Clark Institute of Aviation [Archive] - Page 3

jtcbclark

2nd Oct 2008, 15:49

looks like from your email you are a student of CA. but how could you have seen them in nana plaza (if indeed they went there) if you were here in clark? you make all us in this thread look stupid. well, if you were really based in Bangkok as per your profile who just joined this October and posted just a single note in pprune, how would you know about these people in Clark and incidentally saw them in nana plaza? What a coincidence! Unless you are actually from here and just added another new name again in pprune and spreading lies!

here's what I think. You changed your name again so you won't be recognized as you are once again a very new member of this thread but you have a lot of angst to grind. i thought you (is that you JT/CB) were booted out of CA because of your incompetence leaving the school cash strap with 100+ students unable to graduate? and of course, to hide your mismanagement you’re putting the blame on to the bombays of this world.

now that they infused the necessary capital and installed the new management to make things work, you and your buddy once again enter the scene instigating the students and bad mouthing the company on mismanagement of contracts and training that were actually under you care then so you can divert the blame to the new management and of course to the bombays. great work!

JT/CB, you treated us like sh*t and the employees are now willing to petition you as undesirable aliens. while i personally don’t know these new people from the management, we would rather have anyone than the two of you jokers around. why don’t you try visiting CA again so i can inform the cook you illegally dismissed; i heard he has been waiting for you so he can hang your heads in his kitchen. that bad, ha?

for the other people in this thread, my apologies. if you want to know what’s really going on in the school please talk to the students or to the employees and see for yourself how things have changed after these charlatans left the management of the company. Don’t listen to these impostors pretending to be students in this forum as they can no longer embezzle the funds of the school.
probably that’s why they know what nana plaza is because these gangsters who are not welcome in their own countries run brothels in this country.
by the way Jonathan Thorp and Christer Bigander, don’t pretend to be Filipinos, you are not!:=

jtcbclark

2nd Oct 2008, 15:57

if this was how you did business when you were still managing CA, not anymore.:yuk: are you and nana plaza one and the same?:D

funnydaytoday2

3rd Oct 2008, 11:07

sorry to burst your little bubble of glory:ouch::ouch: there jtcbclark..
but i have no affiliation with JT or CB. nore have i ever really met them... so before you start pointing your finger again, you should get your facts right...
but let me explain to you why im asking what im asking, just so you know why. The reason im so concerned about the new management is because of what happened with the old management. We, the students, all suffered so much under the hands of those other people. And this management has done nothing to prove to us "yet" that they can be trusted. You seem to forget that the key management that actually controled CA during those days are still around...you think things have really changed?? :ugh::ugh:please... the GM and he's Asst are but puppets for these guys..
So yes... We the students have every right to know what's happening with the school, we the students have every right to know what the management are doing... We have that right..

fernandeztv

4th Oct 2008, 06:31

Funnydaytoday2....I too am a cadet at CA. From my user id, its very clear as to who i am and where i come from.

So can we please know as to who you really are and in which batch you belong to? Reason why i am asking you is that if you ask anyone from course 1 to course 6...they all know the transformation that CA has undergone since june 2008. IF you are somebody from batch 1 to 6...please come over to dorm F...i will treat you to a drink and we can talk!

Till June 2008 i along with my bathmates were very concerned as to what will happen to us. there was an immense possibility that the school might just shut down and put an end to many dreams. Guys like me who are non sponsored had paid up in FULL even before i set my foot in Philippines. I was literally staring at Bankruptcy as i had sold me house and possessions and borrowed money to pay my tution fee. (and provide for my family also in my absence).

However now the things have changed for the better (as you can verify IF you just come to school and see for yourself).

I alway choose to ignore the Bumbay/Bombays bashing that some of my suppossedly fellow cadets (u never know whothey are!) keep posting at regular intervals in this thread. Is it of any use to anybody?!?

If you even care to ready my posts you should be aware that batch A cadets all are on track to graduate in Oct/Nov. This is as was planned by the mgmt and conveyed to the students by the students affairs officer a few months back. Nobody believed that the school would turn around. But now as a cadet when you can SEE the results for yourself. Should it really matter as to who is running the show? What one should be more concerned about is to see how his/her training is progressing and whether a clear path is visible in the future for the training to proceed. (That was ABSENT a few months back with the previous mgmt)

It was very clear a few months back that its going to take a while for the all the mess to get sorted out. Nobody believed that anything good would happen...so why is it that you find it so difficult to digest the fact that something good is finally happening.

Pep talk that i had with most of my batchmates and upper classmates only indicates that most of them are satisfied that their training is finally progressing. So what exacly is the problem now other than the FACT that we anyways are delayed. So it took 2 years instead of 1 to get into the right seat of an A320...so what? Is the wait not woth it? IF i were so dissatisfied with my training here, i would have quit long back and taken the traditional route.

Its a sad thing that even now most are not aware how MPL differs from a traditional CPL. People look at it from a monetary point of view and say oh for XXXX$$$$ we can do 200 hrs of flying and a blah blah blah type rating. well at the end of the day it is a personal choice...

I have worked in different positions in my past jobs. Most of the latter part of my job i was into grading people for their efficiency and skills. If i were to apply any of those techniques now...i would give full credit to the current mgmt and the their staff (irrespective of nationality) for turning around this school to what it should have been in the first place. TRUE...a lot of things can still be improved...but it would be highly unfair to just put down anyone without actually looking at what has been achieved in the past few months.

Last but not the least. As a cadet I will continue to post the updates from CA (as and when they happen) and they will all be verifiable FACTS only.

fernandeztv

5th Oct 2008, 12:37

CA finally have got the first 2 of 6 C172s that were purchased. 2 C172SP Skyhawks were flown from Cebu by CA FIs and they landed at OMNI yesterday. (04 oct)

They have been registered as RP-C3544 and RP-C3545. One of them is equipped with dual Garmin GPS and the other with a Bendix King. The aircrafts actually look pretty good (and well equipped)! Hope to fly them soon...

Also finally we guys from batch D have started flying IFR sorties :)

Cheers....

Edit: Just checked out RP-C3544 today. Dual Garmin G430 GPS. Garmin avionics & Xponder. Leather seats, plush interiors...(a big change from the Cessna's that I have flown till date :ok:) Ah...just wish they transfer the registry soon as i am one of the first in the waiting list to fly them ;))

son gokou

6th Oct 2008, 05:37

thanks fernandeztv (http://www.pprune.org/members/143860-fernandeztv) for the news.:D im glad the planes are at now omni. safe flight to all batch D who started flying their IR sorties and we batch F are just as excited as everyone. anyway, that long vacation that we had was a blessing in disguise for me cause it gave me time to study in advance some A320 lessons and training videos that a good ol friend shared to me :rolleyes:. thanks tom. keep the blue side up course oo4/o7

738FO

6th Oct 2008, 06:54

Well if you guys are already willing to spend 75000usd why not go for Delta Connection in Sanford Florida? Same evrything except you'll be flying the cirrus sr21 and 22. Direct hiring too after you grad. Most Airlines look what Av school you graduated from nowdays. Might as well go for the best. Or for the undergrads out there. if you have the money, why not go for embry riddle.

Im not saying that theres something wrong with the Av schools in the philippines, just lettin you guys know that you have lots of options.:)

fernandeztv

6th Oct 2008, 10:03

@738FO..again this is exactly what i was talking about in my previous posts...People usually come up advising that for XXX$$$ you could as well do it at such and such a place ....

I agree without any contest that both Delta Connection, Embry Riddle are very well known schools and have been around for a while.

However i do not completely agree to the "Same evrything except " statement...as both Delta conn and Emry Riddle offer their training for the CPL and NOT MPL! ... and that IS the biggest difference!

I agree that MPL is still in its infancy and we as the first few graduates will be judged with a microscope! I sincerely hope we live upto the expections of the the aviation community!

From the mindset of the aviation community at the US, i really doubt if MPL will ever catch on there...but in European and Asian countries my personal feeling is that MPL will in due course catch up...purely as an alternative to an Airline oriented training methodology. (For G.A ofcourse its the traditional way...no question abt that!)

FlyBe in U.K is the latest airline to give MPL a try. (Though i wonder if they will do it for their Dash 8 Q400s or their Embraer E195s....who knows maybe both types!)

Thai is about to start an MPL programme. Back in India, The govt owned flying school at Gondia has a JV with CAE to launch the first MPL training programme. As is already known Alteon is currently training cadets the MPL way for 2 Chinese airlines.
----------------------------------------------------
Flighglobal advertises a debate on CPL Vs MPL during the Crew Management Conference 2008 1st, 2nd Dec, Dubai.

2008 Flight International Crew Management Conference (http://www.flightglobalevents.com/p/1523)

Should be interesting to watch the events at that conference.
-----------------------------------------------------

@Son_gokou

Thanks for your wishes buddy. By the way in another 2 weeks Batch D would be in their Night sorties...that is assuming that we have only RP-C2818 and the Omni a/c for the IF sorties!(and weather :bored:) If CA 172s get operational...it might be even faster. So batch E should gearup for your own IF sorties. :ok: Batch F should not be far behind....

tbavprof

7th Oct 2008, 06:34

fernadeztv,

Am I reading this correctly? You're a self-funded MPL candidate? Why?

At some point (like wanting to change aircraft, air carrier, or upgrade to captain) you'll have to break down and spend the money to get a CPL or ATPL. And the first Euro MPL's are now indefinitely furloughed...with no other flying work even available to them because of their qualifications.

If I wanted to fly the big shiny ones, and was willing to put up with 10 years of indentured servitude for a carrier where I knew I could go for 10 years without a layoff, the MPL might be an attractive option. But the push behind the license was as a benefit to airlines, not to aviation and aviators.

If you're doing it for yourself, and paying for it yourself, you're being ripped off. If it's a matter of initial training costs, you can get better value for your money (meaning more usable credentials) elsewhere, as has been pointed out.

And while you had a nice list of where the MPL is beginning to pop up, you're being a bit naive to assume that it is being introduced because its a good idea and there are no other motives. Remember, the guy in charge of that bright shiny still has to hold an ATP. An MPL with 20,000 hours (19,850 on type) still doesn't qualify you to act as pilot in command.

fernandeztv

7th Oct 2008, 08:08

tbavprof...you are right in many ways but as to your question regarding as to why i am a self funded cadet is simply because i wanted to try MPL instead of a CPL...period (No matter what the cost). I did not wake up one day and decide that i wanted to be an airline pilot. Nor did i come to clark aviation because of any agent!

I was bitten by the aviation bug right since i was a kid but my parents never had the financial ability or willingness to send their only child into what they deemed as a dangerous job :(. (Mom, Dad..I love you :ok:) BUt they did let me do whatever it took to keep my interest alive. The only way i could keep in touch with the field was to hang around airfields, airports and get whatever information i could. I also borrowed/bought reading material right from coffee table books to Operation manuals, FCOMs from friends/well wishers. After 2 years in Army reserve, I made it to the Indian Air Force selections but because i had an Engineering Degree I could not make it to the flying cadre as that was reserved for cadets without a degree :ugh: and for those who joined the selection process before they started college...age limits etc etc.
To cut a long story short...i had to work to pay for my flying lessons and i first came acorss MPL in 2004 (YES repeat 2004) That was the time i belonged to/moderated a pretty big Aviation internet community back in India.

I have a lot of friends who in 2004 started their CPL training and most of them are now flying for Indian Carriers. You have to understand that GenAV is almost non existant in India. Unlike here in the Philippines, India is well connected by Roads and Railways ...eliminating Gen Av flying...and if it ever existed it was for the ultra rich.
So..back in India airlines were recruiting fresh CPL holders with as little as 250 hrs of flying and a minimum 25 hrs of Multi time. (of which 10 can be in any approved sim). None of my friends who joined Indian Carriers have more than 300 hrs at the time of joining. (except one who extensively flew Gen Av in the US) Most of them had a tough time during the type rating. That is when MPL came up. Purely from an Indian perspective and operating conditions...MPL seemed a better way to train for an airline...considering the fact that the aircrafts in question were A320 and B737NG and not the earlier generation types like DC9, MD 80, B727-200Adv or B737-200 etc. The pilot of a current generation aircraft is more of a manager than a pilot used to flying a C172. The Cessna is such an honest aircraft you want to lose altitude fast ...just chop power and pitch down slightly....can i do the same on an A320?

Feb 14th 1990 an A320 crashed in Bangalore killing 92 people. Both the pilots were captains with more than 30000 hrs put together. Only one hitch...almost all that time was on the B737-200 which was the earlier type operated by Indian Airlines. (actually that was the first time i ever saw an A320...still remember that day!) It was blamed on improper training of the pilots...but its also a well known human factor that you usually regress to your old way of flying. Many of my friends had trouble in the SIM sessions coz they could not get out of the mindset of single eng flying. leave alone jets..MCC...hahaha that was a big joke. It is as if that one has to "unlearn" most of the flying techniques when learning a new type.

By the way i dont know who started this disinformation campaign that an MPL holder can never be PIC! ofcourse when the 1500 hr comes we too are eligible for the ATP LIKE ANY OTHER CPL HOLDER! Dont take my word! Get it checked with ICAO! (i did it...as is said i did not just wake up one day to any ad for the MPL :)) What we are not eligible to do is ...ummm take your GF or Wife or friends around in a C172 for a joyride. Now that is a personal choice. If i wanted GEnAV trust me i would have done a CPL. (Actually there is nothing stopping me from doing a CPL even after i get my MPL :ok:)

Now Why Clark Aviation? Well well well...i never even dreamed of the fact that i would end up doing MPL! the very thing that i had been tracking fora long long time. After a lot of debates/information exchange with seasoned pilots and well known aviators back in India...i decided to join Calrk Av. Why? Coz both Alteon and CAP (Denmark) were not taking in any self sponsored cadets. And they were not taking any Indians either.

Now the idea was that we eventually go to work with Indian Carriers...but unfortunately the DGCA (whenever someone says ATO is so slow....pls come to DGCA India...ATO/CAAP seems so fast! DO you know that one can appear for the CPL written exams only 4 times a year back in India? For an initial issue of a Class 1 medical examination date i had to wiat for 7 months! Should give you an Idea of how DGCA works)...ok the DGCA of india is dragging its feet on MPL because of reasons which i dont wish to elaborate as it is of no concern to the people reading this thread!

Last but not the least. I earned every penny/paisa of the tution fee that i paid to CA(i did not borrow from the banks or my parents)...so I think as an individual i have every right to invest my money as i deem it fit. I am happy with what is going on right now. I am happy with my training so far except for the fact that i got delayed...but then if everything happened as one wants it to...we can as well be in heaven!

The obvious next question i know people will throw at me is ...so what are you going to do with your license ...you dont have an airline! Now that is an answer which i will not answer now. I will post updates here as and when they happen. Not before :). If at all anyone in CA should be worried it should be ME. But i am just going ahead with my training. Why get stressed with things beyond your control. There are others to take care of it!

Somebody thinks i got ripped off?....time will tell. Till then...safe flt to all. Keep the blue side up.

Cheers...

funnydaytoday2

7th Oct 2008, 11:52

You are not only a true scholar but a gentlemen in every sence of the way. And before anything else i do appologise for any of my colleagues racist remarks.. as you can see by my posts i have never stooped so low.
let me inlighten you on one thing, I have no problem with CA, As a student i want nothing but the best for CA to work.. Its this lack of information in the air everytime i walk out my dorm that i dont seem to agree on... can you disagree on me there...exactly... there are no memo's or meetings or any type of interaction between the the cadets and this new management... So yes i do care to read your posts.. and am aware of the progress that has been made at CA, very positive to the cadets infront of me and you.. but as i recall these descision were made prior to the new mang coming over. they only fine tuned descisions that were already done by others..they still have alot to prove to us.
Ps I am in my IFR fase..
keep up the good posts
happy flying

tbavprof

7th Oct 2008, 13:59

Fernandeztv,

Best of luck to you. I understand where you're coming from. I trained several of those 300 hour FO's you had in India.

But, the problems you mentioned don't sound like they're derived from a "single-engine mindset." Sounds like piss-poor selection, and shoddy sim, LOFT, and CRM training. All understandable for an aviation market going from zero to huge in such a short time, with a regulatory body that has virtually no experience, and any warm body with a CPL could get an FO slot. You can get type-rated at any point (PPL or CPL) in coming up, but the standard for the type is still ATP standards. There aren't a lot of 50 hour or 250 hour pilots that fly to those standards consistently.

I think you better check Annex 1 again as far as your ATP goes. Special attention to the sections on "pilot in command" time required. Don't see how you can make that time if you can't act as PIC or log pilot-in-command time for anything but that 100 hours in the Cessna.

lingsy

8th Oct 2008, 03:37

funnyday2day. With your post, you just confirmed my suspicion that you are not a CA student/cadet. Why? You seemed to have missed the many memos, announcements, training schedules currently posted in the Flight Ops office board.

FYI, I belong to the lower batches of cadets due to report back in a few weeks to commence our IFR phase of the training, but despite our long vacation, we have been regularly updated by the new management of all the developments going on via e-mails and meetings. I would say that the present management is carrying out a pretty good job in putting back on track what the previous CA management "did" to the school.

Cheers mate!

fernandeztv

9th Oct 2008, 05:28

Funnydaytoday2 thanks for your kind words! As i said i really dont care about the racist posts as i dont even know if the people who are posting them are cadets at all....

Anyway we as cadets have gone through repeated nightmares of inactivity and uncertainity. What matters now is that we definitely do have a clear path in front of us and it really is encouraging to see the progression of our cadets/friends in the upper batches. So lets just give the current management their fair chance...As many pointed out, there is still a lot to be done...but surely we are all moving forward now.

I tend to agree on the information part...we dont exactly have any centralised mechanism for it yet...we usually have to get it from the flt ops notice boards to check who is in what phase. It would be nice if there were bulletins regarding the progressions. (I have also raised this issue with them) But what does happen that we (course reps) have a meeting with the mgmt and usually i send the minutes as a detailled mail to my batchmates. till we have a central information distribution mechanism...i think i will just continue to do that.

Cheers....

fernandeztv

9th Oct 2008, 06:01

@tbavprof....i have taken the following from the CAR released by ATO/CAAP on 23June2008.
taken from section

2.3.3.5 MULTI-CREW PILOT LICENSE (MPL)

2.3.3.5.2 REQUIREMENTS

(g) Privileges. Subject to compliance with the requirements specified in this Part, the
privileges of the holder of an MPL shall be:
(1) (i) to exercise all the privileges of the holder of a private pilot license in the
appropriate airplane category provided the requirements have been met;
(ii) to exercise the privileges of the instrument rating in a multi-crew operation;
and
(iii) To act as co-pilot in an airplane required to be operated with a co-pilot.
(2) Before exercising the privileges of the instrument rating in a single pilot operation,
the license holder shall have demonstrated an ability to act as pilot-in-command in
a single pilot operation exercised solely by reference to instruments.
(3) Before exercising the privileges of a commercial pilot license in a single pilot
operation, the license holder shall have:
(i) completed 70 hours, either as pilot-in-command, or made up by not less than
10 hours as pilot-in-command and the necessary additional flight time as pilotin-
command under supervision;
(ii) meet the requirements for the commercial pilot license.
(3) Act as second-in-command/co-pilot in commercial air transportation in airplanes
required to be operated with a co-pilot by the type certificate of the aircraft or the
regulations under which the aircraft will be operated; and
(4) When the holder of an airline transport pilot license in the airplane category has
only previously held a MPL, the privileges of the license shall be limited to multicrew
operations unless the holder has met the requirements established. Any
limitation of privileges shall be endorsed on the license.

As made clear by point (4) an MPL holder can directly upgrade to an ATP.

Also from a purely logical point of view...why on earth would an airline invest on a life long copilot? :rolleyes: That too 50+ of them?

Agreed that when ICAO approved of MPL in Nov 2006, it was not as if all the contracting states had integrated MPL into their systems! The implementation part was left to the contracting states...and it does take time for each state to implement the new type of license...which also happens to the first new type of license since WW II!

Before one puts something down totally (even before giving it a chance)just because the current gudelines do not have any provision, please atleast acknowledge that something different is being attempted...and it took ICAO 5 years to arrive at MPL. It will take some more time for the contracting states to fully implement it.

Way back in 2006 when the debate on MPL was going on in the Indian internet forums...the primary detractors for MPL turned out to be some well known FTO owners in India! Surprisingly some of the people in favour of MPL were the retired TRIs/TREs!

tbavprof

9th Oct 2008, 07:00

Fernandeztv,

Appreciate your DGAC post, but I'm not sure that it says what you claim it does. And I'm not saying anything about the thoroughness or appropriateness of the training methods, but about value received. But before we get into details, please think carefully about your question "...why on earth would an airline invest on a life long copilot? :rolleyes: That too 50+ of them." If the idea of an entrapped, low-cost labor force doesn't thrill you, then you're thinking like a wannabe pilot, not like an airline executive.;)

Now to the details.

According to #1, you'll be able to exercise PPL privileges. You'll be able to exercise PPL/IR privileges only in a multi-crew operation. So, no renumeration, and no instrument work unless you have a similarly qualified crewmate, AND the operation requires a multi-crew. And you can exercise PPL privilege as co-pilot of an AIRCRAFT requiring a multi-crew (not the operation). Again, no money.

A PPL gives you the same privileges as 1(i) and 1 (iii). A PPL/IR removes the restriction for multi-crew operations.

How is #2's "demonstrated ability" verified? Checkride? Syllabus completion? Again, you've now matched the same privileges as a PPL/IR.

Number 3 is interesting. Okay, a minimum of an additional 10 hours, or 70 hours depending on your viewpoint. Take the low estimate. So you'll have to fund an additional 10 hours out-of-pocket anyways. Now, how does that additional "acting as PIC under supervision" get accumulated? Remember PF/PNF has nothing to do with PIC. So, at a minimum, you will have to gain the additional 60 hours under supervision in an AIRCRAFT and OPERATION authorized for single-pilot operations.

So you have now equaled the privileges of a CPL/IR, which includes Act as second-in-command/co-pilot in commercial air transportation in airplanes
required to be operated with a co-pilot by the type certificate of the aircraft or the regulations under which the aircraft will be operated.

And now to #4. You've conveniently ignored my suggestion that you look at the PIC times required for an ATPL. If there are any shortcut hours (and from the lack of inclusion in the regulation I'm betting there aren't any), the license would have to be endorsed "Does Not Meet ICAO Requirements", along with the limitations. This is the same endorsement many states issue when FE time is counted (generously) toward the required flight time.

So now, you have the privileges of an ATP, restricted to multicrew operations, WITHIN the issuing state.

And a strict reading of all this is even worse. For someone who has never held an CPL, the limitations cannot be removed without meeting the standard requirements for an ATPL. Again, all the same questions raised in number 3 rear their heads.

Once you meet the PIC requirements, then you'll have all the privileges of an ATP.

Again, the MPL may be a fast-track to the right seat of a bright, shiney airliner, but it's definitely the slow boat to an ATPL (except for the 1500 TT, where it's on a par with the JAA frozen ATPL).

Best of luck to you.

skypilot66666

10th Oct 2008, 15:33

is that you in_go

skypilot66666

13th Oct 2008, 15:19

what are you ding for a living, kaus trouble for everyone, wheres the admin they arent doing their jobs, this idiot mentions full names of people here, maybe this is MW.

regardless admin pls get on the ball and do your jobs cut these idots off this site.

shellybeach

16th Oct 2008, 02:54

He did mention full names but fair enough, these 2 guys should be outed, they live off scams and poor filipinas, there main source of money is from girlie bars like the la cafe in maynila. Try and name 1 good thing they did at CA. The undesirable alien is the way to go, do CA and this fine country a big favour...just mt 10 cents worth...

738FO

16th Oct 2008, 04:43

fernandeztv ,

Yeah MPL go shortcuts on all the training. just remember "A good pilot is an Experienced pilot"
:=:=

And by the way, im not advertising , its a suggestion. i sure hope you know the difference

gilderoy lockhart

16th Oct 2008, 08:26

All experienced pilots are not good pilots!

fernandeztv

16th Oct 2008, 08:27

@738FO My apologies if i sounded disrespectful. MPL is not all bout shortcuts as many do believe...but it will take time to prove ourselves on the line...for that we first have to graduate! Hope to share the skies with you some day....

Safe flt...Cheers..

fernandeztv

16th Oct 2008, 08:33

tbavprof (http://www.pprune.org/members/222908-tbavprof) I got you were trying say...reg the 100 hrs PIC req for an ATP. As of today the CAR for ATP has not been amended but rather only an additional section for MPL has been introduced into the CARs here in Philippines. I do sincerely believe that this is not the last time any amendment is made. But anyway right now the focus is on getting to graduate with the requisite skills! Still a long way to go for ATP. But again thanks for your insight into the issue.

