MPL – We told you so…

[The Sandman]

You simply cannot escape the fact that an airliner, despite what the average SLF is made to think, is in fact a big complicated aeroplane that operates in a hostile environment and is at the mercy of the whims of nature at times. You still needs pilots who can fly the thing. Otherwise all you would need is for the senior cabin crew member to type in the destination and push the big green button marked GO!

I think the above is a quite relevant quote - and eventually that said scenario will indeed be the case, but as today the technology does not afford the manufacturers (Sperry, Honeywell, etc...) the impregnability they require, you will always need a pilot to pin the blame on - not to be too blunt... The more experience the better obviously, but not to say that focussed training is a bad thing. It seems that the legislative requirements that tie a MPL licencee to a particular type/airline's procedures is the Achilles heel of the entire concept. Just what was it intended to accomplish viv-a-vis the traditional CPL/IR license? It appears that a minimal savings in flight time at the expense of maximal classroom/sim time is intended to suffice for a small increment in flight time, at the tremendous cost of flexibility on the part of the licensee.

Seems only well thoguht out if viewed from the perspective of a sponsoring carrier. Otherwise pretty dodgy.

[Wee Willy McGorbals]

No doubt there will be queues of wannabes eager to hand their money over to play airline pilots

[misd-agin]

I'm just glad my carrier required approx. 5+yrs prior experience, be it military or civilian, before they would grant you an interview.

[SimJock]

I wonder who decided that the MPL(A) should be an 'Ab Initio only' licence ??

It seems to me that a CPL holder with ATPL exam passes, could enter the MPL at a halfway stage and have a better/quicker chance of getting into the right hand seat of a jet.

Lets say you have the CPL and the exams and you know what type you'd like to fly, and perhaps who you'd like to fly with, so do you pay for an IR and then a type rating and MCC and hope for an interview, or do you do a part MPL course tailored to your preferred employer ? Which would the employer rather have ?

Shame that option doesn't seem to be available really.

[Intruder]

I don't know why a CPL holder would want to go the MPL route. Any airline that accepts the MPL would likely accept a CPL/IR for a normal training program...

I don't see the advantage of jumping into a "partial MPL course," even if such a thing existed. An airline would be better off getting the candidate through the remainder of the IR so he could then become a candidate for Captain in a few years. It would be better for the pilot, too!

In either case the airline would make the decision whether it makes the candidate pay for the training. If an airline paid for an MPL course, then it might allow equivalent cost credit for an IR and normal sim training for new FOs. If the airline required the candidate to pay, I see NO advantage for a CPL holder to go the MPL route -- especially if he has already been through the ATPL courses and tests!

[SimJock]

Intruder

I was looking at it from a cost and marketability viewpoint.

Assuming that the CPL holder had to pay for everything, which seems par for the course in Europe and what you have to plan for, it seemed that 1/2 a MPL(A) course might be cheaper than an indpendant IR, MCC & Type Rating, plus if the MPL was 'sponsored' then you might be better placed to get a job.

Accepting that this may fix you in the RH seat for some considerable time may not be an issue.

[Guttn]

Intruder pretty much answered my question... To qualify as PIC/Commander of an aircraft of more that 12500lbs/5700kgs MTOW you essentially need to hold a valid ATPL and an appropriate type rating. To qualify for an ATPL you need the theory (of course), minimum 1500 hours, 500 multicrew, some IFR time (if I`m not mistaken) and some PIC time. But those are minimums for the license, not what an airline actually may require for upgrades for F/O to Capt.

