MCL - Is it Mickey Mouse?

[Mach086]

I am starting to see Pilot Schools across the world, especially in Asia, promote the Multi-Crew Pilot License. You never fly solo but it seems according to the ICAO, the world needs pilots and fast. You can be fully qualified to fly an A320 (or whatever aircraft the school is dealing with) within 12 months - and basically walk straight into an airline that is recruiting for that certain type.

Whilst this is not a Mickey Mouse course as it was invented by ICAO's Navigation Commision in Europe, is it seen by airlines as a Mickey Mouse way of becoming an airline Pilot??

The reason this came about is because it is no longer necessary or Relevant to build 1500 hours in a cessna flying by yourself when what you really need is Multi-Crew Experience - hence why this new way was made.

I just want people's views. I've found a place in Asia that does for the grand total of £36 grand. Not bad really. At the end, you fly 12 landings/take offs in an A320.

[Ropey Pilot]

You can be fully qualified to fly an A320 (or whatever aircraft the school is dealing with) within 12 months - and basically walk straight into an airline that is recruiting for that certain type.:}:}:}

Just an opinion, but I think it may be a while before heads of recruiting are convinced - in the UK at least.

And even then you will probably be the third choice after integrated and modular.

is no longer necessary or Relevant to build 1500 hours in a cessna flying by yourself

Probably not - but I think that 100 hours or so of making command decisions about weather, diverting etc are very relevant. Presumably you eventually want to be a Captain and unless there is a major shift in CRM/operating procedures within the airlines then a Captains job will suddenly include your entire training because initially you will probably be treated as an extension of his arms (ie he will just be flying the aircraft through you). At the moment my sector is my sector from planning, briefing, fuel decisions etc etc they only time the Skipper would interfere is if he thinks that I am doing something dangerous:}

From myself on another thread - can't be bothered to re-type
The 'need' to have light aircraft experience before going on to the jets has been debated many times but among other arguments I can see two very good reasons:
1) You learn how an aeroplane works. You can see the ailerons working, feel the buffet and then drop out of the sky as you stall (in a controlled manner having done all the appropriate checks). You can see the effects of wind on a cross wind landing as you fly is smoothly all the way on to the runway. The feedback through the controls of a big machine is usually artificial and you can be somewhat detached from it - to land many still do it by numbers (ie 30ft slam the throttles closed and flare the nose up 2.2 degrees. +/- 10 feet depending on weight). They do know why though and have a chance of conpensationg if conditions suddenly change (huge gust of cross wind). If you have never flown anything light where even small gusts make you think you have nowhere to refer to in that split second (as you freeze up totally wondering what is happening, the sim didn't do that!)

2) In a big machine you are second in command. If your hypertensive skipper drops dead of a heart attack in the Heathrow TMA and you have 0 hours on real aeroplanes, and 0 hours in command of anything all the sim time in the world can't replicate how alone you will feel the very first time you have to take charge in a stressful situation. Back in the Cessna you will have got lost/hit unexpected weather possibly faced a technical failure and had to 'take charge' make decisions and save the day. A lot of people underestimate how much difference these small 'emergencies' (for the want of a better word) boost both your confidence and ability to aviate under stress. When/if you plough it into the ground in the sim you know you will find yourself back at 3000 ft trying it again 2 mins later. You can't replicate the stress of a 'real' emergency in the sim.


It is a much cheaper route - but the airlines aren't putting up the cash - so they won't really care about that. And twelve whole take-offs and landings! If you didn't alternate sectors in the airline that can be done in 1 and a half days work. Given that is the time for potential mishaps in even relatively benign conditions - would you let a surgeon perform 'routine' open heart surgery on you (doing the same thing a consultant does after 10 years or so experience) one and a half days after coming out of med school whilst simply being watched by someone else?

I'm sure there are many posts on this subject with many arguements for and against - I just know that I wouldn't want to be the first one applying for a job with a licence the airlines have no experience with (or any specific interest in - what happens when you want to move to the left hand seat. Do they then have to pay for your full training, do they give you a sabbatical while you do it or do they employ someone that they can just give a command course to and let them loose with minimal disruption to their crewing figures?)

It may be the way ahead in the future, but I wouldn't go down that path yet myself.

[Mach086]

You are corrcet in everything that you said - especially the analogy regarding a surgeon with no experience. But I am talking about the direct comparison between a pilot straight out of ATPL school compared with a Pilot straight out of MPL School. In a head-to-head competition, surely the airline would rather go for the person who can straight away walk into the right seat of an A320 on Day 1 compared with the ATPL person who will need type rating, line training, simulator time which is alll a considerable amount of cost aand time to the airline?

Obviously, 5 years down the line, if the MPL pilot hasnt bettered himself - i.e done more training to get the ATPL license, he could certainly find himself third in the pecking order when he/she goes for the covetted position as a 747-400/A380 pilot or indeed a Captain position.

I'm trying to find out who gets their foot on the ladder first- the ATPL pilot straight out of school or the MPL pilot straight out of school? Surely you are at that advantage of being the first in the pecking order (providing the airline requires pilots for the specific plane you trained on). And rememebr, if you are looking at further career progression, you would have had the job first, earned the money and paid for extra training yourself to get more licenses whilst still building up hundreds of hours in an airline and getting paid for it!

I still welcome anyon'es opinion cos this is such a tough decision.

[snuble]

A cheap school is not necessarily the cheapest option in the long run. I suggest you to look for a quality school, one that has been in the game for some time, witch offer linetraining as part of the package (or even better a bond).

It might be difficult convincing conservative chief pilots that the MPL is a good thing, while hours on type is something they can relate to:ok:



what happens when you want to move to the left hand seat. Do they then have to pay for your full training, do they give you a sabbatical while you do it or do they employ someone that they can just give a command course to and let them loose with minimal disruption to their crewing figures?That is your Mickey Mouse right there, as the JAR FCL states that you need 500h PIC to take an ATPL. 70h of those 500h has to be genuine PIC time, not PICUS!



snuble

[Mach086]

"That is your Mickey Mouse right there, as the JAR FCL states that you need 500h PIC to take an ATPL. 70h of those 500h has to be genuine PIC time, not PICUS!"

