Finals 19. You start of chastising my view but then hit the hail on the head in your last sentence.
It is indeed a question of gaining experience, but at what cost?
It is called supply and demand. Currently there is ample supply so the buyer i.e. the airlines do what they want as we the seller are prepared to pay more and more. When/if the balance shifts then the boot will move onto the other foot.
Is it ludicrous that pilots have to pay up front training cost, errm yep. Is it morally wrong, errm yep. Do we continue to do it droves errm yep. Why because much as we would like it our moral conscience doesn't pay the mortgage and the facts are simple aviation is no longer a meritocracy it's an hoursocracy and experienceocracry.
I would love to see the introduction of a universal pilot aptitude test of the sort of OASC caliber which had scores going from 1000 = Chuck Yeager to 10 = I will follow you into an aircraft purely out of curiosity.
A fully integrated test i.e psych profile, maths, physics, verbal numerical reasoning, spatial orientation as well as motor skills and learning. This test to be run by an independent contractor to JAR with every firm in Europe as an ironclad agreement to take the next best form the top of the pile only. None of this rubbish where you get an A starred for taking part, pure hard cold competition. Where the guy/girl who gets 600 is just simply in every way not as good as the guy/girl who gets 601 and companies start at the top and hire in the order the market can provide.
Now the fact is companies do not just hire the best pilots on offer, they do not know who the best pilots are as the criteria that most screen on is arbitrary.
i.e. Many airlines will not interview you until you have, say 1000hrs with 500hrs on type or 200hrs multi, etc ,etc. You could be the next Chuck Yeager but no one will ever know until you have scrabbled about to get the minimum hours that airline X require before they even look at your CV. Or they may say they only recruit integrated or modular or flaxen haired. What I am saying is they are not as a rule interviewing everyone, putting them through a robust selection procedure and taking the best of the crop.
Now if the world were like this then
number would be wasting his money unless he was a top scorer but because no one knows or cares what his score would be those who want it find a way, beg, borrow, beg again if they have to but they do what is required to get a job, any job, anywhere in the world.
Those who haven't got the stomach for the fight can feel free to leave, less competition for the rest of us. We don't make the rules as the supply, we only make the rules when we are the demand. Until then
number take the job or step sidewards your call but don't say in 5 years time you never got your shot and ask if it is fair that the guy who did pay is now flying his version of the dream.
Is life fair NO, is it a meritocracy NO, has someone offered you a job YES. Get on with it as the answer to
is subjective is it worth yet more debt in pursuit of your goal to me yes, to you well only you know and only you can choose but when you do choose bear in mind that you may not get another opportunity like this again. They know it that's why they get away with it!!!