Easyjet New Ab-initio scheme :)
Seahorse,
Just for your info, a type rating costs about £14,000 not £30,000, and certainly not the £35,000 OAA charged the current crop of cadets.
When I refer to high risk, I am talking about what happens if either you or the operator fail to complete the course. With the MPL you are left with nothing, or a bill to convert (ref. Sterling pilots).
And by reward, I am referring to the current crop of contract cadets who have had to declare bankruptcy, and the lack of actual employment (unless you call self-employment actual employment).
And I am not lying, I am politely expressing my opinion. If you disagree, then feel free but ideally without hurling abuse. It is my opinion that the MPL is a poor option for pilots, for many reasons.
Just for your info, a type rating costs about £14,000 not £30,000, and certainly not the £35,000 OAA charged the current crop of cadets.
When I refer to high risk, I am talking about what happens if either you or the operator fail to complete the course. With the MPL you are left with nothing, or a bill to convert (ref. Sterling pilots).
And by reward, I am referring to the current crop of contract cadets who have had to declare bankruptcy, and the lack of actual employment (unless you call self-employment actual employment).
And I am not lying, I am politely expressing my opinion. If you disagree, then feel free but ideally without hurling abuse. It is my opinion that the MPL is a poor option for pilots, for many reasons.
Bealzebub,
Absolutely.
What frustrates me is the secondary effect of the MPL - and the whole circulatory nature of the problem.
1. The A320 is a poor place to learn to fly. The lack of dual controls make the Airbus a nasty trainer. The FO cannot follow through as the Captain does a tricky take off or landing - and likewise the Captain cannot feel and rescue a poor landing. We have already paid the price (in Lisbon) and we are chopping good guys in the base training who "cannot land". I feel sorry for them, because they may have ended up as excellent pilots, if their career path had been slightly different.
With the old route, you would do 1500 hours at one of the UKs numerous TP operators, and learn the basics. You would then have made a good Airbus pilot.
2. The more wannabes are prepared or able to pay for their first job, the more the Operators and FTOs scrabble around to take that money. Traditionally it was the FTO, now it is both. A320 TR for £35,000? Yep, that's the one you have to pay for if you want to be a contractor for eJ.
As the new FO becomes more of a profit centre than an asset, new ways are devised to up the price and reduce the cost. Upping the price is easy - "it's your only way in, son". Reducing the cost includes reducing the amount of time in expensive real aircraft. I would argue that 1500 hours is a good amount to have before you get into an Airbus. Recently we have been inundated with 250 hour pilots, and many have struggled. Safety has, without doubt, been compromised. Now with the MPL, it's 90 hours and many, including me, would say that that is too few.
Which brings us back to 1.
Absolutely.
What frustrates me is the secondary effect of the MPL - and the whole circulatory nature of the problem.
1. The A320 is a poor place to learn to fly. The lack of dual controls make the Airbus a nasty trainer. The FO cannot follow through as the Captain does a tricky take off or landing - and likewise the Captain cannot feel and rescue a poor landing. We have already paid the price (in Lisbon) and we are chopping good guys in the base training who "cannot land". I feel sorry for them, because they may have ended up as excellent pilots, if their career path had been slightly different.
With the old route, you would do 1500 hours at one of the UKs numerous TP operators, and learn the basics. You would then have made a good Airbus pilot.
2. The more wannabes are prepared or able to pay for their first job, the more the Operators and FTOs scrabble around to take that money. Traditionally it was the FTO, now it is both. A320 TR for £35,000? Yep, that's the one you have to pay for if you want to be a contractor for eJ.
As the new FO becomes more of a profit centre than an asset, new ways are devised to up the price and reduce the cost. Upping the price is easy - "it's your only way in, son". Reducing the cost includes reducing the amount of time in expensive real aircraft. I would argue that 1500 hours is a good amount to have before you get into an Airbus. Recently we have been inundated with 250 hour pilots, and many have struggled. Safety has, without doubt, been compromised. Now with the MPL, it's 90 hours and many, including me, would say that that is too few.