Sorry, can you please explain the acronymns. i have no idea what that means. - thanks

"A cheap school is not necessarily the cheapest option in the long run. I suggest you to look for a quality school, one that has been in the game for some time, witch offer linetraining as part of the package (or even better a bond)."

It is only cheap as the fuel costs are like 50% of the obscene costs we pay here. And also you becoming FULLY QUALIFIED Pilot - albeit without the line training but you only get that in Airlines don't you? i.e 50 hours with a captain doing operational routes. Surely no school is affiliated/offers line training. the fuel for 50 hours in an A320 would be hundreds of thousands?

Let me copy and paste this from the website:

The MPL was developed by a panel of experts from 25 different ICAO member states following a review ICAO initiated back in 2001. This review determined what many aviation experts already knew; that existing ICAO licencing and training standards had not kept up with development in the aviation industry and advancement of aviation training, thereby having a detrimental effect on aviation safety and efficiency.

The benefit of the MPL is that we train pilots from day one to be airline pilots; in a multi-crew airline operating environment where the training is delivered by experienced airline training personnel. We utilise the majority of the flying training instruction on the actual aircraft type that the cadets will be entering airline service on.

Benefits to cadets are;

Progress dependent on competency - not hours
Flight instruction hours increased over current requirements (240 vs. 200)
Utilisation of modern training methodologies as practised by airlines
Emphasis on modern jet aircraft techniques rather than light aircraft techniques
Continuous assessment process throughout training
Modern simulation technology allowing weather and environmental effects to feature in training
Comprehensive and integrated training syllabus 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 Becoming a commercial airline pilot can be a long and expensive process. The traditional method of reaching
this objective was to obtain a Private Pilot Licence on a single engine aircraft followed by a Commercial Pilot
Licence, Instrument Rating, Aircraft Type Rating and Multi-Crew Co-operation training. All of these training
programmes have a specific number of flight hours that cadets must complete and cost a significant amount of
money. This is a process that was developed after the Second World War and has not been updated since,
regardless of all the advancements in aviation technology.
This no longer has to be the only process. There is a better way to become a commercial airline pilot and the
answer is the Multi-Crew Pilot Licence (MPL).
The MPL exemplifies the progression in the aviation industry as it utilises the most advanced technology in
simulated environments to teach cadets in a safe and controlled manner. Furthermore the MPL differs from the
traditional method of training as it is based on competency and understanding rather than hours of flight time.
The cadet will continue to learn until the instructors are confident in their ability to move on to the next phase.
It is the most efficient and cost effective method of training available today

What do you think?

[BillieBob]

I think there might be couple of misconceptions here. In the JAA, the MPL can be offered only by the a JAR-OPS 1 operator or by an FTO that has an approved arrangement with a JAR-OPS1 operator and the course includes all line training. It would be a very dangerous option for self-sponsoring, not least because the training in Phase 4 is directed to a single aeroplane type, which restricts one's options on graduation.

It would not be a very clever move to self-sponsor an MPL course without a cast-iron guarantee of a job at the end of it. How, for example, would you feel if you had an MPL valid only on the A320 and there were only 737 jobs available?
I've found a place in Asia that does for the grand total of £36 grand. Not bad really.Except that you would then have to find a job in Asia - that course would not qualify you to fly for a JAR-OPS 1 operator.

[3Greens]

you would of course still have to complete a sim course to get to grips with the particular airline SOPs and to pass an OPC. Ok, so you might get away with a slightly shortened course but not significant enough to outwiegh the cost of hiring an intergrated/modular pilot with circa 1000hrs.
Sorry, but there is no substitute for experiance, and in my airline there is little chance of employment without time on type...

[Re-Heat]

Probably not - but I think that 100 hours or so of making command decisions about weather, diverting etc are very relevant.
Back in the day when I was training (on UAS), I remember working at a significantly higher level when with an instructor, rather than without (when one could get away with far more)...particularly when instructed to do a practice divert without notice...

[pfd99]

The MPL course does actually include you going solo. You complete a minimum of 70 hours aircraft training (both dual and solo) and the bulk of the course is FBS and FFS with glass cockpit which is what you are going to fly on qualifying for your licence. Check out www.alphagroupclark.aero (http://www.alphagroupclark.aero) and check the MPL information pack. This company has some airlines they are working with to find you a job on completion of the licence.

pfd99

[BEagle]

In JAR-land, this Mickey Mouse Licence will only be available as part of qualification for a specific airline and aircraft.

There will be no such thing as a 'generic' MPL.

Still, most captains I've heard say "No problem, I just won't let the little buggers touch the controls".

So it'll become a glorified wireless operator/flap lever operator's licence.....

[Groundloop]

you would of course still have to complete a sim course to get to grips with the particular airline SOPs

One of the principal ideas behind the MPL is that that all the type-specific training is undertaken to a particular airline's SOPs. This, of course, means that the airline has to be involved in the student's training. At the moment, in the UK, no airline appears to be prepared to make that level of commitment.

My understanding of the original concept behind the MPL as that you cannot undertake one on your own - you have to be supported by an airline. Of course, now the MPL is a reality no doubt certain "requirements" will quietly disappear.

[Mach086]

Id like to thank everyone who has commented so far. I really appreciate your views so please keep them coming!!!! I need all your views. But there still seems to be some confusion as to what my point is.

"It would not be a very clever move to self-sponsor an MPL course without a cast-iron guarantee of a job at the end of it. How, for example, would you feel if you had an MPL valid only on the A320 and there were only 737 jobs available?"

Surely the fact that the best cross-commonality is Airbus. A320=A319/A318/A321/A330/A340 et al. Much more commonality than boeing. So at least you've got a 50% chance of getting a placement compared to the ATPL graduate who has flown weed-killer planes for a year! PLus- you'll be able to know your way around an FMC much more.

