Clark Institute of Aviation
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FYI:
3 are in their IOE stage in 5J
8 are in their OBS stage in 5J
11 finished their BOM and waiting for the 12 TAGS with 5J
20++ finished their a320 checkride already with clark av. Awaiting for 5J to absorb them. (so the ball is already with 5Js court, not clark av)
simply means... thats atleast 41 cadets finished with Clark Av already.
41 cadets in 2 and a half years? thats fairly average considering its a new program, a new school, newly established CAAP.
3 are in their IOE stage in 5J
8 are in their OBS stage in 5J
11 finished their BOM and waiting for the 12 TAGS with 5J
20++ finished their a320 checkride already with clark av. Awaiting for 5J to absorb them. (so the ball is already with 5Js court, not clark av)
simply means... thats atleast 41 cadets finished with Clark Av already.
41 cadets in 2 and a half years? thats fairly average considering its a new program, a new school, newly established CAAP.
Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.
The same applies to those 20++ cadets. No TAGS = No licence.
So, in fact only 11 cadets have graduated from CIA until now.
But, there again, I could be wrong....
On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?
Just to finish for today. The commentator LOLO had two posts that disappeared from the thread.
In those posts he was singing the virtues of CIA and how everything is running to schedule, and how CAAP and ICAO are actually working to resolve the real mess while mentioning things such as the Stirling pilots that lost their jobs because of the crisis, and the chinese MPLrs in Australia time to complete the course and the second(????) Airbus factory in China and the KAL cadets, etc. etc....
Honestly, while these details might make some interesting conversation, what does all that have to do with the CIA cadets graduation and insertion in the job market? NOTHING!!!! Except that it shows some desperate attempt, by someone obviously not experienced in aviation matters, to white wash a bad situation.
And this is evidenced by the FACT that CAAP and ICAO had to step-in to avoid very serious consequences caused by the malpractices of a private business. CAAP and ICAO should not be involved because they are the lawmaker and the regulator authority. But since they are involved, lets hope that we can see light at the end of the tunnel soon.
After all, CIA has its own management to take care of business. Or not?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: clark
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.
Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.
On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?
Unlike the previous management, they're not making promises about it. (But then again, they have to deal with it because of the incompetence, stupidity and foolishness of the 3britons who ran the school)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Area 51
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL certificate
I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.
The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.
Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.
Quote:
On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?
As I raised before, If the previous management didnt accept these self sponsored cadets in the first place, they would have this kind of problem. The current management has to carry this burdern of the foolishness that the previous management did but I know for the fact that they are doing something about it.
Unlike the previous management, they're not making promises about it. (But then again, they have to deal with it because of the incompetence, stupidity and foolishness of the 3britons who ran the school)
Nevertheless, we need to clarify something here. The 12 TAGS are part of the MPL program and, although 5J will provide the a/c to do them, I doubt that the 11 cadets have been issued with their MPL licences.
The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.
Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.
Quote:
On another tack, the info provided only applies to the 5J linked cadets and that leaves us with the self-sponsored group for whom 5J will not provide a/c for the 12 TAGS. Any ideas to resolve this issue soon?
As I raised before, If the previous management didnt accept these self sponsored cadets in the first place, they would have this kind of problem. The current management has to carry this burdern of the foolishness that the previous management did but I know for the fact that they are doing something about it.
Unlike the previous management, they're not making promises about it. (But then again, they have to deal with it because of the incompetence, stupidity and foolishness of the 3britons who ran the school)
OK. Regarding the TAGS, no problem seeing that 5J is the mothership for the Philippino sponsored/partly sponsored cadets. Does 5J provide the same way out to the local self-sponsored?
In any case, and refering to the last two statements, the continued blaming of the previous management will lead nowhere to resolve the immediate needs of the self-sponsored cadets. The people (management) changed but the enterprise (CIA) remained and, therefore, keeps the responsibility.
