could the US ever adopt the MPL?

NJP_MAN

NJP_MAN

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
2,003
Location
Kentucky
Display Name
Shawn
Home Airfield
KFFZ
Speaking with an AME last night at the fuel pump he mentioned he does a lot of JAL medicals for Japanese cadets. He also mentioned the MPL (Multi crew Pilot License) which I had never heard of. This is where pilots never really fly solo and have a restriction to crew only flying. ICAO seems to think it's a good idea so could this be a way to get quick training for flight crews in the US in the distant future?

Obviously it would be a certificate because the FAA doesn't issue licenses but could they invent a C-MP certificate?
 
To my knowledge, those responsible in the FAA have thought about it, but only briefly.

Very briefly.
 
NJP_MAN said:
Speaking with an AME last night at the fuel pump he mentioned he does a lot of JAL medicals for Japanese cadets. He also mentioned the MPL (Multi crew Pilot License) which I had never heard of. This is where pilots never really fly solo and have a restriction to crew only flying. ICAO seems to think it's a good idea so could this be a way to get quick training for flight crews in the US in the distant future?

Obviously it would be a certificate because the FAA doesn't issue licenses but could they invent a C-MP certificate?
Click to expand...

ICAO has moved away from the MCPL for many reasons.

One of the major problems with MCPL is there was no way to get from a MCPL to an ATP. It was essentially a dead end.

Some ICAO member states have now adjusted the regulations to allow the MCPL to sit for the ATP test. Here in the US the same problem, if someone is a MCPL how do they get to a Commercial rating or an ATP?

MCPL essentially makes the holder a permanent First Officer.
 
I see both side of it. If all you wanted to be was a FO for life and some people do just that I guess. Then it would be a lot easier to train a guy/gal specifically for the one role. There certainly has to be pilots who have never exercised their Private or Single engine privileges after making it to a crew. I definitely would not go this route but I could see how some would want to.

If you went to school to be a professional in the HVAC industry I dont expect you to be a hobbyist HVACer during your free time. You are trained in a profession and that's good enough.
 
As I understand it the MCPL is intended to solve the problem that countries with little or no general aviation (i.e. most countries) have growing a crop of potential airline first officers.

By declaring that MCPL pilots will never fly an unsupervised solo these countries can produce a locally grown crop junior of first officers without having to spend the time and money needed to train a real commercial pilot.

The United States has moved in the opposite direction, by requiring real ATP licenses for even junior regional FOs.

I don't see the MCPL coming here.
 
...this has been worked on by several different companies within the United States to propose to the FAA. I'm not sure the current status since I haven't been with one of those companies since 2009, but I don't hear much about it anymore. It was seriously being pitches though...and hard.
 
BGF_Yankee said:
...this has been worked on by several different companies within the United States to propose to the FAA. I'm not sure the current status since I haven't been with one of those companies since 2009, but I don't hear much about it anymore. It was seriously being pitches though...and hard.
Click to expand...

After ICAO created the MCPL they didn't think it through. Essentially each member state winds up with permanent FO's.

For the US to adopt such a license it would take a massive rewrite of the regulations, and considering it hasn't been a success in ICAO would give even more reason for the FAA to stay away from it.

MCPL's aren't that great to fly with, it essentially turns the cockpit into a single pilot operation with an "assistant".
 
RotorAndWing said:
MCPL's aren't that great to fly with, it essentially turns the cockpit into a single pilot operation with an "assistant".
Click to expand...

Isn't that pretty much the status quo for all these Asian crews?

(can't question the Captain)
 
RotorAndWing said:
After ICAO created the MCPL they didn't think it through. Essentially each member state winds up with permanent FO's.



For the US to adopt such a license it would take a massive rewrite of the regulations, and considering it hasn't been a success in ICAO would give even more reason for the FAA to stay away from it.



MCPL's aren't that great to fly with, it essentially turns the cockpit into a single pilot operation with an "assistant".
Click to expand...


Aren't all cockpit procedures the same regardless of the SICs ratings? Can you give us an example of how it's different?
 
dans2992 said:
Aren't all cockpit procedures the same regardless of the SICs ratings? Can you give us an example of how it's different?
Click to expand...
I think he's suggesting that the MCPL's (who may have as little as 300 hours of experience and never on their own) he's seen have been about as useful as teats on a boar hog, compared to a "normal" SIC in major air carrier ops with an ATP and usually 3000 hours or more.

And I'm sure he'll correct me if I guessed wrong.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
I think he's suggesting that the MCPL's (who may have as little as 300 hours of experience and never on their own) he's seen have been about as useful as teats on a boar hog, compared to a "normal" SIC in major air carrier ops with an ATP and usually 3000 hours or more.