I'm just looking for the fasted/cheapest way to getting my foot through the door. ANd surely this MPL means that on head-to-head straight out of ATPL/MPL school - the person who has got the A320 type rating is a better candidate?? Surely this muct be the case. Regardless of whether they are looking for 737 or A320 pilots? You have Multi-Crew experience - infinetly much more than Mr ATPL straight out of school. You know the flight deck-the electronics- flight operations etc.

"Still, most captains I've heard say "No problem, I just won't let the little buggers touch the controls".
So it'll become a glorified wireless operator/flap lever operator's licence....."

Slightly cynical - even if its true? The point is ur gaining your hours, you're being paid, you're in the environment, you've got a job and ur earning the bucks to pay for other courses yourself. Compared with Mr ATPL who is still building up his flight hours as an instructor in a cessna. No Multi-Crew experience etc..

This has obviously brought quite a bit of controversy. This is a new license. Budding Pilots have spent thousands of pounds and time building up hours towards your ATPL, then suddenly some Wally (thats me!) comes along and says you can be a fully qualified A320 pilot in 12 months - whilst the ATPL pilot is still flying weed-killing planes or flying tourists in Eastern africa.

Please please keep your comments coming. and dont be to attached to the acronyms. I'm a wannabe so don't know too much technical jargon. Again-thank you.

[Antonio Montana]

Mach086,
It is my belief that the MCL will only be for one type of aircraft be that A320 or A330 or B737 etc.
You will not be able to chop and change into another type as the whole point of the licence is type specific.
You cannot become a Captain.
If you wish to change type or move over to the left hand seat (Captain) you would have to undertake your ATPL's and CPL etc....
On the other hand,
If you get a Private Pilots Licence (PPL), hour build, Commercial Pilots Licence (CPL), Multi Engine Rating, Insturment Rating (IR) and then do a Multi Crew Course (MCC) you will find you are a much better pilot than one who has done a quick MCL course.
The whole point of the current route to Frozen ATPL is designed to make you think and learn from mistakes. There are many Commercial Pilots out there who have tried to kill themselves on more than one occasion (me included) when they where hour building whilst holding their PPL. The whole point of a CPL is to instill in you command decisions and improve your airmanship skills.
When you undergo a type rating you are learning how to manage the aircraft. You are expected to be able to fly, I know its faster than a twin prop but it is not that difficult to master.
We fly B737's on numbers, Power settings and pitch settings, I have no doubt in my mind that that is the same for any jet just as it is for any prop aircraft, just faster.
I could not agree more with BEgale's comments regarding the fact that any MCL holder will not be allowed to touch any of the controls.
Most airlines when recruiting low houred non type rated pilots are looking to see if you will fit in, and in the sim, flying skills are very very very important, not messing around with the FMC, in fact messing around with it can cause lots of problems. have a look here:
http://http://www.planecrashinfo.com/1995/1995-77.htm
http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_965
The basic principle is this, Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
Just my two pence worth, but I feel that this so called licence will not be worth very much.
Tony

[sam34]

My opinion, we will see a lot of crash of planes in Asia... :bored: I think 250 hours from a FTO today is low so a MPL, that's a joke in a Kinder.

[Mach086]

Tony,

That was a very good reply and thanks for your opinions. So am I right in thinking that according to you, if an Airline is adverising for pilots to fly on their Airbus Fleet who have just finsihed Piltot school - they will go for the one with an ATPL compared to the person who has an MPL and has a license to fly an A320 straight away?

Forgetting about being a captain for a minute - I have read so many posts here about pilots that can't find jobs etc. Now surely, with Airbus having approx 50% market, you have a better advantage of getting a job in the first place with an MPL? We are talking about getting that coveted position in an Airline. Once your in, you get paid- you build hours. You get hundreds of hours and priceless operational experience as well as flying. YOu earn money to do your IR, CPL, MCC. Yet the ATPL pilot is still flying around in cessnas? Yeah- the ATPL person is the better pilot. But so what- an airline have got a pilot ready to walk straight into the right hand seat of an A320 - or with very little time/training/cost - can walk into the right hand seat of any airbus.

I'm finding this so confusing. I'm going to write to every major airline i can think of and ask their reruiting department whether they see the MPL as Useless in this present day. Ill obviously post more info as i get it

[RVR800]

One of the major costs/barriers in all this is the "instructor" resource for MPL training.
Wont be $10/hr.. they may want a tad more pay than that
Being trained on an airliner if you want to be an airline pilot and operating multi crew may have advantages over a candidates from a 6 pack display and single crew environment.

[Antonio Montana]

Mach086,
From reading your reply it seems that you have already made up your mind.
I am a aviaitor.....I happen to drive a Boeing for my job, it pays the bills and can be fun. However I enjoy flying, I try to fly a little Cessna as often as I can as that is REAL FLYING, honest it really is.
I can understand your point that people are struggling to get a job, BUT, and it is a dammed big BUT.... the MPL has to be run in conjuction with an airline and as such it is airline specific.
This means you have to find an airline willing to take you on, which means all the hoops have to be jumped through.
If this is the future you must ask yourself why CTC, Oxford, Jerez and all the other schools are not worried, remember the Chief Pilot of any airline had to learn somewhere as well.
My understanding of the MPL is this, you can only fly one type of aircraft.... so that means for example a Airbus A320 and not any other model of Airbus.
Who told you Airbus has 50% of the market..... there have been over 5000 B737's built and an awful lot of them are still in the air, it is the worlds most popular passenger jet.

[Mach086]

Tony,

Trust me, I'm far from making my mind up. Whilst 50-60% cheaper than an ATPL, not much point me doing it if all airlines are of the same opinion as you that this is a Mickey Mouse course (my own words admitedly). I am just playing devils advocate so I get as much views as possible whilst stading up for the MPL.

