Parc Mcc
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Went to met and found it good. The whole multi crew thing is a bit alien at first, and it was only really when I started flying multi crew that I realised they taught a lot of very relevant stuff.
Can be an emotive argument but IMHO the MCC is a box ticking exercise. You will gain little from doing it an a fancy sim ( and Oxfords isn't a proper 737 sim it is an FNPT2, much the same as Met have a king air FNPT2). Get it done as cheaply as possible. There are few ways to save money in flight training - this is the simplest one. No one cares what you did your MCC in.
Can be an emotive argument but IMHO the MCC is a box ticking exercise. You will gain little from doing it an a fancy sim ( and Oxfords isn't a proper 737 sim it is an FNPT2, much the same as Met have a king air FNPT2). Get it done as cheaply as possible. There are few ways to save money in flight training - this is the simplest one. No one cares what you did your MCC in.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: ask crewing
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably not classed as recent, but I completed my MCC at parc last Summer and found them very prosessional. They use a real B737-200 sim.
Yes its has clocks rather than glass, but the benefit of that is coming from your IR you will feel right at home.
Also the visuals can be put to same by a home PC, but then you're not exaclty there to enjoy the view (that can wait a few months)
The instructors are (or at least were) all line trainers on type with Aer Lingus, Ryanair etc, so know what they're talking about.
Finally in response to the previous post, yes, to a certain extent, the MCC is one last tick in a box. However, I took the view that the MCC is preparation for sim checks and indeed type training, whether on a 737 or not.
But if that's not enough just think of the pleasure you'll get from flying a OEI ILS to a greaser of a landing
(PS i'm not affiliated with parc in any way.)
Yes its has clocks rather than glass, but the benefit of that is coming from your IR you will feel right at home.
Also the visuals can be put to same by a home PC, but then you're not exaclty there to enjoy the view (that can wait a few months)
The instructors are (or at least were) all line trainers on type with Aer Lingus, Ryanair etc, so know what they're talking about.
Finally in response to the previous post, yes, to a certain extent, the MCC is one last tick in a box. However, I took the view that the MCC is preparation for sim checks and indeed type training, whether on a 737 or not.
But if that's not enough just think of the pleasure you'll get from flying a OEI ILS to a greaser of a landing
(PS i'm not affiliated with parc in any way.)
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spoke to a friend yesterday who put his success in a Jet2 sim ride down to the fact he had completed his MCC on a heavy jet (the L1011). Others on the same selection day had used a small turboprop and not passed. There is a difference!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I refuse to believe that successs in a 737 sim ride is down to having done an MCC in a tristar. They are completely different aircraft. Perhaps your mate was just better than the others. You spend the vast majority of time on an MCC adjusting to the multi crew environment. There is very little time to spend learning to fly heavy jets. If it was that easy why bother with type ratings?
Get a basic MCC then do a sim sesson or two on a jet sim dedicated to an airline assessment profile.
I know of a few guys in the last 6 months who have gone from MCC at Met/W'hampton/M'flight straight into a job. Not one thinks a jet sim is advantageous. Indeed most low hours guys are kidding themselves if they think a jet job is waiting for them so why not train on a TP sim?
Get a basic MCC then do a sim sesson or two on a jet sim dedicated to an airline assessment profile.
I know of a few guys in the last 6 months who have gone from MCC at Met/W'hampton/M'flight straight into a job. Not one thinks a jet sim is advantageous. Indeed most low hours guys are kidding themselves if they think a jet job is waiting for them so why not train on a TP sim?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: northumbria (ideally)
Age: 45
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MCC on a proper sim is worth it.
Definetely recommend using a raw data sim, improves your flying no end and its 20hrs of great flying experience.
good luck
Definetely recommend using a raw data sim, improves your flying no end and its 20hrs of great flying experience.
good luck
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silver
You have 5 hours of adjusting to heavy jets in an MCC, that is why the course is 5 hours shorter if flown in conjunction with a type rating! That is good preparation for flying any jet sim ride. Not sure what his sim ride was on, but I would certainly say that my small amount of time in a 767 simulator was not that different to fly than a 1011 (with direct lift control off of course!), and helped me come to terms with it quickly on the MCC.
We are both instructors, so fly very much by the basics of power and attitude, so all aircraft of comparable performance become much more similar. One difference he felt was the speed and fluency of procedures he learnt in MCC - the whole point of MCC, so comprising 15 hours practice! Those procedures are related to company SOPs and the departure or arrival being flown, not type-specific. However they are different in a jet - if only because of the pace.
You have 5 hours of adjusting to heavy jets in an MCC, that is why the course is 5 hours shorter if flown in conjunction with a type rating! That is good preparation for flying any jet sim ride. Not sure what his sim ride was on, but I would certainly say that my small amount of time in a 767 simulator was not that different to fly than a 1011 (with direct lift control off of course!), and helped me come to terms with it quickly on the MCC.
