OAT - Europes finest FTO

[father murry]

Blinkin `ell someone is for the high jump down at OAT.

I`ve just heard that almost the entire fleet of Senneca`s has been grounded cos there just about fallin to bits!

Surley it didnt need the men with the big hats and gold plated magnifing glasses from the CAA to tell them that. I could have told them this last year when i was doing my IR in one of those old `bone shakers`. They are as old as the so called instructors they still have on the books down there.

Perhaps someone has taken their eye off the ball momentarily whilst counting all that lovely APP cash thats rolling in?

I remember when i was there a vey entertaining, if rather twitchy, MD explaining to all us APP students that he wanted to run OAT `like an airline so we would have experience of what it will be like working for a commercial airline`. Well, Sir, i do now work for an airline and if i pitched up for work one morning to be told by Ops. that half the airlines fleet had been grounded not only would the airline go bust within about a week but the MD would recieve a short sharp boot up the backside.

Im sure this wont happen this time cos despite my comments OAT is a very good outfit and that MD i was on about is clearly a smart guy overall. Perhaps it might teach them though not to be so greedy with all that income and again do what the airlines do and
constantly renew the companys main assets - the aircraft - instead of all the cosmetics around the place like new shinny flat screen TV`s, slick marketing materials and office refurbs.

Best of British to those in IR training caught up in this. I only hope OAT will cover the costs of a good old piss up down the Boatman tonight. After all you havent got to fly in the morninig!!!!

[haughtney1]

Heard via the grape-vine OAT has been having a few fail IR's recently....anyone know more?:E

[blueb0y79]

Hi all

Ive heard from a former OAT Instructor who still has ties with them that there pass rates are not what they used to be.

Its about time that the airlines took note that OAT is over-rated and over-priced. Students who have gone the modular route with other FTOs and saved their butts off show just as many, if not more, qualities and determination to achieve their goal of working for an airline than alot of past OATs students.

So come on airlines...give the others a fair crack at the whip and don't be fooled by just the name !

[VC10 Rib22]

Remember, it's not about what school you went to, or whether you were modular or integrated. Being recruited by an airline comes down to your performance in:

1.Groundschool
2. IR
3. Simulator
4. Interview
5. Personality

VC10 Rib22

:ok:

VC10 - You missed out the most important skill while going through flight training. RTFQ.

Or are you doing the modular copywriting course??

Rob Lloyd

[atyourcervix73]

The airline pilot in me wonders.....

How long VC10 has worked there...
Was that copied straight out of a nice leaflet...

The realist in me knows...

VC10 likes working at oxford...
He knows the leaflets..as he probably wrote half of them....


Is it just me? or do you think that last post smells just a LITTLE bit fishy...
:rolleyes:

[orangesky]

... what was that about .....

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
slick marketing materials
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
slick marketing materials
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
slick marketing materials
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


... couldnt agree more with you about the "other" skills which make one candidate more "desireable" than the next, but i think you missed the jist of the original post, which was a question regarding the state of the OATS seneca fleet.

clearly to provide this wonderful environment of training devices money had to come from somewhere, could it be that investment was made on the shiny new flat screens, office refurbs, slick marketing materials , slick marketing materials, slick marketing materials ... instead of maintaining the fleet ?

on another note, it would be interesting to find out a few more facts about oxford :

* on average, how long does it take to complete an IR ?
* how many hours could one IR students expect to fly on a "normal" day ?
* for the duration of the IR course, how many different instructors could a "normal" student expect to fly with ?
* if one isnt able to "keep pace" with the schedule, what sort of remedial training could one expect at oxford ?

the reason why i have mentioned these is during my experience i have met a number of OATS graduates, and a large percentage of them wouldnt sing any praises for OATS. in fact, some even had to leave and complete their training elsewhere, where they felt they were treated as an individual and had their training tailored accordingly.

as i have always said, training must suit the individual, one school which may be good for a certain person wouldnt suit the next. the only way to get a balanced picture and to have an idea of what would be best for you, this might entail a number of trips to the various schools, weigh up all [I]the costs, location, condition and number of aircaft, number of instructors and make your own mind up about how important [I]YOU would be to the school.