738FO

16th Oct 2008, 14:19

Yeah all experienced pilots are not Good Pilots, i agree. but i would be more comfortable if the person on my right have thousand of hours and not hundreds. Woudnt you?

738FO

16th Oct 2008, 14:37

fernandeztv,

No harm done. :ok:

Goodluck with your flying career.

Good Speed and Safe Flying

Spongebobsqpants

16th Oct 2008, 19:53

738FO
Agreed. But there again, I'd also feel more comfortable if the person on my right had 15,000 hours, long blond hair, legs up to her armpits and black leather boots and 20 years old. We can all dream.

So where did you come from and how many hours do you have? I take it that your handle isn't illustrative of your experience, because if you are still an FO with thousands of hours then what went wrong?

738FO

17th Oct 2008, 00:55

lol Yeah I guess we can all dream of having a blonde chick on our right.

Nothing happend man, clocked about 600 pic ,1400 sic on the 738. Was on the CRJ9 before that due to the full roster on the 738. TT 3900+ , taking the left seat anytime next year. still need a couple of hundred hours more. Company needs at least 4500 tt and 750 pic on type to take over the left.

im stil on my late 20's. so nothing really went wrong.

fernandeztv

5th Nov 2008, 00:46

Was busy flying my aft end off...or waiting for a flt burning my aft end off at omni field ;) (which actually happens more often! Our "Visiting Friendly Forces" over the past 2 weeks ensured that i got shooed off more often than not by the controllers either over the CIA station or over the CAB VOR) Well have another flt in the afternoon so i have to go off soon now!

HAd a nice experience the other day when the Clark controller cleared us to hold over CAB VOR at 4000 and when we were 10 DME from the station Fort MAg politely shooed us off saying that a C130 was paradroping in the vicinity. Then we were asked to monitor Approach freq as well as there was heavy traffic there and we were asked to keep a look out for a few F18s...and right then whoosh we saw a couple of them cut right in front of us from the starboard side to the port maybe abt 500 ft below! And we thought OK time to bug out!

Ok updates as far as i know...course A will graduate soon. Batch D has started MCC yesterday. OK me back to flying now...
Cheers....

Bagoongathipon

7th Nov 2008, 10:20

Get this.. one of my classmates was on her progress check. She was stabilized on the ILS about 5DME finals at 80knots. Then she can hear on the radio that about 3 F18s were behind her and also about land at the same runway and another batch were holding short on the runway.

Since C172 was to slow for those F18s, she made the 3 F18s initiate go around. (as she can hear on the radio)... and she and the instructor can see the planes both on their port and starboard side! How cool that can be? And imagine the feeling of the instructor!

I also have my own experience.. as i have touchdown and rolled out on RWY02R, the tower called for me to expedite my exit because two C130s were about to take off! When i exited the runway for stop and go, i held short runway 02R on Fox 5 while watched the two C130s take off! A sight for sore eyes! :) Im done with my Core flying and it was a nice and memorable way of finishing it!

jester_icarus

7th Nov 2008, 20:22

starboard...port...????? 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock????? are those the proper phraseology for aviation? just curious????

Bagoongathipon

7th Nov 2008, 23:54

"starboard...port...????? 3 o'clock or 9 o'clock????? are those the proper phraseology for aviation? just curious????"

No. Do we have to use standard callouts in this forum too? Just curious.

just curious????

Do we use question marks in declarative sentence? Again, Just curious.

powerstall

8th Nov 2008, 01:11

..."A good pilot is an Experienced pilot" ....

An old bloke once told me... it would be better off to Be an old pilot rather than being a very good pilot... :hmm:

He just retired and got a very big pension and living of his big retirement pay.

fernandeztv

14th Nov 2008, 12:17

WOW someone seems to have had better fun with the F18s :ok: hahaha
Once we were made to hold short of 02L to give way to a couple of Sikorsky CH-53 Super Stallions taking off. Also a bunch of F18s and Av-8 Harriers were being readied close to Fox7 and Delta intersection...had a lot of photo ops ;)

IFR traffic has become quite heavy now a days at clark! The other day i was holding over the VOR at 5000. My fellow batchmate was holding at 6000. I could see him clearly...both of us in the same leg of the hold. At the same time there was a PAL a/c on the ILS and another one just airborne and requesting clearence to proceed to the VOR. It was a good thing that the ATC was accomodating all of us training guys!

Yesterday i had a good experience of flying actual IFR conditions. We had a huge Cu buildup over the station at 4200ft. Had to hold at 5000ft. Was smack into the clouds and it was pretty turbulent. now and then there was precipitation as well. I gave the briefing for ILS 02R and when after a couple of holds we were abt to commence the approach then ATC advised us abt r/w in use change to 20L. :p wind had changed from a healthy headwind for 02R to 130/09kts. But nothing compared to the day when we had wind at 110/13kts gusting to 24kts. we were making a full stop at 02 Omni. Was the last aircraft to land before VFR closed. Was coming back from CAB literally trying to outrun the rain but it caught up with us over Magalang. every aircraft ahead of us was reporting extreme gustiness on base and finals. It was one helluva ride down the other day :ok:

Cheers...
PS: Some of the seasoned aviators might find the above post childish but then for beginners like me and my fellow cadets...this happens to be a time we really enjoy, learn and cherish! Safe flt to all!

.Aero

25th Nov 2008, 14:08

It's a 12 month course, it's now two years on. Has anyone come out the other end yet?

foomanchu

25th Nov 2008, 14:32

Nope!

also this week the last member of staff of the parent company alpha aviation group leaves.

so since May everyone has been "let go" sales, marketing, it, senior management, the lot.

coffindodger

25th Nov 2008, 16:44

so since May everyone has been "let go" sales, marketing, it, senior management, the lot.

is that meaning mr m.w and mr p.q. as well ???

foomanchu

25th Nov 2008, 17:10

im talkin about the staff in london, but mw has left and pq has replaced him.

.Aero

26th Nov 2008, 13:39

Nope!

That's a shame. Maybe I should come back in a years time and ask the same question again. The sad thing for the cadets though is the fact that they've spent 2 years worth of accommodation + living expenses + flights homes which probably adds upto the price of the course!

fernandeztv

27th Nov 2008, 09:20

.Aero...its sad that we cadets have been delayed...but the reason as to why we were delayed is not that important...what is important is how our training is going on now. The place is buzz with activity again. The guys in my batch are flying daily...if time permits sometimes 2 IFR flights a day.

As for me, i am halfway through my MCC training now...and am learning new things on a daily basis. :) The training is tough but well worth the wait. :ok:

As is evident i now a days dont find time to post as often due to the hectic nature of my training. Cheers and safe flt to all...

By the way, the statement "spent 2 years worth of accommodation + living expenses + flights homes" is not entirely accurate! ;) I cannot reveal the exact details of that as it is only for the cadets and am not in a position to give anything more!

blueflyback

2nd Dec 2008, 00:07

:}:p hahaha ftv thats nice!

pinoywings

12th Dec 2008, 07:18

http://www.pprune.org/south-asia-far-east/248518-cebpac-pilots-exodus-43.html#post4586150

Can any one here confirm that BH, ex boss CP is now running ClarK Aviation? Why would you go from running an airline as big as CP to running a pilot school? Just curious.

foomanchu

12th Dec 2008, 10:15

bh doesnt run clark direct but he is new group ceo running alpha aviation group at top level - they fired all of the uk staff so he could build his own team

cncalpha

13th Dec 2008, 08:14

bh doesnt run clark direct but he is new group ceo running alpha aviation group at top level - they fired all of the uk staff so he could build his own team

??????????????

Alpha only got small share in Clark, nothing more nothing less. What is there 2 run? Only running Hulk Hoggan does is from the IRS & LG. Thought they only got an IT guy in UK so not much to fire. Is the Hulk really working 4 Alpha or pulling once leg? From CP to CA?? Like from Head of SM to a sariX2 in the provice.

skypilot66666

14th Dec 2008, 00:46

the hotel guy is still with us, even if most have been replaced. gosh wonder what he paid for that priviledge.

wonder if hes making any money

cncalpha

14th Dec 2008, 06:13

Coming Soon To Sharjah
Another Bollywood Blockbuster Feature
Clark 2
Featuring Hogans Hero's

Bend Over And Experience It The Alpha Way

ATR_101

17th Dec 2008, 01:33

Lolo

Im sorry but this caught my attention and cracked me up.

Miles ahead of Gen Av in USA and Canada? Which facility did you go to?
Why compare?

This facility still have to prove a lot, to compete with Gen Av in USA and Canada. dont get me wrong, I DO NOT HAVE SOMETHING BAD AGINST CLARK. i just did not like what you said. And YES i will mark your word and will see after after a decade.

one more question, are you out of ur mind?????? :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:
Peace Out

ubing

19th Dec 2008, 16:39

@ Lolo

better than these institutions?

Welcome | FlightSafety International Inc. (http://www.flightsafety.com/)
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - World's Leader in Aviation and Aerospace Education (http://www.erau.edu/)
BCIT : : aerospace / aviation : : Welcome to BCIT aerospace (http://www.bcit.ca/transportation/aerospace/)
https://www.proifr.com/
Harv's Air Pilot Training, Flight Training School Learn to Fly! (http://www.harvsair.com/)

cncalpha

20th Dec 2008, 01:18

Absolutely with the Hulk now in charge. As he cant go back to US because of IRS he has no option than to stay on here hiding.

@ Lolo

better than these institutions?

cncalpha

20th Dec 2008, 01:24

Question? Is it not conflict of Interest with Hulk BH from COO of 5J now being the boss of Alpha and CA?:confused:

ATR_101

20th Dec 2008, 01:33

@ LOLO

ERAU MOTTO
"Leading the World in Aviation and Aerospace Education since 1926"

I wonder whats yours...........

ubing

20th Dec 2008, 05:15

Fleet:

Flight Safety = 80 Aircraft
EmbryRriddle = 60 Aircraft
BCIT = 22 Aircraft
PROIFR = 21 Aircraft

@ Lolo

Just curious, how many aircraft does CIA have?

ssangyongs

20th Dec 2008, 11:46

let me take a shot. 6 aircrafts? Maximum 3 serviceable:}

cncalpha

21st Dec 2008, 03:46

CA ownes a few Alpha "NZ bankrupt" planes and has a lease agreement with this Alpha Aviation and some BVI company owned by Indians from London on some 2nd hand Cessnas they got from a Cebu Company imported from the US which 1 was a write of from an insurance company due to an accident in 2005 and was grounded in the US but they dont care on safety as they got it cheap and leases it expensive milking dollars out of the PI. Just check the US tail number on the net and you can see the junk they bought but as they say, a good coat of paint makes magic. World Class my ass.

172S9334 17 March 2003
172S9154 10 September 2002
172S9136 05 August 2002
172S9681 24 August 2004
172S9137 13 August 2002
172S8343 23 December 1999

738FO

23rd Dec 2008, 01:35

LOLO

"Bouncing around in their cessnas for hundreds and hundreds of hours?"

What are you trying to say in here? Coz i used to be one of those cadets that you are talking about!!! Are you trying to say we are stupid?? Careful of what you say.

based on your post, you sound so desperate to get into an airline.

Keep on dreaming, might be the only time youll get to fly.

Peace out!!

ATR_101

23rd Dec 2008, 01:37

I can only say one thing to you

DREAM ON!!!

ZFT

23rd Dec 2008, 02:42

Lolo,

I think anyone who would undergo traditional training now that MPL is here lacks vision and foresight and an understanding and appreciation of the art, science and future of aviation. So don't miss the boat!

I think you have misunderstood the purpose of the MPL. It was never intended to replace the traditional route. The sole purpose is to produce competent airline F/Os (currently on either A320 or B737).

There are many pilots who for a variety of reasons do not want to be airline pilots. For these pilots the traditional route is the only route.

pinoycpt

23rd Dec 2008, 05:38

to cnc alpha:
you need to stop spreding lies and half truth about Clark aviation my friend:

1. Aircraft you are refering to as being insurance write off is ex N533ER.That aircraft indeed has damage history BUT it was repaired in US and released to service after being found AIRWORTHY by the FAA! Same aircraft continued to fly in the US until exported to Philippines..THAT IS THE TRUTH!Do you maybe know how many airliners had damage history and after proper repairs returned to service and continued to fly hundreds of passangers ha?
Is that aircraft safe to fly you say...FAA says it is (if you do not trust CAAP) !

2. Calling 1999,2002,2003 2004 dual GNS 430 or KLN 94/Bendix King MFD equipped Cessnas 172S junk...hmmm..no comment buddy..tells everything about your intentions here

tbavprof

23rd Dec 2008, 08:06

After the prerequisite 70 hours in a Cessna for the MPL license, I'll never set foot in a Cessna again; I'll be mastering more technologically advanced equipment, and 12 months later I'll be flying an Airbus A320 and working.

Check the economic picture. In 12 months you'll probably be kicking yourself in the **s, and wishing you could get a job, even flying a Cessna. The MPL doesn't give you the same flexibility as a CPL.

In 10 years, E-R, Flightsafety and others will be offering their own versions of MPL training and will borrow from the Clark experience.

Probably pretty doubtful on your first point unless a couple hundred thousand US commercial and ATP pilots are wiped out by a plague and the FAA approves MPL. Face the facts, MPL and frozen ATPL were developed for rapidly expanding commercial air markets without any GA or 135-equivalent apprenticeship opportunities to train a sufficient number of pilots, and provide the airlines with a low-cost labor force. There's no need for that in E-R or FS's major market.

As to your second point here, I'm pretty sure that any MPL program approved in the US will rely a lot more heavily on the experience the US military has with putting low-time pilots in command of multi-tens-of-millions-of-dollar aircraft, than anything you or CA may dream.

In 20 years, noone will be training in Cessnas any more.

They actually have some decent competition in the trainer market now. Whether they're still a player in that market in 20 years is anybody's guess. But I guess you have a crystal ball, so who WILL be the number one trainer manufacturer of the future?

I know it's hard to see now, but Clark, Alteon and others are pioneers, and data from their experience will be very valuable.

In aviation, that's know as "lessons learned." And it's also a pretty safe bet that in aviation, it's better to learn from someone else's experience than to have go through the tragedy yourself. Thanks for volunteering as a test pilot/guinea pig.

I think anyone who would undergo traditional training now that MPL is here lacks vision and foresight and an understanding and appreciation of the art, science and future of aviation.

I think anyone who would go after an MPL at this point in time, rather than traditional CPL/IR training, lacks the judgement to understand the realities of the world they actually exist in, instead of some future utopian vision. But the roadsides of history are littered with dreamers and their shattered dreams. And of course, there's always folks with more money than sense.

ZFT had a good point. The MPL will allow you to fly right seat in one of two aircraft, registered in countries that actually issue an MPL license. There is a difference between recognizing the MPL license (for a foreign pilot on a foreign aircraft, as required under ICAO regs) and issuing the license for use by one's own pilots and aircraft.

The present, and the future, of aviation would be a dreadfully boring place if the only options to fly were 70 hours of C150/172, and then a lifetime of A320/B737. But, to each his own.

ZFT

23rd Dec 2008, 08:33

tbavprof,

he present, and the future, of aviation would be a dreadfully boring place if the only options to fly were 70 hours of C150/172, and then a lifetime of A320/B737. But, to each his own.

Once your have achieved >1500 hrs and gained your ATPL, there is nothing to stop you converting onto another type. In fact, post 1500 hours there is no regulatory difference in the career path options.

However, you are totally tied to the aircraft AND operator for that initial 1500 hours.

Bagoongathipon

23rd Dec 2008, 12:09

MPL was not brought up to fast track training of pilots. It actually changes how pilots are trained for the airline.

The authors realized that the traditional training for the airline PPL-CPL-ATPL can be actually enhanced by training ab-initio direct to the equipment they'll be starting.

Indeed comparing CPL to MPL are oranges and apples. There are alot of positve and negatives that can be debated upon. CPL is a more general route of experiences, thus more flexible to whatever equipment they'll be using. MPL o the otherhand focuses its training on airline environment and a specific equipment.

PPL and CPL will always be there because pilots have their own purpose of flying. Some wants to fly as a hobby, leisure etc etc. Yet some, wants to fly directly to the airlines.

Some say that they will NEVER fly with an MPL pilot as their F/O because of their lack of experience. But when this MPL pilot reaches 1500 in 2-3years, then they're no different with an CPL/ATPL pilot.

You cannot say 100% that a CPL holder with 3000 hours of Cessna flying in his belt is a better F/O than a 230 hour MPL holder (70hours cessna, 60hours Multicrew coordination training, 100hours Level D equipment based trained). Primarily because, there are CPL holder who flunks airline training. Why? because its a totally different environment.

In my opinion, General Aviation training is totally different from Airline LOFT and Base training. CPL pilots and MPL cadets are on the level playing field when they start training for the airline environment.

For a positive discussion, I ask those who are in the PPL and CPL/IR, give any experiences or lessons that you have encountered that will be impossible for an MPL pilot to learn throughout his training. Thanks.

Bagoongathipon

23rd Dec 2008, 12:15

Please do understand that we are here to prove the aviation industry that our training will be ATLEAST at par to those cpl holders who are also wanting to be in the airline industry.

While we are here to prove, we should not provoke. Who are we compared to those thousands and thousands of flight hours?

Just do your thing.. we still have years to prove the aviation industry.. and we cannot prove it by just bashing. Just learn from them but dont be pulled down by those who have crab mentality.

ATR_101

23rd Dec 2008, 16:17

@ TBAVPROF

Well said. nothing more to say in here.

tbavprof

24th Dec 2008, 00:52

MPL was not brought up to fast track training of pilots. It actually changes how pilots are trained for the airline.

I think that is more than a little naive. There has always been an economic and staffing factor in the length-of-training argument, whether commercial or military. To be a little more accurate, you might want to say, at least for the initial MPL programs in Europe, it changed how pilots are trained for a specific airline.

The authors realized that the traditional training for the airline PPL-CPL-ATPL can be actually enhanced by training ab-initio direct to the equipment they'll be starting.

That reasoning, with a notable exception, is used to rationalize the economic decision. The exception being that, the more training you get in operating any specific aircraft, the better you'll be at operating that aircraft. So, why bother with the Cessna hours at all? Why not start training in the big iron right up front? Economics maybe?

PPL and CPL will always be there because pilots have their own purpose of flying. Some wants to fly as a hobby, leisure etc etc. Yet some, wants to fly directly to the airlines.

Take PPL out of the equation. We're talking about CPL v MPL. And there are a lot of "commercial" and "airline" jobs that don't use the two approved aircraft. Again, the MPL, especially self-sponsored, is so restrictive.

Some say that they will NEVER fly with an MPL pilot as their F/O because of their lack of experience. But when this MPL pilot reaches 1500 in 2-3years, then they're no different with an CPL/ATPL pilot.

I'll bring up ZFT's point, too, here. Where does an MPL get the requisite PIC and PIC XC time for the ATP? It's not just a matter of 1500 TT. How many national interpretations of "PIC under supervision" will there be? About as many as there are for English Proficiency Level 6?

You cannot say 100% that a CPL holder with 3000 hours of Cessna flying in his belt is a better F/O than a 230 hour MPL holder (70hours cessna, 60hours Multicrew coordination training, 100hours Level D equipment based trained).

If I look at the logbook, and examine those 3000 hours, I may very well come to that conclusion.

Does the MPL know how to operate the Airbus or Boeing? Yes. Can the CPL holder with 3000 hours of Cessna be taught to operate the Boeing to the same proficiency standard with about 25 hours of FPD and Level D sim training? Again, yes.

Primarily because, there are CPL holder who flunks airline training. Why? because its a totally different environment.

You've conveniently ignored the fact that there are thousands of CPL holders who have PASSED airline training. Which brings up the question of selection. The military and the major-carrier sponsored ab initio programs have rigid pre-screening processes in place. That's one of the keys to making this work, and in the European programs, the carrier sponsors implemented a process, similar to their ab initio. How does that actually work with a "self-sponsored" MPL in an organization whose primary revenue source is flight training? We'll ignore the well-connected father and tons-of-money screening bypasses for now.

You also need to reconsider your definition of "environment." Everyone flies in the same weather and airspace. That's the environment of reality. I'm very worried that you would consider the ops manual that you fly under as your "environment."

In my opinion, General Aviation training is totally different from Airline LOFT and Base training. CPL pilots and MPL cadets are on the level playing field when they start training for the airline environment.

There are plenty of multi-crew "general aviation" aircraft. High-performance, turbojet, complex systems, type ratings required, etc. Do you think your 320/737 training is somehow superior to that? Don't know how the regs in your country are divvied up, but in FAA-land Part 135 carriers are AOC holders, just like the 119's and 121's (airlines). Do you think that folks don't have to "fly by the rulebook" in those operations? And what about the 125 operators? "General aviation" on the same equipment as an MPL.

CPL pilots are ahead of MPL cadets when they start training for the airline environment. MPL candidates start at 0 hours. CPL's have at least a minimal amount of PIC time. They know how to control an aircraft, and hopefully have done enough airwork and had experiences to sharpen some of those "between the ears" skills that make a PIC. Remember, there are two people sitting up front for a couple of reasons. With a PIC incapacitated, you're now single-pilot, same as the Cessna driver. What happens then when it all goes tits-up, and all of that MCC training is worthless?

For a positive discussion, I ask those who are in the PPL and CPL/IR, give any experiences or lessons that you have encountered that will be impossible for an MPL pilot to learn throughout his training. Thanks.

Stolen from a Rumors & News thread: fear of death and destruction in making a go-around decision in hairy weather. You can simulate the conditions, but not the visceral reaction of fear.

Night single-pilot IMC xcountry into unforecast icing, with a vacuum pump failure. Pick your own instrument failure set, with an unconscious captain, and aircraft is FIKI-prohibited.

Actual determining factor for maximum crosswind velocity on landing. (Hint: It's not in your flight or ops manual).

Bagoongathipon

24th Dec 2008, 02:20

You've conveniently ignored the fact that there are thousands of CPL holders who have PASSED airline training.

Thats my point. Indeed there are many who passed, but there are also those who flunked airline training. Whats the reason behind this? What happens to the years and thousands of flight hours?

You also need to reconsider your definition of "environment." Everyone flies in the same weather and airspace. That's the environment of reality. I'm very worried that you would consider the ops manual that you fly under as your "environment."

HAHAHA! Ok ok, your only definition of environment is the weather and airspace. Maybe its not in your definition the "Multicrew environment?!" "Procedural based environment?! "Airline environment?!" These "environments" are some causes why even experienced CPL holders also flunk!. Now Im very worried that you would consider your evironment to be just the weather and airspace!

If I look at the logbook, and examine those 3000 hours, I may very well come to that conclusion.

Does the MPL know how to operate the Airbus or Boeing? Yes. Can the CPL holder with 3000 hours of Cessna be taught to operate the Boeing to the same proficiency standard with about 25 hours of FPD and Level D sim training? Again, yes.

Yes. You still have to examie the logbook and what kind of 3000hours did that pilot do. 2980hours of visual flight, 20hours of instrument flight, 10hours of multiengine? <-- thats even a lower level of experience compared to a 180hour instrument flight mpl training.

There are plenty of multi-crew "general aviation" aircraft. High-performance, turbojet, complex systems, type ratings required, etc. Do you think your 320/737 training is somehow superior to that? Don't know how the regs in your country are divvied up, but in FAA-land Part 135 carriers are AOC holders, just like the 119's and 121's (airlines). Do you think that folks don't have to "fly by the rulebook" in those operations? And what about the 125 operators? "General aviation" on the same equipment as an MPL.

another problem is you talk as if ALL CPL holders have these experience. How about a 500 flight hour with 20hours of instrument and 10hours of multiengine? This is a sample of a minimum requirement of an airline. These are what I am comparing to. Got the point?

CPL pilots are ahead of MPL cadets when they start training for the airline environment. MPL candidates start at 0 hours. CPL's have at least a minimal amount of PIC time. They know how to control an aircraft, and hopefully have done enough airwork and had experiences to sharpen some of those "between the ears" skills that make a PIC. Remember, there are two people sitting up front for a couple of reasons. With a PIC incapacitated, you're now single-pilot, same as the Cessna driver. What happens then when it all goes tits-up, and all of that MCC training is worthless?

Haha.. its that your definition of MCC? 2pilots flying? Ours is different. 1 or more pilots + cabin crew + passengers + ATC + hardwares + softwares. See the difference? Because you have a narrow definition of things. Just as narrow as a cessna? You are proud of you can control the aircraft and airworks but your environment is narrow.

