Multi Crew Pilot Licenses

[granlistillo]

As far as I know they all have a cadet 'scheme' that they come out with a frozen ATPL. Not a MCPL.

Thanks, that's what I thought. Although the MPL is based on the ab-initio training regime, and with the 750 hr theoretical portion, and the sim training (like JAA MCC course), it is similar to the JAA ATPL training. It is different though...

From a few months back. Interesting read on the MPL.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...-crew-licence-graduates-join-the-line-in.html

 

[FlyingPoke]

There's not going to be any shortage. There will be a reduction in the availability of experienced pilots, but it will be filled in one fashion or another, just as it always has been. The last real shortage was in the '60s, and UAL responded by hiring private pilots and training them from the ground up, then tossing them into the right seat of a 707 with 200 hours. When the regionals had a shortage a couple of years ago, they responded by going to schools like ATP and working out "pref hiring agreements" that got them freshly minted pilots with as little as 190 hours.

"Just saying 'no'" will get you nowhere except locked out of the process, leaving the ATA and a bunch of politicians to write the rules without your input. Sound like a good idea? You won't like the results. For example, if ALPA hadn't been involved in the drafting of the Age 65 law, retired pilots could have returned with seniority. ALPA's involvement fixed that very quickly. If you lock yourself out of the process by crossing your arms and screaming "NO," then you'll be accomplishing nothing more than allowing a bunch of incompetent fools and corrupt airline managers to decide the fate of your profession. Smart move.

I see your point you are trying to make, and if the MPL were the only thing going on right now it would make sense. However, we have the FAA and NTSB pushing for 1500/ATP requirements which would make those 0-Hero programs practically impossible, thus creating a true shortage of experienced pilots.

So... what I think a good stance would be for a union I plan on being a part of one day would be: 'No' to MPL with valid arguments like - why are the NTSB and FAA raising minimums only to have them undercut by a program allowing even LESS experience in a cockpit? etc. Fight hard to get the minimums to fly 121 up to a respectable number.

 

[seaav8tor]

1. Aptitude

2. Training

3. Experience


All three are needed.


Historically we have not policed ourselves very well on #1 (the barrier to entry was/is money). Here in the US training has been marginal but experience was the best teacher and it was relied on heavily to save the day.

Now an assumption is made that some aptitude screening and a very formal structured training program can negate the need for any experience. If they were really concerned about safety all would agree the best solution would be: Meaningful aptitude testing, structured training, AND EXPERIENCE. If the MPL was put in place AND you needed to get 1,500 hours and ATP BEFORE flying revenue passengers for hire under part 121 I would be all for it.

Of course this will not happen as the MPL idea is to maintain a pipeline that will never create an upward pressure on labor costs defeating the entire purpose of its creation in the first place.

Everyone died board 3407 because Marvin did not have enough experience. He choked, did the wrong thing at the wrong time. There is no bringing them back so why do we want to expand on what is a perfect example of what not to do? It's all about money.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

\If the MPL was put in place AND you needed to get 1,500 hours and ATP BEFORE flying revenue passengers for hire under part 121 I would be all for it.

How on earth do you propose some one to get 1500 hours, on top of getting the MCPL?

I wish we could have a study of everyone advocating this ATP minimum requirement, on how those people got to said ATP minimums. Look at the jobs they did, and then compare to how many of those jobs don't exist today, due to technology. I think it would be an eye-opener

 

[C150J]

How on earth do you propose some one to get 1500 hours, on top of getting the MCPL?

I wish we could have a study of everyone advocating this ATP minimum requirement, on how those people got to said ATP minimums. Look at the jobs they did, and then compare to how many of those jobs don't exist today, due to technology. I think it would be an eye-opener

1,500 hours isn't that much time. You could get that instructing/doing aerial survey in a couple of years.

Why is Organic Chemistry a medical school prerequisite? It's definitely not required on a daily basis for MOST MDs... it's a barrier to employment that weeds out potential physicians, thereby reducing the supply of doctors, raising pay along the way.

 

[Alchemy]

How on earth do you propose some one to get 1500 hours, on top of getting the MCPL?

I wish we could have a study of everyone advocating this ATP minimum requirement, on how those people got to said ATP minimums. Look at the jobs they did, and then compare to how many of those jobs don't exist today, due to technology. I think it would be an eye-opener

What? I think most people got the time by instructing, flying 135, or utilizing their commercial under part 91 in some way. I don't think many of those jobs have been made obsolete by technology.