lets be honest, would you want to buy a sandwich which was made in a factory, even if it was from pret a manger, or would you prefer to have one handmade, in front of you with your exact ingredients ? i know which i would prefer !

regarding the F/O responsibilities which were mentioned of "business analysis" and "airline economics" .... give me a break. in the real world, the commercial and finance departments make those decisions, the last thing they want is a starry eyed new F/O trying to tell them what makes economic sense.

this isnt meant to be an OATS bashing session, but i wanted to bring the thread back to the reason for the initial post, and to also raise a few questions which potential IR students might want to think about before making that all too important decision to part with their hard earned cash. very experienced friends within the industry (and i'm talking about the recruiting side of the industry) have mentioned that, in their opinion, OATS is riding on its bygone reputation ... i dont have enough experience to make that comment on my own.

good luck guys and gals, its probably one of the more important decisions you will make in your life, but as VC10 mentioned in his post, if you have the desire, commitment, personality and dedication you will make it happen :ok:

atyourcervix .... aaaaaiiiiiii :) :)

[Ride the Fire]

I wasnt surprised to hear that the majority of oxfords fleet was recently grounded. I was at oxford on an integrated course which I finished last year and during my time there I flew all their senecas. Worn out - but what do you expect - they've been around since the 70s being put through their paces training up a considerable amount of todays airline pilots. They do the job that they were bought for. A bad craftsman always blames their tools and it pisses me off that oxford gets so much ****. It is a good school - up with the best - The ground training and flight training are top class.
For 18 months I worked my arse off and came through with first time passes in everything and now it has all paid off - A right hand seat in a jet for a well known airline and what got me there is hard work and going to oxford. No complaints about the place and its not just me - the majority of my contempories feel the same. The ones who moan are the ones with little aptitude and who shouldn't be there in the first place.:cool:

[PPRuNe Towers]

But if you were about to part with a very large amount of money Ride the Fire wouldn't you want to know a bit more than what is effectively ancient history?

For example: How many of your excellent providers of actual flight and ground school training are still there? Has there been significant movement? If so what would prompt this?

Now working for an airline you must know full well that perceived reputation versus actual terms, conditions and working environment can be both very different and change remarkably quicky.

Our search engine is very good indeed - try going back a year and finding a Ryanair pilot with a single bad thing to say about their company :uhoh: :uhoh:

Rob Lloyd

[VC10 Rib22]

atyourcervix73,

as much as pprune does tend to encourage you to be cynical I can assure you I am most definitely a student at Oxford and not one of their employees.

Rob Lloyd,

thank you for deleting 99% of my post - being not too au fais with fast typing it took me some time to write. I presume this was because you thought my defence of Oxford, in the form of stating its facilities, constituted some form of advertising and removed it on that basis. If this was the case then I apologise, it was not meant to come across as this. I, like 'Ride the Fire', was peeved that people were happy to have a dig at Oxford and wanted to try and provide some balance - maybe needed, I think, seeing as you, as a moderator, edited my post yet were quite happy to leave 'father murry' 's remark about Oxford's aircraft "fallin to bits". You also wrote 'RTFQ'....I didn't know there was one. If you were reflecting on the fact that I didn't comment on the initial post topic, this is because there has been a thread on it running for two weeks in the Professional Pilot Training Forum, which, if you RTFQ, is where you should move this thread to. ;)

father murry,

when you have been been in aviation long enough you will realise that all aircraft eventually suffer faults, it is an absolute given, no matter how well maintained they are. Bearing in mind how often these Senecas are used, and the environment they operate in, I'm not at all surprised this situation has occurred. Sure, it would be nice to have state-of-the-art equipment but, Oxford being the money-making business it is, who do you think would ultimately pay for it? - it would be me and all the other students. As long as they can still do their job safely and effectively, which is what will they will do post-spar repairs, then I will gladly train on them. Finally, do try searching for subjects before you post on them to save server space, and do try to post in the correct forum.

:ok:

[1Way2Live]

Not that I want to stretch this thread out any longer, but...

