Unfortunately I know this is so true.. The guys we're blasting as 300 hour wonders will actually be considered the "experienced pilots"

Future
 

I believe that the next generation of MCL pilots will have obnoxious and difficult personalities, but probably will be better trained for the airline environment. I have always thought that most of what pilots have to go through to obtain a standard Commercial Multi-engine license was a waste to someone with exclusive airline intentions.

The MCL will make it much cheaper to get professional credentials and they will come with a much better understanding of airline operations and air transport flying since that is all that they will have studied.

Years ago when I was a student pilot I showed a sectional chart to a Delta DC-10 captain. He was one of my best friends fathers and was kind enough to have attempted to answer an aviation question that I had. When I showed him the map he developed a twisted look on his face and then asked me what it was that I had presented him. He did not know what a sectional was since in his entire career he had never even seen one before. He went strait into the Navy after college and told me that he only spent ten hours in a piston plane before moving on. He has zero understanding of VFR operations and did not need to know either. Since that time I have encountered many airline pilots with a similar lack of knowledge of VFR operations.

Much of what we train for as civilian pilots is a wasted effort to a airline pilot. The MCL will offer employers and cadets the ability to focus on part 121 stuff.

Skyhigh

"I believe that the next generation of MCL pilots will have obnoxious and difficult personalities"

Where did you get that from?

"Much of what we train for as civilian pilots is a wasted effort to a airline pilot."

Disagree. An airline pilot is nothing more than a pilot who works for an airline. The seasoning and experience you get as a "civillian" pilot carries over to flying big airplanes, too. They drive different but there is a lot more to being a pilot than just driving...

I'm still hoping that the FAA will not buy into this idea. So far they seem to be very reluctant, probably because they know that domestic US is very different from almost any other other aviation environment. Most countries have very few, or zero, GA aircraft in service. Many smaller US airports and large metro areas are saturated with bug-smashers...an understanding of how that environment works is important before you operate in it.

Will we have to honor ICAO MCL's? Probably, but only when they are working on a foreign flag flight...they will only be operating out of the largest Class B airports. I don't see us granting US conversion licenses based on a foreign MCL.

Who is FLX?

I'm sure the unions will do all the can to fight the MCL, but who knows how effective it'll be. Age 65 did work its way to the US, most likely fueled by congressmen's fear of a looming pilot shortage disrupting air traffic, and causing tickets to go higher than $150 coast-coast. Depending on the mood of the time, the same fear might creep back in, and begin a large push for this "fix everything" pilot license, but only time will tell....

As far as the JET U types, i'd have to say they have quite a bit invested in the job. Granted, none of it is in years of real world experience, but, they've invested thousands and thousands of dollars towards training which would be absolutely useless and wasted if they don't continue to fly. Unlike a nice bachelors degree from a regular university, this type of training will only be geared towards one thing, and one thing alone, so i bet they'll do their best to stay in the industry, will they work for pennies...yeh, but so far, we all have too.

Just think
 

The future of Multi Crew License

Cadets could interview and receive a conditional job offer before they take their first lesson. Training could be company and aircraft type specific. Airline's could offer scholarships and financing.

Colleges and flight schools could merge training programs so that graduates could possibly skip airline ground school and go strait to sim training already knowing the profiles and flows. Or perhaps the sim training could become a part of the program and upon completion of the check ride the cadet would also be ready for IOE.

The benefit to the cadet would be a more predictable future and immediate transition into their career field.

The benefits to the employer is access to a constant supply of pre-screened cadets that are instantly slaves to your company since their training is company specific and because they are in debt to the company for the student loans. They also pay for most of their own training.

If the costs continue to skyrocket for pilot training and wages remain low. The MCL could rapidly take over the industry as the norm.

SkyHigh

You guys have some really good points. I agree with most of them. Coming from a "Jet U," there are a lot of pilots that dont jump into an airliner after 300 hrs. I learned so much from staying and instructing, Watching my students make mistakes and me learning from them is priceless. Cant lie though... I am starting to have some SJS symptoms.lol

Just Wait
 

Just wait. If you have SJS now in two years when you are still instructing you will really begin to wish you had jumped at a chance to get into a regional early.