Which brings us back to 1.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HundredPercentPlease
i'll buy you a pint, any time.
Another significant point ref your comment on the Airbus being a bad trainer is that in effect this is also placing an addition burden on the Captain. The whole issue of a crew is that they work together and share the workload, working in unison. Flying the line is not a place to learning and places additional workload on the captain. Anyone, who thinks that by 90 or even 200/250 hours is time enough to have generated and honed a skillset, let alone having generated enough experience to perform in such an evironment is foolish.
i'll buy you a pint, any time.
Recently we have been inundated with 250 hour pilots, and many have struggled. Safety has, without doubt, been compromised. Now with the MPL, it's 90 hours and many, including me, would say that that is too few.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Albanian Seahorse,
With your attitude, perhaps a job at KFC is more your target. In case you hadn't noticed, hundredpercentplease is giving *you* the facts from the inside. These are facts that *you* as a wannabe and others need, should be listening to and heeding. And frankly, you're talking male bovine feces.
As stated, before, there are many on here with years of experience in this industry at all levels and a wannabe making such a statement to someone with the experience putting and effort into providing you with the information *you* need to make effective decisions is highly illustrative.
Your infantile outburst and unwarranted accusation is indicative of your personality type and 'throwing your toys out of the pram' has no place in a professional environment, let alone one with the responsibilities of a professional cockpit crew member. Maybe a trainee manager for a DIY superstore is more your style.
in respect of your comment that you're not applying for the course, but if you could, you would; here's a tip - save your money.
With your attitude, perhaps a job at KFC is more your target. In case you hadn't noticed, hundredpercentplease is giving *you* the facts from the inside. These are facts that *you* as a wannabe and others need, should be listening to and heeding. And frankly, you're talking male bovine feces.
As stated, before, there are many on here with years of experience in this industry at all levels and a wannabe making such a statement to someone with the experience putting and effort into providing you with the information *you* need to make effective decisions is highly illustrative.
Your infantile outburst and unwarranted accusation is indicative of your personality type and 'throwing your toys out of the pram' has no place in a professional environment, let alone one with the responsibilities of a professional cockpit crew member. Maybe a trainee manager for a DIY superstore is more your style.
in respect of your comment that you're not applying for the course, but if you could, you would; here's a tip - save your money.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: somewhere on this planet
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is MPL a JAA license or EASA. the only licenses I know are: PP, CP, ATP
I have never seen in my life a pilot with a MPL.How can you trust a guy to fly a 319 when he can not fly a small piper?
woow, when PAX will learn that!!!
I think it' s time to boycott EJ.
I have never seen in my life a pilot with a MPL.How can you trust a guy to fly a 319 when he can not fly a small piper?
woow, when PAX will learn that!!!
I think it' s time to boycott EJ.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's face the problem from the wannabe side, like me. Thesere are mainly the options we have:
MPL: around 50K, no job guarantee at all. No Type Rating. It is almost impossible to get an airline job within the first 2-3 years.
ATPL: around 60-70K. No job guarantee at all, no type rating in most cases. It is difficult to find an airline job within the first 2-3 years.
Cadets: around 80K. Hold pools, but you should get a job within the first 1-2 years. No type rating.
MPL-EZY: around 95-100k. You get a contract, type rating included.
I don't think the financial risk is higher in the sponsorships than MPL-ATPL courses. Why? Simply because you might end up getting a job quite soon. I met a guy (in Spain though) that went through the MPL way and he is still unemployed after 8 years, not even a summer job, not even an unpaid job. It might be hard to pay that loan back, but it is easier to pay 90K back when you have a job, than paying 50K when you don't have any, or even if you have to fly for free.
For those who are insisting on the fact that, even if you go through the EZY sponsorship you have no guaranteed job, I would like to point out that's only if you FAIL. Same for the cadets, I assume same for the ATPL guys. You pay your airline training, if you fail, you lose the money (that's not "no guaranteed job", that's no guaranteed pass".