Now dont bring out the question "What can the cabin cew, pax, atc, softwares and hardwares do when my captain is incapacitated?" That will just mean how narrow is your perspective.

Take PPL out of the equation. We're talking about CPL v MPL. And there are a lot of "commercial" and "airline" jobs that don't use the two approved aircraft. Again, the MPL, especially self-sponsored, is so restrictive.

Indeed it is restricitve. Thats how it goes when you're training specific. Just like taking up BS Bioinformatics rather than BS biology! It has its pros and cons.

Stolen from a Rumors & News thread: fear of death and destruction in making a go-around decision in hairy weather. You can simulate the conditions, but not the visceral reaction of fear.

Night single-pilot IMC xcountry into unforecast icing, with a vacuum pump failure. Pick your own instrument failure set, with an unconscious captain, and aircraft is FIKI-prohibited.

Actual determining factor for maximum crosswind velocity on landing. (Hint: It's not in your flight or ops manual)

You are too proud of these conditions as if all CPL has already encountered these in real life! I can count 20 pilots who hasnt. Heck, I even know of a 20,000hour captain of an airline hasnt encountered these! So dont give me these conditions because, when it comes... we are all in the level playing field!

subsonic69

24th Dec 2008, 10:44

for the price ????

i would have to say study abroad .... get a better recognition for your rating and so on .. thats just me i guess

cncalpha

30th Dec 2008, 03:35

Where is Matt Wood these days? According to the GM he was fired out of CA, is that so? He was a great teacher. Could anyone elaborate as his # does not ring.

cncalpha

3rd Jan 2009, 08:13

Got the info of MW. Thanks out there.

Glafto

4th Jan 2009, 08:07

How close are you to the GM? Are you sure the GM told you he was fired or you are just spreading lies again? :=

cncalpha

5th Jan 2009, 08:25

How close are you to the GM? Are you sure the GM told you he was fired or you are just spreading lies again?

I do appologize for the terminology, was not offered renewed contract was maybe the proper wording. Saying that though, knowing the way CA operates and how they treat loyal employees makes fired seem nice. MW iws a very nice chap who worked hard since day 1.

Spreading lies again? The truth hurts U mean. :ugh:

zztopgunzz

8th Feb 2009, 04:46

If C.A.A.P. is currently having a problem with their status. Being set into a lower category. Can you please tell me any reason why they should even care of taking a chance with Clark's Aviation MPL. Which can be, more of a burden to the Philippines Aviation Industry rather than to help.

Like whats happening now. The oldest cadets are there for what??? Almost 3 years??? 3x the expense , 3x the time where they should be earning, 3x the lost for them.

funnydaytoday2

17th Feb 2009, 09:45

anyone have any up-dates on the first group of students???seems they are just hanging around doing nothing??thought they would be done by now since thy are type rated on 320.

ubing

18th Feb 2009, 17:07

anyone have any up-dates on the first group of students???seems they are just hanging around doing nothing??thought they would be done by now since thy are type rated on 320.

Possibly studying for Instructor rating in order to build up time for an airline Job.

buskoto

19th Feb 2009, 16:21

Are the MPL guys going to be absorbed by Cebu Pac? Right now there are high-time Air Force and genav guys being channeled through Airbus simulator. Some from that group are just now starting IOE. And yet there are already, what, over two dozen MPL students done with sim training who are just hanging around.

From what I understand of the hiring picture for the rest of the year, no new Airbus F/O's will be needed after this batch going through sim and IOE.

Can anyone tell me for certain whether the CAAP is now issuing multicrew licenses? The MPL program guys are still holding SPLs from what I gather. They need 10 takeoffs and landings. If CEB helps out in that department, then what? What license or certificate will the CAAP issue them? I'm asking because I'm genuinely confused as to the status of the MPL program.

9ball

20th Feb 2009, 00:10

It's confirmed. No more hiring for Airbus F/O for 2009 fiscal year. Even this current batch of trainees in the sim are unsure as to when they will start actual line training since there is a surplus of F/Os at this time.

CharlieLima

21st Feb 2009, 07:45

Wowee this is a long thread on Clark, any more updates on this lot?

I heard that only the first batch will be finishing this year '09, am here in the Philippines and was talking with them on Hot air balloon day - going to go down and have a look around their facilities next week and ask a lot of questions:

I'll look through this thread first, and if anyone wants any specifics answered at this stage jot them down and ill print them all out to ask personally and report back here.

Sorry for bringing up an old thread but might aswell keep it all in one place.

ubing

22nd Feb 2009, 00:53

I don't think 70 hours flying time would suffice for an instructor rating, especially now that there is a new CAR.

yep for sure...

they will have to build more time as 70 hours will definitely not cut it.

9ball

25th Feb 2009, 03:41

yep for sure...

they will have to build more time as 70 hours will definitely not cut it.

they can always do the fish run.....oops thats for CPL holders only, MPLs not allowed.:oh:

haljordan

26th Feb 2009, 11:50

A certain retired PAL Captain who is now working as a consultant for the CAAP is stalling the MPL approval of Clark Aviation. He used to be the Chief Flight Instructor of CA back in 2007 but management was not happy with the way he was running the training program. Ironically He was not happy with management so one day he left and never came back.

The sooner MPL is approved by CAAP, the sooner these cadets will move on to the next step in their aviation career. Sadly though its not really all that well with aviation given that the Global financial crisis is still in effect. Even 5J is not spared.

blueflyback

27th Feb 2009, 10:22

"I would hate to go to work knowing that a lot of people there hates me"

well this job is not for you! where in the world can you find a job where everyone likes you anyway? WELL THEN WAKE UP THIS IS REALITY YOU CANNOT PLEASE EVERYBODY work is boring if everyone likes you give yourself a challenge you dont work for them just prove to yourself you're worth it:) .. mpl's still got a lot to prove. we'll just wait and see.

funnydaytoday2

2nd Mar 2009, 09:26

The sooner MPL is approved by CAAP, the sooner these cadets will move on to the next step in their aviation career. Sadly though its not really all that well with aviation given that the Global financial crisis is still in effect. Even 5J is not spared.

I thought MPL was approved by CAAP last year...??? thats what i was told when i joined sometime at the beggining of last year... can you clarify.....

9ball

3rd Mar 2009, 00:05

Assuming MPL was approved what does the physical licence look like? Is it also the booklet type as the CPL ones?

AvEnthusiast

7th Mar 2009, 13:02

But I think they have changed the booklet one to simple two face card which is not of a good quality either.

airbusbatics

20th Mar 2009, 15:27

Hi guys / gals

I have initiated a thread on the Middle East forum regarding the MPL programme. It is being done by the same organisation conducting your training.

Could some of you be so kind as to to relay your experiences with the MPL programme so far to our pilot brethren in the Middle East?

Please go to http://www.pprune.org/middle-east/366755-mpl-alpha-aviation-uae-caution.html

Your constructive comments would benefit us all.

Thanks,

Airbusbatics

Aerocadet

30th Mar 2009, 13:17

Hello!

I do have a question:

How come the MPL program chooses the A-320 or a B-737NG for the trainee's type rating?

Is it because.. those represent the future of jet airliners?

Thanks! :ok:

x_secutor

31st Mar 2009, 03:20

Has anyone heard of the recent crash of Clark Aviation?

Glafto

1st Apr 2009, 09:26

heard ten cadets done sim check ride and cleared caap. have they started with bupaks?

Bagoongathipon

1st Apr 2009, 12:27

They are on their "Indoctrination" training already with Cebu pac. They will have their TAGS on a real A320 sometime this month.

Best of luck to them. Im sure they'll do good just like in the trainings! :)

mountaintop2007

2nd Apr 2009, 01:36

:D WOW.

this is sooooo amazing. this can only help to prove whether MPL really and does work so a development like this is always welcome.

they claim to be asia's first MPL? because Alteon was just "beta testing". by the way, and my apologies for inserting a different topic, but does anyone have any word/ link on how Alteon's graduates are doing now?

mountaintop2007

3rd Apr 2009, 02:27

How come the MPL program chooses the A-320 or a B-737NG for the trainee's type rating?

Maybe the others in this forum can correct me if i am wrong but i see no safety or training issue with doing an MPL directed towards the bigger jets or the other narrow bodies. In theory, it should be possible to do that.

Choosing the A320 or the B737NG i think is more of an economics decision: the cost of doing base training TAGS on a B777 (as what another Asian airline was said to be contemplating) or an A340 would be prohibitive! Until the Civil Aviation Authorities allow the TAGS to be done on the simulators (not gonna happen in the near future, i guess), i think most MPL programs will be done using the narrow body jets.

then among the narrow bodies, it just comes down to which aircraft types being flown right now has the most number -- likely the A320 and B737NG.

My own question is this -- would the MPL make sense for the small regional and business jets? Or why not extend it to the increasingly popular turboprops like ATRs, Dorniers, Embraers, etc., for which most airlines take in low hour pilots anyway....

ZFT

3rd Apr 2009, 06:05

Flybe are doing just that. MPL onto a Dash 8.

Incidentally, at APATS 2008 TG advised that their MPL approach will be to use the A300-600.

skypilot66666

6th Apr 2009, 08:56

heard the 1st batch still waiting also you need 12 takeoffs and landing in a 320 to pass and that cebu pac didnt want to use their a320.

also heard that the stores here is bankrupt and that the people buy their own coffee, gosh management must be using the money again

:ugh:

HarmonRabb

6th Apr 2009, 10:46

I wouldn't too.... the insurance people wouldn't be too happy I guess.

mountaintop2007

6th Apr 2009, 13:31

like what's been said, initial 10 guys are already with cebu pac. last i heard they have dates targeted. just hoping no AOG's happen and those guys will do landings and take offs very soon....i guess as fellow (and would be!) aviators, we should all wish them the best of luck!

Bagoongathipon

7th Apr 2009, 00:41

skypilot66666

7th Apr 2009, 10:15

HAHAHA, stories are right, the only students who will be lucky enough to graduate are the ones of cebu pac, i pity all those other students who are not sponsored by cebu pac.

heard that the 2 bumbays are blacklisted in the philippines and are wanted by immigration for not having work permits.

hope the rest of the foreigners there have work permits as CID will be checking them all soon.

my stories are correct, management is just trying to deny them to the students.....

did the 1st batch of last year graduate, no BS when you answer.....:mad:

funnydaytoday2

9th Apr 2009, 18:06

im curious, but which bombays are you talkin about... i know of only one bombay.. HOT...
and whats with the non sponcored?
:confused::confused::confused:

Aerocadet

13th Apr 2009, 14:36

Thanks for the answer! :ok:

Hmmm.. Just hope everything goes well with the MPL training.

skypilot66666

21st Apr 2009, 14:09

CLARK AVIATION IS JUST A JOKE AND THE STUDENTS ARE THE ONES WHO WILL PAY...........

I QUIT ALREADY BECAUSE I RIPPED...:mad:

paolylo

22nd Apr 2009, 13:21

would like to bump this thread to say that 5 100+hour single-engine student pilots from Clark Institute of Aviation just did circuits with one of Cebu Pacific's A320's at RPLC.

MPL = now we know it works. :ok:

time for the school to address the non-Cebu Pacific-sponsored students.

mountaintop2007

23rd Apr 2009, 01:06

cheers to cadets who did well: base training is always risky, but good training lessens the risk to acceptable minimal levels!

paolylo, any word on reaction/ actual comments from Cebu Pacific pilots on the performance of the MPL cadets?

paolylo

23rd Apr 2009, 04:56

@mountaintop2007

none yet. but looking at their circuits from afar, all of them landed on the same spot on the threshold, retracted their flaps on schedule, and the sound of the engines slowing down from MAN FLEX was very audible. i wouldn't know what went on inside the cockpit.

Toulost

23rd Apr 2009, 05:46

Wouldn't really be too quick in saying that the MPL program works until the cadets are released from IOE. But still, that's no small feat what they just accomplished.

Kudos to the 5J scholars!

rq4globalhawk

23rd Apr 2009, 13:10

Their instructors tell me most of them are good ... it ain't over until the fat lady sings ... so release from IOE will be the final milestone ... congratulations and all the best to the MPL pioneers

mountaintop2007

24th Apr 2009, 03:34

Wouldn't really be too quick in saying that the MPL program works until the cadets are released from IOE. But still, that's no small feat what they just accomplished.

I second the motion! Hope we hear from the gentlemen who did the exercise here (hopefully the cadets themselves, but most especially the pilots) how it was...can't wait to read their thoughts. :ok:

happy flying everyone!

skyhighbird

24th Apr 2009, 12:31

Everyone, I have followed this thread with interest.

Is everyone at CIA on the Cebu-pacific sponsorship scheme - where 50% of the course fee is paid by Cebu pacific?

If not, do the cadets realise that the MPL is worthless? The MPL schemes that have happened in Europe (Denmark and England) have been airline specific so training is managed with airline SOPs from day 1 with a Type Rating on the aircraft that the airline operated. This is the correct procedure for an MPL course.

If CIA have a generic MPL course (or a course based on the Cebu Pacific SOPs), then anyone who is not "guaranteed" a Cebu Pacific position will come out with a worthless license.

PAL will not touch you, neither would Air Philippines, Asian Spirit(whatever the new name is) etc. Also, you will not be able to fly GA (General Aviation) as you do not have a CPL ME/IR.

Does everyone at CIA know this? If not, then I am so sorry for you. because the MPL is worthless if you are not guaranteed a job at an airline. this is not my opinion. This is 100% fact based on what is happening here in the EU.

skyhighbird

25th Apr 2009, 20:18

Lolo,

thank you for your reply. My post was in no way meant to put the Philippines on a lower standing. I was not trying to make it sound like Clark was a bad school. I have read the posts and I have not formed an opinon due to the negative things that were said here.

I am purely here to tell you about what the MPL is and how it is viewd in the EU.

Your post was saying that the MPL taught at Clark is continually improving etc and give it a chance. Fair enough.

But if I joined Clark and spent $35000, I would still come out in 2009/2010 with a worthless licence. That is the truth. Do you think I care that the failings of my course helps cadets 1 year or 2 years after? Do you think my parents care about other cadets when I do not have a job? But it is ok because it is a "work in progress"?

If you are not affiliated with a partner airline like Cebu Pacific form the begining, then you will NEVER get a job. This is truth. The MPL is airline specific. Ther proof is there.

I am not putting anyone down. I am just wondering what is the opinion of cadets in Clark at present? Have they been told that if they are not Cebu Pacific cadets, then the MPL is worthless?

You do not need to advertise Philippines! I love the country. I am half english, half malay. The philippines is VERY underated. It is a beautiful place with great people and a VERY HIGH level of English. But this is irrelevant. Because if Clark was in England, the licence would still be worthless!

skyhighbird

26th Apr 2009, 13:48

Lolo,

the scary thing is that I don't think students were given the full picture and were probably told that the MPL is greta blah blah blah.

YES! The MPL is 'probably' the course of the future because this training scheme can supply the deman for pilots within a year compared to 2 years with an fATPL+TR.

But that is that the MPL will ONLY be airline specific.

All you need to do is make a quick phonecall to Air Philippines, Asian Spirit, and |PAL and ask the HR department whether (if there was a need for pilots) would they consider an MPL license? Their answer would be no.

I hope ALL cadets not affiliated with Cebu Pacific were made aware of this.

Lolo are you a cadet there?

beatrix

27th Apr 2009, 14:47

Have been watching this thread with interest since my time in the Phils, am EXTREMELY glad that the cadets have got into the cockpit at long last.. you are a credit to the industry and to yourselves, I keep my fingers crossed that you go on to have long illustrious careers and manage to stick two fingers up at the doubters and the people who've tried their very hardest to ruin it all for you.

Congratulations - you've deserved it! :D

mountaintop2007

28th Apr 2009, 11:55

If CIA have a generic MPL course (or a course based on the Cebu Pacific SOPs), then anyone who is not "guaranteed" a Cebu Pacific position will come out with a worthless license.

Care to expound why it is worthless? In the scenario you mentioned, if the CAAP gives out a license, how will that license be worthless? perhaps showing the relevant Philippines CAR provisions to this effect would be a good starting point. Hint: EU experience does not count, unless you think a poor third world country ought to just follow the lead of EU.

PAL will not touch you, neither would Air Philippines, Asian Spirit(whatever the new name is) etc.

How are you privy to their thinking? Unless you have insider info, or you are an insider in the top management of said companies you mentioned (by the way, there is no more Air Philippines), you very well know that you are in no position to speak for these companies.

Also, you will not be able to fly GA (General Aviation) as you do not have a CPL ME/IR

I don't think that was ever the intention.

All you need to do is make a quick phonecall to Air Philippines, Asian Spirit, and |PAL and ask the HR department whether (if there was a need for pilots) would they consider an MPL license? Their answer would be no.

skyhigh you must be in a place so high as to have a ready answer to your own question. Pretty clever.

if i do your dare and i get a positive answer, why would i even post it here? to glorify your pontification?

TO OTHERS:
i have been reading this entire thread for a month now and it is pretty obvious how this is populated by people with varying agenda. i am beginning to see a pattern here: whenever CA makes an important milestone, the thread gets divided into two: those who are happy with the success and those who wish to point out how CA still lacks something, and that is an understatement.

i have witnessed mudslinging, name calling, racism (in this day and age!), and the worst trouble-making imaginable. i am not particularly knowledgeable about CA's past except for those mentioned here in this thread, but what is clear is that CA has managed to finish cadets and take them to 5J, when at one time it was impossible to do so. let's give credit where it is due.

as others have mentioned, now the next step we should monitor is what happens to their non-Cebu cadets. i would imagine that it is in the interest of both the school and the regulator to find a workable solution, as this will have an impact on the reputation of the Philippines and their ambition to be a center for aviation training in the region.

anything else is purely rumor and scare mongering.

BetpumpS

28th Apr 2009, 13:09

mountainhead 2007

As someone who started a career in Phils, I would be very annoyed if anyone said anything bad about the Philippines. But in SHBs defence, I can't really see anything condescending in what he/she wrote. I agree that the second post was a little too assuming regarding what PAL would say.

I can verify however that the way the MPL is structured in the UK and the whole EU is airline specific. The first scheme in the UK which was the Flybe/FTE scheme (Flybe is a low cost carrier flying Dash-8s) has a clause where MPL students would automatically be transferred to the fATPL course if the Airline went bust during the training.

This is because the course is Flybe specific. However, if the MPL cadets successfully gain employment at Flybe and the company goes bust or they are made redundant before the magic 1500 hours, then they will be in a very difficult position.

Mountaintop, I must however pick out one point though in your message.

"Also, you will not be able to fly GA (General Aviation) as you do not have a CPL ME/IR

I don't think that was ever the intention."

It is very very risky to embark on pilot training and think that you will go directly into an airline flying big shiny jets. That is the possible best case scenario. In the UK/USA the time honoured route was to build hours first either by flight instructing, crop spraying, towing gliders, pleasure flights etc. For this, you need a CPL. Now with an MPL, you will not be able to even do this kind of General Aviation so how will you build hours?

The point is in the EU, no airline will take an MPL license unless the MPL course the pilot completed was for that specific airline. I also know for definite that N.America aren't even touching the MPL. So straight away, the two biggest pilot markets in the world are closed to any MPL cadets at Clark.

Gulf Air I believe has/will be about to embark on an MPL but this is GulfAir focused - like the MPL is supposed to be. So again any Clark pilot who took the genric MPL course would not be able to apply for Gulf.

I believe Mr Narmon is still the top recruitment guy at PAL so I am pretty sure he could give a quick answer if anyone wanted to call him. But remember, considering PAL already have their own school and take 2 batches a year-fATPL, straight away the national carrier of Philippines is another closed door to MPL cadets.

So I too am now interested as to what exactly was told to MPL cadets when they first applied to Clark without a guarantee from Cebu Pacific?

I agree with your comment that it would be interesting to see what happens to non-bupac MPL cadets. The problem is isn't it too late to "wait and see" for this cadets who have spent a lot of money. Singapore Airlines have their own training school along with Cathay Pacific. So I can not see these two SE Asian airlines recruiting MPL cadets from Philippines. I'm sure nationality requirements are also a hindrance too.

So my area of interest is whether non-bupac cadets were informed of these uncertainties before they started their course at Clark?

mountaintop2007

29th Apr 2009, 01:42

i have questions for you for which i hope you can provide answers. but if you can't that's also not a problem. :ok:

1.I can verify however that the way the MPL is structured in the UK and the whole EU is airline specific.

is this a requirement of all ICAO member states or is this a UK and EU initiative? pardon my ignorance, but i cannot seem to identify a restriction to this effect from the ICAO documents regarding MPL.

if this is ICAO requirement (as reflected in ICAO Annex 1), then Philippines and CA should follow.
if this is NOT ICAO requirement (which is what it seems to me, pls correct me if i am wrong), then would you agree that EU and UK don't have any business preaching how another fellow member state should behave?

2. Gulf Air I believe has/will be about to embark on an MPL but this is GulfAir focused - like the MPL is supposed to be. So again any Clark pilot who took the genric MPL course would not be able to apply for Gulf.

last time i checked, the Gulf isn't composed of Gulfair alone. however, again the question would be, do we know for certain that Gulf air or any of the other Gulf airlines are not willing to take in MPL from another country/ ATO? Or are we assuming again?

3. I believe Mr Narmon is still the top recruitment guy at PAL so I am pretty sure he could give a quick answer if anyone wanted to call him. But remember, considering PAL already have their own school and take 2 batches a year-fATPL, straight away the national carrier of Philippines is another closed door to MPL cadets.

If I call PAL now, they will answer with their standard protocol -- min 1500H of flying time with CPL/ IR, but will give exemptions to low hour pilots only if they are "deserving" graduates of PAL AV school. Even if that is the case, isn't it fair to say that PAL not saying anything about MPL now does not mean they are not thinking about it?

4. Singapore Airlines have their own training school along with Cathay Pacific. So I can not see these two SE Asian airlines recruiting MPL cadets from Philippines.

I cannot see it either! but again wouldn't it be too presumptuous to conclude there is nothing going on in the region?

BetpumpS

29th Apr 2009, 08:08

Thank you for your reply. As someone who has almost 10 years in the industry and believe it or not actually talks to counterparts daily from different airlines, I think whatever I write would still be quoted and rebutted by people like you who thinks they know more.

I have a filipina stepmother. Father now lives there. And I spent my first 2 years flying in the Philippines. I learnt a lot about the culture of Filipinos and how they are easily taken advantage of when a possible dream could be made true. Pyramid schemes as an example and even educated nurses who, due to lack of research, will plough a large amount of finance into the hands of an unscrupulous agent who promised them employment in another country.

I am not for one second saying that Clark are a scam. They most certainly are not and regardless of the problems they have had during the earlier stages (I've read the posts with a pinch of salt by the way), they really are trying to build up a centre of excellence based around the MPL.

I just hope for the sake of my adopted kababayan that Clark did not falsely advertise the MPL as something that has an equal standing as the fATPL. I believe the MPL is the way forward - it is cheaper and quicker and can meet the needs of airlines within 12 months as opposed to a fATPL+TR which could take 2 years. The only way this can work (and this is how it is being worked in the EU) is by the airline constructing their own MPL course with a partner FTO - Flybe/FTE for example. Learning the SOPs from day 1 is the attraction for airlines to invest in an MPL.

Remember one more thing, Clark offer the MPL on an A320. So if there happens to be a wait as there are no A320 positions available, an MPL cadet can not even stay current by flying General Aviation.

Has Clark offered advice on the procedures for remaining current? Costs?

manina

29th Apr 2009, 10:20

I am not for one second saying that Clark is a scam

Oh I would beg to disagree with that. Just ask M***k Pea*s** and company......... they were the original scam architects of CIA.

BetpumpS

29th Apr 2009, 14:57

Lolo

This was written in March 2008. :ugh::ugh:So I don't quite understand your point.

And every single paragraph has backed up every single point I and SHB have tried to make for example:

the only difference is that the MPL pilot can't act as a pilot-in-command of a single-pilot airplane. In other words, he can't fly a Cessna by himsel

"Candidates were trained in Sterling procedures "from day one.

Now this March 2008 article talks a lot about Sterling Airlines. This is the Danish Airline that was the first European Airline to adopt the MPL scheme for THEIR airline using THEIR procedures. Now below are some extracts from another aviation magazine about what happened when Sterling Airlines went BUST.

And this was written in AUGUST 2008

The world’s first MPL-rated airline pilots are to be laid off this November. Danish carrier Sterling Airlines are dismissing 61 employees as part of cutbacks forced on the carrier due to high fuel prices and the economic downturn, and the MPL-rated pilots will be amongst those to go.