Managers are just people paid to do the necessary to achieve the enterprise objectives and to speak and act on its behalf. If the enterprise is put on a hot spot because of some undue actions by its managers, then it is up to it to protect its interests by suing the managers. Has CIA done that and, if not, why not?
The point is: CIA sold a product (MPL) that included some time and work guarantees but, in the end, the product (MPL) failed to materialise despite the guarantees. Isn't CIA (the enterprise) responsible for the terrible shortcoming of those who paid for the product (MPL)?
Managers come and go and the current CIA management will, in time, also be replaced by others who will blame them for something. Its the nature of the beast!!!
But while they are being paid to do the job, they better get on with it and resolve the issues affecting negatively the enterprise (CIA) and not only.
It is not enough to continually say that something is being done without showing any results. More than promises, what matters most are the deeds and CIA is lacking on both.
Unfortunatelly, CIA is playing with much more than what is going on at Clark. The whole MPL concept (in which I believe) could be at stake by the negative actions allowed to take place within the enterprise. Many many prospective pilot candidates will shy away from that type of training for fear of being caught very short of their dreams.
They will, instead, go the traditional way to get a pilot's licence. Cheaper and more secure.
ICAO is on-site to avoid this disaster and not because CIA is a model flying academy.
Now!!!! Get on with it!!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL certificate
rq4globalhawk
I guess that by "certificates" you mean pilot licences but I don't know the relevance of the colours. Could you explain, please?
In any case and as Bagoongathipon says, the guys are flying with 5J and they could not do it without some sort of legal paper.
For the rest, see my last post.
I was told by one of the cadets that they have been issued MPL certificates - I can't remember what color CAAP assigned, though
In any case and as Bagoongathipon says, the guys are flying with 5J and they could not do it without some sort of legal paper.
For the rest, see my last post.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Lunar module
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmmm, I wonder.....
Bagoong,
The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.
Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.
Work hand in hand? I think not.
According to CAAP, 12 TAGS CIA cannot
CEB just a client, a partner its not
No plane, no gain
all banter blah blah
The truth of the matter is, CIA is all alone in this brouhaha they themselves created. CEB has to step up to provide the plane SO THEIR CADETS CAN FINISH WHAT CIA CANNOT DELIVER! CLARK AV doesn't have any qualified A320 FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR nor A320 aircraft to begin with!
So please, stop pussyfooting around, clucking like satisfied chickens. CEB just did its part because they will eventually need these cadets to fly their planes. CEB paid for these cadets to undergo the MPL training course, which CIA promised can be done in ONE YEAR! No joy on that. Then they started getting non-sponsored cadets. CIA promised these poor souls heaven and earth just so they could lay their hands on the money these poor souls are willing to spend! And that, my friends, is the whole story of this fiasco in a nutshell. As for the non-sponsored cadets? Well, I guess CIA has this to say.....SO LONG SUCKERS!
The MPL program works hand in hand with the airline and the school. The school has finished their role on training on these 11 cadets. So, its 5J role, as required by the MPL program, to have these cadets get their 12 TAGS.
Specifically, in the TAGS, no Clark Av instructor is involved in this phase. 5J instructors (who are qualified for TAGS training) and CAAP/ICAO checkpilots are the ones who are inside the cockpit during this phase.
Work hand in hand? I think not.
According to CAAP, 12 TAGS CIA cannot
CEB just a client, a partner its not
No plane, no gain
all banter blah blah
The truth of the matter is, CIA is all alone in this brouhaha they themselves created. CEB has to step up to provide the plane SO THEIR CADETS CAN FINISH WHAT CIA CANNOT DELIVER! CLARK AV doesn't have any qualified A320 FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR nor A320 aircraft to begin with!