A lot of things can be said pro and con the MPL license, and the training. But the one thing I really think not a lot of people pay attention to is the factor called situational awareness. One side of it has to do with aircraft position in regards to distance, altitude, attitude, speed and so on. The other has to do with being able to make a mental picture of what every other aircraft is doing, where they are and which way they are going. I don`t think this can be replicated in a sim, with all kinds of ways of speaking English and accents, though you can of course practise collision avaoidance. My point being that with having a menatl picture of the traffic you should never be in a position where you need to take action because of TCAS activation. The other thing I have against the MPL is that if the Capt suddenly is incapacitated, the MPL is PIC/solo for the first time in his flying career with around 150 pax on the other side of the cockpit door. With a bit of luck there might be another pilot onboard who can assist with radios and checklists and such, but if not then this is an immense task

[Deep and fast]

The MPL is all about training a machine operator not a pilot. It is also a mechanism for reducing cost for the airline. In days gone by, airline would employ instructors with 700 hours plus needed to get the cpl. In gaining these hours they learnt not only the mechanics of flight but also CRM. Also you learn about people and what they are like under stress and how to both deal with and mitigate the negative factors that stress brings. I think instructors are an undervalued resourse but who am I to say.

I am ex instructor and single pilot air taxi in Seneca Navajo and had no difficulty transitioning onto a jet.

D and F

[Groundloop]

the MPL is PIC/solo for the first time in his flying career

Jeez, no he/she bl**dy isn't. Haven't you read the previous posts?

[Intruder]

I was looking at it from a cost and marketability viewpoint.

Assuming that the CPL holder had to pay for everything, which seems par for the course in Europe and what you have to plan for, it seemed that 1/2 a MPL(A) course might be cheaper than an indpendant IR, MCC & Type Rating, plus if the MPL was 'sponsored' then you might be better placed to get a job.

Accepting that this may fix you in the RH seat for some considerable time may not be an issue.

Again, i suspect the cost would likely be about equal -- or even less for the IR. The 100+ hours of 737 or A320 sim time would not be cheaper than an equivalent amount of IR instruction. Same for the ground training for the "1/2 MPL." After that, a type rating would take a good deal less sim time (31 for my 744 and 37.5 for 742) -- and many airlines do not even require a type rating for F/Os (dunno what kind of rating comes with the MPL)! Add to that the fact that most/all airlines pay for the required aircraft-specific training for new-hires, which would be the same (or less) ground school and sim time required for a type rating.

Also, a "sponsored" MPL will likely incur an extended payback contract, with attendant lower wages very possible.

Marketability is another issue. Again, I have no doubt that an ATPL is more widely marketable than an MPL. Same with a CPL/IR. While a few airlines may give preference to those who complete their own MPL courses (and from whom they have already taken a considerable amount of money), that would not extend in general to other airlines. So, you would be trapped in the right seat of a single airline, with little or no ability to even try another airline, for a LONG time. You might be "better placed" to get a job with the sponsoring airline of an MPL course, but that would be the full extent of any advantage.

Finally, the ONLY reason airlines are going to the MPL is that they cannot find qualified CPL/IR holders, and it is cheaper for them to run an MPL course than to bring someone all the way from ground zero through a CPL/IR. So, any aitline that is thinking of hiring MPL pilots would also be prone to hire CPL/IR pilots. Those CPL/IR pilots would also get into the left seat WELL before their MPL contemporaries.

So, bottom line to me is that a CPL holder would be MUCH better off to complete his IR and look for a job with those credentials.

[snuble]

Many pro's and con's have been adressed. Most of them are valid points, but way too many are plain bull sh1t. Wich is the singel biggest problem with the MPL licence. Many people have (and voice) their strong personal thoughts about this subject, but do not take the time to check basic facts. To learn that some of those people are even sitting in positions handleing pilot applications is worrying. No wonder it will be a hard time finding a new job..!

[tbavprof]

From the Ultimate Simulator Side

Interesting article on UAV losses. Human error causes most Predator crashes - Military - MSNBC.com

Herz reported that most Predator mishaps were the result of three types of human errors: inadequate skills and knowledge necessary to operate the aircraft; lack of teamwork; and lack of situational awareness.The result, Herz wrote, is that operators are less able to conduct "real-world operations." For example, he said, "lapses of judgment and lack of experience" often lead pilots to continue marginal landing approaches when it would have been better to circle around for another attempt.