Multi-Crew Pilots License [Archive]

breguet

25th Aug 2007, 12:36

Yes, they will or might be able to manage the flight without too much difficulties as long as the autopilot is on and nothing serious happens. They will be able to follow a STAR or a SID as long as it is programmed and flown as per the FMS...but cut the STAR with a direct to then real flying skills have to kick in to bring the aircraft on final stabilized. Will these MPL be able to do it? Because the push button phase will be over by then....

I forgot, the CAPTAIN will be there to correct, recover and fly the aircraft safely to the runway. With these MPLs the Captain will have a little bit more work to do and in an emergency (where button pushing is of no use) he might be alone....

phantomcruiser07

25th Aug 2007, 17:12

the operative word being "economic" , they should rather just improve the current MCC, or make it into some kind of "multi crew rating"

Intruder

25th Aug 2007, 18:51

I also wonder what happens in 4 or 5 years when a normal FO would be ready to go into the Captain's seat, but all these MPL guys don't have the licenses to do so. Where will the future Captains come from?

BEagle

25th Aug 2007, 18:57

As I've said before, current thought amongst many Captains is that the MPL co-piglet will not be allowed to touch the controls on any flight they command - so will be nothing more than flap-snatching wireless operators.

Most will then fail their first LPC/OPC. Without a shadow of a doubt.

Bullethead

26th Aug 2007, 00:59

Generally the F/Os I fly with are excellent and a pleasure to fly with, though once in a while when I get paired up with a guy who has only recently checked out I notice an increase in workload, not overly demanding but an increase nonetheless. And this is with guys who have at least a couple of thousand hours.
I wonder what the load will be like when flying with the recipient of a brand new MPL when in a busy terminal area with a bit of weather around and maybe a tech problem or two.
Years ago, when I was an F/O, I had to take over from a Captain who became ill and complete the sector with the second officer in the LHS. This was into an airport the S/O had never been to, in marginal weather and a very busy terminal area. I spent as much time supervising the S/O as I did managing the flight. Thinking back on it later, it probably would've been easier to do it all single pilot rather than explain everything twice. So how would an MPL holder stand up to the challenge?
Even further back in in my previous life I had to fly with an inexperienced F/O, across north America, and I gave the sector to him, he was horrified. I said that actually flying the aeroplane was the easy bit, handling the ATC, weather and traffic etc in an unfamiliar environment was the hard bit. At the end of the sector he agreed and thanked me, he learned rapidly and as his experience level grew he had no trouble dealing with similar situations.
The secret is experience and as has already been mentioned, you can't replace it or artificially generate it. A thorough and intensive simulator training programme is fine though generally you are the only one in your bit of simulated sky and you pretty much get the clearance you want and there is no continual background chatter or other people having problems which you have to make allowance for. So an MPL holder my be able to fly well and deal with tech problems proficiently but the missing bit is the invaluable real world experience.
Time will tell how it all works out.
Regards,
BH.

Contacttower

26th Aug 2007, 05:49

This is sounding even more worrying than the '1500hrs for jet command' thread. :E

Oilhead

26th Aug 2007, 14:23

This is not so much answer to the alligator wrestling question, but an observation along the lines of what is relevant in assessing a pilot these days. United is not doing sim checks on new hire candidates any more. Nor are they requiring a medical other than the FAA certiicate in hand, plus of course pre-employment drug screening.

Flight Detent

28th Aug 2007, 11:32

And we don't need a Flight Engineer....Right!!!

What a really silly decision that was.....and look where we are now!

Cheers....if that's the right word! (more like 'gulp')

islandjumper

4th Sep 2007, 16:09

Good article though.
Well written and informative, in contrast to much of the stuff out there in the non-aviation press. I'd quibble with a couple of points, but guess that depends on your point of view.

Krueger

7th Sep 2007, 09:45

The first bunch are airborne...:suspect:

Center Air Pilot Academy
Roskilde, September 3rd, 2007

Graduation of first ever MPL trained Pilots in Europe

Today marks a historic event in European aviation as the first group of MPL trained pilots graduate from Center Air Pilot Academy in Roskilde, Denmark.

What began as a strategic partnership three years ago between Center Air Pilot Academy and the Scandinavian low cost carrier Sterling Airlines, culminates today with the graduation of the first group of pilots trained after the new MPL (Multi-crew Pilot License) training curriculum.