So please, stop pussyfooting around, clucking like satisfied chickens. CEB just did its part because they will eventually need these cadets to fly their planes. CEB paid for these cadets to undergo the MPL training course, which CIA promised can be done in ONE YEAR! No joy on that. Then they started getting non-sponsored cadets. CIA promised these poor souls heaven and earth just so they could lay their hands on the money these poor souls are willing to spend! And that, my friends, is the whole story of this fiasco in a nutshell. As for the non-sponsored cadets? Well, I guess CIA has this to say.....SO LONG SUCKERS!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Area 51
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL
I guess that by "certificates" you mean pilot licences but I don't know the relevance of the colours. Could you explain, please?
Second, I find it odd to write MPL license (or "licence") when "M.P.L." already includes the word. It's like saying "Multicrew Pilot's License License," so I wrote "MPL certificate."
By the way, as an FAA check airman told me, there is no such thing as an FAA license - they call the documents "certificates", e.g. ATP certificate, etc. It's actually the same banana.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Area 51
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TAGs
A CAAP check pilot told me that they will go overseas for MPL TAGs. The DG has agreed to have it done in non Philippine-registered aircraft. The school is paying for the TAGs (reliable info). The last time I did TAGs was on a wide body aircraft decades ago - personally I think a dozen TAGs is more than enough, having done these on level 4 simulators.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL
Never mind the spelling....
Thanks for the color (or colour) coding explanation. Perhaps that method was devised by some "off-set" mind...
Indeed all white certificates make life easier.
Thanks for the color (or colour) coding explanation. Perhaps that method was devised by some "off-set" mind...
Indeed all white certificates make life easier.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TAGS
A CAAP check pilot told me that they will go overseas for MPL TAGs. The DG has agreed to have it done in non Philippine-registered aircraft. The school is paying for the TAGs (reliable info).
I wonder why the Philippino A320 carriers have not put their a/c up for some extra income in these difficult economy times.... Any idea?
The last time I did TAGs was on a wide body aircraft decades ago - personally I think a dozen TAGs is more than enough, having done these on level 4 simulators.
I actually agree with the 12 TAGS requirement to cement their sim experience on the real thing. If you think that 5J will keep them as observers for quite a while before getting their pants on the RH seat....
Since it seems you have some contacts in CAAP, is there any chance to know if the certificate will be valid (and accepted) outside of the Philippines?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: clark
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reedeye
I beg to disagree.
In the first place, MPL should have an airline sponsor in the first place. Cebu Pac are the ones really tasked to have the 12TAGS for the MPL cadets not Clark av.
The program was
1. Groundschool (Clark av)
2. Core flying (clark av)
3. Multicrew coordination / intro to jet training (clark av)
4. LOFT: A320 (clark av)
5. Advanced phase: A320 (clark av)
6. 12 TAGS (sponsoring airline)
It is until the first management decided to take in non/self sponsored cadets which caused what these problems.
It is Clark av who proposed that they do the TAGS even without a parnter airline for the self sponsored as a resolution to the issue. At first, CAAP/ICAO didnt want to but I think they are now considering the option.
Traveller,
I agree with you that Clark Av should be taken as an entity, even there's a change in management. That, what was decided by a previous manager should be dealt by the current one. Well, unlike the previous management that cadets dont respect, primarily because we all know they talk B.S., this current management is still manageable.
While i dont blame the current management on what happened, IT IS EXPECTED OF THEM TO RESOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. And unlike the previous ones, they've created alot of progress in the past year as compared to the first year. (where, as i said, they didnt do anything at all.. only b.s.)
MPL license.
Its colored blue. just like the CPL. But with glitters! lol
I not 100% sure, but the rating in the MPL license restricts the holder to whom he/she has finished his training (12 TAGS). i.e. A320-Cebu Pacific.
Their next step is to get their ATPL.
Currently, Clark Av, is proposing to CAAP/ICAO, to rent an a320 and do the TAGS for the nonsponsored themselves. The issue was that MPL was designed for a smooth transition from clark av to a sponsoring airline. If, clark av, does the TAGS, it deviates from the philosophy/principle behind the MPL.