I would like to highlight indeed that I don't think cadet pilots are worse than those who have 800-1000h. There are other requirements other than time building which can be even more important than that. I have seen many pilots who are absolutely not mature and not responsible enough to take over an airline plane. Furthermore, I work for a Spanish airline and I have been able to talk to the recruitment manager several times. He told me the major requirement was not time building, that they rejected many 4000h pilots simply because they weren't good enough.
Finally let me say something. I understand you airline pilots are absolutely terrified with the new conditions we wannabees are offered. How can we accept that? Well, unfortunetly there's no other option I'm affraid, I would say it is more your fault - the current airline employees - than ours.
This is just my oppinion
MPL: around 50K, no job guarantee at all. No Type Rating. It is almost impossible to get an airline job within the first 2-3 years.
ATPL: around 60-70K. No job guarantee at all, no type rating in most cases. It is difficult to find an airline job within the first 2-3 years.
Cadets: around 80K. Hold pools, but you should get a job within the first 1-2 years. No type rating.
MPL-EZY: around 95-100k. You get a contract, type rating included.
I don't think the financial risk is higher in the sponsorships than MPL-ATPL courses. Why? Simply because you might end up getting a job quite soon. I met a guy (in Spain though) that went through the MPL way and he is still unemployed after 8 years, not even a summer job, not even an unpaid job. It might be hard to pay that loan back, but it is easier to pay 90K back when you have a job, than paying 50K when you don't have any, or even if you have to fly for free.
For those who are insisting on the fact that, even if you go through the EZY sponsorship you have no guaranteed job, I would like to point out that's only if you FAIL. Same for the cadets, I assume same for the ATPL guys. You pay your airline training, if you fail, you lose the money (that's not "no guaranteed job", that's no guaranteed pass".
I would like to highlight indeed that I don't think cadet pilots are worse than those who have 800-1000h. There are other requirements other than time building which can be even more important than that. I have seen many pilots who are absolutely not mature and not responsible enough to take over an airline plane. Furthermore, I work for a Spanish airline and I have been able to talk to the recruitment manager several times. He told me the major requirement was not time building, that they rejected many 4000h pilots simply because they weren't good enough.
Finally let me say something. I understand you airline pilots are absolutely terrified with the new conditions we wannabees are offered. How can we accept that? Well, unfortunetly there's no other option I'm affraid, I would say it is more your fault - the current airline employees - than ours.
This is just my oppinion
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vikdream,
Don't get confused with getting a contract and being a contractor. (see hundredpercentplease's prior posts)
That's a fair comment.
1. How can you accept that? Don't. Full stop, that's it. The second you commit to an MPL program like this you are placing yourself in the situation that you have very little option to recover from. THAT is fault of those of who accept such terms, no one else's. So don't attempt absolution of responsibility there. By acceptance of these terms from the outset with the understanding of the risks undertaken does nothing but set the standard even lower.
2. To some degree, flight crews in the past have been blind to such schemes. Further to that, the professional associations who are paid to represent their members best interests in terms of T&C's have been ignorant and blind to what is coming down the track.
Pilots have however been taking note in the past, however, there has been limited capability in addressing such situations without the implicit support of their representative bodies.
That of course does not absolve previous crews of allowing such schemes to be implemented, much less there is no absolution for their representative bodies in failing to recognise the situation at any stage.
However, flight crews are challenging such schemes and are lobbying their representation to address such schemes. However, the zombie army throwing themselves forward as cannon fodder is actively undermining any effort to address such issues. So while change is sought, those who accept such terms are now directly responsible.
You break it, you buy it.
MPL-EZY: around 95-100k. You get a contract,
I understand you airline pilots are absolutely terrified with the new conditions we wannabees are offered. How can we accept that? Well, unfortunetly there's no other option I'm affraid, I would say it is more your fault - the current airline employees - than ours.
1. How can you accept that? Don't. Full stop, that's it. The second you commit to an MPL program like this you are placing yourself in the situation that you have very little option to recover from. THAT is fault of those of who accept such terms, no one else's. So don't attempt absolution of responsibility there. By acceptance of these terms from the outset with the understanding of the risks undertaken does nothing but set the standard even lower.