We are both instructors, so fly very much by the basics of power and attitude, so all aircraft of comparable performance become much more similar. One difference he felt was the speed and fluency of procedures he learnt in MCC - the whole point of MCC, so comprising 15 hours practice! Those procedures are related to company SOPs and the departure or arrival being flown, not type-specific. However they are different in a jet - if only because of the pace.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bristol U.K.
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet MCC
Have you flown many jets silverknapper?
Just about all jets fly the same, they are designed to be similar so that line crews will not have much trouble transitioning to different types.
If you can fly a B727 then apart from assymetric problems on the bigger twins, you should be able to cope with anything else.
The reason that the L1011 makes such a good trainer for MCC is the size of the flight deck and the ability to automate moste of the 3rd crew members duty.
Students completing their course on the Tristar normally have no difficulty with the B727 or the B747 (all 3 in the same building).
The B727 is used by many airlines for sim assesment because of the low cost and availability as is the BAC 1-11 at Cranebank.
I know that this subject has been done to death, but you do learn a lot about jet handling using a proper simulator.
Yes I do have a vested interest as I teach MCC on the L1011, but I can honestly say that it is well worth anybody spending a couple of hundred more to get that experience in a 'proper' sim.
As far as it being easy, ask someone who has jumped into a jet for the first time, they would be lucky to keep it right side up, but it only takes a few hours to get the hang of it.
The reason that a type rating takes so long (40 hours) is to cover all of the system failures. You have very little time to explore the handling qualities.
Just about all jets fly the same, they are designed to be similar so that line crews will not have much trouble transitioning to different types.
If you can fly a B727 then apart from assymetric problems on the bigger twins, you should be able to cope with anything else.
The reason that the L1011 makes such a good trainer for MCC is the size of the flight deck and the ability to automate moste of the 3rd crew members duty.
Students completing their course on the Tristar normally have no difficulty with the B727 or the B747 (all 3 in the same building).
The B727 is used by many airlines for sim assesment because of the low cost and availability as is the BAC 1-11 at Cranebank.
I know that this subject has been done to death, but you do learn a lot about jet handling using a proper simulator.
Yes I do have a vested interest as I teach MCC on the L1011, but I can honestly say that it is well worth anybody spending a couple of hundred more to get that experience in a 'proper' sim.
As far as it being easy, ask someone who has jumped into a jet for the first time, they would be lucky to keep it right side up, but it only takes a few hours to get the hang of it.
The reason that a type rating takes so long (40 hours) is to cover all of the system failures. You have very little time to explore the handling qualities.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Westward TV
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh pur-lease!
To say that an MCC done in a jet sim is the benchmark that judges how someone performs is complete paap.
How much sleep you had, how stressful the drive to the centre, the row you had with your wife/husband before setting off, how hungry you are. These are much more relevent. How good your IR training was, how current your skills are, remembering the correct entry to an NDB hold. Probably more important than whether you have flown a TP or Jet sim with some generic SOP's.
If some guy you know did a jet sim and has got a job, then that's great. Methinks it's got something to do with him being a good pilot.
To say that an MCC done in a jet sim is the benchmark that judges how someone performs is complete paap.
How much sleep you had, how stressful the drive to the centre, the row you had with your wife/husband before setting off, how hungry you are. These are much more relevent. How good your IR training was, how current your skills are, remembering the correct entry to an NDB hold. Probably more important than whether you have flown a TP or Jet sim with some generic SOP's.
If some guy you know did a jet sim and has got a job, then that's great. Methinks it's got something to do with him being a good pilot.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: BFS
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tristar1
Why has no one realised this before? Here are airlines wasting millions on type ratings each year. All they had to do was go to you for an MCC and all their troubles would be over. I'm surprised no one has realised this before now. I wonder when this will click at the CAA. Don't go to flight safety for your 737 ng type rating - go to tristar1.
And not because you make more money if more people come to you?
Or alternatively go on a sim where there is no need to automate the 3rd crew member because there isn't one. After all we all fly 2 crew these days.
Why has no one realised this before? Here are airlines wasting millions on type ratings each year. All they had to do was go to you for an MCC and all their troubles would be over. I'm surprised no one has realised this before now. I wonder when this will click at the CAA. Don't go to flight safety for your 737 ng type rating - go to tristar1.
The reason that the L1011 makes such a good trainer for MCC is the size of the flight deck
and the ability to automate moste of the 3rd crew members duty.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silverknapper
I thought we were having a sensible discussion here, not going off on one completely, and each wildly exagerating what the other says. The logical conclusion of your exageration is that anyone who has an MCC and passes a sim ride needs no type rating at all. You also completely ignore his explanation of the type rating course, and I suspect he knows rather more than you do about the issue.
Let's keep this helpful, instead of defending entrenched positions!
By the way the L1011 sim Tristar refers to is extremely busy, so I don't think he needs any advertising.
I thought we were having a sensible discussion here, not going off on one completely, and each wildly exagerating what the other says. The logical conclusion of your exageration is that anyone who has an MCC and passes a sim ride needs no type rating at all. You also completely ignore his explanation of the type rating course, and I suspect he knows rather more than you do about the issue.
Let's keep this helpful, instead of defending entrenched positions!