In the first place, MPL should have an airline sponsor in the first place. Cebu Pac are the ones really tasked to have the 12TAGS for the MPL cadets not Clark av.
The program was
1. Groundschool (Clark av)
2. Core flying (clark av)
3. Multicrew coordination / intro to jet training (clark av)
4. LOFT: A320 (clark av)
5. Advanced phase: A320 (clark av)
6. 12 TAGS (sponsoring airline)
It is until the first management decided to take in non/self sponsored cadets which caused what these problems.
It is Clark av who proposed that they do the TAGS even without a parnter airline for the self sponsored as a resolution to the issue. At first, CAAP/ICAO didnt want to but I think they are now considering the option.
Traveller,
I agree with you that Clark Av should be taken as an entity, even there's a change in management. That, what was decided by a previous manager should be dealt by the current one. Well, unlike the previous management that cadets dont respect, primarily because we all know they talk B.S., this current management is still manageable.
While i dont blame the current management on what happened, IT IS EXPECTED OF THEM TO RESOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. And unlike the previous ones, they've created alot of progress in the past year as compared to the first year. (where, as i said, they didnt do anything at all.. only b.s.)
MPL license.
Its colored blue. just like the CPL. But with glitters! lol
I not 100% sure, but the rating in the MPL license restricts the holder to whom he/she has finished his training (12 TAGS). i.e. A320-Cebu Pacific.
Their next step is to get their ATPL.
Currently, Clark Av, is proposing to CAAP/ICAO, to rent an a320 and do the TAGS for the nonsponsored themselves. The issue was that MPL was designed for a smooth transition from clark av to a sponsoring airline. If, clark av, does the TAGS, it deviates from the philosophy/principle behind the MPL.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: clark
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A CAAP check pilot told me that they will go overseas for MPL TAGs. The DG has agreed to have it done in non Philippine-registered aircraft. The school is paying for the TAGs (reliable info).
Aside from the issues raised by ICAO regarding the training that was solved and met by clark av, there are alot of things that Clark Av management is doing and has done.
Regarding the resolution on issues for self sponsored cadets TAGS. FYI:
1. This idea has been brought up by clark av management since last year (December 2008)
2. Only last May or June 2009, did CAAP/ICAO entertained this idea and asked for proposal from clark av on how this should be done.
3. Even before CAAP/ICAO asked for proposal, Clark Av, was looking for possible airlines who are willing to rent their A320s, settle issues on insurance, etc etc.
4. This project doesnt work overnight. It take months. Self sponsored just have to understand that it works that way because this wasnt the original program, but a resolution to their issues.
Other than that, there are atleast 2 more other avenues that Clark Av is working out for self sponsored cadets to get a license/airline sponsor that Clark av is also working on for months already.
It is wise that we dont say what these are because if we do, they it dont materialize, people from this forum will say that these are just empty promises. But if it comes from an outside source, such as rq4globalhawk, then it is quite receptive.
With all due respect, traveller93, I hope you understand why you always hit a brick wall on me. I always read from your posts that clark av is not doing anything, that proclaiming others know nothing whats going on here in this school, as if you know everthing.. yet you do not know that there are things being iron out for months already. So what does that leaves me to think of you, that you're just here with personal agenda, with hatred, to bring down the current management? the MPL program? Because I dont really see how you benefit this.. You might say its for the good of the community? But it goes back to the strong words that you are saying, that clark av is not doing anything for the students.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: 6DME/ILS24
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL cert
the license is light bluish in color if i remember correctly. i don't think it would be accepted elsewhere because in the note portion, it is written in very bold letters: "License is valid for 320 with Cebu Pacific only"
however, the first 3 had their 319 upgrade or retraining or whatever it's called so i guess they had an additional 319 stamp there.
however, the first 3 had their 319 upgrade or retraining or whatever it's called so i guess they had an additional 319 stamp there.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL
Bagoongathipon
......I mean, the only thing that i dont like Traveller93 is talking is how he says that Clark Av management is not doing anything as if he knows everything that is happening.