2. To some degree, flight crews in the past have been blind to such schemes. Further to that, the professional associations who are paid to represent their members best interests in terms of T&C's have been ignorant and blind to what is coming down the track.
Pilots have however been taking note in the past, however, there has been limited capability in addressing such situations without the implicit support of their representative bodies.
That of course does not absolve previous crews of allowing such schemes to be implemented, much less there is no absolution for their representative bodies in failing to recognise the situation at any stage.
However, flight crews are challenging such schemes and are lobbying their representation to address such schemes. However, the zombie army throwing themselves forward as cannon fodder is actively undermining any effort to address such issues. So while change is sought, those who accept such terms are now directly responsible.
You break it, you buy it.
Last edited by stuckgear; 4th May 2011 at 12:17.
MPL: around 50K, no job guarantee at all. No Type Rating. It is almost impossible to get an airline job within the first 2-3 years.
I met a guy (in Spain though) that went through the MPL way and he is still unemployed after 8 years,
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gigolo,
In the UK, we don't have much GA. We are a tiny island where fuel costs over 3 x as much as it costs you over in Canada. GA is therefore not economically viable in the UK and in much of Europe. Also, being a relatively small land mass our cities and towns are much closer together and not massively separated like the municipalities of remote regions in the US and Canada. We have a bigger need for transporting 100-200 people 300-400 miles away then we do for transporting 10-25 people over the same distance or less. Our farm and food stock is transported by road as is all mail. For these reasons and many more, smaller aircraft and turboprops don’t work as well for us as they do in other parts of the world. By my rough guess there are probably less than 50 UK registered turbo-prop or commercial 'light' aircraft flying with UK airlines today. Compare that to the number of jet aircraft of which there are over 400!
Therefore it is quite normal for a 250 hour pilot to come out of flight school and straight onto flying a large commercial aircraft because realistically that is the only place he will find a job. There are far more jet jobs available than turboprop, instructing, banner towing, agriculture, parachute dropping jobs put together. We just don’t have the aircraft diversity to support the kind of “career progression” you guys look forward to and are so used to. It’s a different ball game over here. Also, the JAA fATPL course is a much tougher and more regimented pilot training course compared to the US FAA or ICAO/Canada one. We have the concept of 'Integrated' schools which indoctrinate pilots (or like to think they do) from day one getting them thinking like and acting like airline pilots (and occasionally boastful toffs!)
Regarding EasyJet and this scheme. It's a sad state of affairs that the biggest recruiter of pilots in the UK cannot offer pilots a proper career anymore. In any case, for new pilots they can only offer a position if one has spent £100k + (including interest) on something that’s worth only £60k (including a TR) at a flight school owned by their buddies. It's also a sad state of affairs that this position is of a "temporary" nature with the airline not interested in helping pilots by basing them where they want to be based (at least 75% of the time). This is the nature of low cost aviation and it is spreading like wildfire. What can we do? Airlines are businesses and serve one purpose. That is to reward investors and shareholders. If that means screwing around with the lives of young pilots abusing them in the process then so be it. They capitalise on the desperation of loads of young, keen aviators who have not experienced life enough to say no! It’s capitalism gone mad, I agree.
In the UK, we don't have much GA. We are a tiny island where fuel costs over 3 x as much as it costs you over in Canada. GA is therefore not economically viable in the UK and in much of Europe. Also, being a relatively small land mass our cities and towns are much closer together and not massively separated like the municipalities of remote regions in the US and Canada. We have a bigger need for transporting 100-200 people 300-400 miles away then we do for transporting 10-25 people over the same distance or less. Our farm and food stock is transported by road as is all mail. For these reasons and many more, smaller aircraft and turboprops don’t work as well for us as they do in other parts of the world. By my rough guess there are probably less than 50 UK registered turbo-prop or commercial 'light' aircraft flying with UK airlines today. Compare that to the number of jet aircraft of which there are over 400!