"My understanding of the MPL is this, you can only fly one type of aircraft.... so that means for example a Airbus A320 and not any other model of Airbus.
Who told you Airbus has 50% of the market..... there have been over 5000 B737's built and an awful lot of them are still in the air, it is the worlds most popular passenger jet"

Again my point was missed. I'm saying that IF an airline was hiring for A320 positions and it was open to Pilot Graduates (not just 40 year olds with 4000 hours) , surely the guy with an MPL for the A320 is in a better position than the ATPL guy who has spent 1.5 years in a cessna?

"Who told you Airbus has 50% of the market"

Also, I'm amaking the assumption that as Boeing and Airbus more or less manufacture the same amount of planes (give or take 25-50 planes a year - whoever is winning in terms of builds/sales) then I'm making an educated guess that they have 50% of the market. And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it universally accepted that across the whole of the Airbus Fleet there is much more cockpit cross-functionality/comonality (318/319/320/321/330/340) compared with Boeings Fleet. I think 757/767 is the closest they have, with 747 being completely different to 737/757/767 etc.

Which concludes that an MPL graduate has at least a 50% chance of flying in an airline due to the Airbus A320 license( and thus a 'commonality' with ALL airbus planes), compared with the ATPL graduate who has no Airbus/Boeing license at all and thus a much reduced chance of getting their foot in the door unless British Airways starts flying cessnas to singapore?

Again, i really welcome your thoughts Tony- especially as you actually are a Pilot and fly for an airline. Please keep them coming everyone. I rally do thank you for ALL your advice. I want people to slate the MPL (with good reasons) if you want, and i want to be able to argue against it until I have no more arguments and agree with the rest of you. So Please, keep them coming.

[Ropey Pilot]

Which concludes that an MPL graduate has at least a 50% chance of flying in an airline due to the Airbus A320 license
Taken slightly out of context here but I believe it sums up a lot of your thinking.

Just because you have that rating on you license do not expect airlines to come to you begging you to work for them! The bigger outfits turn plenty of people down with ATPL / boeing plus airbus ratings and several thousand hours on jets! They are not looking to save a few pounds on a rating they are looking at a potential pilot that will do their company proud for 30+ years! They are looking at you. If you are a to$$er with a rating expect to be shown the door. If you are a good bloke without a rating but meet their criteria, welome aboard! There are plenty of cases of ATPL candiates paying for an airbus rating at £20K+ to find that no-one is in the slightest bit interested in it:eek:

My company took a lot of people with airbus ratings on and put then though a boeing 777 course and took me on with a light jet rating and put me on an airbus course (at the same time) - why not save money and employ bloke A on the 'bus and only pay for one course? Because they are not that bothered!

When looking at the bigger picture most companies do not see a type rating as a major cost (and most will 'bond' you for it anyway -differing methods ranging from paying them back at a fews hundred pounds a month to paying nothing unless you resign within a few years).

Also you were saying £36K is 50 - 60% cheaper than an ATPL. Don't think that a £75 integrated course is the only way to do it. If you go modular and are willing to travel (USA is a good option) you may only be looking at £45-50K all in (At least I did in 2003).

Bottom line is - don't be the guinea pig! You don't say how soon you are looking to apply, but you could end up with nothing but a £36,000 framed certificate on mummy's wall;) if the airlines don't go for it.
Let someone else run the gauntlet and follow their success (whether than be with a 'proven' MCL in 5 years time or with an ATPL next year)

ps - don't think you will be flying a 340 on a 319 license with little more than 'differences training' (Unless you are aleardy tri- rated on the boeing 737/747/777:ok:)

[snuble]

Bottom line is - don't be the guinea pig!One of those guinea pigs would be me.


If all goes well, I will soon have my MPL with linetraining as part of the contract, and with a possibility for a two year bonding. (reduced salary, but still ok)

During the basic phase we had instructors from several European airlines and the local CAA, all convinced that the MPL route is the best route forward. I know it is a bit one-sided, but it shows that at least not all major airlines are anti MPL. But if the "common" perception out there is what is reflected in this forum, I hope pilots out there would be a bit more open-minded.

As for the ATPL, as long as you have the required hours, you do not need anything beyond a MPL.



Think I will dig myself a ditch now, waiting for the incomings...:)
-Snuble

btw: I look forward to prove you all wrong:ok:

[Groundloop]

If any UK FTOs eventually take up the MPL there is no way it will be cheaper that an Intergrated ATPL. With so much of the training required to be undertaken on a type-specific simulator this is not cheap. Compare £400-500 hr for an A320 sim compared with £250-300 hour for a twin. Possibly cheaper lower fidelity sims may be allowed to be used for some of the training but not all.

In fact it is possible that the MPL will be MORE expensive because of this.

[Antonio Montana]

Snuble....Good luck
Mach 086...

I did get all your points, I don't think that I made myself clear enough so here goes.

The MPL must be done in conjunction with a Airline, you will only be able to fly for that airline and no other, if you wish to change jobs you have to start again.(At least that is my understanding).

You will only be allowed to fly one model of aircraft, again this could be a Boeing 737-300 or a 900 but not both, however if you wish it could be a Airbus A318 or a Airbus A320, but once again not both.

The differences you talk of refers to Type Ratings that have been sat by people who have ATPL's or CPL's with ATPL Theory passed (Frozen ATPL). I can fly 7 different types of 737 on my licence as long as I do differences training.

The MPL cannot be done on spec, therefore you are tied to a Airline, see above.

Assuming (I hate that word, but) you do get a job with Air Kazakstan on a Mega planes Z673, based in eastern europe, (for example, as I don't see any Uk based operator looking at this, after all they have a ready and willing supply of self funded wannabees), what happens when you want to leave and come back to good old blighty???? Back to square one.

Also what if your airline decide to change from all Megaplanes to Superbus, your well and trully stuffed, yet again, Back to square one.

Do not think for one second that any airline is going to pay you the same salary as a fully quallified ATPL or Frozen ATPL, because they will find an excuse not to. They are after all in the business of making money.

Lastly..... if MPL really is the way forward, imagine the crisis that will happen in the next 10 to 20 years as older pilots retire and there will be no Captains available as everyone will have MPL's..........

Tony

PS. Snuble, one final point, I have always found any training establishment to be completely unbiased as any goverment organisation is as well.