......I mean, the only thing that i dont like Traveller93 is talking is how he says that Clark Av management is not doing anything as if he knows everything that is happening.
Bagoongathipon
Regarding the resolution on issues for self sponsored cadets TAGS. FYI:
1. This idea has been brought up by clark av management since last year (December 2008)
2. Only last May or June 2009, did CAAP/ICAO entertained this idea and asked for proposal from clark av on how this should be done.
3. Even before CAAP/ICAO asked for proposal, Clark Av, was looking for possible airlines who are willing to rent their A320s, settle issues on insurance, etc etc.
4. This project doesnt work overnight. It take months. Self sponsored just have to understand that it works that way because this wasnt the original program, but a resolution to their issues.
Regarding the resolution on issues for self sponsored cadets TAGS. FYI:
1. This idea has been brought up by clark av management since last year (December 2008)
2. Only last May or June 2009, did CAAP/ICAO entertained this idea and asked for proposal from clark av on how this should be done.
3. Even before CAAP/ICAO asked for proposal, Clark Av, was looking for possible airlines who are willing to rent their A320s, settle issues on insurance, etc etc.
4. This project doesnt work overnight. It take months. Self sponsored just have to understand that it works that way because this wasnt the original program, but a resolution to their issues.
Bagoongathipon
Other than that, there are atleast 2 more other avenues that Clark Av is working out for self sponsored cadets to get a license/airline sponsor that Clark av is also working on for months already.
Other than that, there are atleast 2 more other avenues that Clark Av is working out for self sponsored cadets to get a license/airline sponsor that Clark av is also working on for months already.
Again you are talking about months. Do the affected cadets know about those efforts?
Bagoongathipon
It is wise that we dont say what these are because if we do, they it dont materialize, people from this forum will say that these are just empty promises. But if it comes from an outside source, such as rq4globalhawk, then it is quite receptive.
It is wise that we dont say what these are because if we do, they it dont materialize, people from this forum will say that these are just empty promises. But if it comes from an outside source, such as rq4globalhawk, then it is quite receptive.
Now you are talking as a CIA manager.... but you have posted in this forum as a cadet. Define yourself as either, to be addressed as such.
Bagoongathipon
With all due respect, traveller93, I hope you understand why you always hit a brick wall on me. I always read from your posts that clark av is not doing anything, that proclaiming others know nothing whats going on here in this school, as if you know everthing.. yet you do not know that there are things being iron out for months already. So what does that leaves me to think of you, that you're just here with personal agenda, with hatred, to bring down the current management? the MPL program? Because I dont really see how you benefit this.. You might say its for the good of the community? But it goes back to the strong words that you are saying, that clark av is not doing anything for the students.
With all due respect, traveller93, I hope you understand why you always hit a brick wall on me. I always read from your posts that clark av is not doing anything, that proclaiming others know nothing whats going on here in this school, as if you know everthing.. yet you do not know that there are things being iron out for months already. So what does that leaves me to think of you, that you're just here with personal agenda, with hatred, to bring down the current management? the MPL program? Because I dont really see how you benefit this.. You might say its for the good of the community? But it goes back to the strong words that you are saying, that clark av is not doing anything for the students.
PPRune is an aviation forum and not the appropriate place to analyze persecution complexes as evidenced in your text. Where did you get such ideas? Have you ever tried to look at my posts as something that, in the end, will be beneficial to the whole project? Think about it....
Many other PPRuners have asked pointed questions about CIA, since the begining of the business, on many unsavoury subjects such as racial an xenophobic comments.
Traveller93 is looking at the CIA business issues that mainly affect a group of innocent people that believed they could get a future in aviation and that paid a lot of money for it.
That is all for now.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, let's assume that the self sponsored cadets finally finish all the requirement to achieve their MPL certificates. Will they be given a chance by cebu pacific or PAL to apply for a job with the given license?