By the way the L1011 sim Tristar refers to is extremely busy, so I don't think he needs any advertising.
From the TRTO's point of view there is no discernible difference between those trainees who have completed the MCC course on a jet sim/fnpt and those who have used a turboprop, whether in MCC skills or aircraft handling. However, when it comes to comparing those who have been taught by current airline pilots and those who have not, the difference is striking.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My coments are simple -the MCC is the nicest part of a frozen ATPL licence - right.
After the stress of passing the dreaded IR test you want to end the whole thing off on a good note - right. So if it where all a 'big game' and you got a choice of 'playing' on some silly torbo prop thingy ma bob or a big jet engine aeroplane like a B737 or Tristar, what would you choose - I know what I would - respecting the fact that it is not a game!
Also, put yourself in a potential airline recruiters boots - try to imagine how they see things - pretend you are the recruiter, and take a good look at yourself and your CV, and then you should make the right choice
After the stress of passing the dreaded IR test you want to end the whole thing off on a good note - right. So if it where all a 'big game' and you got a choice of 'playing' on some silly torbo prop thingy ma bob or a big jet engine aeroplane like a B737 or Tristar, what would you choose - I know what I would - respecting the fact that it is not a game!
Also, put yourself in a potential airline recruiters boots - try to imagine how they see things - pretend you are the recruiter, and take a good look at yourself and your CV, and then you should make the right choice
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But is the recruiter acting for a TP or a jet airline?
Surely the onus of the MCC is on the crew interaction element. You can spend the saving on some dedicated sim time tailored to your target airline?
I'm going to be struggling for cash by that stage anyway
LF
Surely the onus of the MCC is on the crew interaction element. You can spend the saving on some dedicated sim time tailored to your target airline?
I'm going to be struggling for cash by that stage anyway
LF
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bristol U.K.
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MCC
Silverknapper.
I do not know who you are, but you seem to have some pretty strong views.
I also suggest that you read my post more carefully before you attack me.
I did not say that an MCC course replaces a type rating, far from it.
What I did say was that 20 hours in a full motion jet sim will help you (if you have never operated a jet) when it comes time to do a type rating.
Type ratings are there to teach you how to handle abnormal operations on a particular type, not to teach you basic jet handling. Training Captains do not have time during a type rating to train you in the basics (which is why airlines prefer pilots to have at least 1500 hours preferably on larger twins etc.) If a training Captain has to spend 5 or 10 hours teaching you the basics then that leaves precious little time to complete the course in the 40 hours. If you fail or require more training then the training Captain will have to explain the budget and time over run to his (her) boss.
I do not have to advertise on here as I have more than enough work. I am currently training up 2 more MCC instructors because we are so busy. Also 90% of my students are referals from other students who have completed the course.
I also agree that a lot of it is to do with the instruction.
For your information I am a recently retired (early) check and training Captain. I have 14,000+ hours and have operated 4 different medium/ heavy jets both as F/O and Captain. I have also worked for 2 major airlines.
Thank you for sticking up for me Send Clowns.
I do not know who you are, but you seem to have some pretty strong views.
I also suggest that you read my post more carefully before you attack me.
I did not say that an MCC course replaces a type rating, far from it.
What I did say was that 20 hours in a full motion jet sim will help you (if you have never operated a jet) when it comes time to do a type rating.
Type ratings are there to teach you how to handle abnormal operations on a particular type, not to teach you basic jet handling. Training Captains do not have time during a type rating to train you in the basics (which is why airlines prefer pilots to have at least 1500 hours preferably on larger twins etc.) If a training Captain has to spend 5 or 10 hours teaching you the basics then that leaves precious little time to complete the course in the 40 hours. If you fail or require more training then the training Captain will have to explain the budget and time over run to his (her) boss.
I do not have to advertise on here as I have more than enough work. I am currently training up 2 more MCC instructors because we are so busy. Also 90% of my students are referals from other students who have completed the course.
I also agree that a lot of it is to do with the instruction.
For your information I am a recently retired (early) check and training Captain. I have 14,000+ hours and have operated 4 different medium/ heavy jets both as F/O and Captain. I have also worked for 2 major airlines.
Thank you for sticking up for me Send Clowns.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,805
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I re-emphasise Billie-Bob's and TRISTAR1's posts, particularly the latter. Get taught by people who know what they are talking about, not bull sh*tters, and contrary to Billie-Bob's opinion I would say, if you have a choice, do an MCC in a real jet simulator rather than a generic turboprop, the L1011 would be ideal. Its not much of an edge, but it's something, particularly if you have an interview combined with a sim check in a jet.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did mine at Oxford
The sim is a generic 737-400 which isnt too bad
but its made by Frasca so don't expect it to be Boeing standard.
Instruction is good there, but I hear the price can be shakey.
Maybe if you wait until the Seneca's all die once more they'll cut the price in half again
The sim is a generic 737-400 which isnt too bad
but its made by Frasca so don't expect it to be Boeing standard.
Instruction is good there, but I hear the price can be shakey.
Maybe if you wait until the Seneca's all die once more they'll cut the price in half again