The thirteen MPL pilots are due to finish with Sterling this November and given their training at Danish Center Air Pilot Academy was focused specifically on Sterling Airlines standard operating procedures (SOPs), they may find it hard to find employment elsewhere.

Sterling's chief pilot Claus Gammelgaard told FTN that the dismissal of the MPL pilots was in no way related to their piloting skills, but merely based on their last-in, first-out employment practise. He said that they were "extremely satisfied" with their level of piloting ability, but faced with the need for redundancies Sterling had no option but to dismiss them.

But hopefully all is not lost for these pilots, as according to when they joined the airline (the first started last October) they will have amassed between 500 and 800 hours each on Sterling’s Boeing 737NG fleet by the time they finish. Additionally, Claus told FTN that while the pilot’s training was focused on the airline’s SOPs, they are in turn closely modelled on Boeing’s own, so hopefully other airlines will look favourably on them given the relatively small amount of extra training that will be involved. Due to the constraints of their licence however, which affords them multi-crew piloting privileges in 737NG aircraft only, their employability will be limited to airlines who operate the same aircraft as Sterling and in the current climate it could be some time before they find new positions.

Read the limitations VERY carefully. These guys have amassed 500-800 hours but there is still the sentence that their licence could possibly still make it difficult to find employment.

So the question and concern still remains regarding the MPL cadets not guaranteed a position with Cebu Pacific. Have past and new cadets been informed of this? Are there still cadets arriving each month?

Reedeye

29th Apr 2009, 16:40

Yes, the times they are a'changin, but for the life of me, could you please answer Betpumps question re whatever will happen to the non bupakers. If I heard it right, it was Cebu Pac who finished their own cadets, not Clark (that's according to the people in CAAP). They said it was all about the takeoff and landing requirement. That true? Clark cannot provide that requirement? How come? Just asking, nothing against the program, really.

mountaintop2007

30th Apr 2009, 00:28

nothing really surprising with Cebu doing Base Training for Clark as Sterling did Base Training for CAPA's MPL graduates and China Southern/ Xiamen Airlines did for Alteon's graduates. no big deal there.

mountaintop2007

30th Apr 2009, 00:46

why the font changes? we can read your post in regular type and color. :ok:

my position is the same. this is an anonymous forum where everyone and his uncle will claim to know stuff. so let's celebrate the sure stuff (Clark finishing cadets, MPL cadets reportedly doing well in Base Training) and reserve judgment on what we don't know or what we cannot prove.

have safe flights everyone!

Reedeye

30th Apr 2009, 13:21

Yes, I understand your position there, but what about the non sponsored cadets? Who will do the actual aircraft training for them?

manina

30th Apr 2009, 13:29

The non-sponsored cadets will just wait for an airline to sponsor them or they can wet lease bupak's A320 for 1,000 USD an hour to do TAGs.

BetpumpS

30th Apr 2009, 20:41

Ok, I'm back.

Mountaintop, it is quite clear that you are incapable of understanding my point or perhaps suffer from the good old fashioned "selctive hearing" syndrome that many filipinos suffer from.

I do not dispute the fact that MPL students are doing great. I do not dispute the fact that MPL cadets originally partnered with Bupac will find employment there.

My concern are for those MPL cadets who have embarked on the CIA MPL without guarantee of a job. As someone who is proud of his adopted pinoy heritage and as someone who spent my first 2 years in aviation flying in the Philippines, I take a valid interest in the Philippine Aviation.

I have almost 10 years flying experience on the 732/742-F/and now the 744 yet you respond to me like I am a 17 year old wannabee who is here to cause nothing but trouble. The news report I quoted is fact. The limitations and current standing of the MPL in Europe is fact.

I have slowly made my way through the posts on this thread and feel utterly embarassed by what has been written here. If someone who knew nothing about Philippines came to this thread, he will see Philippines Aviation very negatively. That is why I have come here voicing my concern in the hope that if any pinoy-wannabees are thinking about joining CIA, they can read these posts and hopefully have the knowledge to ask the right questions.

I will ask one last time- what about non Bupac MPL cadets? What were they told upon induction and what are they being told now?

manina

2nd May 2009, 00:59

Out of curiousity, what does the Philippine MPL paper license look like? is it the booklet type or the blue card type just like the CPL?

batman123

5th May 2009, 09:22

Hello,

I gave a look at he Clark institute's website in Philippine.

where are the planes, all I can see is a nice simulator 320?
I don't want waste my time to read the 34 pages, can you resume me the situation there?.
I understand, Cebu pacific should "sponsor" students from clark.
and Clark Aviation work with alpha aviation.

If I understand correctly, Clark has financial problems due to the actual crisis and bad management; lack of instructors...(are they looking for flight instructors?)

this is a problem I have seen in many school. They see too big, and have failed.

Train a pilot is very complicated...
you know guys, all these schools are telling bullock. What they want is your cash, then they don't care if you have problems or not.
These guys make money from you, they sit their ass all day long behind a desk, they wait for their money every 30 days, why should they care about students?

I have seen managers building schools with million of US$, buying the best flight m simulators, but they are unable to run a school professionally.
They think if you have the best hardware (A320, 737,...), you will train the best pilots in the world and Students will come to play with their sim.What a concept!!!

It doesn't matter what you fly, a 172 or an A320, at the end, the best pilot is the one who is still alive and who fly.
It 's not about race, religion, school, or type rating, it's about pilot attitude and professionalism.I have 4 licenses from different country, and actually the best place for training is USA, Canada, and maybe south Africa and Australia.
if you are looking for a JAR license, go to UK to convert to JAR.

I don't think Asian countries have the experience to train pilots.They are too corrupt and unwilling to take any responsibilities. I would not invest one penny in an Asian flight school.

I wish you luck!

skypilot66666

5th May 2009, 12:59

am glad you finally figured that 1 out. the worst part of it is that clark aviation has always been a problem and no one cares for these students. i dropped out because nothing was ever accomplished. mgmt realizes that there is big money here to be put into there pockets,, from the foreigners to the locals running the school. did anyone ever graduate?????????????? its php4million for the course, were is the diploma???

i would suggest that if any of you idiots want to give your money away give it to charity or something else. dont waste your time training in a school thats corrupt, doesnt care for the students or anything else.

DONT INVEST YOUR MONEY IN THIS SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!:ugh:

skypilot66666

5th May 2009, 13:23

do you believe it. i know it. these guys who argue that the mpl license is good, work for clark. they are probably in on the take.

they have 100 students at php4,000,000 each, that php400,000,000. you figure it out.

the philippines is corrupt dont deny it. its a fact of life but what can you do????

investigate 1st before you invest your money. stupidy is the filipino who doesnt want to investigate 1st. thats why they lose their money. i have seen clark A grow from 2005 i was a student who just got tired of the B******T................

you guys who think you know more are just working for CA..:suspect:

skypilot66666

5th May 2009, 13:26

they dont have planes, the money is being mismanaged. they cant afford a roll of toilet paper.:suspect:

BetpumpS

5th May 2009, 14:29

Batman123, Skypilot666

You should be able to see from my post where I stand on the MPL and Clark. However I believe your posts are not constructive to potential MPL/Clark cadets or to the cadets currently studying. I also think the use of the word scam is unfair.

The mismanagement at Clark that I have read (issues with scheduling and a/c) is indeed an embarrassment and I hope that these problems have been/are close to being fixed.

The marketing guys at Clark are in no way different to the marketing guys for established integrated schools in Europe - Oxford, CTC, FTE. They tell you that there is a shortage of pilots (even though there isn't) and they tell you there has never been a better time to begin training (whatever).

The difference is that many aspiring pilots have read a lot about the industry/licenses etc and are not fooled by marketing hype. They also know that the limitations of a modular course vs integrated, and also know the limitations of an MPL course. It seems to me that those who are at Clark without the guarantee of a job with BUPAC have not done their research.

How many cadets at Clark realise that if they do not get a job straight away (which they won't with a generic MPL-FACT) they can not even fly General Aviation without spending more money?

This is one point that I definitely agree on with Skypilot6666:

investigate 1st before you invest your money. stupidy is the filipino who doesnt want to investigate 1st.

Unfortunately, the culture that I have seen from my time in Philippines is that "investigate" is not found in the dictionary of the average Filipino. NEVER solely trust the organisation you are giving money to! This pertains to Philippines AND the Western World. NO SCHOOL in the world cares if you get a job at the end of it. Their number 1 aim (just like any company in any industry in any country) is to make money.

RESEARCH and INVESTIGATE. Feel free to PM me.

batman123

5th May 2009, 21:15

I don't know clark, and I don't care about their crap.I give you my point of view.
I don't think it was set to run a scam....here I explain how a flight school is losing his money:
I have seen many schools during these last 20 years, and many have failed (3/4 are out).
the MPL was introduced because no one wanted to launch this type of training, it s new, revolutionar,....whatever.... I don't say it s good or bad as I have all licenses included the Airbus rating, so I am well positioned to talk about the advantage and disadvantage of this MPL but who cares of that. What a student want, is a service for his money!!!.

The MPL in Phillipine could have worked, but it 's very hard for a school to take care of planes and big simulators in same time.
Then there is the human factor to ad, I mean students need a place to stay, to live,...so now we are talking about a real big big school, with a big infrastructure, lot of personels(instructor, mechanic, examiner, assistant,..., all these mean a LOT of money.

in the actual climate, it can NOT work. Even flight safety in florida, the biggest school in the world, have lot of problems.

So here we are, some crazy people who come with lot of ideas, and specially a new idea that nobody know if it s going to work or not... :the MPL.
wooow, I have now a hard one, ahah!!!oh, yes, we are going to make lot of $$$ say the bank, (this they don't tell you).

Then you see these managers, starting their academy of smurfs with millions of $, building a flight school, setting offices, sim, retroprojectors, computers,...etc....(oh, it look like a real "academy"!).

then they discover they dont have enough money, so they start to take students money to pay debts to the bank.

then month after month, there is a delay in the program, and the bank want his money after they realize it' s going to be a fiasco.

so the school cancel planes' order, and start to say bullock to students who still belive that planes are coming, and all will be ok...

you start to see the company going down and down more and more, and people saying it s going to be OK!!!

Be real,when a school has 34 pages on pprune of complaints, it s in point of view not a good school.
The last student I have met in this aviation field, has just lost 10'000$. His manager run away and filed bankrupt. since the time, we all say don't pay too much in advance, what did you learn? nothing! how much Clark charged you, 80'000$, probably more?

and by the way, you can not work with these Asian people. they are lazy, take no responsibility and wait their salary.

I don't give a toss of this school, I fly now since years, so I am total neutral . I just found this on pprune, and I start to look at it. in my point of view you should GET OUT and TAKE YOUR MONEY...cuz the titanic is sinking!

Bagoongathipon

6th May 2009, 01:20

and by the way, you can not work with these Asian people. they are lazy, take no responsibility and wait their salary.

Racist! YOu dont know what you're talking about.

Do you want me to stoop down to your level? Actually, it was those 3 white people (plus another white they hired to fix the core flying phase.. which was supposedly their job in the first place)who starting the mpl program here in Clark who was lazy and talk nothing but bull during the initial phase of the program. Too lazy that they just sat around their desk watching football instead of teaching students groundschool and fixing the Flight school license!!

Good thing that they got fired!! And asians replaced them.. atleast, these asian managements fixed the mess that those 3 made and worked round the clock. So who's lazy now?! Geez!

Im not saying that whats happening to our school is already out of the danger areas. While there are 3 students got their a320 12 TAGS while 7 are waiting for their turn sometime this month, there are still hundreds for CA to problem about which was caused by mismanagement of the 3 stupid white ex-employees.

One important thing I learned from aviation (early this stage of my life), is that it changes everytime. One moment, you seem to be on top of the world, the next, you realized you dont know what hit you! It goes vice versa should I say.

So my point is, that its funny how some forumers think of this MPL project as static, and cant be worked out. Everything changes from time to time. It is dynamic and the project and the versatile ASIAN people would adapt to the needs to make this work out. (unlike some white people I know who cant adapt to his environment... poor thing!)

As for you Batman, thanks for boasting that you have multiple license and bothered to say your grudges to Asian people here in our forums. It really looked like you had a bitter past that you cant get over with! hahaha.. get a psychologist.. i think you're too rich not to give it a try. it MIGHT work you know.

batman123

6th May 2009, 20:27

Sorry, I have to correct my statement about asian people being lazy.
what I tried to say, this school was run by european or US people trying to make money from you,I don't know exactly who run this school, but I know by experience that people who know nothing about aviation just follow a leader who just want make big bucks.Such business is proned to fail!

Buying a sim 320, it s like showing a toy at 20'000 millions $ and then say to everyone, "see? we can train for the MPL"... well, let' s see how many of you will be trained and how many of you will get a job when thousand of A320 pilots are struggling to get a job.

ok, let's correct my statement, asian people are not lazy, they are hard worker , but why they should work when their leader is making foul of their students.
I will do the same! and I am not asian!I am not lazy, but when the titanic sink, nobody give a toss about you.

clark is apparently run or was runed by some monkeys who know knothing about training pilots, and thought it was simple to train a pilot.
just by a sim, build some rooms, and classrooms and that's all.
If now it s run by asian people, it s going to be same...
I don't see asian people to run a flight school. too much corruption.

sorry guys, it s not working like that.

About the quality of the training, I can tell you most asian coutries will teach you crap. I dont belive that these asian pilots can teach you correctly by following ICAO standards and Airbus syllabus.
I dont talk about the indian pilots, who are just a farce.

the sad thing: some people make u belive u can go on a A320 in minimum time, and minimum effort.These planes are very complex, specialy during failures, so spend 200h in the A320, with a minum hours of real experience in a C172. what do you know about pilot decision, GO or NO GO???
it is not in a sim you learn that, it s by looking outside we can see in what kind of sauce you will fly.But some monkeys people will tell you how to fly a sim, when they have no idea how to fly a cessna.

I do believe you can learn to fly an airbus, then fly in smaller planes, why not?? the 320 is highly automatic, so it s possible.Yes USA and europe, we dont want to accept that, we are old fashioned...let s give a try!give them their chance.
if europe and USA like to stick to their rules, it s because aviation there is the safest in the world, when pilots in asia, are called plane crashers!!!

I think this MPL licens is not so bad, but it s very risky and limited because for the same price you can have a real license with unlimited plane and a MPL.In europe, Britsh airways trained guys with 200h and are now on the 777.

anyway fly safe... (why would you care to fly safe, you have no idea how to fly a REAL plane!!!LOL)

ZFT

7th May 2009, 02:31

batman123,

Buying a sim 320

I think you will find that the A320 FFS operated within Clark is owned by Cebu Pacific.

mountaintop2007

7th May 2009, 06:43

"About the quality of the training, I can tell you most asian coutries will teach you crap. I dont belive that these asian pilots can teach you correctly by following ICAO standards and Airbus syllabus."

so batman123, where is this lovely place where there is no corruption, and every teacher is of a high standard?

"clark is apparently run or was runed [sic] by some monkeys who know knothing about training pilots, and thought it was simple to train a pilot"

yeah i heard that some former CA managers/directors ("monkeys" as you say) are using this thread to sow trouble under the guise of being "former students." they were kicked out when 5J complained about them.

mountaintop2007

7th May 2009, 06:55

i agree with you that people must investigate before they invest. in fact, that is what i am doing now. :)

with the graduation of 3 cebu pacific cadets, it is obvious that the last piece left is about the non cebu sponsored cadets. unless that gets solved, i'm not taking the plunge. i imagine the management in CA have the same headache (which if you believe what i have been told, and as mentioned below by bagoongathipon, was something the old management made a mess of and the current management is trying to fix).

unfortunately i have no way of knowing what was told to the cadets at the start maybe we can both come down to that nice town one day and check it out. beer's on me :ok:

BetpumpS

7th May 2009, 10:38

Mountaintop and others,

ignore pretty much everything batman has said - some of which is bordering on racist and actually insulting against the country I love. Talagang tanga sya - hehe I can still speak it :ok:

Mountaintop, that is the best advice - to investigate. However I will give you some more wisdom.

i imagine the management in CA have the same headache

Mountaintop - they are not having a headache. In Europe, Oxford, CTC, FTE do not care if their cadets get a job, likewise management in Clark do not care. The only headache management have is the morning one after a night out!

I'm sure one may respond by saying "If their cadets do not get a job, that is bad for the school reputation and no one will go". Wrong! People want to be pilots and the reason they pay marketing guys $75000-$100000 per annum is to get starry-eyed pilots through the door.

This is evidenced by some of the posts here - cadets who know next to nothing but come out with things like "Be positive, MPL is the future, MPL is constantly changing and improving" etc.

I am not here like batman to talk about the mismanagement.
I am not here to insult management of any race with regards to the troubles the school is having.

These problems happen in any FTO, especially anew one like Clark.

My only intention here is to make filipino's and others aware about the current limitation of the MPL IF you don't have a guarantee of a job - like with Cebu.

jamestaylor

7th May 2009, 12:21

wow - it continues to amaze me the ignorance in the world, This program is not perfect at all nor is anything else in this world. No matter what - this is the future. My father was trained for WW2 under the old system - why can't we move on ha. The team are great at clark, they are caring people who have no agenda. The GM is a solid smart phil lad who cares about the students as one of them is his wife!!@!!! So please young men stop bashing these fine people they are doing there best and paving a path which no one has done before. Bravo chaps and carry on and ignore all of the na sayers. To all of you seasoned pilots shame on you for bashing something new - therefore as captain kirk said "mAKE IT SO"OR WAS IT CAPTAIN PICARD?

Long time aviation dude.........................................

BetpumpS

7th May 2009, 21:14

Guys,

Here is the gurantees with Oxford Aviation Academy/ Flybe MPL scheme. Flybe is a low cost carrier in the UK.

Do Clark non-cebu pacific cadets have any gurantees like this?

The following guarantees are in place:

MPL to CPL/IR Guarantee: MPL is a brand new and highly innovative programme. Whilst we are fully confident that it represents the future route to commercial pilot training, we also wish to protect participants from any unforeseen risk in undertaking this first ever UK based scheme. In the very unlikely event that any problem does occur, OAA will guarantee to provide, at no cost to the selected students, any additional flight training required to convert to a standard CPL/IR licence. This will ensure that graduates will be eligible to join any airline with the same professional licensing qualification as available to our APPFO students.

Airline Employment Guarantee: Any sponsored or mentored training programme involves a risk – albeit a very small one – that the participating airline might be unable, for reasons outside its control, to offer employment after graduation. For MPL graduates, there is an added potential complication because their licence is directly linked to employment by the airline involved. Under current regulations, it cannot readily be transferred to another airline. To guard against this slight risk, OAA will again guarantee to provide, at no cost to the selected student, any additional flight training required to convert to a standard CPL/IR licence. This will ensure that, in the event of such an occurrence, MPL graduates will be able to join any airline with the same professional licensing qualification as available to our APPFO students.

A large investment is being made by the school in case anything goes wrong. This is how risky it is in Europe. How about SE Asia?

mountaintop2007

8th May 2009, 00:13

tangang tanga nga! see i can still speak it too!:cool: (Big indiots indeed!)

the last time i inquired about 2 weeks ago i was told that the school already has a TRTO license from the CAAP. They don't own the A320 sim (because that is owned by Cebu) but they do manage it for 5J. In fact Zest Air is moving all their A320 sim training to Clark instead of HK. (Zest Air guys pls you are welcome to correct me if i am wrong) So if CA plays it well, they can actually offer a better product than what OAA has in mind because they can offer A320 TR.

What CA is reportedly just waiting for is to get the CPL IR license and they will be able to get this option (convert the training to CPL IR PLUS A320 Type Rating) open to non Cebu cadets, IF they want to, knowing that some of the guys may not be willing to wait for the negotiations with some potential airlines to get the MPL. i think that was also the line they told the last batch of cadets who enrolled last January (checked from their marketing guys): if things go wrong, we will shift you to CPL/IR with option also to convert to A320 TR. Clever marketing? maybe, but definitely not a scam.

also i can confirm to you that the 3 5j pilots who got their TAGs already have a "provisional" license, and doing pre employment stuff and airline training from 5J, while waiting for the actual MPL to be issued by CAAP. Once they have that, they can already fly as FOs! wow......

Things are definitely better. Cadets have IN FACT graduated.

I agree, let's ignore the idiots. i have a nagging suspicion that those idiots were the same idiots who nearly ran this school aground and are now bashing the present "Asian" management for doing the stuff they couldn't deliver. ;)

mountaintop2007

8th May 2009, 01:03

and by the way guys really some people have sick agenda and it's about time i let this out, hoping the other guys here who are interested in a good professional debate rather than mudslinging will support me.

i suspect there is a poser here (whose anonymous ID is riddled with the number of the devil, and who has a penchant for dramatic multiple question marks and exclamation points) and who says this:

investigate 1st before you invest your money. stupidy is the filipino who doesnt want to investigate 1st. thats why they lose their money. i have seen clark A grow from 2005 i was a student who just got tired of the B******T................

i quoted that here because he might edit his remarks later. i must admit this had me stumped. how can he be in CA in 2005 when the school opened in 2006, and the first MPL cadets enrolled in 2007? if he was already with CA in 2005, then he could not be a student.

if he is a real student he could only have gone to CA's flightline to know there are planes there and the place is progressing real concrete steps...

could he be a part of the former management who got CA into all this mess and now is spreading all of these lies to get back at the school?

you guys who think you know more are just working for CA..http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/cwm13.gif

this just made me laugh all the way to the comfort room for my morning ritual! aaay the perils of an anonymous forum....

jamestaylor

8th May 2009, 01:23

Cheers to all and especially the smart Phil team in place that replaced the European people who were the root cause of the problems.....

God bless you all and remember every thing that does kill you will make you stronger..........................:ok:

traveller93

8th May 2009, 12:36

I've been following this thread since the beginning and it is amazing how some things, and attitudes, change over time. But something does not change: the side tracking of the issues at hand by bringing race and nationality to the front instead of concentrating solely on the problems that require urgent solutions.

CA began operations in early 2007 and the first cadets were supposed to end their MPL training in just over 12 months.

By the end of 2008 CA had 100+ cadets and the question is: How many of those have received their licences and are earning a living as pilots?

I read that there are 3 cadets that have completed the A320 Base Training. Out of 100+ is a very poor performance from CA.

Another point that I read here is that there are self sponsored cadets that have completed their training but are still missing the needed 12 TOs and LDGs to get their licences. What is CA doing to correct this situation and for how long is CA prepared to keep it like this?

I also read that CA intends to set up a CPL/IR/TR training school. When will it begin operations?

If, as someone says in another comment above, CA is willing to provide the self sponsored MPL cadets with alternate CPL/IR/TR licences, when will that take place?

Many many questions that have nothing to do with race or nationality but require answers from the organization (CA).

The answers must come from those who have management responsibilities. Since the original management is no more, does anyone know who is in charge of CA now? Their website does not provide any clarity.

The MPL is the future in the present and CA should be proud of having the guts to break new ground. Don't spoil it by getting a bad name.

Good luck to all and keep your dreams alive.

batman123

8th May 2009, 21:19

Clark=MPL= surprise !!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfyo3UAKHxk)
:E:E:E

slatch

12th May 2009, 12:45

There is no doubt that CIA was mismanaged from the start. They started during a period of pilot shortages that had not been seen for 10 years, and never seen before in Asia. The basic idea is sound, train a qualified student to acheive the profeciency to fly copilot. But MP and the rest did not understand how to run a training program. They mismanaged almost every part of the program. The one part that I thought was well run was the ground instruction. They started off with a cheap campus (Wagner High School on Clark), Cebu Pacific payed for the A320 sim, and had access to cheap labor and cheap cost of living for instructors. But when you spend your money paying your friends a large salary, and on new SUV's and drivers, put ads up in the local Go-Go bars (not that alot of captains would argue if some of the girls made the program), bought aircraft that had never been used in the RP before at a very high price (probaly consulted the AFP procurment manager on how to get a big payday) and numerous other irregularities. Plus 5J started using ATR's. How do you take a MPL and put him/her in a A320 over other pilots already flying looking for an upgrade? The current attempt to change to a CPL program may work, however there is alot of negative publicity that needs to be overcome. But people should realize the current managers of CIA are not the ones that created this mess, they are working hard to try and make things work. Unfortunitly it is a hard time to do this with the current recession. It does not matter if you like the MPL program, the airlines will go for it because it gives them access to a group of pilots that have incurred a large debt and need to work. It will decrease pilot costs, and that is why they are doing it.

traveller93

13th May 2009, 01:22

What is under discussion is not the worth of the MPL training but the current problems that the cadets are facing to get a valid and worthy licence.