“We are obviously highly exited about having achieved this milestone in our work to modernize the way commercial pilot training is being executed” says Chief Ground Instructor from Center Air Pilot Academy, Anna Kjær, and she continues “The dramatically increasing demand for commercial pilots all over the world pushes both the airlines and the training organizations to innovate and develop the training procedures inside a framework of airline safety to sustain the constant growth in the airline sector.”

Also, from the side of the airlines there is enthusiasm on the evolution of the MPL training system.

Center Air Pilot Academy’s partner in the project, Sterling Airlines, will hire the newly graduated MPL pilots, and Flight Operations Director Claus Gammelgaard says “We sat down three years ago to discuss how to mitigate the potential shortfall in pilot availability. Already back then we were seeing the signs, and he continues “The MPL training is a revolution in the airlines and together with the Training Organization can work to secure a steady flow of highly qualified pilots to enter the growth of airlines in Europe. Moreover, as we have a very serious focus on flight safety it is utmost important that we as an airline cooperate with Center Air Pilot Academy on the development of the MPL training in order to secure that our safety standards are met. It is, therefore, with great confidence that we see the graduation of this first group of excellent pilots”

Center Air Pilot Academy has already more than 30 MPL pilots in training and is seeing a very high level of interest from future potential students for the MPL programme.

Our goal is to establish quality pilot provisioning to the airline industry says CEO at Center Air Pilot Academy Jens Kristian Frost

Check Six, Krueger...

woodyspooney

7th Sep 2007, 11:33

Me thinks you do need solo pre CPL and post CPL hours to built up confidence and command potential. Too early a start with multi crew operation can hurt later as psychologically under stress, one regresses back to the first few early years of training for command decision making. Just an oldie's opinion.

Avi8tor

7th Sep 2007, 11:50

Pilot Shortage? What pilot shortage? We still have loads of young guys sans jobs.

I have just turned down a CX DEFO interview because there is NO way I could live in europe on the 'tip' they are offering. If there were a real pilot shortage the loot that we earn every month would go up and the shortage would go away.

Its called 'the law of supply and demand'

TINTIN25

7th Sep 2007, 12:07

I think the Multi-crew licence is just a quick fix to put pilots in the right hand seat F/O without thinking of how they will cope with being a captain one day. How can doing pretty much all your training in a simulator train you to fly the aeroplane in command when it comes time to go for your command training or cope with an emergancy situation if the captain is unable to do his duties. Sure they say they will be trained but It will be interesting to watch a newbie with a few hundred hours handle an emergancy on their own if they have never experienced single pilot flying in the real world!

Intruder

7th Sep 2007, 13:35

Has the JAA endorsed the MPL already? If not, where will Sterling operate with them? If so, is that not a slap in the face to all those who have struggled to get their CPL and ATPL via the "proper" route? Also, it would appear that all those JAA tests and courses are not really needed in the first place...

Ace Rimmer

7th Sep 2007, 13:44

Islandjumper: I concur, Slobo is a good egg generally. He is also a pilot, I think because of that, imparts complex stuff well, I suspect in short order he will become a leading light in AP's aviation coverage...

hopeful_pilot

7th Sep 2007, 17:39

2 questions...

1) does that mean that a MPL holder will only be able to be a FO and never a captain?

2) can a MPL holder fly other kinds of aircraft other than an A320 and B737?

cheers..

BEagle

7th Sep 2007, 20:17

The MPL 'pilot' (Microsoft pilot licence) will be able to fly in the type on which training was conducted.

No-one in their right would let such an inexperienced, unqualified person actually fly an aeroplane. They're just wireless operators and flap snatchers.

They aren't even qualified to fly Cessna 152s on their own....:eek:

'Sterling' - that's sounds like an airline to avoid at all costs, now that they can't afford 2 pilots..........

Alpine Flyer

7th Sep 2007, 23:37

Thanks to JAR-FCL most airline-only pilots are not licensed to fly C150s unless they do so frequently.

As for the "more of a manager" philosophy, I am not sure if there are really that many aircraft around that do not need more than button pushing if more than one thing goes wrong at the same time. While my trusted steed is able to autoland itself along an ILS even with an engine failure, things get rather nasty if electrics elect to quit. We also fly to places where there is no ILS at all and to others were you need a little bit of manual flying in order to do not make a fool of yourself.