I have to agree with VC10. Having had recent experience at OAT, I know that their instructors and their equipment is all first rate. As with any FTO, there will be unhappy customers and bitter drop-outs, but the OAT statistics speak for themselves. Over 95% of ALL APP graduates so far have got FO jobs with airlines within a month or two. You can't argue with that. (although many will probably try...)

As for the Senecas, I can't believe that just because the OAT engineers found some well hidden and tiny cracks in a wing spar before anyone else did that they should be accused of shoddy maintenance!! I would put money on the fact that there will be other Senecas in the UK with the same problem but as yet undetected.

Either the OAT engineers have been over-cautious in grounding the Senecas, or a serious design flaw has been discovered. Either way, does OAT really deserve abuse?

Before anyone says anything, I do not work for OAT or have anything to gain by promoting them.

:D

[BigAir]

Why is this even a post - it was mentioned a few days ago in the flight training forum. If u look at the Oxford website it outlines the situation in detail.

AP explains the situation on the OATS website - it is the only responsible thing to do. Why always oxford bashing. Yes the aircraft are old, but they are maintained well so just give Oxford a break.

BigAir
Ex Oxford graduate who likes the place

[PPRuNe Towers]

Glad to see you back Rib 22,

All that typing of yours was deleted because it was nothing more that an extremely extended and totally uncritical advert. I got to it but not before your were already having the piss taken out of you and your words thrown right back at your school.

The search engine is available for all and anyone can find that with the exception of the quality of the instructors there is very little about such a large concern that hasn't been criticised over many years.

Going back to the mid nineties the debate raged regarding the poor food and accomodation, security, cultural clashes and noise in halls. The 'new' simulators have been consistently criticised for years as poor similacrums of aeronautical devices and the marketing has been under a constant critical review. Roll back the date a year and the 'success' in placing students is a constant and very disparaging theme. Strangely enough this has turned around but obviously has nothing to do with the immense worldwide demand for pilots now.........

Experienced aviators have become giddy with the chopping and changing of allied training fields overseas and anyone in the business and not a customer knows that latterly the legendary training staff has been battered in terms, hours and conditions.

Thus your post simply screamed naivety at best or cynical con job to anyone with even a year or so interested in FTO's let alone in the civvy game.

Spouting success for the latest and more expensive scheme is a total nonsense when airline training departments are working to absolute capacity, expansion is delayed due to both lack of pilots and airframes in many parts of the world and startups are putting their plans on hold. Why, the poor sods in India are having to work an extra year before retirement coz the training can't keep up.

We hold no brief for the FTO industry other than upholding standards. They are an entirely seperate entity to the airlines, providing a career path and a living for some remarkably good people. But I repeat, they are entirely seperate from the fortunes and cycles of the industry many of you seek to enter.

Collectively, they will never willingly do anything other that tell you what you want to hear even when there isn't a job to be had for guys with 5000 hours let alone the newly qualified.

Doubt me? Spend a couple of weeks on the Australian forums - over 10,000 issued but unused professional licences. Fodder sold dreams to keep flying schools running and a hundred or so instructors finding their own students so they can slowly, painfully build their hours. The UK is exactly the same - turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

That's flight training writ large and why we expend the time and effort year after year to counter the gladhanding, promises and gloss.

Using this site carefully will give all a picture of many schools doing a fine job with integrity. You'll discover organisations that don't need to advertise anywhere and individual groundschool and flying instructors who are quite simply deeply gifted individuals. That's what PPRuNe is for. Slap down the hype and praise the best in the industry.

You may not agree with me but consider this.

The FTO's are in business to take money from you.

We don't take a penny

These forums exist through working airline pilots putting something back into the industry you want to join.

Regards
Rob Lloyd

[atyourcervix73]

Pure gold Rob......as Ive had a Jar or two..I cant think of anything more eloquent to show my agreement and appreciation of that last post.......:ok:

[Alex Whittingham]

I don't think anyone should be accusing OAT of shoddy maintenance, its just not true. Oxford have one of the best maintenance facilities in the south of England.

Their aircraft may have had different usage than those at other schools. Oxford's students, for instance, used to be allowed to fly the twins solo. I understand that all of OAT's Senecas with more than 6000hrs had cracks in the spar. BFC's highest time aircraft has 16,000hrs but no cracks, but then BFC's students don't fly the Seneca solo and as a consequence the aircraft don't get whacked into the concrete either so hard or so frequently.