Many have been there for more than two years and they have neither a MPL or CPL/IR/TR licence that could launch them onto the job market. This is not what CIA promised when they took their money and someone must take responsibility for that.

Besides vague mentions to "current management", does anyone know who is in charge of CIA and answering to the multinational company owner of that business? Is there a third CEO?

Too much murky waters in a lost golden opportunity to lead the MPL world.

Anybody care to clarify?

paolylo

14th May 2009, 11:41

*bumping this thread again*

learned that the first 3 cadets already have their MPL's and have started flying with Cebu Pacific. :D

funnydaytoday2

14th May 2009, 21:35

i still dont see what the managament here at Clark Av have done.. they seem lost for any answers when a student asks them anything.
now dont get me wrong here, im happy for the students who have graduated and are with 5j.. but the fact is that it wasnt the currnet managament that did it. what hae they done except get fatter and and richer.. i remember when they first started here... they showed up in a pair of jeans and t shirt... now you see them dressed in the best suit money can buy... hMMMMM kinda makes you think where the moneys all going right,....im sure they have a very nice house and life style outside of CA while we the students suffer.... hope they can spare some of miss used money and start investing it insead on fuel and spare parts for the planes.. i really would like to finish the flying fase sometime this year...
open your eyes everyone... they did nothing to help us. if anything they ve done nothing but lie to us...

funnydaytoday2

14th May 2009, 21:41

and where is Fernanez
you seem to have gotten very quiet... is it cause CA has nothing to offer you... have you opened your eyes finally and seen that they are screwing you big time...
wheres your updates and all that...
and dont tell me that you are busy... cause we all know its not true.
why dont you just say whats on your mind.say the truth

mountaintop2007

15th May 2009, 00:50

but the fact is that it wasnt the currnet managament that did it.

then who did?

mountaintop2007

15th May 2009, 01:17

What is under discussion is not the worth of the MPL training but the current problems that the cadets are facing to get a valid and worthy licence.

i agree totally. my own concern, as a prospective MPL cadet (am maybe too old for CPL track hehe :}), is how CA plans to solve the situation of the non cebu pacific cadets.

as a filam, i have no interest in a european or mideast license as i would prefer to relocate in the Phils. there are many more like me here in the US, so we are looking at the situation in CA with extreme interest.

mountaintop2007

15th May 2009, 01:19

wow that's exciting news! could you give any more comments? how are they performing? where are they flying? what's their program? any details will be very much appreciated. :ok:

x1alpha66

15th May 2009, 01:45

they're still undergoing 319 difference training. their mpl lic. is specifically for the 320 only. but they have to perform to/landings again soon to be current. they have a 3 mos. restriction for currency. (at least 3 t/o and landings)

traveller93

18th May 2009, 02:08

I detect some effort here to mask the real situation at this school(?) by repeating the "news" that 3 cadets are actually finally employed by 5J.

Good for them and the best of luck in their careers!!!

But what about the other more than one hundred candidate pilots? What about the rest of batch 1 and batches 2 and 3 whose members have been there for more than two years?

Bottom line is that the visible "management" is not doing anything to resolve the pathetic situation and CAAP is not cooperating either. As the authority, they should.

This is not good publicity for the Philippino aviation....

After all, which head is running that setup at Clark?

traveller93

20th May 2009, 02:03

It's interesting to realize how silent this thread has become.... Have the "praisers" run for cover?

This was much more interesting when MP and BH were running the show.

Has CIA began the CPL/IR/TR training courses?

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

Bagoongathipon

20th May 2009, 03:04

Based on your inconsistency on what you really want to address, the MPL course perse, the current problems the cadets are facing, or you're just bitter to whatever is happened/happening to you that you spill it out in this forum.

To give you a status on whats happening.

3 cadets are on their OBS on Cebupac already. Employed and earning.
7 cadets are waiting for their 12 TAGS with Cebu Pac. Their TAGS has been cancelled several times already in a span of two months because of several reasons.
About 10 more cadets are waiting for 7 cadets to finish their TAGs so that they can be absorbed by Cebu Pac.

The above-metion cadets have finished their courses with CA and is on transition with their airline sponsor. So, what has management done for them? ALOT! (unlike the previous management who doesnt know anything but to talk, just like you).

The next batches are on their Advance phases, Loft Phase, Ground school and Multicrew coordination phase, which really runs smoothly.

To summarize it, the main bottleneck is the transition between CA and Cebu Pac.. not within the CA itself.

The core flying phase has its own problems and cadets who are in that stage might have their own frustrations, but once they go to the MCC phase, it just runs smoothly.

As for non-sponsored students and foreign students. I cannot say anythign as of now until it is already concrete. There are about 8 students, 5 foreigners and 3 locals, who have finished their A320 training who are on the wait. I am sure that the management now is doing something about this and this is their main focus unlike the previous management who cant do anything on their own.

lets see what happens in the next few months especially for the nonsponsored students and foreign students.

betpump5

20th May 2009, 08:21

Are there new batches of cadets still entering CIA each month? I understood that initially, CIA were getting 24 cadets (2 classes) each month. IS this still the case? Or has intake dropped very low?

traveller93

20th May 2009, 13:02

At last there was some reaction from someone " in charge"..... who felt touched...

But the report still shows the mess going on at CIA. Poor cadets that are still suffering from previous and present amateurs trying to make a fast buck while sitting on a gold mine.

Even the 5J sponsored cadets are heavily affected by the continuing management incompetence. The truth hurts? So be it.

Bagoongathipon said

Quote "As for non-sponsored students and foreign students. I cannot say anythign as of now until it is already concrete. There are about 8 students, 5 foreigners and 3 locals, who have finished their A320 training who are on the wait. I am sure that the management now is doing something about this and this is their main focus unlike the previous management who cant do anything on their own.

lets see what happens in the next few months especially for the nonsponsored students and foreign students." unquote.

Your text is self explanatory and a reflection of what is really going on. You say you cannot say anything as of now until it is already concrete. You are trying to pull the wool over everybody's eyes... and only talk of "something". What exactly? I challenge you to give the readers a hint.

You say 8 students finished their training and are on the wait. When did they finish their training? Waiting for what? What is management (as you call it) doing to resolve the situation?

And the cherry on top is lets see what happens in the next few months. Months? Are you joking?How dare you play with the future of those who entrusted you with their dreams and are stuck in a web of lies woven by a bunch of crooks? Time waits for nobody!!!!

Bitter? Why should I be? I took my time to read this thread since the beginning and I've followed all the different pro and against arguments written here. Therefore my knowledge about what is going on at CIA and it paints a very sad picture indeed.

In truth, I believe the visible management might be willing to do something but are powerless to make any decisions without the prior approval of those in the dark background.

The question still is: After Mark P. and Brian H. who are they?

There is no transparency in CIA.

traveller93

20th May 2009, 13:59

Lolo.

It is obvious that you have not been at CIA long enough. If you are really a student, how long have you been there? Did you enrol in 2007 and are still happily waiting for the completion of your one year MPL training conclusion?

Most probably you are part of the management and are only trying to smoke the issue out of existence with those "nice to hear stories". It's called BS.

Since you are so well informed and feel that all is OK, then tell the readers of this forum who is really in charge of business in CIA.

If you cannot, then good riddance and let the people that live in the real world talk about the CIA reality.

traveller93

20th May 2009, 15:43

Lolo.

It is evident that you don't have a clue about what is going on.... Therefore you insist in the BS stories trying to woodwink everybody else.

First, I'm not a student at Clark but rather an interested person when it comes to pilot training, and not only. So, lulabies don't interest me but I'm open to talk to people that live in the real world.

You talk as if you really know what is going on in the aviation world but.... be ready when reality hits you in the face when, eventually and if, you complete your MPL training. Where will you find employment with that licence?

The rest of your story is of no interest to anybody minimally informed about what is going on in regards employment opportunities. When you become a pilot you will understand this....

You mention the Clark Aviation website for information about who is managing that setup.... when was it updated? It still has a picture of Mark P. and the Philippines President during the inauguration... and the management list is surely not up to date and no mention of a CEO. Isn't this strange?

Besides, it includes this pearl...

" Key benefits to airline customers are;

Pilots trained, in a highly disciplined, multi-crew operating environment
Superior, relevant training at no cost and no delay to airline
Pilots ready and prepared to for active airline service in 12 months
Guaranteed, consistent supply of fully trained pilots to meet airline’s needs in accordance with their scheduled aircraft deliveries
Win-win solution for the pilots, airlines and aviation industry"
Do you understand the issue or want me to draw a picture for you?

NOTE: I don't intend to carry on exchanging words in this tone with someone so "green" in the world of the big silver birds. No time for civility training, sorry....

mountaintop2007

21st May 2009, 01:46

lots of action lately. snce ive been away. there's a new guy stirring things up, but honestly, he's asking fully loaded questions! it's getting hot in here.

betpump5,
i'm not sure what happened to you. r u the same one posting stuff here before? you were out for a while and most of the early posts you did are now missing. if you're the same guy, glad you're back mate!

traveller93,
you know you have no right to be condescending to a "green" guy. if Lolo is in school and that is how he views the situation then who the hell are you to challenge how he views things, when, as you say you are not even physically in CA?

i detect in you a determination to find answers that bely your declared role of being just an interested person. this is pprune. do you really expect the people in CA to answer you here? if you are really just an interested person, such as myself, then what the hell are you doing making judgments on this school based on what are posted in PPrune, and on CA's "Unupdated" website? if you have doubts, and if somebody answers you here, what benefit will that "truth" give? it is obvious you have a very big axe to grind against this school and are therfore biased and asking slanted questions.

as for:
This was much more interesting when MP and BH were running the show.

is MP the same guy who made all those promises of employment and finishing training in one year? if so, then i am not sure what you meant by "this" being "much more interesting." i'd definitely not enroll if he was still there.

right now i don't care anymore what happened before, as that is past. however, intellectual honesty compels me to withold judgment on things that are not apparent. and i am not trying to shove the issues aside by saying that all we know for sure is that 3 Cadets have gone on to 5J while people have done sim training and waiting for the TAGs.

As for the charge that current management is not doing anything to resolve the situation with the non Cebu cadets, we'd be wiser than be assuming stuff: after being in charge for less than a year (as other cadets in that school i have talked with say), that "bad" management have overcome a lot of adversity and managed to move cadets forward -- delivered 3 cadets to their dreams! not even YOU and your interested posturing can refute that!

mi gaaaad the people here.

Bagoongathipon

21st May 2009, 04:08

You really have no idea... and to top it all, you act as if you know everything

You say 8 students finished their training and are on the wait. When did they finish their training? Waiting for what? What is management (as you call it) doing to resolve the situation?

They're waiting for their turn for the 12 TAGS from Cebu Pac.. CA has already turned over them to their airline sponsor. What situation do you want CA to resolve for these 8 students as its 5J turn to finish their TAGS.

And the cherry on top is lets see what happens in the next few months. Months? Are you joking?How dare you play with the future of those who entrusted you with their dreams and are stuck in a web of lies woven by a bunch of crooks? Time waits for nobody!!!!

Do you know how an airline business works?? I dont, but I know for the fact that anything can happen with a day, a week, a month or years!! Even PAL postponed the training of newly hires, trainees who came from PALav, because there wont be hiring as of 2011! (Then again, that was what they said a week ago.. anything can change)

The problem started when the MP and his gang promised 1year of training to the cadets... They just say flowery words and isnt back up by any plan.

Bitter? Why should I be? I took my time to read this thread since the beginning and I've followed all the different pro and against arguments written here. Therefore my knowledge about what is going on at CIA and it paints a very sad picture indeed.

Well, after 2years and 2months, from 0 hours to F/O seat of an A320. I think its not that sad. There maybe problems, there may be people who create problmes. But, for a new program.. which had a first year of really realy bad management. Compare it to 1500hours of cessna flying, rumor education and no idea of a flyby wire system. A good start for both the program and the NEW management.

lets see what happens in the next few months especially for the nonsponsored students and foreign students." - bagoongathipon.

In truth, I believe the visible management might be willing to do something but are powerless to make any decisions without the prior approval of those in the dark background.

The question still is: After Mark P. and Brian H. who are they?

There is no transparency in CIA.

First of all, Look at this way, atleast i have the guts to say "lets see what happens for the next few month" to the team working now as compared with the MP team whom we all know talks B.S.

Secondly, how can you conclude what the current management is doing / not doing, based on PPRUNE!? HINT.. maybe they're doing something but some people or system is hindering them to make progress OR another point of view is, maybe CAAP is still trying to create/Refine a system for MPL. Maybe ICAO has something to do with this? Its a work in progress.

Lastly, its kinda funny how you defend the old management compared to the new one when those studnets who started since 2007 know who talks B.S. and who talks whats on the table.

To conclude my 3 statements: It seems how you are bitter to the new management and all praise to the old one.

I find it odd and funny because the first 1year in C.A.,
the old management did nothing but apply for bristol ground school for students, did not teach, did not even have a plane to fly.

The 2nd year in CA, with the new management, changed the ground school corriculum, fixed (fixing) the core flying, fixed the MCC, fixed the a320 groundschool, fixed the A320 LOFT, fixed the A320 Advanced phase. They have had hand overed 10students to their sponsors and gives recurrency training to the next 30 students finished with their checkrides and awaiting acceptance from cebupac. Im confident they are now focusing on the non-sponsored cadets which the OLD management promised give an airline sponsor in the first place.

In short, much of the problems came because of the B.S. and stupidity of the old management and the new managment is carrying the burden of their works.

traveller93

21st May 2009, 13:17

Bagoongathipon and all

Attacking the messenger and ignoring the message is not fertile ground for a constructive conversation...

Looking at your text, I surely have a different idea from yours regarding CIA current situation.....

To say that I praise the old management headed by MP is an excellent indicator of your ignorance about who I am. And it shall remain as such.

But I know a bit more about CIA than you might imagine. What happened after MP was kicked out (a favour to humanity was done there)? BH took over.... and now seem to be gone too. So, who is running the show as the head of the corporation? Nowhere a name is to be found. As I said before, CIA is in the middle of a corporate crisis (for whatever past reason) and needs to be seen to resolve the cadets (all of them) immediate need to get a valid pilot's licence. If there are difficulties getting the MPL done in good time, then CIA should be actively working to provide an alternate solution to those that have completed their training and are stuck in a never ending spiral of empty promises and hope building half statements.

Not to complete the MPL course in 12 months is acceptable. 14 to 16 months would be OK to cover for hidden snags in the initial planning. But 30 months (and counting) is a bit loooong.... Don't you think so?

There again, 5J is only taking care about the cadets they fully sponsored. The ones they sponsored 50% are in a terrible limbo and without any means to cover their debts if they don't start working.

The fully self-sponsored cadets are in even more trouble because their debts are much bigger and facing the prospect of bankrupcy at an early age.

The foreign cadets are in a much worse situation, accumulating all the above and even without any chance to do the necessary 12 TAGS for the MPL licence. 5J will not provide any assistance.

As a corporation, isn't CIA responsible for this situation?

Certainly it is!!!! And all corporations have a top person that must assume the responsibility for these matters and CIA doen't seem to have. By the way, this top person assumes the responsibility for all corporate matters regarding Alpha Aviation and covering the UK, UAE and Philippines business units. Does anyone know who this person is? I don't think so....

The junior managers running CIA are only doing the day-to-day management and are in no position to make any corporate decisions, such as providing alternate solutions to the poor cadets stuck between a rock and a hard place, despite all their good intentions and hard work.

The cadets are fully grown adults looking for a professional qualification. They should not be treated as imberb middle school kids but deserve all my assistance to demand proper treatment.

And I stop here for now. Just remember that no ammount of white-washing will clear a situation that demands transparency.

Horatio

21st May 2009, 22:41

Maybe we don't know how you are, for certain, but can have a pretty good guess! Interesting that all of your posts to date revolve around CIA.

You are not a cadet, so why do you care?

Your facts are not correct. MP resigned he was not kicked out, as you say. Interesting fact in itself, considering he set up the company.

So, somewhere along the line, you didn't get what you wanted. Now, what might that have been? I have a good idea.

I think you were kicked out, and for very good reason.

I think that hurts bad. Get over it and get on with your life. In fact, just get a life and do us all a favour.

mountaintop2007

22nd May 2009, 01:33

Attacking the messenger and ignoring the message is not fertile ground for a constructive conversation...

o god you were the first one to attack a poster here! your rudeness at dismissing other people's views can only be described as shameless arrogance.

in fact you have displayed a shocking contempt of other people, dismissing their comments on the basis of your perceived superior knowledge about the entire CA situation.

As I said before, CIA is in the middle of a corporate crisis (for whatever past reason)

if you know this for a fact, then you know much more than many of the posters here in pprune. so it begs the entire situation: why do you need to ask questions in a rumor network? :D

the fact is you are not as knowledgeable about the entire thing as you claim. you are here not to engage in something constructive, but to go on a fishing expedition to serve your own means. go get a life.

mountaintop2007

22nd May 2009, 01:36

yes it is such a pity you lost some of your posts. some of my replies to you now seem worthless :O

Bagoongathipon

22nd May 2009, 03:41

o god you were the first one to attack a poster here! your rudeness at dismissing other people's views can only be described as shameless arrogance.

hear hear!

in fact you have displayed a shocking contempt of other people, dismissing their comments on the basis of your perceived superior knowledge about the entire CA situation.

As I said before, CIA is in the middle of a corporate crisis (for whatever past reason)

if you know this for a fact, then you know much more than many of the posters here in pprune. so it begs the entire situation: why do you need to ask questions in a rumor network? :D

the fact is you are not as knowledgeable about the entire thing as you claim. you are here not to engage in something constructive, but to go on a fishing expedition to serve your own means. go get a life.

He even told in his previous post that he gets the info from the thread because he has read the whole thread already! hahaha.. such inconsistency!! Maybe he was really part of the old management.. what he says is different from what he thinks, much worse, he doesnt know what he says is obviously inconsistent, fallable and full of B.S. (really just like the old management)

He was talking about the alternatives to those nonsponsored cadets..
first of all, this problem started when CA accepted nonsponsored cadets (which was the decision of the old management just to get students) secondly, the management just finished setting up the system for sponsored cadets, im sure they're now focusing on the nonsponsored cadets situation.

30 months?! yeah.. pretty long time huh.. subtract the 12months the old management did nothing.. thats 18months. Then take consideration the new management cleaned up the mess, the # of time CAAP leadership changes, the decision of ICAO to focus on CA and the fact that this is a new program. 18months is fast for an airline industry standard. Sadly, the students have to suffer from this because the old management did not fixed this before they started accepting students in the first place!!

WD103

22nd May 2009, 11:47

Re the comments suggesting CIA is in a corporate mess.

I can say with certainty MP was sacked due to his extremely poor management of CIA and various other issues.

The current local management at CIA are there in good faith, appointed by the shareholders. They (the local management) have no autonomy. All are aware of the tremendous mess to be cleaned up.

At 'corporate' level, CIA is one of the 'academies' within Alpha Aviation Group (AAG), owned by C+C Alpha Group of 1 Vincent Square, London with a minority shareholding by Prescient Technologies, Singapore. These people have lost many millions through investing in CIA, buying Bond Aviation Solutions at LGW (now Alpha Aviation Academy Europe), and another poorly conceived MPL academy in Sharjah which has not yet commenced operations. The LGW 'academy' is actually a TRTO but is insolvent. It also owns a Sim Industrie B737NG sim sitting unused at FSC Amsterdam. C+C have no real expertise or experience of pilot training. It is their London HDQ where the buck stops, and where frustration should be directed.

Apparently C+C etc did not perform any due diligence when they invested in MP's dreams of a global network of MPL academies in 2006. Sadly it is the innocent students and employees who continue to suffer while the 'venture capitalists' continue to dither and pontificate.

betpump5

22nd May 2009, 12:53

Alas a probationary ppruner has posted here - it all gets interesting. And a fellow countryman at that.

For me as I have stated many times, I am purely concerned with Filipino and other nationalities who are embarking on the CIA MPL without some form of sponsorship/guarantee from an airline like 5J.

The MPL in its current state is flawed. No airline in the world accepts an MPL cadet unless they were taught with their own SOP's and also the aircraft the airline flies. This is the whole essence and attractiveness of the MPL - a ready made pilot who on Day 1 of joining the airline can fly in the RHS of that particular aircraft.

Regardless of the mismanagement that has occurred at CIA, whether it be in Manila or in a London HQ, the simple case is that the fundamental flaw of the generic MPL course has not been addressed. That flaw and subsequent concern will always be there - regardless of the management.

This NEEDS to be addressed.

It doesn't matter whether CIA fixes its management, and all cadets are taking 10 months to complete an MPL and everyone is happy blah blah blah.... NO AIRLINE will take a generic MPL cadet straight out of school.

With an MPL, you CAN NOT fly GA to build hours! So you are :mad:ed either way! When will people realise this!

Next time I visit my dad in the Philippines, shall I take a trip up to Pampanga and stand outside with a megaphone shouting out everything I have said?

777-Aviator

22nd May 2009, 18:51

Hi there

I need your help guys!

Looking for all the possible details about Clark's assessment and aptitude tests. What are they exactly &how do they perform these tests? What about math and physics? Any study materials?
& from your personal experience with Clark's assessment, what is it that I should worry about the most?

Your input and recommendations in this regard are highly appreciated.

Thank you very much

FourStripes

23rd May 2009, 00:09

Speaking of CA students, I finally got to fly with the first two MPL course graduates, which, according to them, was Navitimer's instructions.

My first impression:

1. Good theory and procedures.
2. Radio Telephony needs work - probably because no one ever taught them the proper phraseology, sequence, message content, listening technique and "etiquette.
3. Some action paralysis due to the psychological shock of flying the real A320 - realization that mistakes can be disastrous. No "freezing" the plane and having someone explain.
4. Problems keeping up with the pace of actual line operations - The pace during their training was slow and controlled.
5. Little or no bad habits (great!) - because they are starting from a "clean slate".
6. Some anxiety flying into "short" runways - I flew them into Legaspi, where we are currently operating on a reduced runway distance of 1,700 meters (Tagbilaran is 1,700 meters). I demonstrated to them the short field landing and takeoff performance of the A320 (RP-C3247) with a 95% load factor, and how you would only need 3/4 of the 1,700 meters, if you do things properly. To think, I'm scheduled to fly into Ozamis in June, which is 1,500 meters.
7. Need to study more on Aircraft Performance & Meteorology.
8. Need to improve task prioritization and organization - I think this is also caused by the shock of flying the real plane.

I also flew them into Puerto Princesa (long runway), where (I think) they got their first taste of a night instrument approach in bad weather. As Murphy's law would have it, some of the approach, runway and airport lights went out while I was on VOR/DME 27 short final. A scene right out of "Airplane" the movie.

These were "Familiarization" flights, though - they were observers, and I flew with regular First Officers in the right seat. I haven't let them physically fly the A320 yet. They don't get to do that until Navitimer says so.

funnydaytoday2

23rd May 2009, 06:38

traveller93

23rd May 2009, 15:48

There are now four messengers. Lets see if the message gets through without any more time wasting.

Yes, time urges for a solution to ALL the CIA cadets that found themselves caught in a web of deceit, lies and greed and are already suffering financially, psycologically and even physically.

They enrolled in the MPL course because they had a dream and it seemed a new way to become a professional airline pilot. CIA, as a corporation, is in debt to them and not the other way around.

If, as some previous commentators mentioned, the governments of some countries are (even indirectly) involved in the companies that make up Alpha Aviation, then an appeal must be made to them to provide the necessary muscled action to resolve the cadets predicament.

More, ICAO must look at the CIA current situation and provide the needed change in regulations (guidelines) to enable the eventual MPL licence holders to be trained in the general aircraft type manufacturers SOPs instead of the sponsoring operator's.

That is where the most senior management of CIA has to get involved, if they exist and are minimally professional and want to make this adventure a real success.

Is there any movement in this direction? Is there any attempt to provide alternate means to enable the cadets to fly professionally (after all, they already paid for it)?

The small managers are just cannon fodder to take the blame.

airbusbatics

23rd May 2009, 20:41

Hey FourStripes

Sorry to tell u this, but you sound like a pompous ass if I ever heard one...
What an ego trip you're on!

Your pearls of wisdom:

"Some action paralysis due to the psychological shock of flying the real A320"

"Problems keeping up with the pace of actual line operations"

"Some anxiety flying into "short" runways"

"Need to improve task prioritization and organization - I think this is also caused by the shock of flying the real plane"

and then: "These were "Familiarization" flights, though - they were observers."

DAMN. That probably makes you the worlds best instructor! You were able to pick up all that without them even touching the controls!

