Government scheme - airline apprenticeships.

[Al R]

BBC News - Apprenticeships scheme to train pilots and lawyers (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18535397)

Young people will be able to train as airline pilots, lawyers, accountants and engineers as part of a government apprenticeship scheme. Vince Cable said he wanted to encourage more women to become commercial pilots. Mr Cable said the scheme was targeting sectors "where skills shortages are threatening to choke off growth".

For example, it is estimated that between now and 2030 European airlines will need to recruit 92,500 new pilots. Over the next four years, the government also says the UK will need to train 96,300 engineers just to replace those due to retire. The business secretary said higher apprenticeships would also "help us break down the doors of professions that are not representative of the society in which we live". It cannot be right for example that only 4% of registered commercial airline pilots are women.

Good news if you're being shown the door possibly? I hope its not just another good idea that gets a few good column inches and then falls by the wayside. Good news too, for trainers such as Oxford Aviation Academy, maybe..?

[tucumseh]

Having taught MoD engineering apprentices a long time ago, when MoD introduced a “new” apprentice scheme at AbbeyWood for engineers about 12 years ago, I thought I’d apply as it was something I had enjoyed before.

I was rejected out of hand. We’re not having that “tuc” imparting practical knowledge. What they wanted was Defence Administrators, who at most vaguely knew the difference between a screwdriver and a screw, but certainly not a transistor and a transvestite. I’m afraid there are very few in Government who understand what an engineering apprenticeship is. I hate to think what kind of pilot such an attitude would produce. Someone good on Flight Sim games perhaps.

[Chugalug2]

The thing about getting old is that you've seen it all before, including this "initiative". In the early 70's there was a thing called TOPS (Training Opportunity Scheme). The nice people down at the Labour Exchange had a big fat chequebook to fund the training of erstwhile brain surgeons, Automatic Data Processing Technicians (ie Computer Engineers), pilots, etc. Those leaving the RAF, including a Nav or two, returned triumphant from a visit with "loads'a money" for licences and Instrument Ratings. Comes my turn and I'm told, "Ah, yes, there was such a scheme up until last week but sadly it has had to be terminated as we've run out of money". So I have to shell out the gratuity that I've just been handed, and some more, to Kidlington for the IRT course. In addition they rather apologetically announce that their fees are now attracting the brand new VAT and they are obliged to charge it but, "don't worry because we are an educational establishment and should be exempt. As soon as that's approved you'll be refunded".
Guess what, they weren't and I wasn't.
It's Deja Vu all over again, Vince!

[Chicken Leg]

For example, it is estimated that between now and 2030 European airlines will need to recruit 92,500 new pilots
Hmmm, the re-occuring prediction of a future pilot shortage! I've been reading that for at least 10 -12 years and I bet many others on here have been hearing it for much longer??!!

[wokawoka]

Why bother with some scheme which is probably going to be half arsed and not achieve what it is set out to do. You have some brilliantly trained engineers and pilots who are part of one of the only military aviation organisations in Europe to not obtain some kind of licence when they complete their service. Would it not be more advantageous (and even part of the covenant) to help the chaps who have completed their 16/22 get a Flight crew/ Engineers license and have an easy transition to civvie street bringing bags of knowledge to the industry. But hey what do I know?

[Harley Quinn]

Probably because the Techies are consistently being de-skilled that they need to be retrained through the civil system to understand system and fault diagnosis techniques.

[A and C]

Until the government remove or zero rate VAT on aviation training this is just so much bull !

[Jollygreengiant64]

From what I believe, there is only about £200,000 being directed at the Pilot training side of things. How many pilots does that pay for? 3?

[Rigga]

"and have an easy transition to civvie street bringing bags of knowledge to the industry. But hey what do I know?"

Obviously, you want to bring all civil aviation training industries to an end as employers would only have to wait for some military folk, who often don't qualify for civil jobs when leaving school/college/uni, to drop out of the military system to be placed where they rightfully belong... and, in most cases, with no comprehension of what is actually required of a licence holder.

Take us poor engineers for instance.

"Bags of knowledge"? In what exactly? Let's start with Spanners -
Well, they all look the same shapes really...but picking up a Nut from stores has different recording needs and the use of Locking Nuts is different from military needs...

