L3 Harris, the final shafting
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: LGW
Posts: 1,049
guy_incognito
Same thoughts again, it puts a person who can not really fly in the flight deck. They have no feel for stalls ( Airbus pax allready dead in a stall ) cross winds, landing single engine ops outside a sim and if the skipper has a heart attack they are in charge. Skippers face day after day with these types and end up single pilot on anything other than calm cavok 10,000ft runways. And even that is a challenge to many. The MPL is dangerous. Pilots need a bedrock of being able to fly to fall back on for the day the Airbus doesn’t do what it’s supposed to.
Same thoughts again, it puts a person who can not really fly in the flight deck. They have no feel for stalls ( Airbus pax allready dead in a stall ) cross winds, landing single engine ops outside a sim and if the skipper has a heart attack they are in charge. Skippers face day after day with these types and end up single pilot on anything other than calm cavok 10,000ft runways. And even that is a challenge to many. The MPL is dangerous. Pilots need a bedrock of being able to fly to fall back on for the day the Airbus doesn’t do what it’s supposed to.
de minimus non curat lex
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,343
ezydriver
I would suggest that it depends to a large extent on the simulator type your cadets carried out their 120 hours of initial multi crew training. I would hazard a guess and say they did their training on an A.320 simulator?
My experience is with MPL students on a B.737-800 simulator.
The feedback from airlines with these cadets is not the unfortunate experience you describe.
Having watched the ITV series where EZY were carrying out base training etc, what you say comes as no surprise. Flying a stable approach on final did in some cases seem to be somewhat of a challenge !
Aer Lingus MPL cadets at FTE (until March) carried out their 120 hours on the B737-800 and not the A.320
As for 100 hours P1 on light ac, I am not entirely convinced. There is sufficient light ac flying on the MPL course to teach “the basics”: select the appropriate ATTITUDE and Trim. That does need to be taught properly, otherwise there is no solid foundation to build on.
It is possible that where your particular experiences all stem from: indifferent initial basic training.
Given the C-19 implosion the MPL scheme with it previous one sided financial arrangements is probably a dead duck anyway.
Your wish is granted.....
I would suggest that it depends to a large extent on the simulator type your cadets carried out their 120 hours of initial multi crew training. I would hazard a guess and say they did their training on an A.320 simulator?
My experience is with MPL students on a B.737-800 simulator.
The feedback from airlines with these cadets is not the unfortunate experience you describe.
Having watched the ITV series where EZY were carrying out base training etc, what you say comes as no surprise. Flying a stable approach on final did in some cases seem to be somewhat of a challenge !
Aer Lingus MPL cadets at FTE (until March) carried out their 120 hours on the B737-800 and not the A.320
As for 100 hours P1 on light ac, I am not entirely convinced. There is sufficient light ac flying on the MPL course to teach “the basics”: select the appropriate ATTITUDE and Trim. That does need to be taught properly, otherwise there is no solid foundation to build on.
It is possible that where your particular experiences all stem from: indifferent initial basic training.
Given the C-19 implosion the MPL scheme with it previous one sided financial arrangements is probably a dead duck anyway.
Your wish is granted.....
Last edited by parkfell; 15th Nov 2020 at 13:42. Reason: Dead 🦆 comment
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 549
The MPL was a con trick to save money and cut corners and put a body into the rhs with the bare minimum of training. Not the fault of the cadets themselves. However, an arrangement between unscrupulous ATOs, compliant regulators and although not blameless but naive airlines. I feel very sorry for the cadets involved. Massive bills and no jobs.
de minimus non curat lex
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,343
Originally Posted by olster
......put a body into the rhs with the bare minimum of training........
for ab-initio training so that trainees are properly prepared for the RHS?
Undoubtedly there are many ways “to skin the cat”.....
de minimus non curat lex
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,343
.....that could fetch $1 billion. No final decision made, and they may opt to keep the unit according to people familiar with the matter.......
Private Equity Firms are those apparently interested......make a quick buck and then sell on?
Private Equity Firms are those apparently interested......make a quick buck and then sell on?
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: London
Posts: 3
It is beyond doubt that L3 has not generally served its customers or the industry well - it has caused huge harm. But some of the criticism on this thread relating to the MPL and their handling of it is not well founded. The MPL was not designed by L3, it was designed by airline personnel, one in particular, approved by the CAA, and is only offered under the auspices of a sponsoring airline. L3 and the several other players (big and small) who offer training for this qualification only do so when an airline requests it and 'sponsors' it. If people don't like it (and I understand some of the arguments why people might not), you should direct your criticism at the airlines and the regulator.
Regards L3's handling of its own MPL cadets, other people have asked the question on this thread, and nobody has satisfactorily answered it: what else should they have done? The people who contracted these cadets, and then left them high and dry, are not L3 employees...
Regards L3's handling of its own MPL cadets, other people have asked the question on this thread, and nobody has satisfactorily answered it: what else should they have done? The people who contracted these cadets, and then left them high and dry, are not L3 employees...
