It's a two year program...that is not fast paced. I did my IR, COM, ME , CFI, CFII at a local school in 6 months (already had the PVT). Did the MEI while employed as a CFI.

First off, I am neither an advocate of MAPD and MESA nor an opponent. I have tried to be objective with my comments, but let's stick to the facts:

This depends on several factors. First, what equipment you are on. The Beech 1900D upgrade does not require the ICAO mins as you do not fly international. The ICAO mins will also likely be waived for much of the Dash-8 domestic flying. Even so, if you fly regularly you will meet all ICAO mins after 3 years with Mesa (assuming you graduate from MAPD with bare minimum time). And the upgrade to CA on the ERJ is currently less than 2 years, and the CRJ about 3 years. So even if you have to wait to meet ICAO mins, you still are looking at going from private pilot to the left seat of a regional jet in 4.5 years total. If you go with the CFI route you are going to spend 3.5 years+ before you can apply to a regional. As pointed out, however, the CFI route does certainly give you some invaluable additional experience flying which is always a good thing.

I certainly can't comment here on what other airline pilots think. Perhaps this is true. However, I would think that this is a rather narrow view held by a select few. I will say that I personally know and/or know of MAPD grads that have gone to United, NW, SW, JetBlue, Fed Ex, UPS, US Airways, Continental and Alaska. As a matter of fact, I know of at least 7 MAPD students who were sent to the program by their father's who were Captains at United, Continental, SW and Alaska - all of whom thought MAPD was the best option for their child to enter the airline aviation business.

I would think once you build up the time to meet a major airline's hiring requirements, whether you were MAPD or not is going to be of little significance. Your personality, competence, and connections are going to be what gets you the job.

Actually I think this is a really good idea. I'll make the post. I'm very curious to see what those guys have to say.

I cannot tell you as much about Mesa Pilot Development as I can about other academies, but I just want to throw out two ideas to consider before you consider Mesa's program:

1. Have you ever been to Farmington, New Mexico? Well if you haven't, then I would recommend keeping it that way. Do you want to spend 2 years of your life there???

2. Do you have a college degree?
If yes, Mesa is a bad idea. It takes longer than most the other pay for training paths (2 years) because you receive a 2 year degree from San Juan College.

If no, then go get a real 4 year degree. First off, many major airlines require a 4 year degree. Second, you should have a backup career incase you get furloughed from an airline job (and it may happen). Having a 4 year degree is the highest recommendation I can give.

All the other things aside (high cost, flying for mesa, Farmington, NM), the fact that their program is linked to a 2 year AA degree is the worst part of this program. I would not recommend this.

I second that. At the end of the program you are given an interview after you've worked your ass off and got all Bs or better in classes. You are held to the same standards as the 1000hr street CFI guy/gal. If you are hired, this means that you have the same knowledge and preparation that the street folk do (perhaps a little more). The only thing you lack is 750 hours of single engine piston time-- which IMO is not excellent preparation for a jet - the B58 and CRJ FTD are better preparation. You're not paying for a job- you are simply granted a chance to interview and prove yourself. These bridge programs have been around for a while- Piedmont used to hire UND grads at 250 hours. Was that PFT?

I spent 2 years as a CFI, as did my contemporaries (with degrees) and things were slow then. Today you can get a call with 1000/100, so that's less than 2 years.




I am neither an opponent or proponent of MAPD, I am simply relaying information that some readers of this forum have no means of acquiring on their own...they don't spend much time in airbus or boeing jumpseats. I would not refuse to hire an MAPD grad, many are my friends...but all other factors being equal I would probably hire someone who has the added depth of the CFI background over someone who doesn't. And there are guys who harbor serious resentment over the state of the industry and their careers, and the PFT issue just makes a convenient outlet...they are out there.

Now obviously if dad's a senior captain, or you hold an affirmative action golden ticket... then all you need are the mins. I am addressing the circumstances of the average pilot.

What? That's crazy, MDP prices are outrageous. $250 for a twin? You can fly a light twin for half what it takes at MPD. I bet the owners of that school are bathing in money wondering how many suckers are willing to go there. Oh, and by the way $74 for a 1972 C172 around here.

Hahaha, I certainly can't disagree with this statement. It is quite a sacrifice.

This is a very good point. At MAPD you are trained specifically for airline flying and have to meet performance deadlines or you are removed from the program. The MESA interview process does not grant you preference or leniency because you were MAPD, it only gets you the interview. I attended a ground school of 40 jet FOs: 20 street hires and 20 MAPD grads. Those that washed out of the training were 3:1, street hires:MAPD respectively.

Definitely a legit point. You can get your ratings much cheaper than MAPD rates. MAPD gives you two things: 1) a low time interview with a regional airline; and 2) higher quality training than your average FBO. But they are making you pay...it is a cash cow, business operation. MAPD isn't there to be charitable to aspiring pilots, they are there to make money.

As an alternative...if you don't want to do the full program. Go get your PP, IR and COM as quickly as possible, then apply to the MAPD PACE program. This allows you to dodge a lot of the expense, but still pick up the low time interview.

Just thought I'd add this, my flight school rents well-equipped 172N with dual navcoms, and IFR approved GPS for $99 an hour. A 2004 172SP with Autopilot, a KLN-94, and MFD-550 will set you back only $130 (five more than your quote). $140 will get you a 2006 172 with a G-1000.

Second, those 750 or so hours in a single teaching somebody give you something that I, nor anybody else here will ever have at 250 hours regardless of background. Decision making skills. It's great that you know how to push buttons and do flows in a CRJ. I'd prefer to learn that in training. On their dime, not mine.

What like should I fly at night or day? :) Actually what they don't have at 250 is experience!! Hey atleast the 250 hour guys aren't flying the 747 like they do in asia right out of pilot cadet training.

Ok bud. Whatever you say. These guys pay for their flight training (around $45k or so for the private-multi commercial) and receive a job interview in doing so. Can it be done cheaper? Yes, but that's not the argument here...they're not paying MAG for groundschool, and if they don't pass and get kicked to the curb they at least have something to show for it - they still have their commerical multi.

A traditional "PFT" operation is you show up, qualified for the job, but you must fork over $XX,XXX for the training that the employer is required to give you in 135 or 121 ops. This is not the case here. They are paid from day one at mesa. Again, this is not the argument here however.

Would you believe that more of the CFI's wash out percentage wise than the graduates of the program?!?!?

These people also probably resent the fact that when they were hired at a major, they had instructed for 2+ years, flown freight for 2+ years, and were finally given an interview at a "commuter" flying B99's for $10/hr. IOW, you can't please everyone, but they are certainly few and far between. They don't give a rat's @ss how you got your time when you get to a major (whenever they will hire again...).

85% of the US Air EAST pilot group will retire in the next 5 years (assuming age 60 stays the same). There's a LOT of hiring coming up BTW.

Instead of jumping on the bandwagon and dissing these guys, open your eyes and you'll find that everywhere you go there are exceptions to the rule. I met a United (MAINLINE) CA a few months ago who knew the CA I was with; this guy was hired at United at the age of 21 with 1000 TT and a few hundred multi after doing an internship there thru his college (NO INSTRUCTING BTW!).