With regards to PAL, they have a 1500 hours requirement for a direct entry FO. When PAL require cadet pilots (250 hour pilots), they are taken from PALs Av school. This was the case when I flew in the Philippines and this is still the case now.
PAL will NOT take on any MPL cadet who has just graduated-whether it be from CIA or a European MPL FTO. This is because the MPL FTOs in Europe, i.e FTE and Oxford are SOP specific to their partner airlines. This is how the MPL should be done and is being done in Europe. The advantage of an MPL is you can fly the specific aircraft for a specific airline using their specific SOPs from day 1. This is the beauty of the MPL.
So how do you build those 1500 hours before you can apply to the likes of PAL or any other airline?
Well that is the biggest discussion here and the answer is simple - You can't. The MPL dos not allow you to fly GA (General Aviation). Therefore, you can not build your hours UNLESS you pay for extra ratings. But these ratings will affectively give you a CPL ME/IR. Or put simply a fATPL. That is your answer.
However this is for PAL and any other airline.
Cebu is currently the only airline that could potentially hire non-sponsored MPL cadets out of Clark. This is because the current syllabus is Cebu Pacific SOP specific. So that is the only choice. But why would Cebu hire self-sponsored cadets when they have already given 50% of the course fee to their own sponsored cadets?
At present, no International organisation has constructed a Generic MPL course. This is because airlines do not use generic SOPs. The maths here are simple.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would not say it is completely useless.
I am a pilot with 9 years behind me who started off his flying career on 732s in the Philippines. My father lives there with his Filipina wife and I truly adore the country. I call it my adopted country and any chance I get; I will always spend my days off in the Philippines – considering it is only a 2 hour flight from Hong Kong where I am based.
My interest stems from knowing a lot about the Filipino culture and understanding that when the majority of Filipinos have a dream, they will definitely work so hard to get there but rarely ask the questions along the way. Whether it is investing money in a sari-sari store or setting up a larger business, the majority rarely do the maths to see if their business/dream is sustainable, in good times or bad.
Now this is not a bad thing! This is why I love them to bits!
I admire their faith and how hard they work. I admire how Filipinos will leave their children just so they can be maids in other countries in order to pay for school fees for their kids – just to give them a better life.
At the same time, how many Filipinos have blindly given money to an “agent” who can give them a visa and employment in Thailand or Dubai but have turned out to be a fake and have ran off with their PHP50000? – Just because they did not ask any questions or researched what they were getting into?
So this is why I am here. This is where my interest lies. How many non-sponsored Clark Cadets have heard of an SOP before they joined? How many cadets researched the MPL and its advantages and limitations? How many cadets have researched past MPL schemes in Europe and looked at the struggles the Danish MPL pilots had to face when their airline went bust? How many cadets have researched what airlines have their own ab-initio schemes hence ruling them out for employment before 1500 hours? How many cadets constructed a back-up plan in case they do not get a RHS on an A320 after graduation?
These are the questions I want perspective cadets to ask and research. I have no vendetta towards Clark or the MPL. I see the MPL as probably the future of airline pilot recruiting. As long as the MPL is partnered with an airline, it is brilliant, cheap and quick.
At the moment however, any non-sponsored MPL cadets will not get an airline job with anyone else apart from Cebu. And if they don’t get a job with Cebu, they will need to spend more money on ratings to fly General Aviation.
I am not here to complain about the management at Clark. Or the lack of aircraft. Or the facilities. Or the Communication . Or the duration it has taken…etc. These are in-house issues which I have no place to debate. I am simple concerned by the concept of the generic MPL and those non-sponsored cadets who are training for it. Because there is NO job at the end of it. In good times or bad.
I am a pilot with 9 years behind me who started off his flying career on 732s in the Philippines. My father lives there with his Filipina wife and I truly adore the country. I call it my adopted country and any chance I get; I will always spend my days off in the Philippines – considering it is only a 2 hour flight from Hong Kong where I am based.
