I dont want to get into a row with WWW but the facts are:-

I have flown with ABC, BCAL, Mearsk, BEA, Brymon, and BA after the take-over plus various others, I dont have a RAF(I was a naughty boy) or any other gold plated pension. What I do have is plenty of experience and now in my present job I get pleasure from helping the new guys and girls and keeping my interest going.
Before thowing the s--t get some facts.

I have suddenly realised this thread is not supposed to be about me or WWW so this will be my last post on this thread.
I still think that the MPL will be the way to go, maybe!

It may be the way to go and in theory it has merit and in practice as Flybe seem to implementing it looks good.

Experience suggests caution though. If we could go back a decade in flying training then I think that would be a better quality of product delivered in a more fair fashion to Wannabes. MCC and SSTR's would not be part of their budget domain for one thing and SPIC hours of 'training' still wouldn't exist and all sorts of other post JAA wonders.

So am I right to be worried?

I'm due to pop out from the modular sausage machine in 2012. Could it be that I'm confronted with red tape..."MPL only"?

I can't be the only one concerned here? Flybe are one of the biggest recruiters of modular students.

:eek: :rolleyes: :{

Don't worry. MPL is a tiny part of the market and only one airline seems to be dipping its toe in the water. Not that there will be any jobs for any license holder as there may not be any airlines.

As Warren Buffet has termed it - this is an economic Pearl Harbour. After which the world changed forever.

Dave UK,

I'm not worried and I aim to come out of the same sausage machine 2012.

Unless anyone can correct me, I believe the Flybe/Cabair MPL course is the only authorised scheme to do this course in the UK.

I have not heard of OTT :E, FTE, CTC or other smaller mod schools applying to CAA to conduct this style of training.

Someone earlier mentioned that a pilot on MPL who attains 1500 hours "automatically" becomes ATPL. Please check this fact as I think this is the biggest myth about the MPL.

I have trawled through the interweb to find a definite explanation of this. If someone has it, please copy and paste.

I'll correct you. The MPL scheme is Flybe/FTE.

Oops - cheers groundloop :ok:

point of my message still the same though.

EWSD02 wrote "If you had an MPL now you would be on very low hrs and with virtually no chance of getting into another airline. That is putting aside the fact the other airlines would think twice about taking on an MPL in any case."

How is that different from an fATPL holder with low hours? Both are at the bottom of the proverbial dung heap. Does it really matter much which layer, number 7 or number 8, they are on? Both are at high risk of redundancy, and difficulty moving to job number 2.

There is so much rubbish going around about MPL. Perhaps if someone can answer these questions, it will help people assess the risks more effectively:

1. What are the requirements to upgrade from MPL to ATPL and how do they differ from upgrading a ME/CPL/IR/MCC to an ATPL?
2. What will it take for an MPL to upgrade to an ME/CPL/IR/MCC if they are made redundant before achieving an ATPL?

The first point goes towards establishing approximately how long the 'bastard child' period will last. One who is considering the risk of accepting a FlyBe or other MPL seat needs to know how long it will be until they can come in out of the cold with other potential employers.

The second point assumes an MPL would not be marketable to other airlines in the event of redundancy from the company that sponsored the MPL cadet. It goes toward putting a price tag on mitigating the unemployability risk in the early years before a full ATPL is achieved. Once the upgrade path and cost is known, then a cost benefit assessment can be done.

Adios,

you are right with many of your points regarding knowing a bit more before rubbishing it.

However with regards to EWSD02 "very low hours", what he meant is waaaay below the 250 that a fATPL person would have. Thats the differencehe was mentioning between the MPL and fATPL.

Wider implications?
 

In addition, the FATPL would have a fighting chance of air taxi/turbo prop/instruction/photography flying etc etc without having to convert or add ratings having only 70hrs SEP.

Aside from the considerations for the individual, I am also concerned about the affect the MPL could have on GA in the UK. If SEP/MEP flying is reduced or not required as part of the MPL, and the scheme catches on, will this not mean many flying clubs and schools could be in trouble? Great if you are a sim instructor, bad for everyone else in flying training.

As you all know, flying schools breed an interest in aviation feeding commerical flying schools and eventually the airlines.

Interested in your thoughts.

When I placed my first post "Is MPL Mickey Mouse" back in 2007, I found myself arguing FOR the MPL. I really wanted to do it. 12 months in Philippines, $70000 which equalled £38K at the time - straight into an A320 - Job Done!!!!