Airlines can change from hot to cold, at least the current route gives you lots more options.

[Ropey Pilot]

snuble, I truly wish you well - but in my opinion you are a very brave individual!

As I have said (and why the question was aked in the first place) no-one knows how this license will pan out. And even if it does become the norm/is found to be an excellent route into jets the teething problems will take some time to iron out and you will suffer all of them!

When the JAA exams came out they were farcical (and even a few years later they had no rotary ones so helicopter pilots were learning all about things happening at 30,000 feet becaus they just had to do the fixed wing ones - has that even been rectified yet?). It gat to the stage where questions were non-sensical mistranslations and training schools were advising candidtates to put 'b' for every question that they thought didn't make sense (if it was right no problem - if it was wrong then enough people got it wrong to have the question withdrawn and marks awarded).

The JAA system probably works quite well now, but I would rather have been the last CAA candidite than the first JAA one!

And as has been mentioned - you will probably still take the financial hit anyway?

Previously 200 hr candidates could not fly jets (the old CAA self-improver route) and everyone had to build 700 hours before applying. When that changed wannabes expected jet jobs straight off and do you think they are better off for it? The £75,000 course came into existance, add on to that the £25,000 self-sponsored rating, or perhaps the 'work six months for free with no job guarentee at the end' airline affiliated route. How about the, join us but on a reduced salary for 5 years (BA) - and don't even start with O'leary air.

At the moment a type rating on an airbus without 500 hours on the line is nothing more than a very expensive peice of paper; probably pretty similar to the MCL - but with more flexibility.

As has been sai the MCL is effectively an airline sponsorship (with you paying everything) so however it is set up there may be a job with that airline. I wouldn't expect it to be a huge financial benefit in the long run though! Airlines will squeeze terms and conditions as much as they can until pilots go on strike and they have a balance. Do you think hundreds of pilots who are either so far from thier training they don't care or are new and paid a lot will risk their jobs for your MCL T&Cs? And you will be very limited in your flexibility - Captain (no) company change fleets (no) company want you to mve base with a different fleet type (no). And in 15 years time as a junior FO with kids you will probably have to resign and do an ATPL before applying for a Capt's job (and if you are in a seniority based company would have to join as the most junior FO - so that probably restricts choice even more)

As I said - I wish you all the best, and someone has to be first,:ok: but with my entire future career at stake I'm just glad it isn't me:\

[potkettleblack]

There seems to be a lot of misinformation here. Suggest you pop off to the JAA.nl website and have a read of the latest JAR FCL document. If you look under the priviledges of the MPL as far as I can see there is nothing to preclude an MPL holder from upgrading to an ATPL and therefore being a captain of a multi crew aircraft in due course.

[Mach086]

Tony

Im still confused:

"The MPL must be done in conjunction with a Airline, you will only be able to fly for that airline and no other, if you wish to change jobs you have to start again.(At least that is my understanding)."

How can that be? You spend 2 years flying an A320 with that airline, got a thousand hours or so under your belt. got paid. Got the experience. Went on extra courses etc. You then go for British Airways Job or a major airline and ur head to head with Mr ATPL who for the past 2 years has lived a life in a cessna?? I don't understand what you mean by - "start again".

I'm really confused by this "start again" thing. Imagine youve done 5 years on an A320 for Garuda Indonesia or whatever, and accumulated 4000 hours. U apply for a job at a major airline who are willing to train pilots from any background for A340-500 flights from LA-Singapore. Are you saying you stand less of a chance compared to the ATPL pilot who has 2 years in a cessna, and 3 years as a flight instructor in the same cessna??? Suley not.

PLease explain.

[Mach086]

"There seems to be a lot of misinformation here. Suggest you pop off to the JAA.nl website and have a read of the latest JAR FCL document. If you look under the priviledges of the MPL as far as I can see there is nothing to preclude an MPL holder from upgrading to an ATPL and therefore being a captain of a multi crew aircraft in due course."

Exactly.

[WatchThisAirSpace]

HI Ropey Pilot,

I was part or at least under the scheme of a large pro-pilot training organisation who (relatively speaking) took the leap and dropped everything to instigate the MPL. Whilst I left before it began, the initial introduction was disastrous! They could not keep up with all the changes to policies and schemes. I also think it si still a bit of a gamble. Only the so-called "desperate" airlines will take MPL candidates. It is a big gamble with £36k. I know the Asian company youre talking about too...

Still, the flip side of the coin is "what if it works...?"

That would leap-frog all the usual red-tape and licences, etc.

End of the day, its down to how comfortable you feel with the concept. As good ol' Del Boy would say, " 'ee 'oo dares, wins, innit?"

Let me know what you decide and stay in touch. You could be one of the lucky few to start a revelution! ;)

WTAS

[Antonio Montana]

Okay thanks for that Potkettleblack, I did have a look its all here:
http://www.jaa.nl/publications/jars/607069.pdf
Starts on page 214.
So maybe I was a bit judgemental
However..
It seems to me that the overriding factor is that you will only be a copilot.
So after all that spend, if you want to go the whole hog and get your CPL, IR etc... you would have to fork out a load more money...... I think I might set my self up in business as a training school.....
I would be very cautious going this route.
Tony
mach 086, its dammed simple. every Airline does things slighly different, that is my point, if this licence is Airline Specific then you will be stuck, I cannot be bothered to argue with you dear boy.

[WatchThisAirSpace]

:confused:

Can an airline extend the usual "bonding for training" concept to being able to snaffle those MPL candidates [who are essentially under-time CPL people sheilded from the usual complex (but diverse) training route] and keep them under the thumb career wise as well as financially?

It seems to be a step backwards in that case - it used to be that as a trade-off for training/ratings, you would promise long service ("bond"), but now they will limit your opportunity for promotion and advancement too? ("F/O only..) :ugh:

Is that the reality of the MPL?

WTAS

[Mach086]

its dammed simple. every Airline does things slighly different, that is my point, if this licence is Airline Specific then you will be stuck, I cannot be bothered to argue with you dear boy.

