Flybe MPL at Oxford (commences 1 September 2009)

[BillieBob]

There is one minor flaw to all this - according to the UK CAA, Oxford do NOT have approval for the MPL. I would strongly suggest that anyone thinking of entering into a contract with OAA for an MPL course checks with PLD at Gatwick before signing up.

[Alann]

Hi!

Where did you get that info from BillieBob?

[A Very Civil Pilot]

CAA standards document 31 lists OAA as approved to conduct JAR ATPL(A), CPL/IR(A), CPL(A), IR(A) ....etc. No mention of a Multi-Crew Pilot Licence. To be fair, no UK registered training organisation is approved for MPL, or so it seems.

[dartagnan]

they only school I know who has a MPL course is in Philippine, and they are not JAA.

this MPL, is another new method to attract wanabe who don't know how to fly a plane correctly.

Oxford in my point of view, is soon finshed! lack of cash!

[Lew747]

Just seen an add from 'Alpha Aviation' to the right who offer an MPL course with 40 sectors or something >>>>>

[Bealzebub]

However, a real issue is this;

1) They have a recruitment freeze.

2) They have a holding pool. Incidently it costs around £5,000 per year to be in the holding pool to remain current.

3) They will only start emptying the hold pool when the economy dictates.

4) The new MPL cadets will have to wait their turn in the hold pool.

So, for MPL cadets to go into a job, the economy has to pick up, flyBE start recruiting and the hold pool has to empty. All within the next 18 months.

1) May or may not be relevant to this particular scheme a year or more from now?

2) "Holding?" Nobody is held. You are free to go elsewhere as you wish. It might cost you £5000 a year. It costs them virtually nothing except maybe the price of a postage stamp.

3) The "pool" can be made larger or smaller or done away with completely as they see fit. There is absolutely no binding commitment one way or the other to anybody within it. Offering contracts of employment to anybody who has been previously interviewed and deemed suitable will only happen when each individual airline has a requirement. The wider economy might or might not have a bearing on the absolute requirement. Even then employment may be offered to previous applicants deemed suitable, or may be offered to brand new applicants.

4) Will they? I can find no stated requirement or any legal obligation to do that. This scheme is a structured scheme that operates at outset within one particular airlines training programme. If you actually stop and think about it, applying that logic, no MPL student would ever realistically be able to gain employment within an airline so long as there were suitably qualified applicants within this "pool". Clearly that is not the stated aim or in any part a requirement of this particular programme. The money that has been advanced to these students is recovered from their employment within that company. Given the financial outlay who do you think they will actually employ first?

So, for MPL cadets to go into a job, the economy has to pick up, flyBE start recruiting and the hold pool has to empty. All within the next 18 months.

No it doesn't. No they don't and no it doesn't.

[A and C]

At 250 hours and a fATPL the product of these establishments is only just scrapes the bottom line.

The magenta line kindergaten was bad enough but this............. what a load of bean counter bull the MPL is dragging the standards of pilot training into the gutter and is a disaster in the making.

I only hope that the industry gets wise before the MPL holders get to kill them selfs and the 180 or so punters that have to fly follow them around the sky

[gone_fishing]

A and C,

How does being an MPL make you dangerous? This is a genuine question - I'm someone who hopes to train in two years.

From what I can see (admittely from zero expirience) the MPL seems perfect for airline sponsorship schemes when an airline wants a cadet trained to their exact requirements. I don't see it replacing the ATPL - but another route. An MPL, again from what I've seen, is just less time spent in a simple SEP aircraft and more time spent in complex aircraft and then alot of time in simulators flying pretty much like they will be when they're in the RHS. They'll be taught the company SOPs from the beginning and CRM should be very good as MCC is almost built into the entire course. They should be very competent in handling airliners as they've spent most of their training doing this. Do they not have to meet the same standards for a type rating that an ATPL does? From what I can see, isn't this just a very effective way of training those airline cadets to the exact requirements of an airline?

Don't get me wrong, I think there are problems with it. It's perfect for those people who just see flying as a way of looking good, showing off and for a job that will impress Daddy's friends. But that is certainly not everyone. And from what I can see, there are many ATPLs, young and old, who don't seem to give a damn about the flying and just care about the money or lifestyle, or whatever. I read a post recently by someone who is in his forties and flies for BA. He seemed to be jumping at the chance for getting redundancy and, presumably, giving it all up whereas many are absolutely desperate for a job, let alone one for BA.

I don't want to fly for the money or for the social credit - I want to fly because I love flying and aslong as I can live a half decent life off my wage - I'm happy. For me the MPL presents some issues. I plan to do the PPL before I start my main training and this doesn't seem to wash down well with the airline schemes. Which would mean I'd have to do all the differences training for single pilot, SEP operations (as I'd like to bimble above during my days off). Also, I wouldn't feel comfortable taking up such a scheme unless it was through an airline with "guaranteed" employment at the end. And, of course, such schemes I suspect would be fierce in competition.

