You know, someone told me before I got in to this business that it was extremely risky, and you might spend so much money that you bring your self to the edge of bankruptcy. In fact, more than one person told me that. You then sit down with all the information and make a decision. 12, 24 or 36 months down the line or however long it takes you to finish your training be you integrated OR modular, if you reach the point where their advice proves to be true, then you took the risk and it didn't pay off. Anyone who has half a brain did their research properly before getting involved. You should be as positive as you can be (and certainly put out that vibe at every opportunity), but at the back of your mind be mentally preparing for the worst from the very start. What am I going to do if I don't get a job in the first 12 months, or 24 months, or what if I don't get one at all?
I've seen a number of presentations from airlines over the last few months and to be honest it has been quite disheartening. But at the end of the day, I chose to take the risk and if it doesn't work out I'll have to deal with it. You certainly won't find me posting angry posts on pprune shouting about how the industry is going down the plug hole and how no-one should ever become a pilot, yada yada yada, as so many posts seem to do. Its a personal decision and it will be affected by different factors for everyone.
Nor, by the way, do I think people have any right to slate modular OR integrated students for their choice. Both parties made the decision they thought was best at the time. The guy who has rich parents and went integrated shouldn't have to justify his choice any more than the guy who went modular should have to justify his. You simply can't say definitively that one way is better than the other. Money aside their are so many other considerations - will distance learning suit you or do you need to be in a classroom environment? Do you want to live on site or live in your own place off site?
Regardless of which way you go its all a gamble. You can slightly reduce the risk by going integrated purely because several airlines now have schemes/understandings set up with the big integrated schools and it might (subject to performing well) mean that your CV lands on the right desk at the right time. Im my opinion modular students can also reduce the risk by trying to keep their training auditable and mainly based at a single FTO, and complete it in as shorter space of time as possible. Doing your ATPL's, then waiting months and months to start your CPL, then another X many months for IR and MCC means you start to lack currency, costing you more money to reach the required standard and making your position worse with a prospective employer.
And thats the one thing that has been continually hammered in to me. These days, performance is everything. Airlines will consistently hire the guy who got a clean first time pass rate in his ATPL's with a high average and first time CPL/IR passes, over the guy who had to resit 2 or 3 exams, got a poor average and failed his/her CPL a couple of times before he/she got it. The exact line I've heard mentioned is "we want the best pilots and we make no excuse for that". So maybe if you get to the first set of ATPL's and drop a couple, you should think seriously before investing any more money.
The "its not fair" and "why should integrated students get all the goodies" argument is completely flawed. Firstly, integrated students definately do not get all the goodies. I personally know several modular students hired very recently by major carriers and similarly integrated students who are unemployed. Second, Airlines are commercial companies operating in a highly competitive market place. If, on average, they decide to go to Integrated schools to hire their pilot's, then who are we to question that? They can do whatever they like - indeed whatever they feel is best for their company and moaning and hammering on about it on here is not going to instigate the slightest bit of change. More and more airlines seem to be opting to do this and I can only assume the reason is that at the end of the course, they get a hefty file with results from every single written test and every single training flight - a complete training history. So, instead of having to dig through the thousands of CV's which appear on their desks every day they get handed it on a plate. They can still sift out those who didn't perform as well, but it takes them a tenth of the time, and it only takes 1 guy instead of 5. I haven't come across many modular schools who offer an "integrated style" course at a modular price. I know Oxford do something called waypoint now but I know very little about it. Certainly at the modular school I went to for my PPL, there we very few records kept and those they did keep were for internal use only.
Anyway, in summary having read this thread (and several others) my overriding feeling is that its a shame that so many of us who will hopefully one day work together get drawn in to these ridiculous mud hurling contests without realling knowing anything about the competence or experience of the people we're talking about. I've heard people claim that integrated students are just drones rolled off the production line and that modular students are pretty much inferior because they spent less. Both suggestions are completely ridiculous and pretty insulting. Lets all show a bit more respect.
My two cents.
V2
Last edited by veetwo; 28th Aug 2006 at 11:53.