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 549
You make some valid points JJ. I think the ethical route would be to do a deal with the regulator and convert all mpls into atpl with no extra cost to the individual. I realise that is a romantic vision of a hard corporate business model and could be construed as naive. However, the cadets with I agree the cooperation of the regulator and certain airlines have been royally shafted.
cheers
cheers
de minimus non curat lex
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,343
I believe FTE offered their Flybe MPL students a ‘conversion’ to fATPL at favourable rates.
As has been pointed out these students were selected by the airline; in this case Flybe.The financial risk was with the student during the Jerez phase. The Exeter type rating & base training were funded by Flybe with I presume a ‘bonding scheme’.
The difference was that Flybe ceased trading on 5 March with C-19 impacting on passenger numbers.
EZY simply dumped their trainees***
Incidentally NATS also dumped their 128 (?) trainees as well. Now that was shortsighted.
***EDIT: Good news if CAT3C information is correct that EZY will complete the MPL training for licence issue.
As has been pointed out these students were selected by the airline; in this case Flybe.The financial risk was with the student during the Jerez phase. The Exeter type rating & base training were funded by Flybe with I presume a ‘bonding scheme’.
The difference was that Flybe ceased trading on 5 March with C-19 impacting on passenger numbers.
EZY simply dumped their trainees***
Incidentally NATS also dumped their 128 (?) trainees as well. Now that was shortsighted.
***EDIT: Good news if CAT3C information is correct that EZY will complete the MPL training for licence issue.
Last edited by parkfell; 23rd Nov 2020 at 22:22. Reason: ***EDIT
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: In the SIM
Posts: 966
Are people aware that the current MPL EJ cadets in their, intermediate and advanced training are going to finish the course and EJ have agreed to do their base training?
This has been the result of a number of individuals at L3H working hard negotiating with the CAA and EJ to resolve the issues to which they have been successful.
This has been the result of a number of individuals at L3H working hard negotiating with the CAA and EJ to resolve the issues to which they have been successful.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: In the SIM
Posts: 966
Ladies & Gentleman,
I had the pleasure of working with some on these cadets last year in the first part of their SIM phase and saw some of them last week, back to finish their intermediate SIM phase with the advanced phase imminent.
I found the comments made about flying ability with MPL cadets interesting. I have had first hand experience of MCC/JOC and MPL cadets and seen various levels of ability in both areas and generally I must admit I have been very impressed with some of these MPL guys & gals and their ability to fly the aircraft manually. In the MPL basic SIM phase the cadets as a 3 crew variation do 64 hours in the SIM with no AP/ATHR or FD which is concluded with a competency check, very similar to an IR skill test. I think around 98% of the cadets (at their peak) I have seen have flown the aircraft far better than any line pilot I have ever seen in my Airbus line flying career! The feedback I have had from my friends who work in the training department at EZY has been very positive.
I was very pleased to see these cadets back and continuing with their training, and I know they are very grateful for what some of the instructors at L3H and EJ have done for them. Of course the next challenge will be to secure a position. I guess we can only hope that now, not only for MPL, but for all our less experienced colleagues in the flying world, that with the positive news of a vaccine for C-19, that the industry bounces back a lot quicker then expected. I am optimistic for the future.
I wish all our up and coming pilots all the best in the coming months.
I had the pleasure of working with some on these cadets last year in the first part of their SIM phase and saw some of them last week, back to finish their intermediate SIM phase with the advanced phase imminent.
I found the comments made about flying ability with MPL cadets interesting. I have had first hand experience of MCC/JOC and MPL cadets and seen various levels of ability in both areas and generally I must admit I have been very impressed with some of these MPL guys & gals and their ability to fly the aircraft manually. In the MPL basic SIM phase the cadets as a 3 crew variation do 64 hours in the SIM with no AP/ATHR or FD which is concluded with a competency check, very similar to an IR skill test. I think around 98% of the cadets (at their peak) I have seen have flown the aircraft far better than any line pilot I have ever seen in my Airbus line flying career! The feedback I have had from my friends who work in the training department at EZY has been very positive.
I was very pleased to see these cadets back and continuing with their training, and I know they are very grateful for what some of the instructors at L3H and EJ have done for them. Of course the next challenge will be to secure a position. I guess we can only hope that now, not only for MPL, but for all our less experienced colleagues in the flying world, that with the positive news of a vaccine for C-19, that the industry bounces back a lot quicker then expected. I am optimistic for the future.
I wish all our up and coming pilots all the best in the coming months.
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Borders
Posts: 21
ezydriver
I've flown with the same guys as you have. If you gave me two cadets one day after another one of whom came through the traditional CPL/IR route and the other through the MPL, and nobody told me which was which, I doubt I'd be able to tell. You either accept the premise that it's safe to put cadets (of any background) in the RHS or you don't: that's up to you. The statistics simply don't support your argument that it is inherently dangerous though.
I've flown with the same guys as you have. If you gave me two cadets one day after another one of whom came through the traditional CPL/IR route and the other through the MPL, and nobody told me which was which, I doubt I'd be able to tell. You either accept the premise that it's safe to put cadets (of any background) in the RHS or you don't: that's up to you. The statistics simply don't support your argument that it is inherently dangerous though.