Granted I did not have ATP mins when I was hired. I would've had to instruct for a few more months. That would've been fine.

 

[USMCmech]

I wish we could have a study of everyone advocating this ATP minimum requirement, on how those people got to said ATP minimums. Look at the jobs they did, and then compare to how many of those jobs don't exist today, due to technology.

For myself, I taught as a CFI until 135 mins. Then I flew at a 135 freight hauler for another 2 years and another 1000 hours. 10 years ago, that amount of experiance would barely qualify me to get hired at a regional turboprop carrier.

 

[Trip7]

For myself, I taught as a CFI until 135 mins. Then I flew at a 135 freight hauler for another 2 years and another 1000 hours. 10 years ago, that amount of experiance would barely qualify me to get hired at a regional turboprop carrier.

And that was merely because of the huge supply of pilots available, not because it was necessary.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Yes, I agree CFI'ing is where that time is going to have to be built up. But, what happens when, everyone has a CFI, and there are about 10 students? Your going to get guys paying to instruct, because they need the time.

And, in reference to jobs being eliminated due to technology. Traffic watch is all but gone. In the last 10 years, I'd venture to guess there has been a significant reduction in check hauling via airplane.

 

[derg]

I disagree. Requiring an ATP would be unnecessary. That will extend the training process to at least 3 years. We have the technology now a days to improve the training process, make it quicker, more efficient, and most importantly, safer. I believe the MPL will do that. Airlines like Cathy, Singapore, Lufthansa, British Airways, KLM are all doing it with great success. Why can't we do the same in the US?

A couple of issues. I could train my cat Sasha to take off, clip on the autopilot at 400' and set it up for an autoland at the destination.

MEL the autopilot, give her an engine failure and a big level 5 storm where the gain isn't set correctly, and There Will Be Blood.

However, when it comes to situational awareness, wisdom, judgement and decision-making skills, that can't be taught, but it is gained through experience. Don't let ego and thirst to fly big airplanes decouple the importance of the aforementioned qualities from the profession.

Read Iain's page on European cadet programs on the main page.

I've seen some stuff in the last 16 years of flying being my sole source of income. Not a whole lot has changed except propulsion and our enthusiasm to self-degrade our profession.

 

[seaav8tor]

not because it was necessary.

The families of those who were aboard 3407 don't buy it. You can say whatever you think but at the end of the day their loved ones are still dead. If Marvin had flown 1,000 hours doing stalls his brain stem would have had a survival mode that would have saved the day. Instead he had nothing to draw on when he got outside of his airline trained profile. How many examples, how many people have to die before the industry figures this out? Only time will tell but I think the injury lawyers will speed the process along. The insurance underwriters are going to quickly lose their sense of humor as they start writing lots of checks with lots of zeros.

 

[USMCmech]

The insurance underwriters are going to quickly lose their sense of humor as they start writing lots of checks with lots of zeros.

Thank God that the "ultimate regulatory authority" will object strongly once several planes have crashed and a few hundred people have died.

There is a reason that most corporate flight departments have minimums much higher than all the regionals. The insurance companies know (even if the FAA dosen't) that a ME CPL from ERAU isn't enough to fly a jet, and they set their minimums to reflect this reality.

 

[C150J]

The insurance companies know (even if the FAA dosen't) that a ME CPL from ERAU isn't enough to fly a jet, and they set their minimums to reflect this reality.

This is a tremendously important point, thank you for making it. Actuaries spend their entire careers sorting through information, and come up with REAL numbers. From what I've seen, you're looking at about 2,500TT to sit in the right seat and 3,500-5,000 to occupy the left.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

MEL the autopilot, give her an engine failure and a big level 5 storm where the gain isn't set correctly, and There Will Be Blood.

However, when it comes to situational awareness, wisdom, judgement and decision-making skills, that can't be taught, but it is gained through experience. Don't let ego and thirst to fly big airplanes decouple the importance of the aforementioned qualities from the profession.

Honest question for you then. Does 1000 hours of dual given in a 172 help with the judgment of the problems you listed? You have to deal with where to get around thunderstorms, where is the ice, and various other stuff. We don't deal with that in most GA airplanes. If there is a thunderstorm, we sit on the ground, and wait. If there is ice, we sit and wait. A lot of the stuff that would be beneficial to train on for airline flying isn't practical to be taught in 95% or more of the GA airplanes.

