The 'END OF G/A As A Stepping Stone' ???.....

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

From the 'Avweb' site;

"Australia's Multi-Crew Pilot License Category Draws Concern

Six cadets from China Eastern Airlines and Xiamen Airlines last month completed work at Boeing's training arm, Alteon, in Brisbane, in a Multi-Crew Pilot licensing program (MPL) that aims to revolutionize and streamline airline cockpit crew training to answer the forecast demand for pilots. Boeing and Airbus together currently have a backlog of more than 7,000 aircraft -- all of them will need pilots at a time when the pilot population is expected to lose increasing numbers to age-induced retirement. To produce more airline pilots at a faster rate, MPL shifts training's emphasis from flight hours directly to airline cockpit competency with a focus on cockpit resource management, critical thinking and risk management. Aspiring airline pilots in the 20-month trial program did not spend thousands of hours building their flight skills, working their way up from private, to instructor, to commercial aviator to airline pilot, but instead were "trained from day one for the job they will be doing in aviation," Civil Aviation Safety Authority chief executive Bruce Byron told The Australian. MPL, now tested through two years, was on Dec. 19 endorsed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) with rules and requirements that support the program. But because the program replaces what could be years of hands-on flying with simulator training and coursework, opponents say substantial concerns remain.



Supporters of the program say MPL's specificity of design directly targets and develops those skills pilots need to have to operate in an airline environment. And opponents who say there's no substitute for flight time may in the end be overruled by market forces. Workforce forecasts based in part on order backlogs at Boeing and Airbus suggest a strong demand for airline pilots over the next two decades. In 2007, Boeing's forecast projected a need for more than 17,000 new pilots per year for the next 20 years. Alteon's solution may not yet be optimal, but as job-focused training the company hopes it will prove to be an efficient and effective substitute to sending cadets off to train private pilots and then haul cargo in a 310 for a few years before being thrust into the cockpit of an airliner."


Rather lengthy I know, but I thought it had to be left intact for the full body of the story to be presented...

No more G/A 'Stepping Stone' pilots with this system....so I guess the future aviators will have to make up their minds rather early in their aviation career,
which way they're going to go!
No 'second guesses' now....

And somebody recently asked what would be the future of aviation as we know it in the next 25 years, was it?

[Horatio Leafblower]

If the article is right, it's more like the end of GA.

...or another nail in the coffin :suspect:

[startingout]

Not to offend anyone, but realistically with the whole outlook from gen Y being airlines, with such a license on offer in the the near future how many people here realistically would not take up the offer of flying a jet whilst paying not much more then the basic licence?

How many people really see themselves flying around a SE Vfr aircraft when they choose flying as a profession. The world is changing, im not saying it is for a good cause but bringing in such a licence probably will eventually lead to the destruction of GA as we know it. As years progress the number of instructors will diminish as they venture onwards and upwards.

This is all just my 2c, I'm in the game to be able to go over seas and see things i usually would never have dreamed of, one of those is a wish to fly around mountains and glaciers. From my upbringing I am still pushed towards where one can settle down and earn a decent living. I am gen Y and really we have been taught to go out there and strive for the top of the peak as quickly and efficiently as possible, many will choose the multi crew path....

[Keg]

20 months? I reckon you could do a full CPL with ME CIR, throw in some turbine F/O time on a light jet and then still manage an expanded endorsement process on the line type and come in about the same time frame....with probably the same degree of quality. If this thing is about saving time for a 'better' product then I'm not sure how it delivers either outcome?!?!

[RadioSaigon]

I may be completely off track here, but my understanding of the MPL is that holders of that particular 'licence' will never occupy the Left seat of anything. They are FO's for life. Correct me if I'm wrong, but on that basis, there is still going to be a need for Pilots to occupy the Left seat to keep those MPL's honest. Those pilots have to come from somewhere and as sure as all hell, it ain't going to be from an MPL programme.

Far from this being the death-knell for GA, it is just another diversion in the road. There will still be a need for qualified and competent GA drivers well into the future.