SkyHigh

I agree. The FAA foreign license conversion process is quite involved; and that's even when converting over from another country with very similar part 61 rules. But trying to convert a foreign MCL to a standard Commercial certificate or, ATP? That would interesting to see.

Unless the FAA start's issuing MCL's (I hope not) in the future, foreign MCL holders that wanted (and were able) to fly for a US airline would have to get standard FAA certs. They would almost have to start from scratch due to the many areas where they didn't meet the CFR 14 part 61/141 requirements.

Humm. Can some one explain to me how flying 1000hrs in a 172 going around the pattern with a primary student trains you for an airline job? I see this idea a lot on this forum and quite frankly don't see the value of this type flying other than building the required time. Heck, most of the time logged would not even be considered X-country! I guess I did it the backwards way, I bought a B-35 Bonanza and have flown the stink out of it from coast to coast and north to south. Most CFI's I've encountered haven't flown further than the 2 hour required X-country. I bought a part share in Turbo Travel Air to get my 200 hours of twin time, we flew from FL to AK to CA just to get real life experience. I'm sorry but you guys barking about getting time the "hard" way as a CFI....just doesn't add up to me. Quality of flight time as well as quality of training is more important IMHO than just time.

577nitro-

nitro - no worries man, I don't think anybody here would debate you that CFI pattern-time is far better than what you've experienced. The problem is, I'd imagine, is that the route you took may not be available to most folks, which makes the CFI way of life more often than not the way to go.

Interestingly, a similar concept is being utilized by Qantas; for over a decade now. Candidates off the street with 0 hours flight experience can go through their cadet pilot program and on successful completion can get hired as 2nd officers.

Blast? No. It is hot, dirty, and boring (at 500 feet, all t*ts look the same). But in 1997, it was $9 per hour, 40-50 hours per week (about $1600 per month... when most regionals were paying around $1200).

And freight? Hunched over in the back of a Caravan in 98 degree weather, throwing 3000 pounds of boxes.... sweating so much that when it dries, a black shirt will have zebra stripes from all the salt...

Or instructing? Eight hours of pattern work in Florida during the summer... Eight hours times eight landings per hour equals 64 landings per day.

Yeah, they were all crappy jobs, and yes, if I could have made the jump into the right seat of a Brazillia with 250 hours, I would have. But today when I hear my coworkers say, "You just wait until summer! It sure gets hot in those Saabs!" I just nod and smile.

Nitro, from what I've read it has to do with the difference between a 1000 hour guy jumping into an RJ versus a 300 hour guy. The CFI has had responsibility, has had students put them in challenging and / or dangerous situations that they've had to maneuver their way out of, has had to make go / no-go calls. While taking turns in pattern in a 172 may not equate directly to airline flying, it provides aviating experience, leadership experience, and builds confidence and maturity. Your way does as well. The debate centers around folks taking the reigns of a jet hauling 50-76 unwitting souls without gaining any experience beyond gaining their ratings.

I believe I mentioned this before, but I can't quite agree, 100%, that instructing a primary student at 250 hours is more responsible than taking second-in-command of an RJ or TProp...

If you're not a stellar Pilot, I can guarantee you that you'll be passing along some very bad habits, as well as not instilling good aviation sense into somebody that knows no better. These habits will follow your unfortunate student throughout his aviation career, possibly getting himself killed in an Arrow one day...

Just something on the other side of the equation to think about, to play the Devil's advocate here. Some may call that irresponsible.