 

[C150J]

Honest question for you then. Does 1000 hours of dual given in a 172 help with the judgment of the problems you listed? You have to deal with where to get around thunderstorms, where is the ice, and various other stuff. We don't deal with that in most GA airplanes. If there is a thunderstorm, we sit on the ground, and wait. If there is ice, we sit and wait. A lot of the stuff that would be beneficial to train on for airline flying isn't practical to be taught in 95% or more of the GA airplanes.

Most of the issues I see coming through our safety program is lack of situation awareness, which directly relates to experience in ANY aircraft. Inexperienced pilots fail to see red flags that surround dangerous/irregular situations, and therefore are apt to commit acts of omission. Whether that red flag be flying into a low pressure system and missing an altimeter setting or getting a last minute runway change and not flying an ODP, the only way to get a "hunch" is experience. For example, the "common student errors" you see as a CFI don't stop with teaching students going for their instrument. These errors continue day in and day out, and heavily rely on TWO experience pilots to observe each other's work.

If you get a chance, read "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell. He talks about intuition and how "hunches" can be disturbingly accurate if supplemented by experience.

 

[seaav8tor]

Honest question for you then. Does 1000 hours of dual given in a 172 help with the judgment of the problems you listed? .

Before I flew part 121 I did the following:

Starting in high school, civilian rating path,
Undergrad Aero Degree
Military Instructor, UPT
Heavy jet bomber,
Combat Helo Rescue,
Part 135 scheduled turbo prop,

Every experience has contributed to my ability to do my job. So the answer to your question is..... yes. The experience that doesn't contribute is an experience bag that is empty. That would be spelled MPL.

(by the way it's MPL not MCPL)

http://67.89.232.173/firstofficer/mpl.aspx?id=3
.
.
.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

Before I flew part 121 I did the following:

Starting in high school, civilian rating path,
Undergrad Aero Degree
Military Instructor, UPT
Heavy jet bomber,
Combat Helo Rescue,
Part 135 scheduled turbo prop,

Every experience has contributed to my ability to do my job. So the answer to your question is..... yes. The experience that doesn't contribute is an experience bag that is empty. That would be spelled MPL.

(by the way it's MPL not MCPL)

http://67.89.232.173/firstofficer/mpl.aspx?id=3
.
.
.

Fair enough. You are also smart enough to realize that 1) the military isn't for everyone and 2) the country can't possibly get all the pilots we need from the military. I wish that in the civilian world, we had some way to wash out those who fail things time after time. I don't care if John Q public fails his checkride 10 times on the way to his private certificate, or instrument ticket for that matter. We just need a way to keep those who have many failures out of large scale passenger operations.

I'll be honest, I'm not totally against the MCL deal. I'm against it in many cases though. If its pay for training, I'm against it. If when it gets instituted, pilots who are already certificated don't get picked into the programs, I'm against it. I still think its funny that eventually, we'll have people qualified to fly a transport category jet, but legally couldn't go out the local field, and fly a $80/hr Cessna 152.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Will there be a reduction of experienced pilots or a reduction of experienced pilots willing to work for unskilled labor wages and terrible quality of life?

It doesn't make any difference, because they'll fill the seats either way. Reduce the hiring mins down to FAR mins and you'll never run out of newhire pilots. Do you have any idea how many RJ program "graduates" that placed like ATP were putting out a couple of years ago? The airlines will always be able to fill the newhire classes. The only way to stop it is to raise the FAR minimums (not going to happen) or impose GA user fees that make it cost-prohibitive to get your ratings (most pilots on this forum scream like little girls when you propose this).

I see your point you are trying to make, and if the MPL were the only thing going on right now it would make sense. However, we have the FAA and NTSB pushing for 1500/ATP requirements

The FAA is actually opposed to that idea, and the NTSB hasn't announced a position. Not sure where you're getting your info. Without the FAA's support, that idea isn't getting through Congress. In fact, it probably wouldn't get through even if the FAA supported it.

 

[400A]

Experience gained is, IMO, reliant on the apptitude and (for lack of a better over used word) professionalism of the pilot. On the same hand experience is a poor measure of ability, observation of skills is a must. I will say it again, that last sentence is where training departments and check pilots have failed this profession almost as much as everything else.

It doesn't take decades of experience to be a well rounded aviator and it doesn't really take all that much of a variety of experience (ie CFI, 135 cargo, regionals, etc). It takes apptitude and a willingness to learn and learn from mistakes and successes, not letting the success over shadow the mistakes.

 

[deadstick]

I could train my cat Sasha to take off, clip on the autopilot at 400' and set it up for an autoland at the destination.

Don't let the bean counters see this movie!!