[Wally Mk2]

This reads as quite disturbing for us older generation, what Gen A for eg:)

The way I see it in time the ONLY way into an airline job will be via the MPL. Obviously the worlds A/C manufactureres & the demand for pilots to fly them won't be able to be sustained with the current way pilots are supplied. So change IS on it's way. If by some chance a youngster does have a pvt lic then he/she would still have to do the whole MPL course from scratch anyway, just that these 'pre trained' pilots may very well have a better/easier journey thru the course.
As for L/H seat jockies? Well eventually the transition from R/H to L/H will be just a matter of time on type in the R/H seat, there is to my thinking no other way around this, essentially this is what happens now in todays climate.
Look lets face it it ain't rocket science to fly a modern day jet, sheeeez they are now currently full of low houred pilots anyway from the last uptake we saw recently. The job is becoming more a systems manager than anything else, real pilots flying real jets will in the not too distant future just be in the history books or old folks homes. It's a brave new world out there with technology & pilot training as it is these days becoming out of whack with each other. I wish the career path to the top job to stay the same as it has since day because it has worked in the past, but nothing is forever sadly.
GA will survive for many many years yet but the gap will be even further apart with the "them & us"

'Keg' you raise a vaild point:-)

Wmk2

[c100driver]

I may be completely off track here, but my understanding of the MPL is that holders of that particular 'licence' will never occupy the Left seat of anything.

No they will hold the MPL until they have the flight experience to sit and pass an ATPL flight test. As per ICAO. The challange for most regulators is what should those flight experience requirements be?

The P in C must still hold an ATPL

My personal belief is the the MPL and direct entry into the airlines would be a good outcome for GA. Those who want to instruct or fly GA may be able to be paid better as all the hour builder pilots are removed from the lowest rungs of the aviation ladder.

[gettin' there]

Maybe we will eventually see it where GA pilots with real experience who can fly a plane rather than just "monitor they systems" will be in such great demand that they will get paid more than their MPL airline counterparts? :rolleyes: :eek: Nah........:)

[porch monkey]

Wally, I usually find your posts entertaining and sometimes informative. However, I have to take exception to your statement regarding last uptake and lack of experience. If you call 5000 + hrs in GA, mainly night single pilot IFR, (Just like yours.....) inexperienced, then maybe so. You would be surprised at the experience levels of many of the recent joiners at VB and jetstar, if you actually asked. And yes, the majority of the time it is pretty easy, at least now, but I can assure you it isn't always like that. I've seen you make the "easy" statement a few times now. You ever actually flown a 73 or a320?

[Xeptu]

In my view the MPL is doomed to failure, it is nothing more than a supply and demand licence. In the oncoming recession there will be adequate supply for demand. Those you make it through on an MPL will find themselves in exactly the same position as a flight engineer come next boom cycle.

A short term fix to a short term problem and hardly a career path.

[Wally Mk2]

Well I'm sorry you are offended in some ways 'PM'. There's a saying, 'you don't need to be a cook to boil water', meaning you don't need to be that experienced to be a jet jockey. And I stand by that statement 'easy' 'cause I believe it is, mostly.
I didn't quote eany actual hrs or say 'lack' of experience but am sure not everyone has your/mine experience sitting in the R/H seat of some 'bus'.
And for the record no I haven't flown a big 'bus' but I did some time ago now when the Ansett B727 Sim was in full swing fly it single pilot for a few hours, hard work for sure due it's rudimentry flight systems compared by todays stds but not that impossible to handle seeing I was a fairly 'green' pilot at the time.
Oh & BTW having flown a small Medi-jet in CMD out over the Pacific at night in very ordinary wx with few options for an out with a TT of LESS than 3000 hrs means (well to me anyawya) it's got little to do with hrs.

So will the MPL be the way of the future? I believe it will.


Wmk2

[Gearupandorrf]

Hi all,

Just my $0.02 worth on the whole thing...
If this scheme is ever made available to local Pilots, they had better consider the following scenario:

Sterling Airlines in Denmark took on the first European MPL's (on the B738) until just recently (which had to lay Pilots off due to present Economics). These guys had been flying the line for under a year with their shiny new MPL and B738 endos.

Now that they're out on the street (last in/ first out), they're now stuck in a situation where:

1. Excluding the B738, they've got a License to fly nuthin'. As part of their MPL, the Pilots received approx 20- 40 hrs flying a Piston Single (I don't think a PPL issue was even part of this). So having lost their job, and wanting to keep some hours ticking over by other means, they are completely stonewalled. There are no options to Instruct, fly Charter- or even to waltz down to the local Aero Club and hire a C152. No doubt already hocked to the hilt from paying for their MPL, very few would be in a position (or have the inclination), to go back to virtually square one and do it "the hard way".