Would certainly agree with the statements above. But would throw in that the 1000 hour CFI needs to have some quality time as well. Not sure were or how somebody with 300 hours is going to get or can get, the necessary exposer to flight conditions your going to see on the line. How are they to experience severe weather, multiple frontal zones, mountains, ice, equipment failure (at the most in opportune time) with out really flying. To me, that means real long distance flying. Multi day trips across the country to new airports in high density traffic areas IFR at night. (Many a pucker factor 10 flight in winter gaining this exposer) Conditions you would encounter as FO on the line. Some of the guys I talked to that have gone through the flight schools (Jet U or whatever) get most of their training in the sim. And sims are good, I have 400 hours in an AST300 which was great for practicing CRM and procedure. However, it was woefully inadequate for preparing me on how to pick my way through a midwest stationary front. That I had to learn on my own...and lessons learned on your own are the ones you carry with you the rest of your life.
So what I think you fellows are saying, is that you want these young upstart's to get some "real" flying in first, before jumping into a CRJ?

577nitro-

FO Job
 

It seems to me that the job description for a First Officer is to serve as apprentice to a captain. The FO is there to learn and build experience while under the eye of the more experienced pilot. The origional intent was not to have two captain qualified and experienced pilots up front.

If the FAA wanted 2000 hour FO's then they would have made the rules to reflect that. They must think that a 250 hour pilot who has passed the training required at that point is sufficient.

As such I can not see how spending years in the pattern doing touch and go's in a Cessna has any real value to an airline career over being an actual airline pilot. If you want to be an airline pilot then become an airline pilot if you want to teach then become an instructor. They are two totally different professions.

SkyHigh

Cadet Programs
 

JAL, Cathay Pacific, Lufthansa and others have cadet style pilot programs. As a CFI in Anchorage on occasion I would try and check pilots out for rental who flew for those airlines. Most could not fly a small plane at all. One guy Could not even figure out how to land. All of them were a danger to the sky, But in the aircraft they were trained in and in an IFR environment I am sure that they were just fine.

One guy who flew for Lufthansa claimed that he only had 80 hours in a small plane.

SkyHigh

Ok so I agree that a guy out of Jet U with 300 hours is a scary concept... that is if your taking JetU to mean 0 to CRJ FO in 6 month programs. As a matter a fact if you go to www.jetuniversity.com and watch the 30 second spot they have posted before you get to their homepage I think it pretty much sums it up.

However, where my opinion will differ from most of yours, I am sure, is that someone who has gone to an Aviation University program such as (in alphabetical order as not to imply one is better than another): Auburn, Embry Riddle, FIT, Purdue, UND, etc. who have proven training programs is a whole different ball game. Most of these guys EARN their certs all the way through their CFII's and some of the schools have a Jet Sim course at the end of their training. Being that the schools are part 141 many of these students actually go through a number more intermediate check rides than a more traditional part 61 environment would, and even though more check rides does not equal a better pilot it would indicate that there is the ability to catch and correct training issues at an earlier stage. One important thing that many forget is that these schools teach full semester courses on Aerodynamics, Advanced Aerodynamics, Turbine Engines, Crew Resource Management, Navigation, Advanced Aviation Weather, Flight Physiology, human factors, etc., subject matters that are only briefly touched on in 121 ground school, but are a huge tool set in aviation. Also most of these guys will instruct at these schools for at least a year or so, and most of them, lately been leaving with somewhere between 400-800 hours to head for the regionals that will take them. My argument would be that these are much better pilots than the JetU Pilots we were referring to earlier and while they do get sim training for the CRJ (or the like) they do get a lot of the experience that someone that goes through part 61 training does and more. Oh, and I almost forgot they get a Bachelors too.

Would they be better pilots if they stayed for a few more years and didn't depart their respective schools for another year or two? Probably, but my point here is just because someone enrolls in a career oriented school doesn't automatically make them a bad pilot. And I would even go to the point to argue that I would rather have a grad from one of these schools with 400-800 hours under their belt sitting in the front of a CRJ i was catching a ride in than someone that came purely from a part 61 environment with 1500 hours.

