareness, experience and jet handling skills. These ARE things that will be useful for ANY jet sim based selection procedure and also for any jet type-conversion (and also, to a lesser degree) on any turboprop selection/rating.
The training has to be good - concentrating upon the MCC/CRM/airmanship skills of the cadet. If it is to help with the handling elements of a type rating then it must also be done on a good quality training device - and in my opinion that should be a device which is at or near the fidelity of a Full Flight Simulator (rather than some of the less able MCC specific devices out there).
The point I have made a couple of times already is that the GAPAN/EPST survey would appear to suggest that airlines now regard this sort of training as an essential requirement for the candidate. As such, if the survey and GAPAN are to be believed, there is a need for people to provide this training and (unfortunately for them) there is a need for the candidate to dip into his/her pocket even further.
However, maybe the cost isn't that bad - if you combine your JIC with the (JAA required) MCC then you will probably have to shell out for at least an extra 12-16 hours to get some real value out of it. Because of the relative costs of synthetic devices and real aeroplanes this will cost much less than the same number of hours on a Seneca. Speak to the marketing department at the FTO that you are considering and get quotes. Then decide for yourselves!
By the way, Alex, I didn't want to name the organisation that I work for because I did not want to be accused of using this forum to advertise. I have not tried to hide the fact that I work for an FTO or that I truely beileve in the value of what we teach.
By the way, PPRuNe Towers, I find the following comment of your's rather offensive:
Finally, I've been flying since 1975 and I will tell you this for free. In your journey through flight training you will be very lucky if you even meet 5 people in FTO's with integrity and no other thought than helping you. With a very few honourable and legendary exceptions they will be career flying and ground instructors with no say in sales, marketing, premises or equipment.
With a VERY few exceptions the instructors I have met in my time with FTOs have been dedicated people who take a personal pride in the success of their students and share their joy and despair. Most will "go the extra mile" if it is needed - especially if you have a student who is truely willing to put the extra effort in themselves. To suggest that "all but 5 people" per FTO have no integrity and are only after your money just shows how out of touch you must be.