My interest stems from knowing a lot about the Filipino culture and understanding that when the majority of Filipinos have a dream, they will definitely work so hard to get there but rarely ask the questions along the way. Whether it is investing money in a sari-sari store or setting up a larger business, the majority rarely do the maths to see if their business/dream is sustainable, in good times or bad.
Now this is not a bad thing! This is why I love them to bits!
I admire their faith and how hard they work. I admire how Filipinos will leave their children just so they can be maids in other countries in order to pay for school fees for their kids – just to give them a better life.
At the same time, how many Filipinos have blindly given money to an “agent” who can give them a visa and employment in Thailand or Dubai but have turned out to be a fake and have ran off with their PHP50000? – Just because they did not ask any questions or researched what they were getting into?
So this is why I am here. This is where my interest lies. How many non-sponsored Clark Cadets have heard of an SOP before they joined? How many cadets researched the MPL and its advantages and limitations? How many cadets have researched past MPL schemes in Europe and looked at the struggles the Danish MPL pilots had to face when their airline went bust? How many cadets have researched what airlines have their own ab-initio schemes hence ruling them out for employment before 1500 hours? How many cadets constructed a back-up plan in case they do not get a RHS on an A320 after graduation?
These are the questions I want perspective cadets to ask and research. I have no vendetta towards Clark or the MPL. I see the MPL as probably the future of airline pilot recruiting. As long as the MPL is partnered with an airline, it is brilliant, cheap and quick.
At the moment however, any non-sponsored MPL cadets will not get an airline job with anyone else apart from Cebu. And if they don’t get a job with Cebu, they will need to spend more money on ratings to fly General Aviation.
I am not here to complain about the management at Clark. Or the lack of aircraft. Or the facilities. Or the Communication . Or the duration it has taken…etc. These are in-house issues which I have no place to debate. I am simple concerned by the concept of the generic MPL and those non-sponsored cadets who are training for it. Because there is NO job at the end of it. In good times or bad.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEAsia
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL
There are obviously good contributors to this thread.
Yes, indeed the MPL training was designed to be taught, in its last stages, using the SOPs of the sponsoring airline. Nevertheless and up to that phase (Type Rating and Base Training), all the instruction follows the normal (traditional) syllabus to get a PPL and CPL/IR. So, the major part of the requirements to get a " normal" CPL are already there.
In my opinion, ICAO made a mistake when it restricted the MPL to the sponsoring operators customised SOPs instead of the manufacturer's published procedures, as seen in the (A320) FCOM Volume 3.03.00, and, therefore, closing the door to the students that would like a generic Type Rating that would enable them to be employed by any airline.
As a matter of fact, most operators use the manufacturer's FCOM in the cockpit. Only very few have a suplementary folder containing small procedural changes to the original. Food for thought....
Is it so difficult for ICAO to change this ruling?
In any case, the ICAO MPL guidelines were published and it was up to the individual aeronautical authorities to set the local rules to accept the MPL training and licenses before any instruction was allowed to take place. Did Alpha Aviation ensure that the local authorities had all the rules in the statute books before advertising for the MPL course?
Give you an example how it was properly done somewhere else:
"Multi-crew pilot licence proposals released
Proposals for the introduction of an Australian multi-crew pilot licence have been set out by CASA. A notice of proposed rule making has been issued providing the broad framework for the new category of licence, which was established by the International Civil Aviation Organization in late 2006. The multi-crew pilot licence offers a new way of training people to become co-pilots in large aircraft operations with at least two pilots. It was established because there was an international recognition that current training requiring a large number of solo flying hours on smaller aircraft is not the most efficient and safe way to train jet aircraft co-pilots. Training organisations and airlines also wanted a greater use of modern training techniques such as flight simulators.