I have a big shiny jet with a flower on the tail ! lol:eek:

That’s interesting. Years ago when I was a line-tech at the flight school where I was training at, a guy that was in his mid 40's enquired at the front desk about getting checked out in some of the schools aircraft for the occasional trip while he was on layover in NZ. One day he walked up to me and introduced himself. We got chatting and he tells me that he’s a 767 F/O for QF. I remember thinking, "that’d be a cool job to have." After a while he asked me to show him around the instrument panel of a 172, and how the avionics worked, as he wasn’t familiar. At first, I thought he was kidding. But, it turned out that he was actually quite serious; he really didn't know, or at the very least he didn't remember. Another time I saw him doing a pre-flight walk around a 172 with the flaps still retracted. I don't know who checked him out, but at the time I thought that it was a bit unusual. But I didn't say anything about it as I wasn't his CFI, I was just the line guy. Unfortunately about a year later he ended up running the schools 206 off the end of a farm strip on t/o; fortunately, there were no fatalities or serious injuries. But, the aircraft was a total write off. That was my first realization that, for some, the knowledge, skills and experience gained in one type of flying is not necessarily readily transferable to another type. I say this because I was initially taught to fly on a farm strip in a C-150 by a 737 skipper; so it was that I thought that every airline pilot had that sort of common core experience.

I was with you up until the last two paragraphs of your post.

You would kill to go back in time and get 1,000 hours of CFI experience or go fly cargo at night? What's stopping you? Those jobs are still available and you don't have to "kill" for them. Loss of pay? What's that compared to the limitless amounts of [supposed] experience you will gain?

Flying an RJ is flying an RJ, flying a 152 closed traffic with a private student practicing his landings is just that as well. Two TOTALLY different things. All the landing practice in the world in a 152 won't help your RJ landings. The basics are the same for any aircraft, that's why their called basics. They are fundamental to flying. Aside from the basics I don't think much of the rest of it helps all that much.

Don't get me wrong, being a CFI is an honorable and worthwhile career. I applaud those that give back to this industry by shepherding the new, but don't go thinking that it really makes that much of a difference flying an RJ or 737 for that matter.

IMO what is most valuable is time in type. Wether it be simulating V1 cuts in a sim, or flying the line, that is the experience that really matters. I just fail to see the correlation between instructing in a Cessna and flying a 82,750 MRW jet.

By the way, hi everyone. :D

Specialized Training
 

A typical University graduate is trained for a career in aviation and not necessarily in the airlines exclusively. Specialized training could release the school from much of the traditional program and focus exclusively on part 121 subjects and procedures. The resulting product would have less flight time but a much more solid understanding of airline flying and would by custom ready for the job.


I think the MCL is on its way and that it will be a separate path taken by those who are exclusively interested in an airline career.

SKyHigh

In that case we should start giving steroids to Little Leaguers to get them ready for MLB

Really, I can't believe I am going to say this...but SkyHigh hit the nail on the head. Thanks for a very good post, SkyHigh.

ERAU actually requires 1000hrs to get the ProAero degree just FYI.

I would certainly agree with this. Not bashing CFI's, I have mine, but I don't make a living with it nor use it to just build time.

577nitro-

Ask the FO in my Avatar... She had a whopping 300hrsTT before she took the reigns of an A320. She failed miserably at attempting a basic flying technique. Watch the video. She had been flying for Lufthansa for a year. She was just learning to walk, then a computer and a CA started doing the running for her. Push came to shove and a skill that was barely mastered in 300 hours quickly faded behind the automation she operated everyday.

The foundation of her flying abilities was just setting then an A320 was placed on top. The structure looked fantastic... till... the foundation cracked badly.

The CA made a very poor choice of not attempting the much more favorable runway, let alone letting her attempt a x-wind landing at the A/C's limit, let alone failing to call for a go around earlier in the debacle.

Since she's low time and never been exposed to her limits (and never even been given a chance to explore them) she didn't even have enough experience to make the judgments that the CA should've. Since the CA failed, and the automation can't help; a very weak pilot, who never had time to truly master the basics, almost drove it into the ground.

Instructing and additional flying b/n being a student and becoming an FO would've created a much stronger flying foundation, thus avoiding a near disaster.

It's not only the poor execution of the technique that's scary, it's the lack of overall experience that lead to a decision to even attempt such a landing when it was completely avoidable in the first place.

BTW, they are hailed as being hero's over there. They posed for pictures and everything.