Therefore it is quite normal for a 250 hour pilot to come out of flight school and straight onto flying a large commercial aircraft because realistically that is the only place he will find a job. There are far more jet jobs available than turboprop, instructing, banner towing, agriculture, parachute dropping jobs put together. We just don’t have the aircraft diversity to support the kind of “career progression” you guys look forward to and are so used to. It’s a different ball game over here. Also, the JAA fATPL course is a much tougher and more regimented pilot training course compared to the US FAA or ICAO/Canada one. We have the concept of 'Integrated' schools which indoctrinate pilots (or like to think they do) from day one getting them thinking like and acting like airline pilots (and occasionally boastful toffs!)
Regarding EasyJet and this scheme. It's a sad state of affairs that the biggest recruiter of pilots in the UK cannot offer pilots a proper career anymore. In any case, for new pilots they can only offer a position if one has spent £100k + (including interest) on something that’s worth only £60k (including a TR) at a flight school owned by their buddies. It's also a sad state of affairs that this position is of a "temporary" nature with the airline not interested in helping pilots by basing them where they want to be based (at least 75% of the time). This is the nature of low cost aviation and it is spreading like wildfire. What can we do? Airlines are businesses and serve one purpose. That is to reward investors and shareholders. If that means screwing around with the lives of young pilots abusing them in the process then so be it. They capitalise on the desperation of loads of young, keen aviators who have not experienced life enough to say no! It’s capitalism gone mad, I agree.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you think a 250hr pilot DESERVES to fly an airliner?
Those that are successful throughout the programme will have been deemed deserving of a place on to the next stage of that appenticeship. That isn't to say it will necessarily follow, but that would be the intention.
These courses usually involve a full time, eighteen month course of study and training. The course is normally recognised, monitored, mentored, and assessed by the partner or customer airlines. Selection (if and when) is made from the graduates such that those who make the requisite grade, move on to the next stage of airline pilot training. There is no automatic right of progression, and the airline can and will reject anybody who doesn't prove to be very competent at the required level.
You make the mistake of confusing "250 hour cadet pilot" with simply any "250 hour CPL/IR pilot" in the general populace. You also make the mistake of assuming that the noun "pilot" is in itself a profession. There are many professions encompassing pilots in different disciplines, employments and genres, but in the context of this thread and this discussion, that profession is "airline pilot" and it is a distinction you need to understand.
Whatever anybodies viewpoint on the fairness, cost, risk or benefit of these cadet programmes, the simple truth is that the concept didn't start last year. They have been around for decades. I have flown with a lot of graduates from cadet programmes and have generally found them to be very self aware, highly motivated, well trained, emotionally stable, quick and eager learners. They bring with them a discipline and set of of CRM skills that in many respects compensates (at this level) for the lack of numerical flying hours they posess.
Where there has been change, it has been in the rate of growth of these programmes. This has happened at a point in time where there has also been a growth in the "lo-cost" sector of the airline industry. Terms and conditions for employment have been squeezed and degraded by the combination of: aggressive new operating philosophies, supply and demand, and global macro economics. These programmes, or certainly the growth in them, has been a small part of those changes, but it is certainly not the cause of them. Times are tough for professional pilots generally. They are certainly tough for airline pilots. They are tough at the top, in the middle, and certainly at the bottom.
Anybody considering a career as an airline pilot in 2011 and into the forseeable future, needs to make sensible, careful, well researched, risk analysis. It won't be for everyone. It won't be for the majority. People will continue (as they always have) to make emotional decisions. Some will make bad choices, good choices, difficult choices or no choice at all. No matter the cost, there will continue to be a supply (at whatever level) of people who are able to meet that cost.
So back to these cadet programmes. Would I as a long term senior captain concern myself with getting on an airline that employs 250 hour cadet pilots from these programmes? From years of direct experience and involvement, no not at all. In fact many major airlines around the planet have cadet programmes of these types. Graduates of these programmes are by and large now flying with airlines all over the world. They are managers, trainers, captains, first and second officers.
For anybody who wants to pick and choose who they fly with on that basis. Good luck!
