Is MPL finally taking off? (now with job guarantee?)
 

Did anyone know that the MPL is getting closer? and now with job guarantee? :ok:
www.tbaa.nl

Anything that looks to good to be generally is. I would be VERY sceptical about any claims of guranteeing a job. Especially on an Airbus, Boeing or Fokker straight out of training.

If they can then good on them but be very careful.

FS :ok:

What do you think about the MPL anyway? Just wondering. :}

You're right. You have to check those things out thoroughly. I know that ex-flight instructors from a dutch airliner went to True Blue aviation academy to get their TRI. Looks like the training starts only when the job interview with an airliner is positive. I wonder...

What i think of MPL? I fly on the 737 already but to be honest, if i was offered this when i started flying, i would consider it. Flying from day 1 with the company procedures you will work for? I wonder what the airliners think...

Even if a student goes on to this course.. looses the job after.. whatever happens.. who would actually employ him or her?

MPL is just a bit too 'modern' for me, I think the longer ATPL route is much better and safer. :rolleyes:

According to JAR, if you have your MPL and want a normal CPL\IR (because you got fired or so) you only need 70 hrs SEP. And you can get those hours during your MPL course just in case... The type-rating is always valid. I will get some more info this week from this company.

Is there any truth from some reports of trouble on flightdecks between MPL holders and some of the pilots from the PPL, ATPL, CPL, IR system where the latter is angry about how the former got their license?

Just some facts...
 

An MPL typerating is an MPL type rating, only valid with the host airline, nowhere else. You have to do a new rating for an CPL/ATPL if this comes up.

It may be a quick way to get right seat time, but no future. You are stuck in the right seat.

ICAO presentet MPL as an option for the BIG airlines to train their own pilots some years ago. Sadly some FTO se a goldmine in this and get you boys and girls to sign up for something thats realy does not have a futurer todays world.

THINK before you go this route......

My two cents...

An MPL typerating is an MPL type rating, only valid with the host airline, nowhere el
 

Not really 8ah.
Only during the course (which ends with the line training) is the MPL limited to the host airline. Thereafter, if you change from airline, you have to do a airline conversion course. But this applies to a normal CPL or ATPL as well. If i'm right the Multi crew Pilot License course, as offered by true blue aviation academy, is an integrated ATP course. So like any other integrated course, you're limited to the FTO and in this case, the airline.
One more thing: i'm interested in the MPL because i'm a Line Training Captain myself and i've experienced that MPL cadets perform well above standard during the line-training. So i wonder where this will lead to.

This looks like a plant to me;

The original poster firsts posts the website then later on says:

Really?

How many MPL candiates are there out there? Only really those trained by Sterling, who were pre-selected anyhow, look what happened to them...

Trying to blow MPL's trumpet because you have an interest in MPL training by any chance?

Sorry for being ignorant, but could someone please explain how MPL would differ from the more traditional routes?

What is the reason for above?

And if you were to move airlines, how easy and how long would it take to do a conversion course? Is it normal practice to pay for it out of your own pocket or would your new employer foot the bill?

A few questions in one:
There are more MPL candidates flying around. MPL as a name is new (2006) but as a concept it's nothing new. Look at FTO's like KLM, Lufthansa etc..so not only those from Sterling. And believe me, i fly with them so i can tell.
The MPL pilots from Sterling were fired together with other pilots as part of a reform plan. So i don't think it's fair to say that it's just the MPL candidates.

Yes, i do have an interest in MPL training. Because as i said earlier:The MPL is Competency based and very effective if implemented right. But it definitely has a downside because of the lack of knowledge (about the subject) or greed (by organisations who just want to earn money).

More Questions Than Answers
 

SMTP
Or the various militaries...and there's still a reduction in actual flight hours between MPL and those airline FTO's old programs.



Are you saying CPL/IR's and frozen ATPL's perform below the LOFT standards? Have you met any fATPL's and CPL/IR's that perform well-above the standard? If you're saying that MPL candidates are superior overall, what's your basis for comparison? MPL v 250hr fATPL? MPL v 2500 hr CPL/IR?