And then:

"I flew them into Legaspi"

"I demonstrated to them"

"I also flew them into Puerto Princesa"

"and I flew with regular First Officers in the right seat. I haven't let them physically fly the A320 yet."

ME! ME! ME!

What would they do without you... And now your my hero too! I'd love to fly and learn from you... Cebu Pacific has A320's since ... May 2005!
So even if you were on the first batch of A320's you have all of 4 years flying the A320!!! Wow, I'm impressed! Can I be your co-pilot one day Sir? Please... I just want to learn from you Your Royal Highness. I'll be a good boy. Maybe you'll even allow me to "physically fly the A320"....

Sorry, got to go puke now:eek:

777-Aviator

23rd May 2009, 22:17

Hey guys... Would you please reply to my post #708 if you have any answers??:sad:

Thanks

FourStripes

24th May 2009, 10:13

hey airbusbatics,

that comment came from the 2009 pilot of the year of Cebu Pacific.

airbusbatics

24th May 2009, 11:59

WOW!

Now I am truly even more impressed! Pilot of the year 2009 in Cebu Pacific! I am humbled... YOUR ARE THE CHOSEN ONE! GOD's GIFT TO THE COCKPITS!

Can I touch you....?

Seriously. You need a reality check. This can only be a wind up.
I'm finding it hard to believe that a professional pilot would come into a professional pilots forum like this to blow his own horn and in the process make such a fool of himself in front of his peers. You cannot be real. You must be a product of my imagination.

"that comment came from the 2009 pilot of the year of Cebu Pacific"

Now you really disgusted me. You're so full of yourself.

I thought this kind of Captain was long gone. Apparently they are still alive and amongst us.

I CAN'T STOP PUKING:eek::eek::eek:

batman123

24th May 2009, 14:02

you should listen betpump5...

he is spot on, where do you go with a 320 rating, no real hours, and airlines kicking out their own pilots?

you can not even fly a cessna 152 with your nice 320 rating done in a third world country where accident rate is the highest in the world!!!.

get a clue! no one want guys like you!

MPL, just good to toss in a bin!:yuk:

batman123

24th May 2009, 17:14

it's lengthy and you will be challenged, but there's no way to study or practice for it.or

you cheque must have lot of 0 followed by a 1, and there is no way to study, as you just need to open a bank account...

be real!!! MPL=:ugh:

Bagoongathipon

25th May 2009, 06:18

This thread is getting so interesting.
But what amazes me most is how most people here seem to think TRAVELLER93 is somehow an obsticle...Ive read his posts with great interest and have come to understand that this person has a genuine consern for the future of the cadets at Clark Av. From sponcored to non-sponcored cadets.

genuine concern? Read his post carefully... Genuine concerns actually includes facts and ideas on how to solve problems... he has not even have his fact straighten out nor contribute any opinion that would benefit c.a. nor this forum.

For instance, he is blaming CA why only 3 students has finished base check (12 touch and gos) while the next 7 hasnt even started yet. He said that CA is not doing anything to resolve this problem.

While it seems that, its a genuine concern proclaiming that CA should do something about this because the 7 students hasnt finished the Tags, this, concern is flawed. Primarily because CA has already turned overed the 7students to Cebu Pac already. In short, they are already employed by cebu pac and CAs work is finished already with them.

This is only an example of the misunderstanding /mis aligned facts that traveller93 is stating. How much more for the other facts?

Yet it seems that the true obstilces, come from certain people here who belive it looks intelligent to copy, paste and then make some insignificant quote about what another has said...Im sorry to say this Bagoongathipon but as much as you want to make your posts sound and look intelligent, constructive and well thought out. im sorry i have to say it but theres alot os BS in your posts and you do seem a little close minded when it comes to an opinion of another person.

Copy, paste and quote. We do that so we can reference the points being debated upon and counter with facts. If there is BS among my post.. why not quote it?! Its better to quote it and rebutt it so we can understand each other.

I am rebutting travellers points because what he says is different from what we see and happening. First he said that he knows whats happening because he has been reading this thread since day one, then he says things that are of out of reference! lastly, he what he say do not even sound like an opinion. He says these as facts.. which is my focus of my rebuttal.

Traveller93 has made very sound statements with ireputable ividence in many ways,

what evidence?!

and yet as soon the word "new managemnet" comes up, it looks like the CA hounds attack... there seems to be alot of well trained gaurd dogs here barking away at anyone who asks questions about the current management..( good boy, have a biscuit )

actually, its the word "OLD management!" Whenever i hear praises from that group, i really dont know where these comes from. Im sure 100% of the students hates the OLD management.. they never did anything! So, ironically, its really between the ppruners who says that they know everything and likes the old management against the students who experienced how the old management conducted their work!!

So Ill ask the same question. what has the new management done for the self sponcored students.

Atleast, the self sponsored students know they're TRYING to do something about it. When it materialize then you'll know. Unlike the old management who just talked BS (why did they accepted self sponsored students in the first place!?)

And let me just say this to set one thing clear. It was'nt the current management who got cebu pac to give the first 3 cadets their base training,

Ofcourse, because its already cebu pacs responsibility to give the 3 cadets their base training not the current management because this should be part of their agreement. Now, if you are talking that there wasnt an agreement between CA and cebu pac in the first place.. then again, the old management hasnt done its job in the first place!!

the GM and hes little puppies did nothin,nothin for the school and nothing for the cadets until now.. the 3 5j cadets can thank our President GMA, cause she inaugurated CA, GMA told the DG of the CAAP that it will be a national imbarresment if this course failed....

Then its an embarrasment for the old management for having students take the MPL in the first place when there wasnt any agreement in the first place.

So all you hounds out there, get your facts straight before you start barking blindly at what people say here.
woof woof

You're facts showed us how poorly the first management started the program and caused all these trouble that we are encountering.
meow meow

Bagoongathipon

25th May 2009, 06:47

More, ICAO must look at the CIA current situation and provide the needed change in regulations (guidelines) to enable the eventual MPL licence holders to be trained in the general aircraft type manufacturers SOPs instead of the sponsoring operator's.

If you truly, sincerely, genuinely know whats been happening with CA, you should have known that ICAO has been actively participating with the MPL program at CA since last quarter of 2008!

mountaintop2007

25th May 2009, 08:09

are we in a pissing contest?? the most obnoxious one wins!

1. batman 123 - you have no constructive contribution. how many times do you need to repeat your belief that the MPL is a piece of trash? if that is your belief, fine and i will leave you in the peace of your own thoughts. but that should be end of story for you, too. pls could you learn the value of shutting up? or do you have an immense need to stroke your own ego?
2. airbusbatics - i think i can understand where you are coming from, but why the drama? puke all day if you want and who will care? btw, you need to revise your first post in the MPL UAE thread which you started: CA has in fact graduated cadets, and they are doing well so far, and not even you can deny that!
3. fourstripes - i found your comments were very helpful. i did not find it offensive at all, so pls keep posting. even if i understand where airbusbatics is coming from. definitely there was no need to say the comments came from the pilot of the year.
4. lolo - you need to relax :cool:
5. funnydatoday2 - get your facts straight my goddddddd 5J will never take the cadets if they will just crash the a320. it has got nothing to do with GMA. 5j isn't as stupid as you make them out to be.
6. bagoongathipon - are you a cadet in CA? has anyone there sued the former management? maybe that will settle a lot of the old wounds that keep coming up.
7. betpump5 - i told you to come to Angeles and i will treat you to a round of beer. ;) but going to the school with a megaphone will make you look stupid.

you obnoxious d*cks should stick to facts. Ie, the way CA did this under old management is different from what Oxford and Flybe will be doing it, but is CA's product essentially wrong, and is CA's new management not doing anything about it but lie, in cahoots with CAAP?

let's remember that the MPL Training Document is a PANS document, not a SARPs document so the CAAP is supposed to have more room to maneuver, ergo, we will not know what CA and CAAP's plan is in this scenario until it is there staring us in the face. don't forget that the CAAP is equally responsible to the cadets who were given their SPL's.

if you want to praise the old management, just talk to cadets who were there (and a couple of whom i have been engaging in constant comms..). you'd find NO ONE sharing your affection. unless maybe you are a bar girl or a former girlfriend benefiting from the generous tips := ....but i digress. i believe also in the end this argument is pointless.

if you wanna doubt the new management then you are free to form your own opinion. but so do the others who think they have done a superb job just keeping the place moving and delivering the first cadets! :D

batman123

25th May 2009, 13:12

oh my god!!

over 70'000 hit on this topic.

who want join a school after reading all the problems that this academy has?.

traveller93

25th May 2009, 18:47

Bagoongathipon

It seems that you have a problem with the English language. Please do yourself, and everybody else, a big favour and read my posts again, think, and tell us where you see any basis for your personal attacks regarding my motivations.....

Take care with your Level 4 Aviation English. One of the pre-requisits is "comprehension", unless you will only fly domestic routes.

So..... keep the blue side up and relax. Blaming the "dead man" doesn't always work.

funnydaytoday2

25th May 2009, 21:15

Copy paste quote, copy paste quote, it seems you dont get the point Mr.Bagoongathipon.
Your english grammer needs a little work there.hehe. Seems like your a little nervous and tense writing your response lol... guess the hounds of CA kinda rode up your spinal chord there did'nt it..woof woof again to you, let me give you the biscuit, good dog... But i hate to say this, you made absolutely no reason in your last post. So no, you dont get a bisciut... you bad dog you....:}:}keep barking.. :ugh::=:ugh:
but hey. let me copy paste quote here so the dog can understand a little bit better:
genuine concern? Read his post carefully... Genuine concerns actually includes facts and ideas on how to solve problems... he has not even have his fact straighten out nor contribute any opinion that would benefit c.a. nor this forum
I have read he's post very carefully( and your's ) a concern is a concern, it does not need to have facts on how to solve a problem. It need only the heart to express ones feelings on a matter.
For instance, he is blaming CA why only 3 students has finished base check (12 touch and gos) while the next 7 hasnt even started yet. He said that CA is not doing anything to resolve this problem.

While it seems that, its a genuine concern proclaiming that CA should do something about this because the 7 students hasnt finished the Tags, this, concern is flawed. Primarily because CA has already turned overed the 7students to Cebu Pac already. In short, they are already employed by cebu pac and CAs work is finished already with them.
When did Traveller93 ever state such a thing.. please COPY PASTE QUOTE that. You seem to know how to do that right LASSIE
Copy, paste and quote. We do that so we can reference the points being debated upon and counter with facts. If there is BS among my post.. why not quote it?! Its better to quote it and rebutt it so we can understand each other
The word is REBUTTAL not REBUTT, get your grammer straight!:ugh:And you have not COPY PASTE QUOTE, anything that can be debated...woof woof again, but no biscuit... you bad dog you...lol...
actually, its the word "OLD management!" Whenever i hear praises from that group, i really dont know where these comes from. Im sure 100% of the students hates the OLD management.. they never did anything! So, ironically, its really between the ppruners who says that they know everything and likes the old management against the students who experienced how the old management conducted their work!!

Your right about one thing, it is up to the ppruners to decide if the old management were good or not... not you. As i recall the 3rd batch, which is you right, had alot of problems with them, but you dug your own grave with them in many ways. not the other way round. Kawawa ka naman!
Atleast, the self sponsored students know they're TRYING to do something about it. When it materialize then you'll know. Unlike the old management who just talked BS (why did they accepted self sponsored students in the first place!?)

When was the last time you actually spoke or asked one of the self sponsored students their thoughts or feeling on the matter. Dont talk for them if you dont talk to them. From what i've heard the New management talks more BS than the old Management.

I must say, It's been fun, this COPY PASTE QUOTE, lol.

As for you MOUNTAINTOP2007:
5. funnydatoday2 - get your facts straight my goddddddd 5J will never take the cadets if they will just crash the a320. it has got nothing to do with GMA. 5j isn't as stupid as you make them out to be.

Dont make my President nore 5J seem or look stupid. Read my post again carefully. GMA knows what she's doing as does 5J. My facts are straight as is my loyalty to this country and its leaders. You should get the facts straight before posting here. I can see clearly you are part of the management. Shame on you for insinuating that GMA or 5J is stupid.

Have a funny day today 2 everyone and lets wish the next guys the best of wishes on their base flying soon.
And lets pray to the student of Clark who had that crash 2 months ago a safe recovery.

funnydaytoday2

26th May 2009, 05:01

students attacking students
Funndaytoday2:

Why are you attacking a fellow cadet in the forum? don't you think you should just talk to mr. bagoongathipon about his posts?

doesn't look good in the eyes of outsiders.

are you by any chance the PSG scholar of GMA?
What I decide to say and do here is entirely up to me. Welcome to the concept of a forum.
And its ok for certain people to be attacked and others not!??:ugh:.Look and read the posts more clearly and you will see that certain people here are attacking and trying to silence the opinions and concerns of others.

You on the other hand, last i remember you got fired from CA a long time ago. And on the CA thread you did nothing but BS the school and the students. So I have to say this, I value more the posts of the hounds of CA than yours still. At least i know i can still have an intelligent conversation and discuss the concerns and problems of CA with them, but not with you FOURSTRIPES.

Good luck to the ones flying the base training.:ok::ok::ok:

mountaintop2007

26th May 2009, 10:05

1.the 3 5j cadets can thank our President GMA, cause she inaugurated CA, GMA told the DG of the CAAP that it will be a national imbarresment [sic] if this course failed....

2. Dont make my President nore [sic] 5J seem or look stupid. Read my post again carefully. GMA knows what she's doing as does 5J. My facts are straight as is my loyalty to this country and its leaders.

somewhere in the middle, a transition happened, and yes you can blame me for pointing out it was you who insinuated that GMA and 5J are stupid. do you think GMA will tell CAAP to just go let the cadets fly just like that? whereupon CAAp will just force 5J to provide the aircraft? and 5J will just give the aircraft to CA? hahaha. it is obvious that you are trawling for info and changing the tone every which way so they seem like proof to the terrible stories you make up.

and stop saying you are a pinoy because you're obviously not.:=

no filipino misspells his english quite so badly. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

mountaintop2007

26th May 2009, 10:17

heard additional 7 guys sponsored by 5J did TAGS today (or are still doing it now as of this time in DMIA)...not quite sure if they finished as that is a tough one if all of them can do 12 each...will keep you guys updated. (or maybe others have better informed news to confirm this...)

congrats to the guys who have done well!

traveller93

26th May 2009, 14:53

The problem remains....

Aside those 10 pilots accepted by 5J, who now have some sort of guaranteed employment, what will happen to the other >100 cadets at CA?

Believing they can be divided into 3 groups:

1 - Partly 5J sponsored
2 - Filippino self-sponsored
3 - Foreigner self-sponsored

Then what are the plans being implemented to resolve these situations?

Groups 1 and 2 (mainly #1) have(?) some chance to be absorbed by 5J just because they are Filipinos.

Group 3 have an enormous problem because they cannot be employed in the Filippines, and will have a worthless piece of paper if and when they eventually graduate from CA.

Do any of the enlightned commentators of this forum have any idea how to resolve this issue?

It is worth to remember that Alpha Aviation, as a corporation, took their money under the promise that the MPL would be accepted worldwide and employment granted (Filippines, Kazakhistan, Indonesia, England, etc. etc.).

Even today, Alpha Aviation is advertising their Sharjha academy without alerting the candidates to the airline sponsoring aspect of the MPL training and, I'm afraid, the whole nightmare will most probably be repeated.

So, what is the corporation Alpha Aviation doing to resolve the current problems? The operational junior management at CA must be aware of the plans. What are they? It shouldn't be a secret to the cadets.

I don't think any cadet is willing to forget all those millions of pesos paid for a service and they are entitled to get a valid pilot's licence.

I suggest that the focus be entirely on the CA cadets problems and not on the personal bickering going on at present.

Your CRM advises to concentrate on the problem....

mountaintop2007

27th May 2009, 02:53

this time i would agree with the traveller93. as i have mentioned a couple of times before, all that matters now is how CA solves the situation of the non-cebu cadets.

i think even the partial cebu cadets will be absorbed by 5j.

i also know from the MPL UAE thread that their Sharjah academy is in partnership with Air Arabia, as such the 40 sectors will be in Air Arabia. their UK academy is not engaged in MPL at the moment.

Kazakstan? Indonesia? hmmmm....traveller93 must know a lot.

however, would CA be able to get the non-cebu cadets to Sharjah? just thinking out loud....

MrBojo01

27th May 2009, 05:23

Clark Aviation needs a fairy god mother right now!.

cessna95

27th May 2009, 09:51

:D

And lots of cash to burn.

Zone 2 Alt

28th May 2009, 10:54

I don't disagree with what Lolo says, however as it stands to issue an MPL Licence, the CAAP as an ICAO signatory, have to abide by ICAO PANS TRG. They can't just pick items they like and discard those they don't!

mountaintop2007

28th May 2009, 13:04

But isn't PANS supposed to be of lesser authoritativeness than SARPs? meaning while any variance on the SARPs will require the ICAO member state to file for differences of practice with ICAO (which will then "judge" if the difference filing is merited and other ICAO member states may choose to withdraw certain privileges granted to the "differing" state), the PANS do not require such notice of difference? in other words, a member such as CAAP precisely can pick those they want and discard those they don't?

for instance, if i remember correctly, the MPL in PANS 9868 is supposed to be for turbine powered engine only, but FLybe of UK is doing it for turboprops. this difference would not have been possible if the MPL is a SARPs document rather than a PANS. So how is UK able to deviate from the MPL but not Phils? i hope we get informed comments, rather than the usual racist sh*t.

Bealzebub

28th May 2009, 13:10

for instance, if i remember correctly, the MPL in PANS 9868 is supposed to be for turbine powered engine only, but FLybe of UK is doing it for turboprops.

A turboprop is a turbine powered aircraft.

skyhighbird

28th May 2009, 13:40

you beat me to it :ok:

mountaintop2007

28th May 2009, 13:44

ok i may be wrong with that example. mea culpa.:bored:

but any comments on MPL being PANS instead of SARPS?

traveller93

2nd Jun 2009, 01:53

Lolo said

"I think we've gone as far as we can with this forum. When the answers do come, hopefully they will be reported here. As for those who so kindly brought to the public's attention some of the challenges at Clark, I say: the cadets here aren't naive or stupid; we know what's what. We also figure that ICAO/CAAP will do what they are being paid to do--make sure that noone graduates with a 'worthless license'."

So, it seems that Lolo is now controlling what and who is allowed to post on this forum.... Naive, to say the least.

I stand by my statement that the MPL is, at the moment, a worthless licence unless the ICAO rules/law changes to make it a GA licence not depending on any sponsoring airline SOPs. And I'm not the only one making that afirmation here.

Does Lolo know how long it will take ICAO to make those necessary changes? I doubt....

Does Lolo understand the reach of his statement:

"We also figure that ICAO/CAAP will do what they are being paid to do--make sure that noone graduates with a 'worthless license'" ?

Surely Lolo does not know, or has forgotten, that ICAO is part of the UNO and CAAP is a branch of the Philippines Government. One makes the licensing rules, the other ensures that, once accepted, those rules are followed followed by the FTOs which, clearly, Alpha Aviation did not.

Where does the "...being paid to do..." come into?

Lolo does not like questions.... but questions must be asked to make him (and others that try the "flowery route") explain, in clear terms, how the rosy MPL holders future will come to be in countries where that licence has not yet been put into the statute books (some 99% of them)? And ICAO cannot force them....

So, what about it Lolo?

Bagoongathipon

2nd Jun 2009, 03:05

I stand by my statement that the MPL is, at the moment, a worthless licence unless the ICAO rules/law changes to make it a GA licence not depending on any sponsoring airline SOPs. And I'm not the only one making that afirmation here.

The problem with you is that you think that what CA/CAAP/ICAO is doing is already finalized.

What we are pointing out is that CA/CAAP/ICAO are all adapting to the needs. And it does not take a day or two.. it takes months.

Making it a GA license and not depending on any sponsoring airline SOPs? If you are really indepth with whats going around CA/CAAP/ICAO, they have been planning this for months already. CA has given them proposals already. Atfirst ICAO and CAAP didnt like the idea but eventually, CAAP agreed on something. (hmm.. what did they agree upon? well, you're indepth knowledge with whats happening means you know whats cooking for months)

While this suggestions sounds good, making a MPL GA license might be a blunder also. What happens when CA has already given a nonsponsored student his/her 12 TAGS? He gets his license yet doesnt have an airline to work on. And, thats even worthless if he doesnt get an airline in 6months?! What makes the MPL supposedly attractive is that there's an airline waiting for you to continue and finalize your training on the type specific equipment. All these has been messed up when the first management accepted non-sponsored cadets. And yes, the current CA management is working on something for these nonsponsored cadets.

Lucky for Filipino nonsponsored cadets is that PAL, Cebu Pac and Zestair has almost the same SOPs. So, whatever training nonsponsored students get here, it will be easier for them to adapt to the company SOPs.

Jetdriver

4th Jun 2009, 01:13

rq4globalhawk

4th Jun 2009, 02:47

From a moderation standpoint, this thread is becoming tiresome. It generates more complaints in this one forum than any other. It is clear that it has become too large and seems to perpetuate (in part) with some users simply typing to their own alter egos!

Get it back on track fast or it terminates!

The ball is apparently in the courts of the school/airline(s)/authorities involved. The rest in the peanut gallery have no choice but to let off steam. It's your prerogative as moderator to terminate it. Too bad though if you do. The topic still falls under a "breaking news" category, a long-winded one but still developing news.

I find the topic interesting reading and ignore the following (to quote one contributor):

So this leaves the rest of us to post a bunch of circular questions, periodically interrupted by teen-agers, or unhappy pilots/bitter ex-Clark staff, or just cretins who are able to touch-type...

The fellow also wrote:

We also figure that ICAO/CAAP will do what they are being paid to do--make sure that no one graduates with a 'worthless license'. This isn't Nigeria!*

Nigeria is on track to move from FAA's Category 2 to Category 1 late this year, I don't know about the CAAP.

So girls & boys, don't upset our moderator - this is supposed to be a PROFESSIONAL pilots' network - or we get a meltdown.

rq4globalhawk

4th Jun 2009, 08:57

message for rq4globalhawk

Ah, yes, it's you Lolo, whom I quoted ... which shows you're one of the level-headed ones whose contributions I read.

In closing, you expressly stated that you meant no disrespect to teenagers and Nigerians (and rightfully so - their NCAA may return to FAA Category 1 earlier than CAAP) - that was good.

To the rest of the group: criticism is fine, fellows, but let us keep it constructive.

rq4globalhawk

4th Jun 2009, 09:04

Oh, sorry fellows, that was bad editing on my part. I had my type on Bold - makes one appear to be screaming. By the way, I'm one of Lolo's touch-typing cretins. I never really learned to type fast, except on the MCDU. Have a nice day everyone, got to move on to other forums.

traveller93

22nd Jun 2009, 00:35

This thread has been quiet..... No news is good news??

They must have all qualified and are flying. Right??:rolleyes:

x1alpha66

23rd Jun 2009, 11:11

well, at least the first 3 are on their IOE already... and from what i heard, they're really doing good.

AvEnthusiast

23rd Jun 2009, 13:47

Hi Lolo,
Can you please shed some light on Nigerian issue? I mean is there anyone from Nigeria in Clark, Management, Student? or what you are trying to refer to? or things are damnn in Nigeria?

x1alpha66

24th Jun 2009, 03:26

"All MPL cadets that bupak will hire is set to be based in cebu, davao or clark..............so there. enough said."

So what does that mean if they would not be based in Manila?

traveller93

7th Jul 2009, 12:56

Are there any news about further CIA graduations or is there an effort to set a world record for the longest pilot training?:ugh:

If so, it will very difficult to break.....:hmm:

jamestaylor

7th Jul 2009, 13:04

You must be a rocket scientist to make this comment or just part of the same snake hesds who tried to ruin a good thing - which is it ///traveller93 ha we all know who you are

traveller93

7th Jul 2009, 17:53

Your comment, and manners, only shows how little you know.... (obviously you have not been at CIA long....).

Nevertheless, everybody should only worry about getting all the poor cadets qualified and earning a living.

traveller93

8th Jul 2009, 10:48

It is evident that the point is being missed by some here that keep on trumpeting the "good news" about the CIA "success".... which is desired but seems to be very difficult to achieve.

In two and half years of MPL training program, how many pilots graduated besides the three at 5J?

Other schools around the world have completed the training program within the time frame set by ICAO.

I fail to see the relevancy of posting news about the China aviation on this thread. Unless CIA has a contract to supply pilots to that market....

I don't think so.

Bagoongathipon

9th Jul 2009, 02:07

In two and half years of MPL training program, how many pilots graduated besides the three at 5J?