Maybe that's just two of the things you don't know about civil aviation life?

[NutLoose]

Wokawoka,

in a way I agree with you BUT, a Military Engineer is a different kettle of fish, this might sound stupid but let me explain, I know they have now gone dual trade SAC Tech, ( and not before time ) though as I believe this simply covers Airframes / Engines. A Civi Licenced Engineer (LAE) will be expected to cover Instruments, Compasses and Electrics and basic Radios on top of that, add to that a totally different legislation culture and methodology and you will find it is not all so straight fwd, I believe the Credits that used to exist from the CAA are no longer so extensive under EASA...

The legislation side of it is the main gotcha, though Service training is what it is, targeted at a small concise area, giving expertise in a small period of time on a narrow front, where the Civilian side expands that, as an example, an SAC Tech, JT, Corporal, Sgt etc will these days tend to be Specialised on a type, say Merlin, Chinook, Typhoon, Herc etc and will unlike in the past swop about and gain a broader experience during their careers, myself I did Wessex, Puma, Jaguar and VC 10 so got a wider experience of types, this I believe no longer seems to be the case.
Additionally as a Civilian my skill base has expanded to include major repairs such as rebuilding and even Spar replacements, something the services would farm out to specialised teams, Airlines tend to do this but not always. I also issue Arcs, which is in effect the aircraft Certificate of Airworthiness with no imput by the CAA bar sending a signed copy of the form and a fee, a job an Engineering Officer probably would possibly do in the Services.

My licences literally has hundreds of types and engine configurations / makes on it, so you are expected to be able to adapt from one to the next...

I personally think the Services are getting a gross injustice in the conversion of their skills these days and that is wrong, and should be addressed, I also thought when I left the RAF I to should have my licences given to me, but realised whilst studying for them why this had not happened.

[orca]

"Hello right hand, my name is left hand."

"If only we'd met earlier we could have made ourselves look really good by weaving our acknowledgement of a pilot shortage into our decision to sack some military pilots, which looked a little shabby in the national press. We could have offered a little re-training and placements as part of a redundancy package. Where do you work? What - just across the road? Oh."

[pr00ne]

"Young people will be able to train as airline pilots, LAWYERS, accountants and engineers...."


What? Believe me, as someone right in the middle of it, we do NOT need to increase the quantity of folk training to be lawyers!

It will take a decade for all those training and trained to work through the system, a proportion of who will never see a paid days work as a lawyer.

Engineers I can understand, physicists and chemists too, but lawyers...

[NutLoose]

Why? It takes a minimum of 5 years to become a licenced engineer, the same as a lawyer! They then need the same to gain approvals etc, additionally most of Europe insists on a Degree too..... Oddly enough the UK CAA licence has always been a harder animal to obtain regardless of a degree, hence even though an EASA licence is supposed to be on a level playing field, the rest of the world insist on a UK version and do not want to know most European ones....... BTW Workout the hours required to become a ATPL and it is months in real time in comparison.

A lawyer in the Uk screw up and he goes to jail or goes free, both of which can be overturned...

An Engineer or Pilot Screws up......... They DIE.


.

[Rigga]

NutLoose,
We may have differed in the past but I'm with you, Heart and Soul, on this subject.

This is a straight - "If you want the job - get the qualification" item.

Military pilots get wings that don't work in Civvy St - because they don't know all the civvy rules and have ingrained military practices.
The same goes for some MT Drivers, training lecturers, Admin-ers, RAF Police, Firemen, ATC folk and aircraft engineers.

All the above need to be re-taught the ways of the REAL world. Experience is not what this is about. But laws, rules and practices are different and need to be learnt, understood and used.

Cooks (probably) do know their job as much, if not more, than their civvy counterparts!

I believe that the RAF Techies trade training is now so bad that "Fault Finding" is an additional and mandatory course after the (equivalent of) Fitters Course - and that may be why MOD-taught engineers are not allowed as much as they were in the past.

