Alternate Route?

Wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

$75K? I'd rather spend minimally on flight training and throw the balance into investments.
 
Doug Taylor said:
Wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

$75K? I'd rather spend minimally on flight training and throw the balance into investments.
Click to expand...


I don’t think there's a single JC'er out there that would touch it. Again the traditional method prevails.
Are most of you guys opposing Ab in programs too?

Is the flying club method (cheaper) the better option?

I can get up to my PPL, Night, CPL, Instrument, SEI for 42,000 and that's conservative, (i can probably get it down to about 36,000) while living in my house having and having a job here in my background: BCOM. I suppose with the 'extra' money I could get valuable ME time and as Doug said invest.

Do airlines place a higher regard on Ab IN training, or prefer traditional method?

Thanks everyone for your posts. Greatly appreciated. :rolleyes:

-MJR
 
Read the Multi Crew Lic write up in Airline Pilot from ALPA. . .

Then make your decision.

It is, in my eyes, another tactic to pay pilots less and less.

MJR, I take it you are not from the US? Have you looked at coming to the US to do your training? Where you can escape user fees, and the like. Of course, housing costs may in the end equal everything all out.

Also, the MPL does not allow PIC'ing. . .so, your dreams of getting in the left seat with a MPL are nil. Except in third world countries where safety is not a huge concern.
 
Many good comments about the MPL. I don't like it either.

I fly an automated jet that was designed in the 70's. It's quite nice. Easy to fly. But real life flying skillz are still quite important, especially if the FMC or autopilot is deferred. (I've seen both but not at the same time).

As to the comment about things not changing since the 40's. Personally, I don't see any reason to change. A brand new 172 is based on an airplane that was mass produced after WWII. There isn't really that much difference between a Cessna 140 and an S model 172 outside the avionics package.

What you need to convince me of, is that advanced avionics are a reason to lower the bar on pilot flight experience levels. I don't think so......
 
MJR said:
Are you saying that its hard to get into an airline with MPL but easy to get to the left seat inspite of PIC reqs?
Click to expand...

Well, it's impossible to get to an American based airline with the MPL since the FAA doesn't recognize it. Go through JetU or GIA and you'll come out without the required PIC time to get the ATP. In order for you to upgrade to CA from FO, the airline has to get a waiver from the FAA to allow those with below the required PIC time to get the ATP. The offset is a longer period of time on IOE.
 
surreal1221 said:
Read the Multi Crew Lic write up in Airline Pilot from ALPA. . .

Then make your decision.

It is, in my eyes, another tactic to pay pilots less and less.

MJR, I take it you are not from the US? Have you looked at coming to the US to do your training? Where you can escape user fees, and the like. Of course, housing costs may in the end equal everything all out.

Also, the MPL does not allow PIC'ing. . .so, your dreams of getting in the left seat with a MPL are nil. Except in third world countries where safety is not a huge concern.
Click to expand...

I will read that doc asap. I am not from the us, but Canada. I know the MPL does not favour the NA markets, more so the Pacific carriers. ATP, FSI, DCA all cost on average 70k USD and offer 0-200+ hours, interview and a possible FI job at the end. Some offer more multi time then others.

I was talking with a CFI last night and he was saying MPL and some Acad. schools dont give you alot of PIC time (esp the MPL), meaning you get the heavys fast but the left wont come as you dont have the PIC exp. Essentially you become a carrer FO. That doesnt appeal to me.

How important is PIC time compared to ME, compared to Total hours?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top