2. Given the above- this situation is severely compunded for Australian MPL holders. Say you're an MPL with Jetstar on the A320, and (heaven forbid), it all goes awry and Jetstar ceases to exist. Any other Airlines in Australia who will be able to accept your applications?? Ýou'd better pray and hope that Tiger have got some sort of interest in MPL's when they can take their pick of experienced GA applicants. Of course they could take mercy- and take you on at much infereior rates compared to the marginal rates for the experienced guys- BECAUSE THEY CAN. What do you have in the way of bargaining power?

Or conversely, you're with Virgin on the B737NG and the unthinkable happens (remember Ansett?). In that case, you'd better hope that Qantas are interested in MPL's- but of course you're set up for a financial raping due to the same reasons above. No bargaining power.

Less of a problem in Europe of course as there are far more operators flying the same equipment. I can foresee though that this could be a major problem here.

3. So you lose your job, somehow manage to do a traditional License all over again, and set out to find a job. Pray that nobody knows that you do hold an MPL, or you'll be viewed (rightly or wrongly) as someone who'll piss off at the first sniff of a jet job.

I can only conclude that such a License- whilst being a quick route to the RHS- may also have the ability to erect severe roadblocks on a career here in Australia. It may also severely restrict your ability to have any clout in an Industrial Relations context too......

Interested in your thoughts on the above also...

Cheers,
Gearup

[The_Pharoah]

lol..I love reading the comments on this forum, esp the heated debates and passion that a lot of you bring. :ok:

I'm not a pilot (yet - still saving up) but I hope by the time I make it, I've got the passion for the airline industry that you guys have. :}

My $0.02 worth...for me, its about the journey, not the destination. As for one about to embark on the journey, I wouldn't touch an MPL with a 10 ft pole because, whats the fun in that eh? (plus all the issues raised above).

[43Inches]

Porch & Wally - I know of a number of companies in nearby asia which have been putting 300 hour cadets into the RH seat of both 737 and A320 types for the last 10-15 years. The time to command for some of the cadets is running around 10 years in some of the large airlines and then they most likely have another cadet sitting next to them. In the last 10 years the accident rate has not been any higher for these airlines than any other for the region and the operations conducted in some pretty challenging conditions.

[PyroTek]

I'm personally hoping to hit up the GA before going near airliners. The progression spurs me along.
I just hope this MPL fails, (greedy, i know) so I can get a job when I'm ready, and not be shunted out due to the MPLs getting it instead.

[bushy]

300 hour pilots have been in the RHS of Boeings for decades.
If they have an MPL and an a jet endorsement it will be cheaper for airlines to hire them than to get involved in the training and expense for another candidate.
The only thing that's constant is change.
And airlines like pilots with multicrew experience and jet endorsements.

[triton140]

I reckon things are really changing in a whole lotta ways ......

MPL and CASR 103 are just a coupla parts of that change.

Old days - whatever you wanted to do (recreational/GA/CPL) you started with PPL and worked your way up the elevator, getting off at whatever floor took your fancy.

Now - if you want to fly recreation, and that's all - go RA. Pretty soon there'll be no real difference between the RA and PPL - RA's will be able to fly heavier and heavier craft and fly into CTA and all those other things. So, if that's your thing, that's where you go - but you'll be increasingly cut off from moving on to CPL/ATPL, because that will be a totally different stream.:rolleyes:

If you want to spend your life as a professional pilot in GA - then you'll follow the current PPL/CPL path under CASA rules. And that'll be it - you'll have a shedload of fun and pick up great flying skills, but you won't fly big jets for a major airline - you makes yer choices.:D

And if you want to sit at a computer all day in a big jet, then you'll go MPL. And that'll be it - you'll miss all the fun, but you'll have a nice life with a (fairly) steady income.:E

[DanArcher]

How many people really see themselves flying around a SE Vfr aircraft when they choose flying as a profession.


1 here! :}

or maybe I've just been sniffing to much avgas over the years :rolleyes:

[porch monkey]

You didn't offend me Wally, the difference is I have seen both sides. Your generalisations do you a disservice. Guess you just missed my point, really.:rolleyes:

[YBRM]

I can tell you now folks that from my seat as a visitor in the US, that the industry isn't doing so well up here. The recession is in full swing, and there are many airline pilots who are now out there hoping to get a slot on a turboprop with a regional coz their plumb airline job had become redundant.