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does this represent the best bet to end up as an A320 pilot within 2 years for a well known airline? Yes.
Do you still want a 30+ year career as an airline pilot given the continuous slide in T&Cs? Probably not, if you've got a brain that will allow you to do other careers.
People need to realise that the job is fundamentally different to even ten years ago. The number of wannabes that I've met, who say that their neighbour/parent's friend etc. is a BA LH Captain and has a great lifestyle, should be no basis for today's entrants, when they'll be struggling to rent a studio in a sink estate.
Do you still want a 30+ year career as an airline pilot given the continuous slide in T&Cs? Probably not, if you've got a brain that will allow you to do other careers.
People need to realise that the job is fundamentally different to even ten years ago. The number of wannabes that I've met, who say that their neighbour/parent's friend etc. is a BA LH Captain and has a great lifestyle, should be no basis for today's entrants, when they'll be struggling to rent a studio in a sink estate.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: somewhere on this planet
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-We will all have a good laugh when these kidos freshly trained with their shiny MPL will be asked to leave to let the place to new dreamers joining this "wonderful orange" scheme.
The long line of unemployed pilots will be even longer.
-Let them dream for now, parents are already excited to announce to neighbors that their son will be soon an airline pilot.
do the contractor has obligation to send them to fly. minimum hours guaranteed?
The long line of unemployed pilots will be even longer.
-Let them dream for now, parents are already excited to announce to neighbors that their son will be soon an airline pilot.
do the contractor has obligation to send them to fly. minimum hours guaranteed?
Last edited by captainsuperstorm; 5th May 2011 at 08:00.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: somewhere on this planet
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not only self abuser, very dumb at least.
what scheme we have?:
1-ryanair
2-easyjet
3-eagle jet
pick the lucky one, for the one which will make you less miserable.
I would still go for easyjet before I shoot myself!
what scheme we have?:
1-ryanair
2-easyjet
3-eagle jet
pick the lucky one, for the one which will make you less miserable.
I would still go for easyjet before I shoot myself!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no skin in the game in any instance, but some thoughts, from someone who took the gamble to self sponsor and has subsequently all but given up on the dream (due to a new family and lack of willingness to work for what is now on offer following the recession)
- Is the easyJet MPL scheme a scam? Errrm. No I'd have to say. IF you can afford it without taking undue risk then it represents probably the best [for "best" read "quickest"] way to an airline seat available right now
- If you DO go for it, you should read - and REALLY try and understand - what I think both hundredpercentplease and Beazelbub are trying to tell you. You will be tied to easy, with no easy(sic) escape route for AT LEAST two years. Should you be aware of the fact that easy have you by the short and curlies and will use that to THEIR advantage? Absolutely. For example, in this thread we've been told to translate an MPL licence to an ATPL, you need 1500 min AND a successful LST. Would it be beyond easy to reduce your hours running up to 1500 so that you only went past that AFTER your next LST? absolutely not - it would tie you to them for another year.
- You should be VERY aware and cognitive of the possibility of the example mentioned earlier - you won't get to take holiday - if at all - when YOU want to. You WILL be used to do the ****ty 0500 shuttle to Glasgow in the middle of winter, that no-one else wants to do.
- Is the existence of this scheme the fault of those that take it? That's a VERY tricky one. It's analgous to the chicken and egg scenario. The "yes it's the muppets who take these schemes fault" group will always say that if no-one did it, then they woulnd't - COULDN'T - exist. This is of course true. However, if those who have already made it to the promised land of the flight deck had some balls and said no, would these schemes ever have existed? also no. PERSONALLY, as near as I can get to the blame game is that both have some burden of responsibility. But in the same way that those who take terms such as these to get on the flightdeck are responsible for lowering the terms for those who seek to follow, those who are already there must surely carry the can to some degree (collectively, not individually) for the fact this scheme runs.
- Is spending £70k to get an fATPL and then enter the hell of trying to find ANY job a better option than spending £100k to have the opportunity to work for a major player - albeit one that's doing it's best to ruin it's long term appeal? You pays yer money you takes yer choice.