I'm no apologist for the APP course but you should give credit where credit is due and not tar all of OAT with the same brush just 'cause you think their marketing policy might be dodgy.

[boeingbus2002]

Whats the latest on other PA34 operators? OATS aircraft were used very intensively, with minimal ground time. Lots of circuit bashing etc. Other schools have charter operations which meant longer cruises and reletively less circuit time.

[VC10 Rib22]

Rob,

in my opinion the complaints concerning any company, be that a flight training one or otherwise, have a definite relationship with the size of the company, and more often than not this relationship tends towards the exponential rather than the linear due to many reasons, including more people-to-people contact (thus more chance of someone rubbing you up the wrong way) and criticism of the company in the public domain being more obvious ( hence more people are aware of others with similar problems and are more inclined to make their grievances publicised as well).

I never said that Oxford was perfect, but I don't believe such a quality can exist in a flight training organisation, as the things that govern the quality are so variable and subjective. Most people will base their opinion of a F.T.O. on whether or not they find employment after they have completed training with it, those gaining employment singing its praises, those not so fortunate tending to criticise it vehemently - with the 'real picture' lying somewhere in between and only revealed by the truly honest, somone willing to say the quality of the training, coupled with natural ability, assisted greatly in their employment, or someone willing to say that they really didn't put the effort in or didn't have what it takes. Either way, someone who definitely has the required competency will make it to employment, as sure as someone without the required competency, but with shed loads of money to throw at Oxford, wont. Some people will fit an airline's profile, others never will - sadly you do not know which bracket you are in until your money is spent.

As for myself being naive, or trying to pull the wool over others' eyes, I can assure you neither is the case. I spent several years researching the FTO scene on various forums and by talking to many pilots before deciding to jump in. The reasons I chose to go to Oxford are many and can be found, no doubt, in the thousands of posts regarding Oxford in the server. Hopefully, any wannabee is going to have the common sense to thoroughly research the available F.T.O.s before deciding which one suits them. Regardless, they must remember that every F.T.O. wants their money and are not in the business for the fun and enjoyment of training another fATPL. Pprune is a fantastic source of information to aid one's choice but because of the nature of the beast, there are always going to be views from entirely different ends of the spectrum and it is imperative that they should sort the wheat from the chaff.

I have to admit I was worried about the change in conditions that caused some of them to leave. It is, probably, another example of mangers/shareholders wanting to increase their profit margin by cutting costs in all areas and a balance has to be struck between doing this and exasperating your employees. Situations like this are part-and-parcel of any wannabee's future airline career so it is something that is better to be accustomed to sooner, although as an airline pilot, I imagine you are in a stronger position, unions et-al than you are as an instructor at a F.T.O. As I wasn't there at the time I don't know their exact reasons for exiting, but I'm sure that it is better for all that they did rather than not being happy with their conditions, and I wish them every success in their new venture. However, I am sure that the Oxford management know that the onus is now on them to ensure that they offer a competitive package to entice and retain the quality and experience personnel that their training business is centred on. I have found all my instructors to be fantastic and make the huge volume of work that bit less painful ( hell, one of them even uses his ears as a permanent feature to remind us of profile drag (sorry, Del) ;) ).

Whether Oxford can aid my employment is ultimately decided by airline recruitment managers. The figures for the APP look good so far, albeit the class sizes have been relatively small as a result of the market being very subdued when these students started ( respect to all of you, you have been rewarded for your bravery). The interesting times are ahead, to see if Oxford can place all the students in the larger classes. You are correct in stating that this success has coincided with an upturn in the market, but that is always going to be the case. No matter how great any F.T.O is, they cannot place students if there are no jobs available. Obviously other F.T.O.s are placing students, in addition to Oxford, and that can only be a sign of a healthy market for all wannabees, and long may it continue.