As a traditional license can be done in slightly over a year (plus time for conversion training), it does not sound unreasonable to try to get it in a little less time and it is probably true that more can be learned inside a SIM than by droning up and down Florida or Arizona in CAVU weather to meet some minimum flight hours requirement. (At least since the advent of GPS which took one of the main elements of adventure out of true VFR without radio navigation. I remember getting splendidly lost on some of my first cross-country trips and still maintain that there are only pilots who have lost their bearings and those who pretend not to remember.....)

It depends on what the industry makes with MPL.

BTW, I find it highly unrealistic to degrade an MPL pilot to a you-will-not-touch anything on my flight deck-role. These guys might have limited training but that will not prevent them from gathering experience in the right seat.

hopeful_pilot

8th Sep 2007, 03:09

thanks guys for the 2 different opinions on a MPL...

seems that there are 2 camps right now with differing views: 1) that MPL holders are mickey mouse pilots, 2) that MPL holders should be given a chance to prove themselves..

anyone cares to share how airlines view these MPL licences and whether an MPL is worth taking up or should one still stick to the tired and tested route of a CPL/fATPL..

Alpine Flyer

8th Sep 2007, 08:04

If self-sponsored and without a good, major airline commited to taking oneself, one should surely go by the proven way for the time.

What worth is an MPL if it ties you to a mediocre airline you have been "tailor-trained" for with no other airline outside China or India willing to take you?

For the time a "classic" license gives you more flexibility in the good employment climate we enjoy.

vunzke

8th Sep 2007, 08:44

isnt it funny how in aviation most "old school" pilots are very weary about changing the things they are used to and are familiar to. Like in most other professions i guess people tend to try and stop "progression" or "new filosophies" by stating that the old and proven way is the best one. When the first cars came on this planet people said it would be the end of the world. when cars could go faster it would be the end of safe driving. :eek: When ,metro systems started operating without drivers it would be the end of safe public transportation. :uhoh: now the introduction of the MPL is the end of safe flying. Nevertheless we all know that this progression will continue and cannot be stopped.
Aircraft are getting more and more automated and we cannot stop that. Its a fact of life that automation will start to take over and we pilots WILL actually become system operators. Lets face it... old school flying is over... its a pitty...YES defenately.... on the other hand its also nice. I for one (and been in aviation for a good 20+ years) dont mind that i can have a coffee, read my newspaper, play with my laptop during cruise knowing that the plane will take care of itself. the chances of these systems failing is smaller than the chances in the old days of the FO becomming incapacitated :8
I beleive the old way of learing aviation (starting small and growing bigger) has become impossible symply for economical reasons. Flying a C-152 has become more expensive than 1 hour of A320 simulator and charters with PA-31 with young new pilots have become rare since low cost airlines are much cheaper and fly the same destinations that we used to do in PA-31's. So young pilots symply have no other option than to start straight on the bigger planes. Wether we like it or not..it has become a way of life. we CANNOT stop this so lets make the best of it and try to train those guys as well as we can. NOT by not allowing them to touch anything. This will FOR SURE not make better pilots out of them. As commanders we should take the responsability to teach these guys to the best of our ability and make sure they become safer pilots with every hour they fly. Yes it involves a higher workload... temporarily... untill they get more experience.... SO WHAT. We are mostly well paid and therefore cannot complain that we do not get an ace in the right seat because it interferes with the movie we have downloaded from LimeWire.
Lets not try to stop the inevitable :ugh: but lets try to make the best out of it and do our best to keep the cockpit as safe as we can by teaching teamwork and exchanging experience.

excrab

8th Sep 2007, 09:30

As suggested above possibly we should keep an open mind about this and see what happens.

Currently, at least in the UK, it is not unusual to have F/Os with 170 hrs TT who have never flown an instrument approach at night or in real cloud prior to joining an airline, having trained in sunnier climates. That is the way the system works, and is no reflection on their abilities, most of them adapting quickly to the multi-crew environment.

However, it is not that which fits them for command, but the several thousand hours they spend in the RHS before passing their command assesments and checks. Conversely, there are others with thousands of hours of instructing and single crew experience who freely admit that with the 500 hrs on type required for a command assesment they still don't feel ready for command.

Whilst those with financial interests in traditional training will never agree, is it not possible that it might be better or at least as good to have a new F/O with 150 hrs in the simulator for the type of aircraft they are operating, who has experienced all the faults available on the instructors panel, hopefully with proper understanding of what the systems of the aircraft are doing and why they are carrying out each step of the recall/memory items and QRH - and with time in the training programme for this to be done as LOFT with decision making thrown in.