Perhaps that is the confusion. The MPL is not airline specific.

Which means if upon succesful completion of the MPL and u got a job cos u got sponsorship with the airline, then for the next how ever many years you are earning hundreds of hours being paid etc, whist ATPL pilot is still flying cessnas or dumping weed killer. So when that opportunity comes up for a posiion at a major airline, the MPL person has the most experience with 1000 odd hours in an A320.

I do agree with the main point thought that Tony and others are saying - its really to early and risky to be the guinea pig.

[Antonio Montana]

Mach086....
Are you REALLY SURE that the MPL here in JAR land will NOT be airline specific.... I am not so sure and BEgale feels it is as well.
That said I am NOT an authority on this subject and if you want to get all the facts I would suggest calling up the CAA at Gatwick. They will know.

[potkettleblack]

Having spent about 5 minutes reading the JAR FCL document here are my thoughts:-

- People are getting caught up about it being airline specific. I think a number of you are comparing apples and oranges. From my understanding the MPL is only airline specific in relation to getting approvals as a TRTO/FTO or whatever fancy name they want to throw at the organisation who runs the training. I couldn't see any reason for organisations like GECAT not to offer an MPL course subject of course to them meeting all of the required JAA approvals and having sufficient sim availability. At the end of the day you come away with a type rating on a specific aircraft type and I could see no reason why you can't take that to another operator at a later date if you so wish.

- to understand the privileges of the MPL you need to read all the cross references that are in the JAR FCL document. You can't just read it in isolation. For example it cross refers to the section on CPL and IR privileges. With a CPL and ticks in the boxes for 1,500 hours, 500 multi crew in a multi pilot, night hours etc etc then there should be no reason why you can't upgrade to an ATPL. This usually takes the form of a few extra bits and pieces during one of your OPC's in the sim.

- I see no reference whatsoever to say that you will not be able to command a jet. Someone can enlighten me on that.

Finally you need to stand back and see what the whole aim of the MPL is about. It was mooted years ago by a few European airlines (think one might have been Lufthansa) that had significant spare simulator and training capacity. They clearly had issues with the current form of training and felt that it had little relevance to a modern airlines operations. They felt that they could train someone from zero to hero to a much higher standard than the traditional route of bimbling around in a C152 then stepping up to a 40 year old tired old twin and capping that off with an MCC course conducted in a glorified cardboard bomber with the autopilot on whilst you convince yourself that you are working together as a multi pilot crew just because you are able to shout out a few standard calls here and there.

Having gone through all of the above then stepped into a full conversion course (type rating) on a medium jet, had my head into SOP's, QRH's, operations manuals and FCOM's, followed by base training, then line training and a line check I can honestly see where they are coming from. My days of negotiating MATZ penetrations, balancing my kneeboard whilst trying to plot a position fix, having an instructor that would take delight in chopping the throttle on one of the engines when I was looking the other way outside all whilst having no autopilot, no tcas and no anti ice are thankfully behind me. Don't get me wrong I would still like to go for the odd trip with mates that have PPL's to get some handflying in but the MPL is probably heading in the right direction.

The doubting thomas's are generally those that have a vested interest in renting you that £300/hr battered old twin and have little comprehension of what airline flying involves nor wish to move with the times.

[Antonio Montana]

Potkettleblack,
I do not have any axe to grind with MPL. I too went through the mill getting all the tick's in the box and also can see the possible benifits of such a course.
However to quote Page 215,

JAR–FCL 1.530 Skill
(See Appendices 1 and 2 to
JAR-FCL 1.240 & 1.295)
(See Appendix 1 to JAR-
FCL 1.520 & 1.525)
(a) An applicant for a MPL(A) shall have
demonstrated the skills required for fulfilling all
the competency units specified in Appendix 1 to
JAR-FCL 1.520 & 1.525 as pilot flying and pilot
not flying, to the level required to perform as a
co-pilot of a multi-engine turbine-powered
aeroplane certificated for operation with a
minimum crew of at least two pilots under VFR
and IFR with a degree of competency
appropriate to the privileges granted to the
holder of a MPL(A). An applicant shall take the
skill test as set out in Appendices 1 and 2 to
JAR-FCL 1.240 & 1.295 in the aeroplane type
used on the advanced phase of the MPL(A)
integrated training course.

the bit that concerns me is "perform as a
co-pilot of a multi-engine turbine-powered
aeroplane certificated for operation with a
minimum crew of at least two pilots" etc....

This seems mad going through all of this and only being a copilot.

[Cobalt]

Antonio,

You are right in pointing out that the MPL is only a co-pilot licence.

So is the CPL/IR/MCC/Typerating you have after the "classic" route.

After meeting some minimum hours and an additional check,both will be an ATPL, which allows you to be PIC. (assuming you do ATPL theory). So no dead end either way. Actually getting the fourth stripe will come considerable time later than the ATPL in any case.

You can think of the MPL as a CPL/IR/MCC/Typerating integrated course, minus the SEP/MEP class ratings, minus the Single-Pilot IR, which you don't need anyway.

The only real drawback I can see for an airline wannabe is that if you don't get that co-pilot job straight away, you don't have the option to "park" yourself doing an instructor rating or flying lighter aircraft for money while waiting for the next job - so your value will decrease rapidly.

Which of the two paths produces better airline pilots only time will tell.

[snuble]

Of course you are to:
"perform as a
co-pilot of a multi-engine turbine-powered
aeroplane certificated for operation with a
minimum crew of at least two pilots" etc....
The skill test is for a MPL, not ATPL. When you have the hours, you take the ATPL skill test performing as the commander.


A MPL licence is either restricted to a specific type, nor airline. The only restriction is that you have to be part of a multipilot crew, performing on a multipilt aircraft.


-Snuble

[BEagle]

But since no captain in his/her right mind is going to allow a MPL wireless operator/flap snatcher to fly the aircraft, he/her will never accrue any PICU/S time, only copulate P2 time.....