FYI:

3 are in their IOE stage in 5J
8 are in their OBS stage in 5J
11 finished their BOM and waiting for the 12 TAGS with 5J
20++ finished their a320 checkride already with clark av. Awaiting for 5J to absorb them. (so the ball is already with 5Js court, not clark av)

simply means... thats atleast 41 cadets finished with Clark Av already.
41 cadets in 2 and a half years? thats fairly average considering its a new program, a new school, newly established CAAP.

traveller93

10th Jul 2009, 02:17

FYI:

3 are in their IOE stage in 5J
8 are in their OBS stage in 5J
11 finished their BOM and waiting for the 12 TAGS with 5J
20++ finished their a320 checkride already with clark av. Awaiting for 5J to absorb them. (so the ball is already with 5Js court, not clark av)

simply means... thats atleast 41 cadets finished with Clark Av already.
41 cadets in 2 and a half years? thats fairly average considering its a new program, a new school, newly established CAAP.

These, at face value, look like some positive move forward for the 5J sponsored and partly sponsored cadets. Congrats and good luck to them!!!

Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.

The same applies to those 20++ cadets. No TAGS = No licence.

So, in fact only 11 cadets have graduated from CIA until now.

But, there again, I could be wrong....

On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?

Just to finish for today. The commentator LOLO had two posts that disappeared from the thread.

In those posts he was singing the virtues of CIA and how everything is running to schedule, and how CAAP and ICAO are actually working to resolve the real mess while mentioning things such as the Stirling pilots that lost their jobs because of the crisis, and the chinese MPLrs in Australia time to complete the course and the second(????) Airbus factory in China and the KAL cadets, etc. etc....

Honestly, while these details might make some interesting conversation, what does all that have to do with the CIA cadets graduation and insertion in the job market? NOTHING!!!! Except that it shows some desperate attempt, by someone obviously not experienced in aviation matters, to white wash a bad situation.

And this is evidenced by the FACT that CAAP and ICAO had to step-in to avoid very serious consequences caused by the malpractices of a private business. CAAP and ICAO should not be involved because they are the lawmaker and the regulator authority. But since they are involved, lets hope that we can see light at the end of the tunnel soon.

After all, CIA has its own management to take care of business. Or not?

Bagoongathipon

10th Jul 2009, 07:45

Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.

The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.

Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.

On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?

As I raised before, If the previous management didnt accept these self sponsored cadets in the first place, they would have this kind of problem. The current management has to carry this burdern of the foolishness that the previous management did but I know for the fact that they are doing something about it.

Unlike the previous management, they're not making promises about it. (But then again, they have to deal with it because of the incompetence, stupidity and foolishness of the 3britons who ran the school)

rq4globalhawk

10th Jul 2009, 13:25

I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.

I was told by one of the cadets that they have been issued MPL certificates - I can't remember what color CAAP assigned, though

traveller93

10th Jul 2009, 14:12

Quote:
Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.
The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.

Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.

Quote:
On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?
As I raised before, If the previous management didnt accept these self sponsored cadets in the first place, they would have this kind of problem. The current management has to carry this burdern of the foolishness that the previous management did but I know for the fact that they are doing something about it.

Unlike the previous management, they're not making promises about it. (But then again, they have to deal with it because of the incompetence, stupidity and foolishness of the 3britons who ran the school)

Isn't it good when we can have a decent conversation without an overly defensive position??

OK. Regarding the TAGS, no problem seeing that 5J is the mothership for the Philippino sponsored/partly sponsored cadets. Does 5J provide the same way out to the local self-sponsored?

In any case, and refering to the last two statements, the continued blaming of the previous management will lead nowhere to resolve the immediate needs of the self-sponsored cadets. The people (management) changed but the enterprise (CIA) remained and, therefore, keeps the responsibility.

Managers are just people paid to do the necessary to achieve the enterprise objectives and to speak and act on its behalf. If the enterprise is put on a hot spot because of some undue actions by its managers, then it is up to it to protect its interests by suing the managers. Has CIA done that and, if not, why not?

The point is: CIA sold a product (MPL) that included some time and work guarantees but, in the end, the product (MPL) failed to materialise despite the guarantees. Isn't CIA (the enterprise) responsible for the terrible shortcoming of those who paid for the product (MPL)?

Managers come and go and the current CIA management will, in time, also be replaced by others who will blame them for something. Its the nature of the beast!!!

But while they are being paid to do the job, they better get on with it and resolve the issues affecting negatively the enterprise (CIA) and not only.

It is not enough to continually say that something is being done without showing any results. More than promises, what matters most are the deeds and CIA is lacking on both.

Unfortunatelly, CIA is playing with much more than what is going on at Clark. The whole MPL concept (in which I believe) could be at stake by the negative actions allowed to take place within the enterprise. Many many prospective pilot candidates will shy away from that type of training for fear of being caught very short of their dreams.

They will, instead, go the traditional way to get a pilot's licence. Cheaper and more secure.

ICAO is on-site to avoid this disaster and not because CIA is a model flying academy.

Now!!!! Get on with it!!!

traveller93

10th Jul 2009, 14:30

rq4globalhawk
I was told by one of the cadets that they have been issued MPL certificates - I can't remember what color CAAP assigned, though

I guess that by "certificates" you mean pilot licences but I don't know the relevance of the colours. Could you explain, please?

In any case and as Bagoongathipon says, the guys are flying with 5J and they could not do it without some sort of legal paper.

For the rest, see my last post.

Reedeye

10th Jul 2009, 16:17

Bagoong,

The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.

Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.

Work hand in hand? I think not.
According to CAAP, 12 TAGS CIA cannot
CEB just a client, a partner its not
No plane, no gain
all banter blah blah

The truth of the matter is, CIA is all alone in this brouhaha they themselves created. CEB has to step up to provide the plane SO THEIR CADETS CAN FINISH WHAT CIA CANNOT DELIVER! CLARK AV doesn't have any qualified A320 FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR nor A320 aircraft to begin with!

So please, stop pussyfooting around, clucking like satisfied chickens. CEB just did its part because they will eventually need these cadets to fly their planes. CEB paid for these cadets to undergo the MPL training course, which CIA promised can be done in ONE YEAR! No joy on that. Then they started getting non-sponsored cadets. CIA promised these poor souls heaven and earth just so they could lay their hands on the money these poor souls are willing to spend! And that, my friends, is the whole story of this fiasco in a nutshell. As for the non-sponsored cadets? Well, I guess CIA has this to say.....SO LONG SUCKERS!

rq4globalhawk

10th Jul 2009, 21:39

I guess that by "certificates" you mean pilot licences but I don't know the relevance of the colours. Could you explain, please?

Yes, certainly. CAAP licenses are color-coded (or "colour"). Green for ATPLs, blue for CPLs I think, pink for SPLs etc. The entire card is colored so it looks terrible when it's photocopied. Personally I think they ought to use white cards with color-coded stripes instead so the text will look much more legible.

Second, I find it odd to write MPL license (or "licence") when "M.P.L." already includes the word. It's like saying "Multicrew Pilot's License License," so I wrote "MPL certificate."

By the way, as an FAA check airman told me, there is no such thing as an FAA license - they call the documents "certificates", e.g. ATP certificate, etc. It's actually the same banana.

rq4globalhawk

10th Jul 2009, 21:54

A CAAP check pilot told me that they will go overseas for MPL TAGs. The DG has agreed to have it done in non Philippine-registered aircraft. The school is paying for the TAGs (reliable info). The last time I did TAGs was on a wide body aircraft decades ago - personally I think a dozen TAGs is more than enough, having done these on level 4 simulators.

traveller93

11th Jul 2009, 01:30

Never mind the spelling....:ok::)

Thanks for the color (or colour) coding explanation. Perhaps that method was devised by some "off-set" mind...

Indeed all white certificates make life easier.

traveller93

11th Jul 2009, 01:49

Bagoongathipon

11th Jul 2009, 02:38

I beg to disagree.

In the first place, MPL should have an airline sponsor in the first place. Cebu Pac are the ones really tasked to have the 12TAGS for the MPL cadets not Clark av.

The program was
1. Groundschool (Clark av)
2. Core flying (clark av)
3. Multicrew coordination / intro to jet training (clark av)
4. LOFT: A320 (clark av)
5. Advanced phase: A320 (clark av)
6. 12 TAGS (sponsoring airline)

It is until the first management decided to take in non/self sponsored cadets which caused what these problems.

It is Clark av who proposed that they do the TAGS even without a parnter airline for the self sponsored as a resolution to the issue. At first, CAAP/ICAO didnt want to but I think they are now considering the option.

Traveller,
I agree with you that Clark Av should be taken as an entity, even there's a change in management. That, what was decided by a previous manager should be dealt by the current one. Well, unlike the previous management that cadets dont respect, primarily because we all know they talk B.S., this current management is still manageable.

While i dont blame the current management on what happened, IT IS EXPECTED OF THEM TO RESOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. And unlike the previous ones, they've created alot of progress in the past year as compared to the first year. (where, as i said, they didnt do anything at all.. only b.s.)

MPL license.
Its colored blue. just like the CPL. But with glitters! lol
I not 100% sure, but the rating in the MPL license restricts the holder to whom he/she has finished his training (12 TAGS). i.e. A320-Cebu Pacific.
Their next step is to get their ATPL.

Currently, Clark Av, is proposing to CAAP/ICAO, to rent an a320 and do the TAGS for the nonsponsored themselves. The issue was that MPL was designed for a smooth transition from clark av to a sponsoring airline. If, clark av, does the TAGS, it deviates from the philosophy/principle behind the MPL.

Bagoongathipon

11th Jul 2009, 03:24

A CAAP check pilot told me that they will go overseas for MPL TAGs. The DG has agreed to have it done in non Philippine-registered aircraft. The school is paying for the TAGs (reliable info).

If that proves to be true, lets hope they will do it very soon to begin closing the sore issue.

This is one of the infos that came from someone outside of Clark av. I mean, the only thing that i dont like Traveller93 is talking is how he says that Clark Av management is not doing anything as if he knows everything that is happening.

Aside from the issues raised by ICAO regarding the training that was solved and met by clark av, there are alot of things that Clark Av management is doing and has done.

Regarding the resolution on issues for self sponsored cadets TAGS. FYI:
1. This idea has been brought up by clark av management since last year (December 2008)
2. Only last May or June 2009, did CAAP/ICAO entertained this idea and asked for proposal from clark av on how this should be done.
3. Even before CAAP/ICAO asked for proposal, Clark Av, was looking for possible airlines who are willing to rent their A320s, settle issues on insurance, etc etc.
4. This project doesnt work overnight. It take months. Self sponsored just have to understand that it works that way because this wasnt the original program, but a resolution to their issues.

Other than that, there are atleast 2 more other avenues that Clark Av is working out for self sponsored cadets to get a license/airline sponsor that Clark av is also working on for months already.

It is wise that we dont say what these are because if we do, they it dont materialize, people from this forum will say that these are just empty promises. But if it comes from an outside source, such as rq4globalhawk, then it is quite receptive.

With all due respect, traveller93, I hope you understand why you always hit a brick wall on me. I always read from your posts that clark av is not doing anything, that proclaiming others know nothing whats going on here in this school, as if you know everthing.. yet you do not know that there are things being iron out for months already. So what does that leaves me to think of you, that you're just here with personal agenda, with hatred, to bring down the current management? the MPL program? Because I dont really see how you benefit this.. You might say its for the good of the community? But it goes back to the strong words that you are saying, that clark av is not doing anything for the students.

x1alpha66

11th Jul 2009, 05:15

the license is light bluish in color if i remember correctly. i don't think it would be accepted elsewhere because in the note portion, it is written in very bold letters: "License is valid for 320 with Cebu Pacific only"

however, the first 3 had their 319 upgrade or retraining or whatever it's called so i guess they had an additional 319 stamp there.

xpto

11th Jul 2009, 11:24

That's crazy

9ball

11th Jul 2009, 12:48

2 years on and this thread is still going strong! you just got to hand it to
Mark, Rick, Matt, and the rest of the founding fathers of CIA.......

traveller93

11th Jul 2009, 15:18

Bagoongathipon

......I mean, the only thing that i dont like Traveller93 is talking is how he says that Clark Av management is not doing anything as if he knows everything that is happening.

Let me tell you, once more, that I don’t claim to know everything that is happening at CIA and that is the reason I ask many questions that, until proven otherwise, have all been correct as confirmed by many other members of this forum that have closer contacts with CIA.

Bagoongathipon

Regarding the resolution on issues for self sponsored cadets TAGS. FYI:

1. This idea has been brought up by clark av management since last year (December 2008)
2. Only last May or June 2009, did CAAP/ICAO entertained this idea and asked for proposal from clark av on how this should be done.
3. Even before CAAP/ICAO asked for proposal, Clark Av, was looking for possible airlines who are willing to rent their A320s, settle issues on insurance, etc etc.
4. This project doesnt work overnight. It take months. Self sponsored just have to understand that it works that way because this wasnt the original program, but a resolution to their issues.

No doubt that it is a lot of work. But is it not the job of management to do that exactly in a timely manner? Yes, time is a very important factor that is hampering the hopes of those poor souls to fulfill their aspirations to become professional pilots.

Bagoongathipon
Other than that, there are atleast 2 more other avenues that Clark Av is working out for self sponsored cadets to get a license/airline sponsor that Clark av is also working on for months already.

Again you are talking about months. Do the affected cadets know about those efforts?

Bagoongathipon
It is wise that we dont say what these are because if we do, they it dont materialize, people from this forum will say that these are just empty promises. But if it comes from an outside source, such as rq4globalhawk, then it is quite receptive.

Now you are talking as a CIA manager.... but you have posted in this forum as a cadet. Define yourself as either, to be addressed as such.

Bagoongathipon
With all due respect, traveller93, I hope you understand why you always hit a brick wall on me. I always read from your posts that clark av is not doing anything, that proclaiming others know nothing whats going on here in this school, as if you know everthing.. yet you do not know that there are things being iron out for months already. So what does that leaves me to think of you, that you're just here with personal agenda, with hatred, to bring down the current management? the MPL program? Because I dont really see how you benefit this.. You might say its for the good of the community? But it goes back to the strong words that you are saying, that clark av is not doing anything for the students.

PPRune is an aviation forum and not the appropriate place to analyze persecution complexes as evidenced in your text. Where did you get such ideas? Have you ever tried to look at my posts as something that, in the end, will be beneficial to the whole project? Think about it....

Many other PPRuners have asked pointed questions about CIA, since the begining of the business, on many unsavoury subjects such as racial an xenophobic comments.

Traveller93 is looking at the CIA business issues that mainly affect a group of innocent people that believed they could get a future in aviation and that paid a lot of money for it.

That is all for now.

betpump5

14th Jul 2009, 08:11

OK, let's assume that the self sponsored cadets finally finish all the requirement to achieve their MPL certificates. Will they be given a chance by cebu pacific or PAL to apply for a job with the given license?

NO NO NO. And this is what I have been trying to educate people on but as you can see from my post history, I have given up posting here for the past month or so.

With regards to PAL, they have a 1500 hours requirement for a direct entry FO. When PAL require cadet pilots (250 hour pilots), they are taken from PALs Av school. This was the case when I flew in the Philippines and this is still the case now.

PAL will NOT take on any MPL cadet who has just graduated-whether it be from CIA or a European MPL FTO. This is because the MPL FTOs in Europe, i.e FTE and Oxford are SOP specific to their partner airlines. This is how the MPL should be done and is being done in Europe. The advantage of an MPL is you can fly the specific aircraft for a specific airline using their specific SOPs from day 1. This is the beauty of the MPL.

So how do you build those 1500 hours before you can apply to the likes of PAL or any other airline?

Well that is the biggest discussion here and the answer is simple - You can't. The MPL dos not allow you to fly GA (General Aviation). Therefore, you can not build your hours UNLESS you pay for extra ratings. But these ratings will affectively give you a CPL ME/IR. Or put simply a fATPL. That is your answer.

However this is for PAL and any other airline.

Cebu is currently the only airline that could potentially hire non-sponsored MPL cadets out of Clark. This is because the current syllabus is Cebu Pacific SOP specific. So that is the only choice. But why would Cebu hire self-sponsored cadets when they have already given 50% of the course fee to their own sponsored cadets?

At present, no International organisation has constructed a Generic MPL course. This is because airlines do not use generic SOPs. The maths here are simple.

reallyawannabepilot

14th Jul 2009, 08:27

That's what I thought...hence rendering this whole MPL discussion regarding non-sponsored cadets useless.

betpump5

14th Jul 2009, 09:46

I would not say it is completely useless.

I am a pilot with 9 years behind me who started off his flying career on 732s in the Philippines. My father lives there with his Filipina wife and I truly adore the country. I call it my adopted country and any chance I get; I will always spend my days off in the Philippines – considering it is only a 2 hour flight from Hong Kong where I am based.

My interest stems from knowing a lot about the Filipino culture and understanding that when the majority of Filipinos have a dream, they will definitely work so hard to get there but rarely ask the questions along the way. Whether it is investing money in a sari-sari store or setting up a larger business, the majority rarely do the maths to see if their business/dream is sustainable, in good times or bad.

Now this is not a bad thing! This is why I love them to bits!

I admire their faith and how hard they work. I admire how Filipinos will leave their children just so they can be maids in other countries in order to pay for school fees for their kids – just to give them a better life.

At the same time, how many Filipinos have blindly given money to an “agent” who can give them a visa and employment in Thailand or Dubai but have turned out to be a fake and have ran off with their PHP50000? – Just because they did not ask any questions or researched what they were getting into?

So this is why I am here. This is where my interest lies. How many non-sponsored Clark Cadets have heard of an SOP before they joined? How many cadets researched the MPL and its advantages and limitations? How many cadets have researched past MPL schemes in Europe and looked at the struggles the Danish MPL pilots had to face when their airline went bust? How many cadets have researched what airlines have their own ab-initio schemes hence ruling them out for employment before 1500 hours? How many cadets constructed a back-up plan in case they do not get a RHS on an A320 after graduation?

These are the questions I want perspective cadets to ask and research. I have no vendetta towards Clark or the MPL. I see the MPL as probably the future of airline pilot recruiting. As long as the MPL is partnered with an airline, it is brilliant, cheap and quick.

At the moment however, any non-sponsored MPL cadets will not get an airline job with anyone else apart from Cebu. And if they don’t get a job with Cebu, they will need to spend more money on ratings to fly General Aviation.

I am not here to complain about the management at Clark. Or the lack of aircraft. Or the facilities. Or the Communication . Or the duration it has taken…etc. These are in-house issues which I have no place to debate. I am simple concerned by the concept of the generic MPL and those non-sponsored cadets who are training for it. Because there is NO job at the end of it. In good times or bad.

traveller93

14th Jul 2009, 14:15

There are obviously good contributors to this thread.

Yes, indeed the MPL training was designed to be taught, in its last stages, using the SOPs of the sponsoring airline. Nevertheless and up to that phase (Type Rating and Base Training), all the instruction follows the normal (traditional) syllabus to get a PPL and CPL/IR. So, the major part of the requirements to get a " normal" CPL are already there.

In my opinion, ICAO made a mistake when it restricted the MPL to the sponsoring operators customised SOPs instead of the manufacturer's published procedures, as seen in the (A320) FCOM Volume 3.03.00, and, therefore, closing the door to the students that would like a generic Type Rating that would enable them to be employed by any airline.

As a matter of fact, most operators use the manufacturer's FCOM in the cockpit. Only very few have a suplementary folder containing small procedural changes to the original. Food for thought....

Is it so difficult for ICAO to change this ruling?

In any case, the ICAO MPL guidelines were published and it was up to the individual aeronautical authorities to set the local rules to accept the MPL training and licenses before any instruction was allowed to take place. Did Alpha Aviation ensure that the local authorities had all the rules in the statute books before advertising for the MPL course?

Give you an example how it was properly done somewhere else:

"Multi-crew pilot licence proposals released

Proposals for the introduction of an Australian multi-crew pilot licence have been set out by CASA. A notice of proposed rule making has been issued providing the broad framework for the new category of licence, which was established by the International Civil Aviation Organization in late 2006. The multi-crew pilot licence offers a new way of training people to become co-pilots in large aircraft operations with at least two pilots. It was established because there was an international recognition that current training requiring a large number of solo flying hours on smaller aircraft is not the most efficient and safe way to train jet aircraft co-pilots. Training organisations and airlines also wanted a greater use of modern training techniques such as flight simulators.

Key proposals put forward by CASA include: the minimum aeronautical knowledge requirements should be the same as the requirements for obtaining an air transport pilot licence and the instrument rating; the minimum flying experience should be the hours specified by ICAO as long as the training course, assessments and flight tests are based on the competency standards specified by ICAO; an MPL candidate will have demonstrated competency acting as pilot flying and as pilot monitoring a multi-crew multi-engine turbine powered aeroplane; a newly qualified MPL pilot should be limited initially to flying aircraft of the same type that was used in the final phase of the MPL course and with the airline associated with the MPL course; induction training and continuity experience requirements should apply to airlines using MPL pilots; the recent experience requirements for the MPL should be the same as the requirements for an air transport pilot licence."

Read the MPL notice of proposed rule making (http://www.casa.gov.au/newrules/fcl/nprm0708fs.htm).

In the document you will find the whole MPL proposed ruling details here http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/newrules/fcl/download/nprm0708fs_annex_d.pdf

and I call your attention to the Annex A (ICAO MPL Licensing Pathway) where it seems that CASA has some sort of bridging to the CPL.

Could other PPRuners comment on this?

There must be a practical and legal way out of the poor self-sponsored students nightmare. A nightmare totally caused by Alpha Aviation.

What cannot be expected is that this situation be allowed to continue indefinitely!!!

rq4globalhawk

14th Jul 2009, 22:16

...it seems you have some contacts in CAAP

Well, when one has to renew license(s) every few months or so one can't help developing contacts.

.. is there any chance to know if the certificate will be valid (and accepted) outside of the Philippines?

First of all the civil air authority has to have MPL in its air regulations, and there's very few at the moment. My crystal ball's too foggy at the moment to see the distant future but I sincerely hope that things can eventually be worked out for the non-sponsored MPL cadets.

In my opinion, ICAO made a mistake when it restricted the MPL to the sponsoring operators customised SOPs instead of the manufacturer's published procedures, as seen in the (A320) FCOM Volume 3.03.00, and, therefore, closing the door to the students that would like a generic Type Rating that would enable them to be employed by any airline.

As a matter of fact, most operators use the manufacturer's FCOM in the cockpit. Only very few have a suplementary folder containing small procedural changes to the original. Food for thought....

Is it so difficult for ICAO to change this ruling?

I agree, completely. After teaching pilots the generic manufacturer's SOP they can be easily trained for the airline-specific procedures. Many airlines have mixed Airbus and Boeing fleets and some come up with standard procedures for both (callouts, etc.). I've worked with other airlines and gone through their manuals. The difference isn't really that much and the young pilots are so malleable and easy to train ... well, most of them anyway.

betpump5

15th Jul 2009, 16:53

I would disagree, traveller, that ICAO made a mistake in limiting the MPL to the sponsoring airline’s SOPs. I think, in its infancy, this was a very wise thing to do. An SOP is to an extent the airline’s bible. It is a set of procedures that every employee must go by without compromise. And it is a set of procedures that have been refined from the manufacturers SOPs that is tailored towards the airline. This is why there can not be and never will be a generic SOP – ICAO would never advocate it and no airline would ever accept it. An extreme example may be an SOP where a specific airline does not allow the deployment of speed brakes at a certain altitude/speed in case it wakes up their business-class passengers!

Anyway I digress. The point is that an MPL is so fundamentally different to the tried-and-tested fATPL route that airlines (especially the legacy carriers with deep-routed training cultures and procedures) needed to have the guarantee that if they were to take on an MPL cadet, they would receive a ready made pilot who required no training and knew how to operate everything in the cockpit and in the right order.

We could argue for ever as to the benefits of flying 150 hours in a Cessna 152 if the aim of the pilot is to fly 747s. What do they really learn in those 100 hours of flight experience? Surely 50 hours in the flight simulator of an A320 is more beneficial than flying 100 hours at 2000 feet in a Cessna. Anyway obviously ICAO and the bean-counters (accountants) at airlines thought it wasn’t that important and hence the MPL was born – a new age flight training course that would take a novice to the R.H.S of an aircraft with the majority of time spent in the simulator of the aircraft they will fly. This is the biggest advantage of the MPL and cheaper!