[salad-dodger]

All the above need to be re-taught the ways of the REAL world. Experience is not what this is about. But laws, rules and practices are different and need to be learnt, understood and used.
you've got an odd attitude rigger, you've clearly identified the point, it's about things being different (see above), but you also bang on about the real world (see above). It's a fairly typical, I've moved on and am now better than you attitude.

Well done for moving on. I agree, that in some respects you've moved on into the real (commercial) world, but in many respects you've just moved onto something different.

S-D

[Rigga]

Hi S-D,
Thanks for pointing out my oddness - it makes me wot I are. And that I've just moved on.

I was interested in moving on when I left the Mob so I looked into what I needed and got it - well before I left (10 years before, actually). I was a Cpl at the time and I remember several Chiefs at Odiham gripeing in the same way as some on here about the ease of moving to the "same" jobs in Civvy St - often wthout realising the "same" jobs just don't exist for experienced military personnel. However, they do exist for qualified personnel.
Unreal, eh?

[BEagle]

This scheme is aimed at restoring the professional nature of the airline pilot and should allow those with the right qualities to be able to embark upon their chosen career without punitive levels of financial outlay. In addition, there will be considerable tax advantages through a formal 'apprenticeship' scheme.

When the previous military aircrew accreditation scheme was being negotiated, it was also stated that 'equivalent civilian qualifications for those obtained during military service' should become available for other groups - such as air traffickers and aircraft technicians.

The aircrew scheme was successfully achieved by aircrew working in close association with the CAA through the MoD/CAA Working Group (MCWG).

Did any air trafficker or aircraft technician set up a similar negotiating body to secure any accreditation agreement for their skills? Or did they just mumble in their beer about the unfairness of it all.........:hmm:

[Al R]

There are quite a few interesting discussions on the CRABS site at LinkedIn. Perhaps getting ready for transition into civvy street needs to be introduced a lot sooner than resettlement; maybe it should be an integral part of the career process, instead of a bolt on at the end.

[NutLoose]

IN a Nutshell Al R...... I did mine when i came out and it involved months and months of self study with a couple of courses thrown in before I got mine, I had to work hard to do them, those on here that are looking at doing theirs when they leave may wish to read this

ELGD 2007: The Engineer's Licensing Guidance Document | Publications | About the CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=2382)

this is the OLD Version as several new licence groups are coming out and it is at the moment being rewritten i believe, as Rigga says, get them done, it not only puts you at the top of the employment lists, it also increases your potential income by a long way.

ELGD | Engineers | Personal Licences and Training (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=177&pagetype=68&gid=777)

you also need to be recording your experience.

this may help too

Aircraft Engineers Bulletin Board - Powered by vBulletin (http://www.airmech.co.uk/forums/index.php)

AS for Apprenticeships, the days of an Apprentice doing 5 to 7 years and literally coming out as an all round and highly skilled individual are long gone, the courses of today are watered down and a couple of years if you are lucky. I myself would loved to have had the training those that have gone before me had, but alas one has to try and pick it up these days on the job, and a lot of those skills built over generations are simply gone.

[Rigga]

"Did any air trafficker or aircraft technician set up a similar negotiating body to secure any accreditation agreement for their skills? Or did they just mumble in their beer about the unfairness of it all......... "

My contacts say that the MOD were asked to input to the (then) new schemes but steadfastly refused to complete the forms when repeatedly reminded.

That inaction has resulted in the likes qualified Swiss farm equipment engineers (Tractor boys) having far more experience credits than RAF, Army or Navy aircraft engineers - for EASA Maintenance Licences. (To be honest they will have an engineering degree too)

I have repeatedly stated on this and other forums that service personnel have an "End of Contract Date" as soon as they put a badge on their heads and that they should work towards it at all times by deciding what it is they want to do and get ready to do it.

Servicemen should be mandated to make "Escape Plans" from at least 5 years prior to exit.

[salad-dodger]

I have repeatedly stated on this and other forums that service personnel have an "End of Contract Date" as soon as they put a badge on their heads and that they should work towards it at all times by deciding what it is they want to do and get ready to do it.

Servicemen should be mandated to make "Escape Plans" from at least 5 years prior to exit.
I might think you odd rigga, but I would wholeheartedly agree with all of that.