Gosh, i guess I have a lot to learn. I thought pitch + power = performance applied to all airplanes.... guess not.

Granted, flying a 152 won't teach one to fly coupled approaches, but the sight pictures are pretty darn similar (maybe you hadn't noticed). Case in point, circling approaches: since big planes fly faster, they have higher minima and larger protected areas (due to increased turning radius), but the sight picture is basically the same. On downwind the runway is near the wingtip or a couple inches below eye level, base turn is roughly at a 45 to the numbers or 10ish seconds beyond the thresh hold.

But, let's assume you are correct that 152 experience doesn't help with flying a big plane. Why then, do the foreign carriers with ab-initio programs even bother putting applicants in a piston single at all (or a single for that matter). Why not just put the applicants in a sim from day one with one, big commercial AMEL (or frozen atpl) check ride at the end?

What a joke! You're absolutely correct - hero's my tail...!

I see so much lousy flying everyday it makes me wonder. We'll be taking off in a x-wind and the Captain doesn't bother to put in any wind-correction - or very little - and ends up skipping across the runway the last few feet prior to becoming airborne, and I watch in shock as he lets the centerline drift past the wingtip before the gear even cycles up :eek:

Automation will continue to mask our Piloting deficiencies, and it will never get any better...

ap·pren·tice (ə-prĕn'tĭs)
n.
One bound by legal agreement to work for another for a specific amount of time in return for instruction in a trade, art, or business.
One who is learning a trade or occupation, especially as a member of a labor union.
A beginner; a learner

okay, an FO is an apprentice captain. But he/she is also an FO: a required crew member whose responsibilities include assisting in decision making and challenging a captain's mistake. For example, the release comes with poor weather at the destination and no alternate. The captain is busy trying to clear an mel as the pax are boarding. A decent FO could call the captain's attention to the need for an alternate. A good FO will say, "we need an alternate and it looks like XXX will work." A bad, or ill prepared, FO can't help to check the legality of the release (he/she might not even think to look at the release).

Yikes! Wheres the video?

:confused:

Da boot
 

If what you have said is true, why didn't you guys just fail her out? If she can't fly, give her the boot, before she kills somebody.

250 Hours
 

250 hours and passing a part 121 ground and flight school should be plenty to satisfy the requirements of an FO.

There are poor 3000 hour FO's and stars at 300.

SkyHigh

I still just don't buy into this 800 hrs in a 172 watching other student pilots land the plane increases your jet skills theory. I do agree that seasoned CFI's are probably less prone to make a bad judgment call, but they are certainly not immune, and it also doesn't mean that a non-CFI will make the bad decision. If all you stated in your post is true (I haven't heard most of those details), than it was a bad judgment call on behalf of the Captain, F/O and controller. Three people had to make mistakes, that's a whole lot of combined experience, which you seem to think solves most all problems.

Landing a 172 in a strong crosswind is a skill, but landing an RJ in a strong crosswind is a totally separate skill. In a 172 chances are your establishing a sideslip 500 feet or so above the runway. Most RJ pilots maintain a crab until just before touchdown as it requires less aileron and rudder input and is more comfortable on the passengers. Also, you have much more bank to play with in a high-wing aircraft such as a Cessna than you do in an RJ (especially a CRJ200). It's just not the same thing at all.

The fact of the matter is that you're instantly putting blame on the F/O and I can't stand when people do this. Until I see a factual report stating that the F/O suggested to the Captain that they use the runway with the higher x-wind component I will reserve judgment. We don't know yet what went on inside of that cockpit and any number of factors may have played a part.

TurboFan - Generally I agree with you here, but I have to say that I believe Piloting skill is transferrable to and from any Aircraft. A great stick in a 172 will be better flying a Jet than his not-so-great counterpart. I promise you. Also, just have to slip it in there, any tailwheel Pilot will be better than one who has only flown with training wheels :D

Well, Experimental beat me to it. Probably because he sits on here all day hitting F5.

But I was going to basically say the same thing. An airplane is an airplane.