An MPL is ovbiously different, but what makes you say that it is dangerous, or maybe, better worded, any more dangerous than a frozen ATPL straight out of an intergrated or modular course?

[EK4457]

Bealzebub

Nil points for clear and concise communication. I've seen software licensing agreements which read better than that.

I think you are trying to say that my post is wrong. If so, by definintion you are implying that flyBE will recruit these guys regardless of prevailing recruitment policy, economic conditions and size of holding pool. If so, we'll have to disagree on that.

In particular;

1) This was my point. Is it wise to spent £71,000 to get a job with a company which is not recuriting? They might. They might not. But you are simply hoping for the best.

2) Eh? Not sure an official definition of 'holding pool' is required here. Especialy when I think we agree. What is your point?

3) You got me. Not a clue what you are getting at. Particularly since my comment is a fairly obvious statement of common sense.

4) I think you are trying to say that they will sneak them to the front because they are 'structured' students.

The problem here is that flyBE have more mentored schemes at the minute than soft mick. Loads of the holdpoolers are there via structured schemes. I can see no special status for MPLs. If you were just finishing a MAPS at FTE for example, you'd be well chuffed to hear that the MPLs have priority.

Indeed, if you apply your logic in a devils advocate (pun inteded) way, you will be less in a rush to employ those who are bound to work for you. Whatever you think about this point, it is at least a serious consideration.

In a nutshell, my point was to say its a lot of cash for the possability of job with a company who are not recruiting, during a recession, with a large holdpool via a license which is still unproven.

If you disagree, you didn't half make a dog's dinner out of it.

EK

[Bealzebub]

I am sure as you get older you will understand.

Let me put it even more simply for you.

"Holding pool," simply means thank you for the attending the interview and if a suitable vacancy occurs in the near future we will re-consider your application. It doesn't mean you are next. There is no contract in existence, and if you wish to find employment elsewhere that is fine. Nobody cares what it costs you (except you of course,) to keep your licence current.

This scheme (MPL) is a structured scheme that in order to be successful does require some significant degree of commitment on the part of the participating airline. Common sense should be telling you that these MPL pilots are most definetaly going to be a priority project. They will have been trained with a partial loan from the employing airline that is only recovered from the proceeds of that employment. These MPL pilots will have been trained in accordance with the specific requirements of the participant airline.

These are pilots being fast tracked into a career with the MPL participating airline. They are not going to wait for any of your "hold pools" to empty, or economies to improve. These pilots are not being "sneaked in", they are being fast tracked. Your problem is believing that a reserve pool of possible candidates has any other meaning than "maybe". Nobody, but nobody cares who might or might not be "chuffed". This is all about business, and in this case a new business opportunity. Whether it is successful at the end of the day remains to be seen. However MPL or 250 hour candidate means little in meaningful flying experience terms. The tailored aspects of the training though, will have a particular appeal to the participating airline.

I don't think you had any problem understanding my 4 simple replies to your own 4 bullet points. I think your problem was the common one of not wanting to understand them. No doubt borne out of reaction to your usual reading matter, software licensing agreements?

[A and C]

Gone fishing

A pilot who has done next to no solo flying simply has not got enough experience to handle a jet airliner, the guys from the integrated course have enough trouble doing so.

How the hell do you think that this beancounter derived couse is going to equipe you to fly on a good high workload day in the UK let alone a dirty night in the Greek islands? You will simply not have enough real flying decision experiance to fall back on.

In the USA most FO's have 1500-2000 hours flying in turboprops before getting into a jet so why in a more demanding enviroment of Europe are we looking at putting next to zero hour pilots in the right seat of an airliner?

The answer is money ...............and the airlines will pay in terms of a rising inccident/accident rate. Only then will the insurance company's set the minimum hour requirement for pilots and those who are in the second wave of MPL training will find them selfs with an MPL and no chance of a job and unable to even fly for fun because they won't even get a PPL out of this.

[Aerospace101]

A pilot who has done next to no solo flying simply has not got enough experience to handle a jet airliner, the guys from the integrated course have enough trouble doing so.

How does flying a PA28 solo relate to flying a jet transport aircraft in a multi crew environment?

IGNORANCE!!!!!!!

[jez d]

There is one minor flaw to all this - according to the UK CAA, Oxford do NOT have approval for the MPL. I would strongly suggest that anyone thinking of entering into a contract with OAA for an MPL course checks with PLD at Gatwick before signing up.

I think you'll find that Doc 31 hasn't been updated since FTE and OAA got their MPL approvals.

