Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies)A forum for those on the steep path to that coveted professional licence. Whether studying for the written exams, training for the flight tests or building experience here's where you can hang out.
A well known UK Integrated FTO has been trying to sell their integrated course lately. They are really trying to build up their cash reserve, since they basically just started over. Is this the same FTO? There aren´t that many integrated FTOs.
I'll state my background before throwing my hat into the ring...
I opted for the integrated route with a large uk training orgainsation and ended up at the same company as WWW...it cost a fair bit of cash - not as much as nowadays though, to be fair. I've done a bit of time on rubbish, and then rather unreliable money - some good, bad and indifferent months. I now have a permanent contract and am about to pop off to what will hopefully be even greener pastures, though the present ones are pretty healthy to be honest.
It's all very well taking the moral high ground of the modular route, but it would be fascinating to see a proper survery of where people - based on date of committing to training - have found themselves.
To me the biggest question is not integrated or modular, but which will best set me up with a right hand seat job?
If you complete your frozen ATPL with 10 different training providers spread throughout the world for 40k, will that look good on your CV? I have always thought more that 2-3 schools was a bad thing?
A friend of mine is now flying for Monarch due to CTC, and I must admit I am tempted to follow in his footsteps. Equally though I have spoken to some great schools about the modular root at around 20-30k less it appeals greatly.
My advice is simple: the only ‘non-direct’ route into a flying career today is an airline authorised integrated ‘MPL package’. By ‘MPL package’ I mean you’ll have to pay for the MPL, the type rating and your line training too. Today the co-pilot’s seat is sold to the highest bidder.
I question the point of an fATPL, be it modular or integrated. Ryanair seem to be taking integrated fATPL’s but no other UK airline of note does. As for a modular fATPL: it seems to be untouchable these days (not in yesteryear). Anyway the ATPL badly needs dragging out of the 1950’s. The MPL is the basis for future airline training in EASA, like it or not.
Instructing to gain experience? Ha! Forget instructing. Airlines aren’t interested. FI’s go to the back of the queue and pay up for a type rating like everyone else; there are no favours on the seniority conveyor belt. So why delay the inevitable cash outlay? Anyway 250 hours integrated MPL is considered greatly superior to 2,500 hours fATPL, however gained.
You can see why integrated MPL is the only way forward for airlines: training becomes a profit centre and eliminates employment obligations. The self funded cadets are pre-selected by the airlines to meet their own quality standards, the cadet pays for the integrated MPL, type rating and line training courses according to the airlines own SOP’s, rendering them virtual indentured labour. Should the airline not need the cadets, they are simply chopped, at zero cost to the airline.
Is the sale of co-pilot seats to the highest bidder sensible? Ask the relatives of most of the recent crashes where over reliance on automatics and a lack of basic flying skills scream from the accident reports. But as long as insurance actuaries don’t think there’s a problem and the accountant-ocracy running the airlines prioritise their annual bonuses, this is the way of the world.
The MPL package is ingenious. It’s all upside to the airlines and plays on the compelling nature of flying and the wannabees’ need for instant gratification, none of which makes economic sense. Indeed I foresee a time when co-pilots will always pay their employer to fly and even at captaincy the urge to fly will one day render the left seat a profit centre. It’s beginning already.
ATPL’s, MPL’s, type ratings and line training require enormous personal outlays for the privilege of flying our tattooed, shaven headed brethren to Benidorm for the cost of a few pints of beer. But there are more takers than ever from whom airlines can now select the cream - at zero cost.
The MPL is exactly suited to modern airline operations and provides the airline with control over cadet quality. And it turns a profit. Perfect. Neither the integrated ATPL nor the modular alternative offers any of these benefits.
Finally, if you think the integrated ‘MPL package’ is expensive, count yourself lucky that EASA will never impose the FAA’s 1,500 hour rule. If they did, buying your way into the cockpit would be well beyond the already drastic step of remortgaging your parent’s home for the privilege.
I am new to the forum and have been busting my brain on weather to go Mod or Int and i just cant decide. i have recently passed my OAA skills test but still thinking MOD. at the end the frozen atpl is still the same. in the thread its all about the uk employers if you're happy to go abroad will modular still hold weight in other countries??
You will have the same license as any one else which is a CPL/IR.
Which is when the realisation dawns that isn't goint to cut much ice with the cadet scemes of British airways, easyjet, Thomson, Monarch, Thomas Cook, DHL, Qatar airways, etc.....
They will expect you to have obtained your licence by one of these integrated programmes. Most airlines will affiliate themselves to one of the big 3. British airways gave you the choice of all 3. The licence simply isn't the be all and end all that some people would hope it was.
Exactly so if your not on one of those schemes its not really worth paying the extra for.
So unless your on a cadet scheme and there isn't another good reason for paying the premium such as you would struggle to self learn without it being spoon fed to you then modular is the way forward.
Any other reason such as you think that its going to give you a boost in your chances to other operators who don't run schemes means that you are subsidising the prefered training method of the legacy carriers and big boys.
It seems that if you can get on to one of the MPL 'sponsored' schemes (I use the term extremely loosely!) then your chances of employment are as close to being guaranteed without actually expressing that. As such, they are by far and away the best route.
However, if you don't get on to one and just go through the normal integrated route (CTC cadets, OAA APP) then at the end of it you stand only a slightly better chance than the modular guys, who have all the same certificates.
The reason that you have a slightly better chance is that you will be placed with airlines when vacancies come up before the modular guys. Why? Well, why else would you just have paid £84k for a set of licences you could have got for under £50k!
At the end of the day, the main benefit of going through CTC, OAA etc is that your chances of getting employment are marginally better than those who went modular, purely because of the contracts those FTO's have with the major airlines.
If you have the means to risk debts of upwards of £80k (plus more for Type Rating) on no promise of a job then integrated is the way forward, but otherwise go modular, then the only risk you face is that after it all you have slightly less chance than the integrated guys straight of OAA/CTC. However, you will have paid for your training as you work, and hence still be in employment whilst waiting for an airline job, and have the means to pay off a much smaller loan to cover anything you borrowed.
As a result, you can afford to take that risk of not being placed with an airline for a period of time post-training, then once you have a place and get the magical 1,500 hours and an unfrozen licence then you are in the same boat as all the integrated guys...except, of course, that this is where the modular guys should have the upper hand because they have life/work/management/etc experience IN ADDITION TO those 1,500 hours and an unfrozen licence. Who looks more promising to a prospective employee now?
Last edited by Libertine Winno; 24th May 2012 at 12:16.
I don't think many people will deny that your chances of employment post-qualification are higher if you go through CTC or OAA, simply because it is in their interests to place cadets over other pilots who haven't paid them grossly over the odds for an integrated course.
However, I struggle to justify the risk of being out of work and facing BBVA loan payments of £1k+ per month, even if it is only for a few months. There are no guarantees in this industry, and in 18 months time we could just as easily be in the midst of an even worse recession and banking crisis than we were in 2008, as we could be in the position where there are more jobs than there are low hours pilots to fill them.
If you have the means not to worry about that risk then lucky you, go integrated, but if you (and your parents!) are going to be royally screwed if you dont get placed for 6 months then I would seriously consider the wisdom of risking all that. Just my views!