The facts are simple enough. In times of war and economic instability, gaining your first pilot job is incredibly difficult, if not impossible. Conversely, in economically stable and peaceful times the pilot market is always going to grow, allowing more opportunities. Unfortunately, when times are good, this leads to a situation where every man/woman and his/her dog jumps on to the training ladder to chase their dream. Apart from very rare situations this means that the number of pilots always greatly outweighs the jobs, meaning a lot of people have spent a lot of money for nothing. The secret to increasing your employment potential is to know when to jump on to the ladder. Get it right and you could be laughing, get it wrong and it can ruin your life.

The costs that go hand-in-hand with self-sponsorship are unbelievable. Most sane people wouldn't go out and spend £80,000 on a Porsche just because they could. That would be crazy enough if you did have the money but unbelievably so if you didn't and were paying in the form of a loan. Sadly, when it comes to flight training , people don't look at it in this way. They look upon it as the price you have to pay be to become a pilot, but this is only true if you are lucky enough to do so. When all the jobs are gone and your dream crumbles around you, you are left with bugger all, except maybe high interest rates. At least with the Porsche you could have had a hell of a lot of fun AND the car would still hold some value.

It would be fantastic if the C.A.A. followed Oxford's lead and posted figures detailing the number of pilots being employed, from what schools they trained at, the numbers undergoing training etc, in a truly open environment, so that wannabees could get an accurate idea of the job situation. At the end of the day if they want it bad enough (and these are the type of people we want in the front seats), they will still go for it regardless, but it would put off those who might be doing it just for the perceived income, status, those being pushed into it by peer or parent pressure, and maybe present a life-saving eye-opener to those who really, really cannot afford it (I sure feel great sympathy and have great respect for those who have to ask their parents to offer their house as a guarantee for a loan, that's a massive and extremely scary ask, I know that I could not risk seeing my mum lose her home, which is why I waited to start training when I could afford to self-finance, even though it puts me outside the airlines' preferred age group). Sadly we know that the C.A.A. will not do this, for it would lessen both it's profitability and that of the F.T.O.s., meaning that there are people sitting in the big building at Gatwick watching a computer screen, looking at people chasing their dream at huge personal expense, knowing that statistically the majority will never know airline employment.

I am a realist and agree that you cannot expect the industry to train precisely the numbers it needs, not least because the market is so dynamic and changes on a day-to-day basis, but I believe it is fairly obvious that there will never be any more pilot shortages ( indeed, some pilots argue whether such a condition has ever existed). I need to make it clear that I am not asking for a quota, as such a thing would clearly be illegal, but ready access to all relevant information on the 'real' market opportunity, to enable those with niggling doubts, or those with their heads in the sand (or cloud), to make an informed decision. With the cost of housing seemingly headed skywards I don't know how fATPLs are going to be able to buy a decent house and pay off their loan in the future, and this can only lessen the attraction of quality candidates into the pilot sector. There are sure going to be CBs ahead for many wannabees.

Anyway, this thread has diverged somewhat, I'm sure the pros and cons of the above can be dealt with in future, dedicated threads, so I'll attempt to bring it back on-line with an update from Oxford's MD on the Seneca situation ( if you'll pardon my obvious copywriting :p ).

Regards

VC10 Rib22



SENECA FLEET RECOVERY PLAN - LATEST as at 01 April 2005
Further to our communication of 17 th March, this is the current (and now thankfully very positive) status regarding the OAT Seneca IFR Flight Training fleet.

5 of the original 15 OAT Seneca II aircraft are fully serviceable and are back in operation. 1 of them is currently having replacement wings installed with a further 4 to be re-sparred within the next 8 weeks.

In order to bring the fleet back up to full strength for immediate training purposes, our Fleet Manager in co-operation with the CSE Aviation engineers, has worked doggedly to bring the OAT Seneca III aircraft back into training service and has also leased a number of additional aircraft.

As of this morning 1 st April: 7 Seneca aircraft are fully operational with an expectation of 9 aircraft available for training by Monday 4 th April and then up to a strength of 14 aircraft by the 8 th April. 2 additional aircraft will be added to the fleet week commencing 11 th April with a final aircraft added at the end of the month bringing the OAT Seneca fleet to a total of 17 aircraft by the end of April.