S-D

[Kengineer-130]

I think I am in a position to comment on the RAF Vs Civvy Engineering, I did 12 years as a Sootie/Rigger, and have been out just over a year now, having studied for my B1 & B2 EASA licences.

Sorry to say it, but the forces are YEARS behind when it comes to training their technical trades, having spent a year contracting, and now being on the brink of qualifying for the B1&2, I thought I was well prepared leaving the RAF with 12 years of experience behind me, it has been a STEEP learning curve if I am honest!

The real world is a totally different beast, there is no freindly JNCO to guide you through a new job a few times, you read the book & crack on, in the knowledge that YOU are the mech & the LAE responsible for getting this jet "S" , no handing it down shift after shift, you are the point of responsibility.

Having come from being an expert SAC tech, with years of knowledge & experience on one type, and a nice rank structure above to soften the impact, to basically bring promoted to a combined SQN LDR/ Flight sergeant is quite an eye opener!

I would say that the young apprentices are light years ahead in hand skills & technical knowledge than their forces peers, simply due to the fact that they get given much harder technical tasks & far greater responsibility than most CPLS & SNCOs.

[NutLoose]

Exactly what Rigga and I have been saying, the problem being that those that do not believe you are still in the Forces and simply do not know or realise, and those of us that have left and are working in the industry do. Hence why we are actively encouraging people to get started now, because no one in the Services are going to do it for you.

[Al R]

Rigga, S-D,

Servicemen and women need to be generally more aware of life after the military even if its only running in the background, but the service is an unforgiving and demanding mistress. And rightly so.

You start planning your exit strategy too early and you're laying your cards on the table that you're not a chiseller and you will be administered a soft career kiss of death. Helmund too, is bound to get in the way and what if you want to do a mid course correction when you decide you don't like turning a spanner after all, after 10 years of doing it? Its a mindset thing too isn't it? I think back, and I couldn't see more than a week ahead when I joined up, let alone 20 years.

Any scheme that raises levels of awareness and makes for a softer landing transition has to be of benefit. And it might give some focus to all those barrack room lawyers!

[NutLoose]

I would have said that by doing your licenses through self study shows a passion to increase ones skills and knowledge, not simply look at an escape route.

[Kengineer-130]

Nutloose, you would like to think the service would see it like that, but a recent example of the stupidity of the forces is clarified in one of my old Sergeants story!

He has self studied all of his B1 modules, has recently just been signed on to Los 30, after completing 22 years without a hitch, with excellent assessments etc etc.

He has applied for air tanker in all the trawls, yet has been rejected every time, despite needing no modules, merely experience. On the flip side there are people who would never have had the drive or motivation to do their B1, yet have applied simply to get a "free" licence, and have been picked up!

Anyway, the fact is if you work hard & get the qualifications you need, you will do ok in the real world.

[NutLoose]

Nothing suprises me, when I came out they advertised a 3 year accompanied position in the Carribean for a SNCO to work on the Piper they were using for hunting down Drug Smugglers, the only person in the RAF that had any experience was the guy serving out there, however a Chiefy on our section had onced helped a friend one weekend put the wings on a Piper Cherokee he had imported in a container, took about 6 hours, so he applied and put that down as his experience, he got the job due to being the only other qualified ( if you could call it that ) applicant... I wouldn't mind but they sent him to CSE to be trained on them and all he was allowed to do was AF BF and Turn rounds, any probs I think someone came out from Miami to fix it.. And when it needed maintenance they took it to Miami.

[Rigga]

...probably explains why my application was turned down.

Mind you the initial interviewing officer (a bod from Gen Office) asked me why I'd applied for a role in Turkey(?) - I assumed he hadn't heard of Turks & Caicos.
I was also told it was "always someone from Lyneham" that got it.

[A and C]

About twenty years back I was talking to an SAC who wanted to get his civil engineering licences but was told by his education officer that the licences would lapse after two years and he would then have to re-take all the exams.

This was totally untrue and naturally the guy had decided not to go ahead with the licence exams.

This leads me to ask if this sort of half truth and misinformation is a sort of staff retention move on the part of he forces or did this guy just have a very poor education officer ?