Me thinks that Oz is really just on the downturn and things will get somewhat worse before they get better. Just maybe, pilot demand will dwindle accordingly, and the whole MPL thing will just go along with all CASA's other policies...... about 10 years to freakin' late!! :ugh: :D

[Wizofoz]

I know of a number of companies in nearby asia which have been putting 300 hour cadets into the RH seat of both 737 and A320 types for the last 10-15 years.

I've flown with 270hr graduate Cadets who,4 years and 3000hrs later, upgraded to command in 737s or A319s- And this in a company that has NEVER had an accident or major incident.

I do not think low-hour cadets are as good as F/Os as high time ex-GA guys, at least until they cut their teeth- but is it safer for low-hour guys to get their experience in Multi-pilot ops next to an experienced Captain, or with unsuspecting punters in a single-pilot situation?

These guys then, on average, upgrade as quickley and successfully as any high-time GA guy as ALL their experience is in the type of SOP regulated, CRM environment they will be using for the rest of their carreers.

The bottom line will be cost- If there is a cost advantage to the airlines to have MPL schemes (and, let's face it, I can see them being run profitably BY the airlines!!) it will happen, and there is unlikely to be any negative impact on saftey.

[Aerofoil]

We had this a while ago in Europe and I can say that only a handful of MPL qualified cadets got a job because nearly every airline refused to recognise the license due to the risks involved in employing an observer of systems rather than a pilot and went for ATPL or frozen ATPL guys instead. one of the airlines that employed these few has now gone bust (not to do with MPL) which means that the number of MPL's that are flying is reduced even further.

Having come from the ATPL route myself IMO the MPL is a crazy idea and a slapdash answer to what 'could' be a shortage of pilots. The idea means that you literally get to the front of a jet without ANY real life experience of anything like the thing you are flying. That to me add's up to one thing...a complete loss of safety added to the massive experience gap between the LHS airline pilot and the RHS simulator driver.
In short if you look at europe as a test case then the MPL has already failed and the idea thrown out.

Thats just my opinion but the day that the MPL idea is erased from world aviation is a good day for passenger safety. :ok:

[tubby one]

yet again we have the un/ill informed holding forth on the merits (or otherwise) of the MPL basing their arguements on personal prejuduce, lack of knowledge or rumour. :p

the genesis of the MPL was based on the valid premise of focussing training towards the requirements of the task - which despite views to the contrary is not flying SE IFR in the back blocks of Oz. this was well before the last 'shortage' of pilots, indeed it was at a time when airlines here in OZ had pools of applicants from which to select. cost saving was not a key aspect as those involved recognised that any savings would be very long term.:ok:
however, there was an expectation that there would be efficiencies gained through time saving and the acquisition of skills that were not readily acquired via traditional CPL/CIR training. there was also an expectation that the 'solo' hours contained in the CPL could be better utilised with focussed training and an emphasis on the competencies required to operate in a multi-crew aircraft.:)

basically, there is nothing overly wrong with the CPL that some updating would not cure along with a a greater degree of standardisation across the training industry. :rolleyes:

and at the end of the day MPL was not intended to and nor will it replace the CPL/CIR.:ugh:

[Wally Mk2]

Hi 'PM'

I guess I may have missed yr point but I was trying to answer yr concerns/questions rather than perhaps directly adding to the MPL thingy.
I'd like to think that perhaps you will still enjoy some of my other posts:ok:




Wmk2

[Mr. Hat]

Would make for an interesting gradient...!

[Wizofoz]

Whilst I might have phrased it more diplomatically, I have to agree with the thrust of Tubbys post.

Aerofoil, what exactley is this "Real life experience" that a guy with a traditional frozen ATPL has that an MPL holder doesn't?

A few non-revenue Nav-exes in a Seneca has very little to do with airline ops.

MPL simply takes the time, effort and money that was used giving guys experience in single pilot pistons, a type of operation they will probably never take part in again, and instead train them in Sims in both the type of aircraft and type of operation they will use for the rest of their career.