Key proposals put forward by CASA include: the minimum aeronautical knowledge requirements should be the same as the requirements for obtaining an air transport pilot licence and the instrument rating; the minimum flying experience should be the hours specified by ICAO as long as the training course, assessments and flight tests are based on the competency standards specified by ICAO; an MPL candidate will have demonstrated competency acting as pilot flying and as pilot monitoring a multi-crew multi-engine turbine powered aeroplane; a newly qualified MPL pilot should be limited initially to flying aircraft of the same type that was used in the final phase of the MPL course and with the airline associated with the MPL course; induction training and continuity experience requirements should apply to airlines using MPL pilots; the recent experience requirements for the MPL should be the same as the requirements for an air transport pilot licence."
Read the MPL notice of proposed rule making.
In the document you will find the whole MPL proposed ruling details here http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_asset...fs_annex_d.pdf
and I call your attention to the Annex A (ICAO MPL Licensing Pathway) where it seems that CASA has some sort of bridging to the CPL.
Could other PPRuners comment on this?
There must be a practical and legal way out of the poor self-sponsored students nightmare. A nightmare totally caused by Alpha Aviation.
What cannot be expected is that this situation be allowed to continue indefinitely!!!
Yes, indeed the MPL training was designed to be taught, in its last stages, using the SOPs of the sponsoring airline. Nevertheless and up to that phase (Type Rating and Base Training), all the instruction follows the normal (traditional) syllabus to get a PPL and CPL/IR. So, the major part of the requirements to get a " normal" CPL are already there.
In my opinion, ICAO made a mistake when it restricted the MPL to the sponsoring operators customised SOPs instead of the manufacturer's published procedures, as seen in the (A320) FCOM Volume 3.03.00, and, therefore, closing the door to the students that would like a generic Type Rating that would enable them to be employed by any airline.
As a matter of fact, most operators use the manufacturer's FCOM in the cockpit. Only very few have a suplementary folder containing small procedural changes to the original. Food for thought....
Is it so difficult for ICAO to change this ruling?
In any case, the ICAO MPL guidelines were published and it was up to the individual aeronautical authorities to set the local rules to accept the MPL training and licenses before any instruction was allowed to take place. Did Alpha Aviation ensure that the local authorities had all the rules in the statute books before advertising for the MPL course?
Give you an example how it was properly done somewhere else:
"Multi-crew pilot licence proposals released
Proposals for the introduction of an Australian multi-crew pilot licence have been set out by CASA. A notice of proposed rule making has been issued providing the broad framework for the new category of licence, which was established by the International Civil Aviation Organization in late 2006. The multi-crew pilot licence offers a new way of training people to become co-pilots in large aircraft operations with at least two pilots. It was established because there was an international recognition that current training requiring a large number of solo flying hours on smaller aircraft is not the most efficient and safe way to train jet aircraft co-pilots. Training organisations and airlines also wanted a greater use of modern training techniques such as flight simulators.
Key proposals put forward by CASA include: the minimum aeronautical knowledge requirements should be the same as the requirements for obtaining an air transport pilot licence and the instrument rating; the minimum flying experience should be the hours specified by ICAO as long as the training course, assessments and flight tests are based on the competency standards specified by ICAO; an MPL candidate will have demonstrated competency acting as pilot flying and as pilot monitoring a multi-crew multi-engine turbine powered aeroplane; a newly qualified MPL pilot should be limited initially to flying aircraft of the same type that was used in the final phase of the MPL course and with the airline associated with the MPL course; induction training and continuity experience requirements should apply to airlines using MPL pilots; the recent experience requirements for the MPL should be the same as the requirements for an air transport pilot licence."
Read the MPL notice of proposed rule making.
In the document you will find the whole MPL proposed ruling details here http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_asset...fs_annex_d.pdf
and I call your attention to the Annex A (ICAO MPL Licensing Pathway) where it seems that CASA has some sort of bridging to the CPL.
Could other PPRuners comment on this?
There must be a practical and legal way out of the poor self-sponsored students nightmare. A nightmare totally caused by Alpha Aviation.
What cannot be expected is that this situation be allowed to continue indefinitely!!!