However, there is one major disadvantage to this. You can ONLY fly that aircraft on an MPL. You are not training to be a pilot. You are training to be an airline pilot and those two entities are entirely different. An MPL does not allow you the freedom that a fATPL does. The first MPL did not even allow you to fly solo in a Cessna! So the very simple logic means that CURRENTLY, an MPL cadet MUST have a guaranteed job at the end of training of the licence is useless because you can not do anything with it.

The biggest mistake ICAO made was not ensuring that there should be very stringent rules that FTOs must not adopt an MPL course without the cadets having guaranteed employment – or at least the guarantee of ending up in the holding pool of an airline (obviously you can not eliminate the risk of not getting a job immediately).

I believe it was immoral for Alpha Aviation to embark on this project without global recognition of a generic SOP/MPL. This is why there are well-founded accusations that Alpha Aviation saw the Philippines as an easy prey because this would never happen in Europe. There have been 3 MPL schemes in Europe so far. The very first was the Danish MPL that had cadets sponsored by the airline (which then went bust). FTE and Oxford are currently partnered with FlyBe. So all schemes are airline sponsored. All cadets will at least end up in the holding pool at their own risk that they may not be given a job – but this is a risk all cadet pilots take regardless of licence. Also, the Flybe MPL schemes have an in-built guarantee that if anything goes wrong with the MPL, they will fund the conversion of cadets to CPL ME/IR.

Alpha and CIA have no such guarantee.

CIA is NOT a scam. But I do believe, from the evidence, that they know they are jumping the gun. They have a lucrative business that they could never get away with in Europe. Where is my proof? Well the fact that they are not in the UK. Out of all the countries in the world, why the Philippines? Why use that country as a starting point? When I look at the big picture, not just an a/c that has gone tech, I smell something that goes right to the very top of CAAP and the government. Maybe Philippines wants to establish itself as the main airline pilot training centre in Asia? Perhaps the country wants to position itself before another country gets the accolade?

Now these are not bad reasons, of course not. I encourage anything that gets the Philippines the investment and recognition it deserves. But just like 99.9% of “good intentions” in the Philippines, there is usually only one winner and it is never the people. Congratulations to all the sponsored cadets who have now finished the MPL and are flying with Cebu (are they yet) but I expected nothing less.

My main concern is the non-sponsored cadets. The Global Airline Community will not change overnight. A generic MPL will not be accepted or absorbed in 1, 2 or 3 years at least. So the non-sponsored cadets have only one choice which is to transfer onto a fATPL. What other options are there? Non-sponsored MPL cadets graduating in the next few years will not be able to build hours while they wait for a job which can only be for Cebu Pacific. And what happens if that non-sponsored MPL cadet fails the interview for Cebu pacific?

If a generic MPL is accepted globally in 5 years time (which I doubt), then you can be 100% sure that there will be a whole host of new rules and regulation rendering any MPL cadet training from 2007 onwards obsolete.

traveller93

17th Jul 2009, 01:55

Betpumps said and I comment:

I would disagree, traveller, that ICAO made a mistake in limiting the MPL to the sponsoring airline’s SOPs. I think, in its infancy, this was a very wise thing to do. An SOP is to an extent the airline’s bible. It is a set of procedures that every employee must go by without compromise. And it is a set of procedures that have been refined from the manufacturers SOPs that is tailored towards the airline.

Our fellow commentator rq4globalhawk has given his view:

"After teaching pilots the generic manufacturer's SOP they can be easily trained for the airline-specific procedures. Many airlines have mixed Airbus and Boeing fleets and some come up with standard procedures for both (callouts, etc.). I've worked with other airlines and gone through their manuals. The difference isn't really that much and the young pilots are so malleable and easy to train ... well, most of them anyway."

and it goes in the direction I meant.

This is why there can not be and never will be a generic SOP – ICAO would never advocate it and no airline would ever accept it.

The generic SOPs are issued by the a/c manufacturer's (as approved by the type certifying authorities) and provided to all the operators as the manner in which the a/c should be operated. Most airlines use them as is. Nevertheless, the operators can, and some do, add their own particular ways to "some procedures" but not all. At least I've never seen that.

So, the students could be trained in the standard SOPs for the type rating and them would have to adapt to their employer's few changes to those. Exactly the same path followed by the traditional CPL/IR/TR.

An extreme example may be an SOP where a specific airline does not allow the deployment of speed brakes at a certain altitude/speed in case it wakes up their business-class passengers!

Well... extreme indeed.... But it just goes towards my point: It is an odd point that probably reminds the pilots that, in certain flight phases, there are other ways to reduce speed.

The point is that an MPL is so fundamentally different to the tried-and-tested fATPL route that airlines (especially the legacy carriers with deep-routed training cultures and procedures) needed to have the guarantee that if they were to take on an MPL cadet, they would receive a ready made pilot who required no training and knew how to operate everything in the cockpit and in the right order.

There is no doubt that the MPL is the future (happening now) training model for airline pilots and should be encouraged, despite the always present "resistent to change" characters. Human nature....

The airlines would be happy to receive a properly type rated co-pilot (and just train him/her on its SOP differences).

We could argue for ever as to the benefits of flying 150 hours in a Cessna 152 if the aim of the pilot is to fly 747s. What do they really learn in those 100 hours of flight experience? Surely 50 hours in the flight simulator of an A320 is more beneficial than flying 100 hours at 2000 feet in a Cessna.

You just agreed with me. lololol And the MPL has about 240 hrs total time.

....You are not training to be a pilot. You are training to be an airline pilot and those two entities are entirely different. An MPL does not allow you the freedom that a fATPL does. The first MPL did not even allow you to fly solo in a Cessna!

I beg to differ. The MPL trains type rated pilots that end up getting a frozen ATPL that will become "normal" after some (many) flight hours have been logged. After that there is no difference.

So the very simple logic means that CURRENTLY, an MPL cadet MUST have a guaranteed job at the end of training of the licence is useless because you can not do anything with it.

I'm 100% in agreement with you. That is the unfortunate problem.

The biggest mistake ICAO made was not ensuring that there should be very stringent rules that FTOs must not adopt an MPL course without the cadets having guaranteed employment – or at least the guarantee of ending up in the holding pool of an airline (obviously you can not eliminate the risk of not getting a job immediately).

ICAO sets the licensing standards (and curricullum) and then it is up to the individual aeronautical authorities to set the rules. See what CASA did in my last post.

I believe it was immoral for Alpha Aviation to embark on this project without global recognition of a generic SOP/MPL. This is why there are well-founded accusations that Alpha Aviation saw the Philippines as an easy prey because this would never happen in Europe. There have been 3 MPL schemes in Europe so far. The very first was the Danish MPL that had cadets sponsored by the airline (which then went bust). FTE and Oxford are currently partnered with FlyBe. So all schemes are airline sponsored. All cadets will at least end up in the holding pool at their own risk that they may not be given a job – but this is a risk all cadet pilots take regardless of licence. Also, the Flybe MPL schemes have an in-built guarantee that if anything goes wrong with the MPL, they will fund the conversion of cadets to CPL ME/IR.

Alpha and CIA have no such guarantee.

Then, what is stopping them from following Flybe's example?

CIA is NOT a scam. But I do believe, from the evidence, that they know they are jumping the gun. They have a lucrative business that they could never get away with in Europe. Where is my proof? Well the fact that they are not in the UK. Out of all the countries in the world, why the Philippines? Why use that country as a starting point? When I look at the big picture, not just an a/c that has gone tech, I smell something that goes right to the very top of CAAP and the government. Maybe Philippines wants to establish itself as the main airline pilot training centre in Asia? Perhaps the country wants to position itself before another country gets the accolade?

Well.... I prefer not to comment on most of your opinion except to say that they are spoiling a tremendous opportunity to lead the MPL training world. On the other hand, it would sufice to remember the Bond Aviation history and see it re-running....

Now these are not bad reasons, of course not. I encourage anything that gets the Philippines the investment and recognition it deserves. But just like 99.9% of “good intentions” in the Philippines, there is usually only one winner and it is never the people. Congratulations to all the sponsored cadets who have now finished the MPL and are flying with Cebu (are they yet) but I expected nothing less.

I'm with you!!! The self sponsored students are just some "small fish" that are trying to make headway in this world full of sharks.

My main concern is the non-sponsored cadets. The Global Airline Community will not change overnight. A generic MPL will not be accepted or absorbed in 1, 2 or 3 years at least. So the non-sponsored cadets have only one choice which is to transfer onto a fATPL. What other options are there? Non-sponsored MPL cadets graduating in the next few years will not be able to build hours while they wait for a job which can only be for Cebu Pacific. And what happens if that non-sponsored MPL cadet fails the interview for Cebu pacific?

It is up to Alpha Aviation to resolve those issues created by themselves. And rapidly!!!

If a generic MPL is accepted globally in 5 years time (which I doubt), then you can be 100% sure that there will be a whole host of new rules and regulation rendering any MPL cadet training from 2007 onwards obsolete.

I don't think so. Everything is in place but require some small changes such as the removal of the requirement for a sponsoring airline.

Once that is done, the sky is the limit and the MPL training will take off as it should.

rq4globalhawk

19th Jul 2009, 12:35

I'm glad to see we're getting a good, civilized and professional discussion for a change. I'll get back to you gentlemen as soon as I get more info from my MPL grapevine.

traveller93

20th Jul 2009, 12:40

I'm glad to see we're getting a good, civilized and professional discussion for a change. I'll get back to you gentlemen as soon as I get more info from my MPL grapevine.

It indeed makes a big difference when the conversation goes, somewhat, in the direction of making a positive contribution to clarify a situation that, in the end, affects, or will affect, the wide pilot community.

It would be great if your grapevine could indicate in which direction ICAO is going.

The future does not lye in keeping the blame on the past individuals that, one way or another, found themselves stuck in this mess. Exception made to those who were born crooks and who are expected to face the law.

Lets go forward.

traveller93

27th Jul 2009, 03:11

It would be a pitty if this thread came to an end without seeing the current problems resolved. So, let all those who care continue posting information that might, in some way, assist those who are in charge of sorting the mess out.

This is what is published by ICAO on its FAQ website:

http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/peltrgFAQ.htm#31 (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/peltrgFAQ.htm#31)

Multi-Crew Pilot Licence (MPL)

What is the MPL?

The MPL allows a pilot to exercise the privileges of a co-pilot in a commercial air transportation on multi-crew aeroplanes. It provides the aviation community with an opportunity to train pilots directly for co-pilot duties. It is a new licence that has been introduced in addition to the existing pilot licences defined in Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing.
The licence focuses on ab initio airline pilot training. MPL training and assessment will be competency-based and involve a multi-crew environment and threat and error management from the onset. It provides for greater use of flight simulation training devices and include mandatory upset training. At this stage, only aeroplanes are considered for this new licence. The details of the requirements for the licence are contained in Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing and in the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training (PANS-TRG). These documents outline the minimum international Standard for the implementation of the MPL by any State; they can be purchased directly (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/m_publications.html) from ICAO through the Document Sales Unit ([email protected]).

Will the MPL be recognized by Contracting States?

As a licence defined by ICAO the MPL will be recognized by all ICAO Contracting States even by those that may decide not to establish an MPL as a licence within their own States. More details on the recognition of licences by other States can be found on the FAQ on "International recognition of flight crew licences" (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/#10).

What is a multi-crew aeroplane?

It is an aeroplane that requires a flight crew of at least two pilots. One of them is the pilot-in-command (the captain) and the other is the co-pilot (or first officer). All jet air transport aeroplanes and the vast majority of turbine powered air transport aircraft and business jet are multi-crew aeroplanes. The definition in Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing states that it is: "an aircraft required to be operated with a co-pilot as specified in the flight manual or by the air operator certificate."

Do I have to hold a MPL to be a co-pilot on a muti-crew aeroplane?

No, the co-pilot on a multi-crew aeroplane can hold either a MPL or a CPL endorsed with an instrument rating and a type rating on a multi-crew aircraft.

What are the differences between the CPL and the MPL?

For the purposes of operating multi-crew aircraft, the privileges of a MPL are equivalent to those of CPL endorsed with an instrument rating and a type rating on a multi-crew aircraft. However, and because the MPL is geared toward operation of multi-crew airplane, an MPL pilot cannot generally fly on single pilot aeroplane without meeting additional requirements. For example, MPL holders cannot exercise the privileges of a CPL and instrument ratings on single pilot aeroplane without meeting specific actual flight time and flight instruction requirements.
A number of MPL courses may be a modification of the current JAA frozen ATPL or the Transport Canada and FAA CPL/Multi-engine training, but it is expected that the majority will follow the guidance proposed in the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training (PANS-TRG) document.

What are the minimum flight hours required for the MPL?

The ICAO Standard for the MPL specifies 240 hours as the minimum number of actual and simulated flight hours performing the functions of the pilot flying and the pilot non-flying. However, the Standard does not specify the breakdown between actual and simulated flight hours and thus allow part of the training curriculum that was traditionally conducted on aeroplane to be done on flight simulation training devices (FSTDs). However, there is a requirement that the applicant meets all the actual flying time for a private pilot licence plus additional actual flying time in instrument, night flying and upset recovery.

Why was the MPL established?

The MPL was established to respond to the growing demand in the aviation training community that felt that the current regulatory regime that dictated a large number of flying hours in solo and on a smaller aircraft was not the most efficient and safe way to train pilots for copilot duties on jet transport aircraft.
Further, there was some perceived negative training in the apprenticeship model that was first developed for flight training in the post second world war era. A number of training organizations and airlines were adamant that modern training techniques and research into the use of modern training devices such as flight simulation training devices needed to be recognized within the ICAO licensing structure. The ICAO Air Navigation Commission formed a Flight Crew Licensing and Training Panel to explore the options and opportunities to address the shortcomings of some current licensing requirements. The competency-based concept and the MPL licence were the outcome of that panel's deliberations.

How can the MPL be implemented?

ICAO has developed the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training (PANS-TRG) document to support the implementation of the MPL and will monitor developments in this area through a proof of concept programme. This programme will involve stakeholders from regulatory bodies and industry. In addition, an Air Training Organization must meet the prescribed organizational standards which are also outlined in Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing and the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Training (PANS-TRG).

What is the status of the MPL regulatory provisions?

The ICAO Council adopted the provisions related to the MPL as part of Amendment 167 to Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing on 10 March 2006. The new provisions will become applicable on 23 November 2006.

It seems that the MPL "must" be recognized by all the Contracting States. But will it enable a "Conversion" or "Validation"?

This is stated above:

"......the privileges of a MPL are equivalent to those of CPL endorsed with an instrument rating and a type rating on a multi-crew aircraft. However, and because the MPL is geared toward operation of multi-crew airplane, an MPL pilot cannot generally fly on single pilot aeroplane without meeting additional requirements. For example, MPL holders cannot exercise the privileges of a CPL and instrument ratings on single pilot aeroplane without meeting specific actual flight time and flight instruction requirements."

Could this imply (somehow) that the MPL training time and syllabus could be counted as credits to get a Type Rated CPL?

As there are contributors here that know about these legal matters, could we get their opinion?

betpump5

29th Jul 2009, 12:27

I agree that it is nice to have a civilised discussion here.

If you go through my posts on this thread, you will see that I am not negative about the MPL. I will never say that an MPL cadet is less of a pilot or question his/her ability. I believe that the MPL has its advantages and is more relevant to airlines.

You should all know my stance by now - that is I am concerned for current CIA non-sponsored cadets AND those who are joining CIA now or in the near future (is CIA still taking 20 +cadets each month - anyone have latest intake figures?).

The quoted text below highlights my concern:

For example, MPL holders cannot exercise the privileges of a CPL and instrument ratings on single pilot aeroplane without meeting specific actual flight time and flight instruction requirements.

Like I have said from the start, any one who has an MPL and is not sponsored by an airline will need to build hours in order to become attractive for when an airline decides to recruit. An MPL pilot can not build hours unless they gain specific actual flight time and flight instruction requirements.

If you can afford the extra flight time and tuition, then this is not a problem. To answer your question Traveller 93, yes the MPL hours can count (perhaps even 100%) to the CPL. The requirements are a minimum 150 hours - just like any other CPL course. I see no reason why the MPL hours you have built can not go towards the CPL but you do need to meet the 150 hours (or so) in order to satisfy the CPL license. I do not not know if you need to resit the 170a or whether the MPL covers that already.

Either way, there will still be a lot more hours to build in order to be able to fly General Aviation to build hours. And this costs money. As it stands, I would never recommend the MPL to anyone who is not sponsored. It is too big a risk. Of course in 1-2 years time things may be different but do you really want to risk PHP4m of your family's money in the hope that the generic MPL is adopted by every airline?

betpump5

31st Jul 2009, 10:36

Like I have said from the start, any one who has an MPL and is not sponsored by an airline will need to build hours in order to become attractive for when an airline decides to recruit.

On whose authority do you make this assumption? The MPL will be attractive enough.

Lolo. In the event that a 250 hr fATPL cadet is not offered immediate employment after training (something that is very very normal even during the boom times), the fATPL pilot has two choices:

He/She can pray and wait for a phone call (remember after a year your IR is expired) or you can try and find a General Aviation job to build hours, keep current so when a recruitment drive occurs in an airline, you are a very attractive candidate.

The latter route into the airlines is something that happens in every single country for non-sponsored pilots. That is my authority. It is how the majority of pilots I fly with everyday got to the airlines - the other method is via the military or if they were on a specific airline sponsorship scheme. This is also based on my being an airline pilot of 10 years compared to you being a cadet for 1 or 2 years ok?

My point is that with a basic MPL license, you can not apply to any general aviation jobs without doing further training to satisfy certain requirements. That was all I was pertaining to in my post.

Having read your post, it seems CIA have now dropped the self-sponsored MPL. This is good. And it also demonstrates that the self-sponsored MPL that Clark marketed was too ahead of its time and has ultimately failed. To all the posters that questioned the MPL via the countless pages on this thread, it appears that you were indeed correct - but this does not make me feel proud.

ICAO has and will acknowledge the self-sponsored cadets that have and are training at Clark. This is not ground breaking or positive news as this was always the case with this course. It was an approved course.

However what does ICAO recognised actually mean in terms of getting a job? If Cebu Pacific don't take you (why should they considering they have sponsored pilots at Clark?) what will you do except to pay for my training so you can fly Gen Aviation to build hours? Sitting around waiting for a phonecall from Cebu is a very very risky plan.

I hope that any pilot, self-sponsored or otherwise (MPL or fATPL) has a back-up plan upon graduation in the very likely event that there is not a job waiting for them.

Grimmace

1st Aug 2009, 20:16

Lolo, I got to agree with Betbump. The point is that, being a self-sponsored cadet, will the MPL you will possess be enough to land you a job...more specifically, at Cebu Pacific. When you do finish your training and get offered a job by Cebu Pacific, Great!! But what if they don't? And you do have to think of "the otherside of the coin". You've got to start thinking way ahead here before you end up with only an MPL license with an A320 stamped on it. That is basically what Betbump is trying to say. When he said "Like I have said from the start, any one who has an MPL and is not sponsored by an airline will need to build hours in order to become attractive for when an airline decides to recruit", he was stating a "more than likely" scenario...it is something to think about. You said, "On whose authority do you make this assumption? The MPL will be attractive enough"...bro, I am sure Betbump was stating and suggesting things out of years of general aviation/military/airline experience...but your statement falls just short of arrogance. Tell you what, other than Cebu Pacific, take a look at airline jobs board on the web and then you tell us if what you have "will be attractive enough". Here are some of the websites so that you will have an idea...these are just a few, but there are other sites.
Flight Crew Personnel, Aviation Jobs, Aviation Maintenance Jobs, Flight Crew Jobs- Parc Aviation (http://www.parcaviation.aero)
Airline Pilot Jobs & Pilot Employment - Rishworth Aviation Recruitment Specialists (http://www.rishworthaviation.com)
Pilot Jobs, Aviation Jobs, Aviation Employment, Career Fairs, Job Fairs (http://www.climbto350.com)

Many of us had made certain decisions in our flying careers that sometimes were for the good, but others for the bad...but then again that's life...there are definitely risks. I think you had made a calculated and well-thoughtout risk when you decided to join that MPL program, which is good...and I hope the very best for you. But like what Betbumps said, do not wait too long for a phone call.

Just my two cents.

traveller93

2nd Aug 2009, 21:45

I don't believe that any speculation on who is who will be useful for the discussion but (there is always one....) I also don't think that lately there has been any CIA cadet posting in this forum. Why do some people behave like cameleons???:eek:

Someone said before:

The current unsponsored MPL students are special batches of ICAO-approved students.

"Special batches of ICAO-approved students"? Does this mean that ICAO has changed the rules and, if so, where are they officially publicised?

Since the philipino airlines will not accept the self sponsored cadets, the MPLrs will have to have their licences validated/converted by other countries authorities. Will they??

If not, unemployment is certain!!!

This is what the ICAO FAQ website says about licences conversion/validation:

ICAO | FLS | FAQs (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/peltrgFAQ.htm#pilot)

Aviation activities requiring a licence

ICAO has developed international licensing Standards for the following aviation activities:

Flight crew licences:

a. Licences and Ratings for Pilots (Annex 1, Chapter 2):

o Private pilot (aeroplane and helicopter);
o Commercial pilot (aeroplane and helicopter);
o Airline transport pilot (aeroplane and helicopter);
o Glider pilot; and
o Free balloon pilot.

Annex 1 also provides for a series of ratings (class, type, instrument and instructor) that complement the flight crew licences.
International licensing Standards for the following additional aviation activities will become applicable on 23 November 2006:

Licences and Ratings for Pilots (Annex 1, Chapter 2):

o Multi-crew pilot licence (aeroplane);
o Private, commercial and airline transport pilot licence for airship; and
o Powered-lift pilot licence.
------------------

International recognition of flight crew licences

The Convention on International Civil Aviation, often called the Chicago Convention, provides for worldwide recognition of flight crew licences issued by any member State of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) provided that:

a. the licence meets or exceeds the ICAO licensing Standards of Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing to the Convention on International Civil Aviation;

and

b. the licence is used on an aircraft which is registered in the State which has issued or validated the licence.

If the licence is to be used on an aircraft which is not registered in the issuing State, the licence holder must obtain avalidation (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/#12)of the licence from the State of Registry or alternatively obtain a new licence issued by the State of Registry.

ICAO licence or international licence

ICAO does not issue any licences. Licences issued by ICAO Contracting States on the basis of Standards and Recommended Practices of Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing, are habitually called ICAO licences. This has led many to believe that there is a specific ICAO or international licence. The fact is that there is not one single international licence issued by ICAO or any other organization. States issue their own licences based on national regulations in conformity with Annex 1 specifications and validate licences issued by other Contracting States on the basis of bilateral or multilateral agreements or the fulfilment of nationally legislated requirements.

For more information, please refer to Annex 1, Chapter 1, paragraph 1.2.2.

Use of flight crew licences on foreign-registered aircraft

Any pilot who wishes to fly on an aircraft registered in a State other than the one that has issued the licence, needs to obtain an authorization from the State of Registry. This authorization is generally given by the State of Registry through a validation or a conversion of the foreign licence. In general, the validation process is used for short-term authorization while the conversion process is used for longer-term authorization.

Validation of a foreign licence

When a State validates a foreign licence, it recognizes it as valid for use on aircraft on its own registry. The Convention on International Civil Aviation and its Annex 1 do not contain specific requirements for the validation of licences beyond establishing the principle and the fact that the validity of a validation, cannot be extended beyond the validity of the supporting licence. As a result, conditions under which validation is granted vary from State to State. It depends on the level of privileges required and on the origin of the licence. It is generally easy to obtain a validation for VFR private flights, but more stringent rules may exist for professional licences. The applicant may be required
to get additional training and/or to take new exams.

Conversion of a foreign licence

As an alternative to validate a foreign licence, a State may issue a licence that is based on the foreign licence held by the applicant. In doing so, the Licensing Authority accepts the fact that holding a foreign licence is an acceptable way to demonstrate compliance with its own national licensing regulation.The conditions for the conversion are generally similar to that of a validation.

How to obtain a validation or a conversion?

The decision to validate or convert a foreign licence is left to the discretion of each Licensing Authority.ICAO is unfortunately not in a position to provide information on the details of the validation and conversion policy and procedures established by each of its Contracting States. The most reliable source of information is the Licensing Authority of the State (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/m_links.html) in which the licence is to be validated or converted, and at times Consulates and Embassies may be helpful.

For more information on validation of a foreign licence, please refer to Annex 1, Chapter 1, paragraph 1.2.2.

As said in the ICAO site, and despite the licence recognition, it is totally up to each country's civil aviation authorities to accept a foreign licence. And if they don't have the MPL on the statute book....

So, what say the old hands in the business about this?

Lets hear it!!!