Gigolo = Not for me to judge you or anyone else - but if you are an intelligent being you should be able to read that Beazelbubs posts are not biased and are intelligent, educated and I would suggest very good guidance for those that seek to follow him/her and hundredpercentplease onto the flightdeck. You may have a differing opinion (which I have to say, I personally, disagree with) but you should at least be able to look at the content of the post and respect the person.
For me? I always knew that given my circumstance when I started training it was a long shot. I started when the market had never been better for low houred pilots - and unfortunately I finished just as the whole economy crashed. I have regrettfully walked away, but with no debt and no regret. I would have considered it an honour to fly with the likes of 100% and Beazlebub....unfortunately these forums show far too many other people I would have loathed flying with - self obsessed, self important and perhaps most importantly holding far too high an opinion of their own intelligence. I'm at ease with my decision, even though I know for the rest of my life I'll always look at the planes overhead or when I go to an airport and think "what if".
- Is the easyJet MPL scheme a scam? Errrm. No I'd have to say. IF you can afford it without taking undue risk then it represents probably the best [for "best" read "quickest"] way to an airline seat available right now
- If you DO go for it, you should read - and REALLY try and understand - what I think both hundredpercentplease and Beazelbub are trying to tell you. You will be tied to easy, with no easy(sic) escape route for AT LEAST two years. Should you be aware of the fact that easy have you by the short and curlies and will use that to THEIR advantage? Absolutely. For example, in this thread we've been told to translate an MPL licence to an ATPL, you need 1500 min AND a successful LST. Would it be beyond easy to reduce your hours running up to 1500 so that you only went past that AFTER your next LST? absolutely not - it would tie you to them for another year.
- You should be VERY aware and cognitive of the possibility of the example mentioned earlier - you won't get to take holiday - if at all - when YOU want to. You WILL be used to do the ****ty 0500 shuttle to Glasgow in the middle of winter, that no-one else wants to do.
- Is the existence of this scheme the fault of those that take it? That's a VERY tricky one. It's analgous to the chicken and egg scenario. The "yes it's the muppets who take these schemes fault" group will always say that if no-one did it, then they woulnd't - COULDN'T - exist. This is of course true. However, if those who have already made it to the promised land of the flight deck had some balls and said no, would these schemes ever have existed? also no. PERSONALLY, as near as I can get to the blame game is that both have some burden of responsibility. But in the same way that those who take terms such as these to get on the flightdeck are responsible for lowering the terms for those who seek to follow, those who are already there must surely carry the can to some degree (collectively, not individually) for the fact this scheme runs.
- Is spending £70k to get an fATPL and then enter the hell of trying to find ANY job a better option than spending £100k to have the opportunity to work for a major player - albeit one that's doing it's best to ruin it's long term appeal? You pays yer money you takes yer choice.
Gigolo = Not for me to judge you or anyone else - but if you are an intelligent being you should be able to read that Beazelbubs posts are not biased and are intelligent, educated and I would suggest very good guidance for those that seek to follow him/her and hundredpercentplease onto the flightdeck. You may have a differing opinion (which I have to say, I personally, disagree with) but you should at least be able to look at the content of the post and respect the person.
For me? I always knew that given my circumstance when I started training it was a long shot. I started when the market had never been better for low houred pilots - and unfortunately I finished just as the whole economy crashed. I have regrettfully walked away, but with no debt and no regret. I would have considered it an honour to fly with the likes of 100% and Beazlebub....unfortunately these forums show far too many other people I would have loathed flying with - self obsessed, self important and perhaps most importantly holding far too high an opinion of their own intelligence. I'm at ease with my decision, even though I know for the rest of my life I'll always look at the planes overhead or when I go to an airport and think "what if".
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clanger,
LST = Licence Skills Test and this occurs at the end of the Type Rating for an MPL cadet, not a year or two into the flying. You probably meant LPC, a Licence Proficiency Check. Read on for a bit more ambiguity though.