As they presumably wouldn't qualify for zero flight time training they would have done the same minimum six actual circuits on type, and the same 60 line training sectors prior to being released to fly with a line captain as opposed to an LTC.

As a current airline Captain, I would hate to think that I am "not in my right mind", but I would expect such a pilot to be perfectly capable of handling the aircraft they had been trained to fly, within the limits laid down in the ops manual, and would be happy to let them do so - just as the Captains I flew with years ago were prepared for me to, when all I brought to the operation was 40 hours in the sim and a couple of log books full of largely irrelevant single crew and instructing knowledge, the majority of which I have long since forgotten.

ZFT

8th Sep 2007, 09:40

Excrab,

Nice post.

I stand to be corrected but I understand that MPL trainees will perform a minimum of 12 actual circuits.

Caudillo

8th Sep 2007, 11:44

As I see it, this really boils down to what had in mind for these guys - essentially I'd imagine they're being recuited simply as someone that isn't going to drop the ball.

You see, if you've ever looked through ads in the sunday supplements or taken a look on the bookshelves, you may've seen the generic "be fluent in X language in 4 weeks" courses. Generally you pop on a pair of oversized headphones, fix a rictus grin to your face, spend half an hour a day doing this amongst some pine furniture and voilá, you're fluent.

Of course you're not, what you've been learning is phrases. Your ability to adapt them to your own circumstances, to interpret the differences amongst broadly similar things that are being said, etc etc, is limited, if at all present.

So whilst one can hardly claim aviation fluency after 200 hours, but it is indeed equivalent to some grounding in basic grammar and idiom. You're aware it exists, and if push comes to shove, you will at least have a minimum foundation upon which to fall back.

Will you need to fall back on it?

This is the interesting part I believe. Now recently I've been having a play with my aircraft, FDs and AP/AT off for various departures and arrivals - back to the sorts of basics I had to practice when I had 100hrs or so - it's good exercise and I enjoy the challenge. Will I ever find myself in a scenario in which they have failed?

No.

Not failed, but switched off. Job interviews and sim rides folks? We're like battery chickens 99% or the time. When we're let out to peck the dust in the sunny farmyard, our feathers and wattle grow back, we get healthier, and are altogether a more appetising meal. As battery chickens our old fashioned flying skills are usually rusty - an understatement - but like the chickens we can improve and pass the sim check. I'm wondering if the MPL guys could. To me it seems like they would have nothing to improve and would thus find it disproportionally difficult to pass an old fashioned (ie normal) sim ride for a job. Unless, that is, the sim rides will in future consist of who can say "check" the most amount of times and the most crisply.. :}

Krueger

9th Sep 2007, 10:22

My believe is that MPL is an idea from the industry to try to have pilots quicker and cheaper, trusting on the unfallibility of the machine to try to keep the safety of the system at the same level.
However, a great part of the acidents that we have is CFIT, where a perfectly flyable machine goes down do to human factor.
Everybody knows that we (humans) are the weakest link, and trying to get even weaker is nonsense.
I am not one of the guys that's always for "the old schooll", but what tat system gave you is airmanship. That airmanship will give you the tools necessary to have the best decision. Of course, MPL guys will get them with time, but it will be a longer run and until then the system will be weak. Put a nearly 65 year old captain with a fresh MPL in bad weather, both on their max FTL and with the new JAR-FCL 3 (medical certification) and probably you will be below the power curve. Do we need this?
Check Six , Krueger...

Ignition Override

10th Sep 2007, 01:35

Who pays for the MPL?

There appear to be serious recruiting and line check issues right now in the US:

A CRJ Captain was heard on tower freq. several weeks ago stating that he needed an immediate return to the airport because the autopilot would not engage. He was probably giving IOE (Initial Oper. Exper.) to a brand-new FO
with very little experience. Somebody claimed that he declared an emergency. One of their Check Airmen told me a few weeks ago (riding to the terminal) than he refuses to give IOE right now. The company offered to pay him time and a half (150%) but he said no thanks-he only flies normal trips. Their problems sound almost as chaotic as those at Mesa. Mesa reportedly had an entire class of new-hire 'no-shows'. No pilots were there for the first day of new-hire class. They have lost about 400 pilots over a one year period-many made lateral moves, to similar small jet operators.