I'm specifically talking about places like Europe where a high percentage of pilots first jobs are in multi-engine, multi-pilot turbines, and have said that a guy with thousands of hours GA time probably makes a better FO. Come Command time, however, I don't think theres any evidence that any particular avenue produces a better Captain.

[Wildduke]

I am working my butt off cutting my teeth to earn my right to eventually sit in the left hand seat of a shiny new jet and have access to staff travel, good looking cabing crew, international travel, and all the other benefits associated with that lifestyle, and it s*#ts me to tears that there are punks out there jumping the que!

However have realised that this is the way the world is and that I have it a lot easier that generations that have gone before me. The truth is we must feel sorry for these people that go the MPL route and skip GA. I fly SE VFR now and have a long way to go, but for these people, when you start at the top what have you got to look forward too?

[bushy]

Wizofoz
I believe that it is probably better to have newbies sitting alongside an experienced captain.
It is also much better to have GA crewed by experienced career pilots. The present system of mainly a surplus of broke, desparate, low time pilots, or an unpredictable shortage if the airlines decide to recruit, is not good for economics or safety.

[langjan]

This is all well and good.

I am in GA and loving every minute of it, in my opinion the experience i've gained from my time here is worth its weight in gold.
Experience beats the "fast track" any day of the week.

I'm glad for all those who get the "jet job" straight off the bat but which sounds better, a 500hr pilot or a 5000hr pilot? Who would you entrust the lives of 200+ people with?

[Wildduke]

Bet Capt. Sullenberger, from the US Airways flight that went down into the Hudson river wasn't an MPL fast tracker!! :p

[langjan]

Well said WILDDUKE!!!!

[43Inches]

A study based on commercial aviation CFIT accidents from a while back showed the following results:

A captain with less than 4000 total hours was equally likely to have an accident as one with more. The range was 480 hours to 16000 hours total time.

A captain with less than 1000 hours on type was involved 67% of the time

A captain with less than 500 hours instrument time was involved 73% of cases, (50% involved less than 220 hours IF).

Have not been able to find more up to date statistics on flight crew experience data.

The point is that the total hours are not so much an issue as experience on type and in operational conditions.

[Wally Mk2]

'43' I couldn't agree more with yr last...........The point is that the total hours are not so much an issue as experience on type and in operational conditions. Today 18:42

I was privy some time ago now to overseeing some CV's that where for perusal in the hoep of finding another driver for the Co I used to work for.
One CV in particular had a guy with a TT of 5000+ & he was around the late 20's if I recall. Pretty impressive at that age with all those hrs but looking further into the breakdown of his hrs revealed nearly 4000 hrs on SE types as an instructor. Hmmmm, would a large TT make this guy better than someone who had say 3000TT with 2000 of those twin & perhaps night IFR? I doubt it. You can gain an awful lot of experience in the first 500 to 1000 hrs but after that sit in the R/H seat instructing basic stuff adds little.
The Cpt whom pulled off a lucky ldg in the river was indeed lucky, Skill no dout played a big part in it but who actually practices ditching at that level, or any level for that matter? Nobody, he was damn lucky that's for sure & so where the pax. Lets hope that we don't ever find out if a MPL driver can pull off the same stunt.

Wmk2

[Wizofoz]

43,

You've specifically quoted Captain hours. We're more talking about enrty level experience. It should, perhaps be noted that with MPL, FOs will HAVE a few thousand hours on type when they recieve their upgrade.

Don't get me wrong, GA gave me some of the most treasured experiences I've ever had, but wether that was the best preperation for an Airline career is what is under discussion.

I believe the FO Coward, who managed to get the BA 777 down in (more or less) one piece after the non-responsive engine accident, may not have been MPL, but DID come through a Cadet scheme, low time into a Jet.

[43Inches]

Wizofoz - The stats for FO's are similar, 50% under 2000 hours total and 50% over. The interesting note was that almost all had less than 500hours on type. Again it shows whether MPL/CPL/ATPL its type & operational experience which is important.

Low time FO cadets have been around almost as long as airlines. The difference in todays world is that they may be paired with an inexperienced captain (on type). This to me is the main concern with the current situation. In the late 1980's a similar situation was faced by commuters/regionals in the US;

http://www.flightsafety.org/ap/ap_nov88.pdf

The section titled 'The wide range of hiring and experience' sounds a lot like todays regional woes.