Some excellent points about the program. But the devil is in the details, and its being implemented in many places without any of the controls that were incorporated in the programs that spawned the idea.

While there's a selection process, is it honestly as rigorous as a military UPT or the old national carrier selection processes? Or has the bar been set lower to accomodate the larger numbers of crew members required?

And what about washout rates? A fair number of those that made the selection under those old programs got the boot, and never actually finished. Don't have any firm data (and the private FTO's marketing departments probably won't want to make it available), but I suspect that FTO's and even sponsored FTO programs may not be as quick to say good-bye to their revenue streams.

The MPL seems to be one of those things that will be difficult to get established and accepted. And the fact remains that most training captains are still extremely skeptical towards it. Posting on a site like this is one of the ways to gradually get this accepted as an alternative route to the right hand seat. As someone has already said, the margins for training providers are far greater for simulator training compared to actual flight time, so of course this is attractive to some training organizations.

It should be no surprise that students trained solely on a simulator (virtually) are in the short term better prepared for airline ops. The argument usually banded about is the lack of decision making and airmanship skills that result from the lack of proper airtime, and what happens when the systems fail?

For me the MPL will be the difference between 'true aviators' who started in a light aircraft and fly for the fun of it as well as the job, and despite big jets at work, will have a share is a light aircraft because they love it, and the others who see the airline pilot as a job bringing a reasonable status and salary. A sentimental view perhaps.

Another view that we can all sympathize with is, of course, that flying training is too expansive, and any way of getting to where you want to be with more in the bank at the end (or less of a loan) can not be bad.

What do you think?

Not Quite the Same Upgrade
 

After completing, at your own expense, the additional flying required for a CPL/IR. And then, there's the little matter of implementation again.

You'll still have to comply with the ATP requirements for the upgrade. While 1400 of those hours may be spent in the RHS of big iron, where are those 500 hours XC PIC, etc. coming from? How many varied definitions of implementation for "PIC under supervision" will be found around the world and in the various operators?

Undoubtedly the high sim time on specific equipment makes for highly proficient aircraft operators. But does a 1600 TT flight crew (1500 LHS + 100 RHS) really have enough aviation experience?

tbavprof,:
Is there a good reason for gaining CPL/IR after the MPL? Unless you want to get back flying around in piston aircraft. Again the idea of MPL is major aviation not general aviation.

500 hours XC PIC? Please go through JAR-FCL 1.280 and make sure you have the right amendment included. The requirements are stated very clearly. The exact definition of PICUS is also stated.
So as aviatiorisu says you bet. and that's exactly what MPL is all about. It's not a licence for GA.

Compared to?

No, i'm not saying CPL/IR's perform below standards. I'm saying that all MPL cadets i came through performed above standard. And off course a lot of CPL/IR's perform above standard as well. I compare two cadets who just finished an integrated flighttraining and got a type-rating (so about 350 TT). Nothing more, nothing less.

You're right. And to my idea that's one of the advantages of MPL. You NEED a JAR-OPS 1-operator upfront to even think about starting. I would say that this licence has lower finacial risks for the cadets and to be honest i've seen students go through alot of unnecessary sh*t to gain that RHS and to me that's not fair at all because the only ones profitting are the malafide fto's.
And there are still some disadvantages in MPL (as in everything) but that's why it's so important to implement it right.

Seems to be yet more ignorance of the MPL. There is still a fair amount of actual flying in light aircraft involved before concentrating on simulators later in the course.

If this were true - highly unlikely - anyone who allows personal feelings to intrude onto the flightdeck does not deserve to be there.

They say on their web-site that they are training pilots for easyJet. Not very likely at the moment!

TRUE (???) BLUE Aviation Academy
 

MPL holders perform better in line training than ATPL holders?!
how shocking...

if you spend a year in a jet sim rather than 4 - 5 weeks, clearly you're going to be more familiar with it. the question is - how do they compare after a year of line flying?

Hopefully no difference at all. But i still like the idea of learning in a small plane, on your own about half of the time, with the occasional brown underpants moment to show you that you don’t know it all...

apart from anything, its a lot more fun than flying a sim.