You want a professional wireless operator/flap snatcher's licence - go for the MPL if you're stupid enough. Otherwise stick to the tried and tested route.

Incidentally, even LH are now getting cold feet. Their CEO, Wolfgang Mayrhuber, frequently asserts that their pilots are ultra safe because they receive more than the minimum level of training. That would vanish instantly if they were to subscribe to the Plastic Pilot Licence idea.

[Mach086]

"the bit that concerns me is "perform as a
co-pilot of a multi-engine turbine-powered
aeroplane certificated for operation with a
minimum crew of at least two pilots" etc....

This seems mad going through all of this and only being a copilot."

Tony. When you graduate from pilot school - assuming you have a job to walk into straight away with either an ATPL or MPL - you are a C0-Pilot anyway!!!

The point is who gets their foot in the door first? Who gets the head start? Who gets the interview? Is it ATPL guy with a year in a cessna or the MPL person with Airbus A320 rating. (or whatever the plane is). The MPL guy then goes on extra courses whilst still building hours, getting paid, getting experience etc.

Btw, the MPL flight school I'm talking about, one of the current trainees has been given an Interview with Gulf Air. So obviously a major airline like that doesn't think the MPL is "Plastic".

And also, The MPL school I'm talking about will be opening another centre in Sharjah with 8 more to come around asia. Something tells me that with emirates order of 40 odd A380's and tons of 777-300ERs on order, gulf air and Eithad ordering planes left right and centre, there must obviosly be a business case for another MPL centre to be open in UAE.

[Antonio Montana]

Mach 086,
Eh.... no you are wrong, very wrong.

On my very first line training flight, I flew one sector PICUS (thats pilot in Command Under Supervision) Not co pilot. I have a CPL and am trained to fly a B737 as PIC by my self if needed, eg if the captain died.....

As I said before, you obviously have already made your mind up what you want to do and good luck to you.

Also can someone please direct me to the part were JAR FCL 1 does mention the MPL being upgraded to a full ATPL??????? I cannot find it in either Subpart K or Subpart G.

Mach 086, you asked for debate on this licence and you got it, but you are obviously better informed than any of us on here, even those of us who have your dream job.

I suggest that you have a look at the links that I went out of my way for you to get, which I then read and cross referenced regarding the MPL, so I have a better understanding of it, but of course you don't need to do that as you are no doubt infallible. I will not waste my time arguing the merits of a untried and untested system that has been met with a lot of skepticism by industry professionals, you know better.

Finally to quote Jack Crawford, Former FBI Section Chief "to assume, is to make an ASS out of U and ME", just in case you are wondering who he is he was the boss of Miss Clarice Starling, in a rather good book I once read.
Tony

By the way Gulf Air.... From their website quote
"Cadet Pilots

This programme is available to owner state nationals holding school diplomas. It covers full pilot training on completion of which the individual is qualified to take up a position as a First Officer.

Eligibility

To be eligible to apply, the following criteria must be met:


Be a national of an owner state (Bahrain and Oman)
Be between 19 and 35 years of age
Be a high school graduate (science stream)"

Mach086 you live in London, I take that you are not from Oman or Bahrain, still I am sure that will not preclude you from applying to them.......

[Mach086]

By the way Gulf Air.... From their website quote
"Cadet Pilots

This programme is available to owner state nationals holding school diplomas. It covers full pilot training on completion of which the individual is qualified to take up a position as a First Officer.

Eligibility

To be eligible to apply, the following criteria must be met:


Be a national of an owner state (Bahrain and Oman)
Be between 19 and 35 years of age
Be a high school graduate (science stream)"

Mach086 you live in London, I take that you are not from Oman or Bahrain, still I am sure that will not preclude you from applying to them.......

Tony,

You are an intelligent person - You say you are a pilot (even though you seem to be here everyday??). Anyway, lets not get personal.

Surely even you must be able to see that my point is that if Gulf Air are interviewing MPL cadets - then it can't be that "Plastic" can it?

I have no intention whatsoever of being based in the desert. The Point was if Gulf Air are interviewing, then MPL can't be that bad. But I guess according to you

"an untried and untested system that has been met with a lot of skepticism by industry professionals"

Gulf Air is not professional. Can someone please confirm that Gulf Air are a World Class airline and one of the leading airlines in Arabia as well as the world with Airbus/Boeings or do they all fly ilyushins?

"you are obviously better informed than any of us on here, even those of us who have your dream job...you know better"

I dont know better - hence why I am here. But unless anyone can tell me that Gulf Air are a terrible unprofessional airline, then I'll treat Gulf Air's views on the MPL as credible.

Also i see you have totally ignored that fact that the MPL college are opening a school in UAE which means there must be a business case. but I await your view that Emirates and Eithad will join Gulf Air as unprofessional becasue they interview MPL candidates.

But thanks for your opinions - and I mean that without sarcasm. I still haven't made up my mind and after our recent discussions, I'm further away from a decision than I was before.

[Antonio Montana]

God having three days off in a row must mean I am not a pilot anymore
then!!!!!!! Damm I'd better not report for work this evening then.

Mach086 I have had my say, I will not get into any further disscussion on this, I have tried to help.

Gulf Air are ONE airline, I cannot remember how many there where when Flight last did their World Airline Directory but it was a hell of a lot more than that.
I am not knocking the MPL the current system has its problems, however you are strongly defending a new untested and untried licence, what if ICAO decide it unworkable with in five years and scrap it?????

Tony

editided to add: Gulf Air DO NOT mention on their website anything regarding MPL. Sorry

[Frank Furillo]

This thread is hillarious now all we need is the oxford johnies to come on and tell us they are right as well:O:O:O:O
I did my fATPL for around £45K modular, so with this new thingy being a similar cost why bother?

[WatchThisAirSpace]

I have to reiterate that this IS a valuable dicussion. With the Pilot Shortage looming (AGAIN! Happens a lot these looming shortages, dont they?), umerous training organisations are once again attempting to out-do each other.

Then the real firecracker of the MPL is dropped into the frey.