All I got back were posts from old-schoolers saying that with 70 hours, they would only let me operate the flaps! I argued against these derogatory with (in hindsight) naive comments:

I argued that you wouldn't pass the TR if you weren't good enough! So you pass it hence you can fly!-Whats the problem? What would an extra 180 hours give me? If I managed to fly an A320 after 70 hours and pass the TR, there would have been no need to do a 250hr fATPL! No expereince of command decisions?-I'll learn that in time, I'm not the captain just yet!

Now do my assumptions still hold true? If they do, then perhaps there is nothing wrong with the MPL and nothing "Mickey Mouse" about it.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

I'll be doing my fATPL the old fashioned mod way :)

More than almost anything else, the PPrune wannabe forums focus on thorough and thoughtful assessment of training related financial risk. It seems to me the dearth of accurate information about MPL makes it hard to perform this function well, to the detriment of the wannabes.

fATPL holders from the big four Integrated courses have about 225 hours with about 140-150 hours in airplanes and the rest in sims. fATPLs from modular training have about 250-260 hours with more in airplanes than the Integrated students get. Do you see a disadvantage in hiring for the Integrated graduate because he has 30-40 hours less in airplanes than the Modular graduate has? If there was such a disadvantage, the airlines that run cadet schemes would not be putting their cadets on Integrated courses.

MPLs are likely to have more total time than fATPL holders at license issue since a Type Rating is bolted on to MPL. They will probably have 70-80 hours in airplanes and the rest in multi-pilot sims.

So which is more relevant, solo SEP and MEP time or multicrew sim time? If money were no object and you had just completed fATPL training and were staring a 1-2 year job search in the face, which would you choose for maintaining currency if you could only do one?

A) 4 hours per month in a heavy jet simulator with another fATPL holder
or
B) 4 hours per month in a piston twin
or
C) 4 hours hours per month in a piston single

The above is a bit of a 'red herring' since you need to revalidate the MEP once a year and you can't do it in a jet sim, but it should provoke a bit more thought about the relative value of various types of flight time.

The wider implications RE: air taxi work, etc. are obviously to the fATPL holders advantage. So what? MPL means one thing, the student has been chosen as an airline cadet in advance. I don't think the pre-selected cadets at various FTOs around Europe give a toss about their chances of getting air taxi work.

If you think you could convince wannabes to self-sponsor an MPL through to Type Rating with no job offer, then a local FTO or TRTO needs you in their sales and marketing department! So far, I don't know of an FTO anywhere offering a self sponsored MPL. I don't think they ever will because wannabes are generally not daft enough to fund a Type Rating without a job offer. As far as the wannabe weighing the self-sponsored fATPL vs. airline mentored/sponsored MPL risk is concerned, this kind of brings us back to the questions I listed above.

WWW has the correct perspective in that one UK airline is testing the waters with MPL. Even if all of the EU airlines that have cadet programmes adopt MPL it will still only account for a small percentage of the market, probably less than 10%. As for his concern that there won't be any airlines left, well, let's just say I detect a Wee bit of hyperbole!

Outside the topic of this thread, there are other debates to hold, such as is MPL a good idea at all? What would happen if the Captain keels over with a heart attack during line training once the safety pilot is gone from the flight deck, etc.?

Personally, I feel that anybody, type rated or not, who holds a fATPL possesses enough knowledge of aircraft systems/flying techniques to be capable of taking over most aircraft and flying it to a successful landing, possibly through being talked down.

Most fATPL ground courses are structured around the Boeing/Airbus systems, including instruction to the use of the MCP, FMC, EICAS/EFIS etc etc

An fATPL holder behind a control column anywhere should be of a standard where they can use their intuition to create a safe result under dire circumstances.

Sure, they may not have '000s of hours of experience, but let's give them credit, they are all highly trained individuals who hold a Commercial Pilot's Licence and an Instrument Rating, with good quality theory to back it up.

Only because we are so used to hearing the term has it lost its appreciation somewhat...

Excuse me! There are plenty of wannabes who do this.

Yes, there may be, but, the EASA/JAA MPL course requires that an airline has direct involvement in the training, consequently there will be no standalone MPL courses on offer in the EU.

Well, 5 years down the line. How is MPL impacting flight training from a recruitment point of view?

Imelda's shoes!!!