And I'm sure he'll correct me if I guessed wrong.
Click to expand...

Pretty well sums it up. In western air carrier ops the FO is a seasoned individual. Rarely flying in the US would I ever think twice about letting the FO fly every other leg. In the east, not so much.

One of the many fears of being an ex-pat Captain is what happens if something happens to me on a dark stormy night and the FO is left to take over command. Do you want to be riding in back?
 
RotorAndWing said:
Pretty well sums it up. In western air carrier ops the FO is a seasoned individual. Rarely flying in the US would I ever think twice about letting the FO fly every other leg. In the east, not so much.

One of the many fears of being an ex-pat Captain is what happens if something happens to me on a dark stormy night and the FO is left to take over command. Do you want to be riding in back?
Click to expand...


So do the captain and FO alternate PF/PNF typically in Asia, or is there some other practice?
 
If I can offer a philosophical take on the MCPL:

Robert A. Heinlein said:
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
Click to expand...
(emphasis added)

This was read brilliantly by Steve Tupper on Airspeed.
 
dans2992 said:
So do the captain and FO alternate PF/PNF typically in Asia, or is there some other practice?
Click to expand...

Another "depends". Depends upon the country and the airline. Some are restrictive to the point that the FO is a gear and flap manipulator to the other extreme of being treated like a "real" FO.

We have several airports that are "Captain Only" for approach, Landing, Take-off and Departure. Also if the weather is down on approach only the Captain may fly it.
 
Yeah, I don't want some jack-ass that's never even so much as soloed a 152 sitting in the captains chair of 777-300 as it starts to hit mountain wave at altitude with very little speed margin either way. No -thanks, bad idea !
 
Art VanDelay said:
Yeah, I don't want some jack-ass that's never even so much as soloed a 152 sitting in the captains chair of 777-300 as it starts to hit mountain wave at altitude with very little speed margin either way. No -thanks, bad idea !
Click to expand...

No worries......we learned on PoA a couple of months ago mountain waves result in a smooth ride.....so it must be true. :rolleyes:

But back to your point, well taken.
 
RotorAndWing said:
After ICAO created the MCPL they didn't think it through. Essentially each member state winds up with permanent FO's.

For the US to adopt such a license it would take a massive rewrite of the regulations, and considering it hasn't been a success in ICAO would give even more reason for the FAA to stay away from it.

MCPL's aren't that great to fly with, it essentially turns the cockpit into a single pilot operation with an "assistant".
Click to expand...

A massive re-write was the idea. Believe me, I had my questions as well coming up through the "normal" ranks. But yeah, the idea was to flow these guys/gals on through to a normal captain position (eventually), and then even allow them to fly in the GA environment with progressive testing/instruction. Personally, I've never been a fan, but this was all during the time when people were looking for quick fixes and the next best thing for training.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Another "depends". Depends upon the country and the airline. Some are restrictive to the point that the FO is a gear and flap manipulator to the other extreme of being treated like a "real" FO.

We have several airports that are "Captain Only" for approach, Landing, Take-off and Departure. Also if the weather is down on approach only the Captain may fly it.
Click to expand...


Wow. The "FO is a gear and flap manipulator" airlines sure aren't grooming these guys for captain roles. Where do they plan to get their captains in the future? Hire more expats?
 
dans2992 said:
Wow. The "FO is a gear and flap manipulator" airlines sure aren't grooming these guys for captain roles. Where do they plan to get their captains in the future? Hire more expats?
Click to expand...

That's the big question. Asia has an astounding number of Airbus and Boeing's on order. Lots of low time locals to fill the FO slots, but slim pickings for Captains.

Naturally they want the locals to have these plum Captain's jobs, but the numbers just don't support it.

Some of these MCPL's are good, they really are eager and they want to learn. Another problem is the culture, the Asian Captains use them as lowly assistants and don't try to mentor them. The ex-pats try to take the time to mentor them and help them progress.

Asia is 30 years behind the west in aviation when it comes to training, CRM, Risk Management, etc.
 
RotorAndWing said:
No worries......we learned on PoA a couple of months ago mountain waves result in a smooth ride.....so it must be true. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

*GASP*!!!!!

You mean I can't believe everything I read on POA??? But there are so many experts!

:lol:
 
RotorAndWing said:
No worries......we learned on PoA a couple of months ago mountain waves result in a smooth ride.....so it must be true. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
R&W believes that all mountain waves have severe turbulence. He's wrong, but since I'm the one who said otherwise, he's not going to admit it. Yes, it often involves severe or even extreme turbulence, but not always, and smooth waves with large up/downdrafts on the order of 1000 ft/min do exist for hundreds of miles downwind of the mountains when winds are strong enough (35-50 knots or greater).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top