What is interesting to me about this thread is that only one or two have expressed concerns about the MPL itself (there are other threads that do this of course). The entire thread is about the T&Cs and risk/reward factors. Yet the first batch isn't six months on the line. How quickly we seem to accept evolution.
Now if I could only find my bookmark to LASORS online, I'd like to post here the entire chapter from it governing UK MPL. It's only four pages long. It is slightly ambiguous on one point and this regards when the company restriction is removed from the licence. It does not state this occurs at 1500 hours like everyone here writes, nor is there any mention of an LPC. It seems to state that the head of training sends a letter to the CAA once the cadet completes line training and the CAA removes the company restriction. The problem with LASORS is that in one place it refers to the company conversion course and another it specifically states line training. Are we to take the different terms to mean the same thing? There is further ambiguity of course in that LASORS offers no guidance at all as to whether an MPL holder who's had the company restriction removed from the licence can then switch airlines before reaching 1500 hours. It is worth noting that we need not say "an MPL holder with less than 1500 hours", since any of them with a stamp and an envelope will send off their light blue book for a green one as soon as they reach 1500 hours, thence no longer are they MPL holders.
Since LASORS mostly parrots JAR-FCL, it might be worth digging into the latter to see if it sheds any light on this very critical issue of how and when these cadet FOs will be legally eligible to move to a different company. If it is earlier than 1500 hours, this will of course open a new stream in the thread as to whether another airline would take them sub-ATPL if it is legal to do so.
LST = Licence Skills Test and this occurs at the end of the Type Rating for an MPL cadet, not a year or two into the flying. You probably meant LPC, a Licence Proficiency Check. Read on for a bit more ambiguity though.
What is interesting to me about this thread is that only one or two have expressed concerns about the MPL itself (there are other threads that do this of course). The entire thread is about the T&Cs and risk/reward factors. Yet the first batch isn't six months on the line. How quickly we seem to accept evolution.
Now if I could only find my bookmark to LASORS online, I'd like to post here the entire chapter from it governing UK MPL. It's only four pages long. It is slightly ambiguous on one point and this regards when the company restriction is removed from the licence. It does not state this occurs at 1500 hours like everyone here writes, nor is there any mention of an LPC. It seems to state that the head of training sends a letter to the CAA once the cadet completes line training and the CAA removes the company restriction. The problem with LASORS is that in one place it refers to the company conversion course and another it specifically states line training. Are we to take the different terms to mean the same thing? There is further ambiguity of course in that LASORS offers no guidance at all as to whether an MPL holder who's had the company restriction removed from the licence can then switch airlines before reaching 1500 hours. It is worth noting that we need not say "an MPL holder with less than 1500 hours", since any of them with a stamp and an envelope will send off their light blue book for a green one as soon as they reach 1500 hours, thence no longer are they MPL holders.
Since LASORS mostly parrots JAR-FCL, it might be worth digging into the latter to see if it sheds any light on this very critical issue of how and when these cadet FOs will be legally eligible to move to a different company. If it is earlier than 1500 hours, this will of course open a new stream in the thread as to whether another airline would take them sub-ATPL if it is legal to do so.
Last edited by Adios; 7th May 2011 at 01:55.
My understanding* is that you have an MPL instead of a CPL. It is at the point where you ditch your MPL to obtain an ATPL that you become a Free Man.
You cannot have an ATPL until you have the relevant hours, 1500 of them and an LPC in the simulator. Under present CPL FrznATPL arrangements the LPC in the sim only counted as long as you had 1,500hrs in the logbook when you went in the sim. What is unclear is whether this condition applies in the case of MPL. Nobody has got there yet. Nobody seems to know. Not even the CAA.
WWW
* given conflicting info from a variety of sources.
You cannot have an ATPL until you have the relevant hours, 1500 of them and an LPC in the simulator. Under present CPL FrznATPL arrangements the LPC in the sim only counted as long as you had 1,500hrs in the logbook when you went in the sim. What is unclear is whether this condition applies in the case of MPL. Nobody has got there yet. Nobody seems to know. Not even the CAA.
WWW
* given conflicting info from a variety of sources.