OAT Fleet Mix – Week commencing 4 th April 2005

Seneca II ---------------------------------------------- 9 Aircraft

Seneca III --------------------------------------------- 5 Aircraft

In the interim, we have also made contingency arrangements for some of our Modular customers who were planning to enrol with us in April. These customers will now complete their MEIR training at another high quality FTO under the auspices of an OAT Pilot Manager. These Modular students will then return to OAT to complete their MCC and JOC training.

Considering the sheer scale of the problem presented to us in early March, for the recovery actions to have been carried out so expeditiously to bring the OAT training fleet back up to full strength in less than 4 weeks is a real testament to the dedication and commitment of all staff at Oxford . Furthermore, the backing and support of our parent company, BBA Group plc was most welcome – a good reason why our customers should be able to justify the confidence in deciding to train with OAT when such totally unexpected events occur!

I would like to take this opportunity to thank both our customers and staff for their incredible goodwill and patience during this challenging period.

I will continue to maintain an update on a regular basis.

Anthony Petteford
Managing Director

[Dutchie]

May I comment the MD on clearly communicating what is going on!

I have no connections with OAT (trained at PAT in BOH) but must say I like the honest manners!:ok:

[Aviation kid]

That sounds like Anthony, the MD to me!:ok:

[Ride the Fire]

Great to hear that Oxford is is getting back to full fleet. Well done to Anthony - what you expect from a good MD - admit the problems, prompt
action, a solution and an update on the rectification of the problem - Well done.
I have much praise for the approach, but I still think that the business is slightly losing site of their main asset - the pissed off, highly experienced, flight instructors. Marketing only goes so far - like icing on the cake. It may look great but taste like ****. :ok: :ok: :ok:

[orangesky]

rah rah rah .... in addition to the questions i asked in my original post ....

*******************
* on average, how long does it take to complete an IR ?
* how many hours could one IR students expect to fly on a "normal" day ?
* for the duration of the IR course, how many different instructors could a "normal" student expect to fly with ?
* if one isnt able to "keep pace" with the schedule, what sort of remedial training could one expect at oxford ?

*******************
.... which have gone unanswered, i would like to add another one.

* with OATS being so quick to mention the stats on their APP students, but nothing about the other non-APP students who are training at oxford, is this a two tier system of training and support ?

the reason i ask this is the impression i get from Ride the Fire's post ...... "The ones who moan are the ones with little aptitude and who shouldn't be there in the first place" ..... so presumably its only the chuck yeager types who OATS want to train ? students who arent "ace of base" and may require a bit of extra attention or training are probably best advised to not go to OATS.

[scroggs]

It is a fact that those least able to give an objective assessment of a FTO are the students currently undergoing a course - unless they have previous experience of other FTOs operating in the same market. Inevitably, students' opinions of their FTO are subjective and largely based on the FTO's own marketing hype.

As for the CAA publishing figures of who got what jobs from which school, I'm afraid that's pretty much imposssible. Most jobs are obtained by people long after they've left their FTO, at a distance where the particular FTO is no longer relevant to the issue. To relate the jobs to the FTOs would be at best misleading. As we know from students' experience at Oxford, the temptation for the schools to claim credit for students' own job-searching efforts is already sometimes too strong to resist; 'official' statistics of the kind you're asking for, however misleading, would make that deception easier...

As in all things, buyer beware!

Scroggs

[father murry]

Quote from that Oxford MD:

As of this morning 1 st April: 7 Seneca aircraft are fully operational with an expectation of 9 aircraft available for training by Monday 4 th April and then up to a strength of 14 aircraft by the 8 th April. 2 additional aircraft will be added to the fleet week commencing 11 th April with a final aircraft added at the end of the month bringing the OAT Seneca fleet to a total of 17 aircraft by the end of April.

OAT Fleet Mix – Week commencing 4 th April 2005

Seneca II ---------------------------------------------- 9 Aircraft

Seneca III --------------------------------------------- 5 Aircraft

OAT students, i am aware that you have all been warned to keep your `gobs shut` over this one but if you can post, was this delivered?

[moo]

I believe so father murry.

I for one commend OAT on this. This was a unique issue and many other FTO's with such a large fleet would not have had the resources to get a problem of this scale resolved.

Glad I'm here......