I have been targetted by the marketing propaganda because of my position, but am VERY much aware of the institution in the far east that is touting the MPL the highest and proudest at the moment.

They are indeed opening up in Sharjah as well as having a branch in the far east and a link to the UK.

Their connection to Gulf Air / Emirates is an unknown to me personally, but I will check it out.

I am afraid this debate may sway this way and that, but one thing will remain true. There will be limitations on the MPL, just as there were in the case thinking of introducing that Glass Cockpit Only Instrument Rating. A good point which was raised is that that the cost of the normal (?) route is near identical to the new MPL. Between £35k - 40k - ish.

However, theres a simple choice to be made, and delving deep into the mysteries of the wordings and implications of the JAR bods may not help at the early inception stages of this new licence. Do you want to go tried-and-tested and risk that the MPL newbies scream past you to the jobs, but you can rest on the probability that things wont change that fast to allow that to happen, OR, take a leap and see if the new "fast track" works?

Personally, I think if I were looking to get trained now, and had my heart firmly on an airline position, I would seek out those people on or nearly through the MPL, and probe their experiences to the full. Have any got the jobs yet? What was the transition like? etc.

If it comes back mostly good and successful, then I would jump on board the new boat. That would be incentive enough for me!

BUT, I would be interested in hearing from any such people on here, and also, from my experience, my sector, the VIP Jet market sector, the MPL is being ignored utterly and is of no value here. Possibly due to lack of type rating available to MPL persons on applicable aircraft in this sector... who knows...

Anyway, keep up the investigations and discussions guys... it is all good! :ok:

WTAS

[pfd99]

Frank F,

Did you complete your ATPL for around 45k GBP and have completed an A320 type rating and also done the base trainung. Please let me know. What are you flying now with your ATPL.

pfd99

[lee_apromise]

According to ICAO website, MPL is equivalent to CPL + IR. It doesn't say anything about limitation to one airline & one aircraft type.

I guess someone with MPL can become a captain once s/he finishes ATPL theory and log 1500 hours.

[monkeytribe]

Just wanted to rekindle this thread!

[Master Yoda]

Does the MPL follow the same ATPL ground school exams as part of the course anyone?

[Don K]

Yes it does.

[sam34]

I read before, that the MPL does not limit on a specific aircfraft.

You're wrong!

It is limited on a specific aircraft of course.

Sorry it is in french from Canada, but there is a recent article about the new licence (rubbish in my opinion) and a lot of pilots are sceptical:

" Le 23 novembre 2006, l’Organisation de l’aviation civile internationale (OACI) a autorisé ses pays membres à inclure dans ses règlements de l’air un nouveau type de certification, la licence de pilote en équipage multiple (ou MPL pour multi-crew pilot licence).

Le titulaire de ce brevet pourra occuper la fonction de copilote dans un type d’appareil précis, à la suite d’une formation intensive d’un minimum de 240 heures, sur des petits avions et des simulateurs de vol. Un élève-pilote qui réussira la formation pour un Airbus 340, devra travailler uniquement sur ce type d’appareil. "

use tanslator.
the last sentence means : a student pilot who passed the course on A340 will only have to work on this aircraft.

I read the whole article, they will use Full flight for the course.

In fact, a student pilot who want to fly a 737, will do a course on full flight 737.

here the link of the article. sorry it is in french, but i guess, or i hope that many people learned french at school :}

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20070813/CPSOLEIL/70812100/6584/CPSOLEIL

[Mach086]

You are correct - you train for the A340, you only fly the A340. but like any otehr license, you need to convert if you want to fly another aircraft.

The whole point of the MPL is to get you into the RHS of an airliner in 12 months so of course - it will only be on that aircraft. And just like an ATPL, if your type rated on a 340, you can't go and fly on a 737! We know this.

I've done some further research and it seems that the MPL has even more limitations. For example, you learn the SOP of the airline (if the school is afiliated with an airline) or the SOP of the aircraft your training on. So perhaps I was wrong to assume that the pilot with a Type rating has a greater advantage than one with an ATPL.

At the end of the day, the airline you join may have its own SOP so you have to go on this course anyway - regardless of your experience on type.

I dunno. its a tough one.

[.Aero]

I've got a question for ya'll air law junkies! Where might I find information on converting an ICAO MPL to a JAA MPL?

:} AeroBoi

[Fabbe_Far]

Call the CAA and ask!
Otherwise you have to fly 3000 :ok:hours and then its just some paper work.

[.Aero]

I don't think they will be able to entertain my enquiry on the basis that the UK CAA at present do not/have not addopted the the latest Amendment no. 7 of JAR-FCL1 which contains all the JAA-MPL nitty gritty. UK ANO and the CAA PLD department are all based on JAR-FCL Amendment 5. :bored:

[A and C]

Just a veiw from the left hand seat of a 78 tonne jet.

Most of the new integrated course first officers I see are only just able to land the jet, won't do a visual approach and are very reluctent to disengage the autopilot above 500ft and as for command decisions........................ that is a long way off!

The Modular guys are usualy much better, with the ability to hand fly the jet to an exeptable standard and are capable of reasonable "command decisions".

This multi crew licence is a disaster in the making and is the invention of accountants and people who have no idea what airline flying is all about and is the next money making plan by the integrated training providers, after all they charge the integrated students about £20,000 more than modular students for the same licence!

Why don't you prospective pilots get together and Kick the whole MCL and integrated course thing into touch.

If you all boycotted the integrated courses and went down the modular route you would all be £20,000 better off and IMO better pilots for it, the industry would have no option to employ you because of the pilot shortage.

The only people that the integrated course benifits is the training providors and the airlines who are all getting money and tax breaks at your expence.

[apruneuk]

A and C, you might want to copy your post into "Rumours and News" thread "More needed, Less interested".

Only the totally bonkers airline industry could possibly argue that a pilot with little experience is more useful than an experienced commercial pilot who is either moving from single crew to multi crew ops or from a light to a heavy machine. It might be harder to teach an old dog new tricks but you just can't buy experience.