A few years ago, an IP there (he met us going up the DFW jetway) told me that one guy had paid loads of money to Gulfstream Int'l to earn ratings then fly as B-1900 FO in Florida. The poor guy got way behind in sim. training and never made it through. This might reflect on him, or the weather in Florida, and possibly the sim. training on the CRJ.
Read about what United Airlines went through back in the 90s, while either under an imminent threat to require UAL to hire pilots in certain quotas (experience was no longer required, in oder to meet these), or under actual court-imposed orders to fill 'certain' quotas. United apparently filled these artificially created slots/billets, but aviation is much more than simple statistics.
United's travails were described in either "Aviation Week & ST" or "Flying" magazine.

BEagle

10th Sep 2007, 06:26

I've always mantained that, if MPL training on real aircraft was to CPL/ME standard (without the IR element), then everything else could be conducted in decent simulators. Boring holes in ADF holds in Senecas on one engine always seemed rather irrelevant to me - but basic airmanship and flying skills are essential.

But 'real' asymmetric isn't even considered to be a 'core' skill....

The MPL can only be associated with an individual airline. Many have now realised that the cost of all this synthetic training, plus the increased flying training needed to pass the final TR check, won't make the cost any cheaper than the current 'traditional' route. In fact, it'll probably be more expensive!

And where do the MPL advocates think all the simulator instructors will come from?

beatrix

10th Sep 2007, 13:30

Have any of you guys actually seen the MPL syllabus, before you cast it aside as some kind of disney qualification?
Your 170 hours of ground school training is EXACTLY the same as the training you'd do for the Frozen ATPL rating going the CPL route...
Then you do 70 hours of flying in a light aircraft - to learn the "hands-on" stuff
Then you start in the simulator (I can't remember how many hours this is, but its quite a significant amount) which saves (sometimes) years of flying for nothing in tugs, or as an instructor etc etc.
this qualification grants you a licence to fly as a second officer initially, then as a first officer, then eventually - once you have covered a whole bunch of other exams and a fair amount of flying (just as much as any other F/O trying to get into the LHS) you can become a Captain.
Why don't you bother to take a look at the facts before you start slagging off a system you know nothing about.
I work for a leading provider of MPL licences in the world (who currently has over 90 cadets with another course starting next month!) and having seen these guys studying, I'd be more than happy to have them helping to fly my aircraft in a multi-crew environment!
I suggest that if you're really interested in learning about something new, instead of just bashing it.. go and look here - it tells you in detail what the MPL is.
http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/peltrgFAQ.htm#31
Potter out.

Algy

10th Sep 2007, 14:56

Regarding solo, I believe MPL as agreed with ICAO does not require solos, but individual airlines and/or schools (and, I suppose, CAAs) are at liberty to insist on them.

And regarding the source of instructors, I just spent some time with a high-up at a very large training organisation whose suggestion is simple: we will need to pay instructors more.

redaces5

13th Sep 2007, 23:08

I am a captain of the A320. A former F5A pilot and Lead Solo of an aerobatics team. I became a captain after so many stick time. My view regarding the new MPL program if quite different from my own experience as a pilot. The MPL program was well researched by professionals and MPL pilots when hired will surely gain the skills and experience through time in the RHS. Just like operating a machine-proficiency comes through constant handling.

elac2

15th Sep 2007, 05:49

Good post beatrix. Just to back up with more details for those who have not read the ICAO paper.

ALL THESE ARE MINIMUMS

Ground school:750 hours (about 5-6 months) which is up to JAA ATPL standard so you could take your exams for future command.

Core Flying: 70 hours minimum and you go solo
(real solo, in other words ALONE)You also do cross countries solo, instrument and night flying. All the basic flying skills and more.

Simulator phase 1: MCC 60 hours, STD 2 or above. (standard training device). Flying as a crew.

Simulator phase 2: LOFT 50 hours, STD 3 or above

A320 ground school: 3 weeks (standard Airbus course)

A320 Type rating: 60 hours A320 FFS Level D

Base Training: 12 take off and landings A320 (real aircraft)

Hope this adds to the information already pumped out and also answers some questions!

elac2

oh yes just a small point as announced by ICAO 2 weeks ago, once you have the hours, exams etc for your ATPL it can be issued and you can get your command but will be restricted to multi crew flying only.