Regards, jez

[zerosum69]

of course flying a pa28 relates to flying a jet. i think the important things are learning self reliance and gaining confidence in yourself in making good decisions, getting yourself out of trouble and learning where your limits are. learning SOPs is important but airmanship is what saves your ass when the SOPs let you down.

[clanger32]

Purely playing devils advocate - and fully accepting that there is no substitute for experience - but WHO is better equipped to fly a MPA jet aircraft straight from their training - someone with 100 hours on a simple, single engine PA28 or similar, or someone who has spent that same 100 hours operating the aircraft they eventually fly, albeit simulated? The differences are absolutely ridiculously enormous. I would actually say that 100 hours PA28 would not equip you in any shape or form for the rigours of flying a commercial transport aircraft. [I caveat this with my only experience of the latter being my 50 or so hours in 737 sim on MCC/JOC]

I have no doubt whatsoever that someone with 1500TT moving to a jet would be significantly safer than any variety of 200hr newbie, but that's not on the menu in JAA land, so the question is whether SEP hours are worth a shiny fig when it comes to operating a complex Multi pilot aircraft.

From my experience - confidence in yourself and knowledge of the limits is more about knowing your aircraft than it is yourself. I would trust someone with 200 hours PA34 (bit more complex than PA28) for example, more than I'd trust an airline captain with 5000 hours, but no PA34 time if I had to be flown somewhere in a Seneca.
I doubt even Chuck Yeager would get into a brand new aircraft type and start throwing it around first flight....

[A and C]

Ignor.........What!

Areospace101

Let me guess, five years flying about Northern Europe in the Q400 as FO and with one company, type ratings .....................ONE.

I would think that 100+ flying a PA28 should teach airmanship, flight planning, weather appriciation, Situational awareness & a bit of commercial sense as well (Planning the cheapest landings & fuel stops).
In short done correctly the hour building part of a modular fATPL is a very inportant part of what is called "airmanship". This is an atribute that is sadly lacking in the new "integrated" pilots who seen transfixed by the FMC and it's magenta line.

Any one who thinks that 100 hours in a simulator is a substitute for 100 hours of flying in command of a light aircraft is away with the faireys, the only way to learn to the basics is to do it for real, that way it is real and "flight freeze" is not avalable to get you out of trouble.

Zerosum 69 What wise words.

[P-T]

10 pence worth

I agree with Clangers sentiments (alright pal!! how are you?) in saying that I learnt more from the the 40hrs of JOC and MCC at OAA than I did of the other 200hrs I have on 152's, PA28's and PA34's at OAA.

I can see the need to get a basic understanding of the principles of flight and the equipment of VOR, NDB, ILS etc and the use of radios and generally an understanding of the aerial environment. But I think the MPL in principle is a variety good way of getting students line orientated prior to getting to the TR.

But like so many of the other posts, I also am slightly skeptical about the MPL, maybe its because its cheaper than the ATPL, Quicker than the ATPL and possibly more relevant that the ATPL. So basically I'm concerned that the MPL is going to undercut the ATPL and the way into the airline industry might change fundamentally. Aircrew in general are stubborn bastards and we don't like change. But I'm just slightly concerned that the skills and experience brought from an ATPL course rather than an MPL course will be lost.

I will standby for the barrage of abuse and opinions, of which you're all entitled to!

[gone_fishing]

A and C, fair enough. I see the point you are making and would not even pretend to have the background to argue against it. Thanks for your explanation. As I said, I expect any of my training will be the more traditional route, but nonetheless was still interested in the opportunities presented by such as scheme as the flybe one.

P-T, I don't think it will undercut or replace the ATPL for people going the self-funded route. I do believe, however, for those few airlines that offer sponsorship schemes or cadet programmes, that the MPL will (if successful) most likely replace the ATPL as it provides customised training exactly to the requirements of the airline.

[A and C]

Gone Fishing

Another thing to keep in mind is the volitilty of the airline business, over the years I have worked for seven airline companys (that is just for flying) two have gone bust and another two are more or less out of business.

If I had been a low time MPL holder my chances of re-employment would not have been good simpley because the training would have been so "customised" for one company.

Airlines are funny things when it comes to SOP's in one airline the pilot who flys the approach hands over control at decision Alt and the other guy lands the aircraft ( no auto throttle disconecting permitted) as I say "nout as strange as airlines"! It is that sort of thing that is going to limmit the employment prospects of MPL holders.

[BillieBob]

I think you'll find that Doc 31 hasn't been updated since FTE and OAA got their MPL approvals.

The information did not come from Doc 31 but from a PLD employee who flies at our club.

It matters not whether you believe it, a simple call to the CAA before signing up for the course will confirm the truth or otherwise of the allegation. A small price to pay, I would have thought. Alternatively, you could ask for sight of OAA's approval certificate.