2pb, I disagree with yuor arguments - has someone sold you an integrated course?
The training environment is closely monitored at all times, with regular progress reporting to chart how the student is doing throughout the course both in the air and on the ground.
Progress reporting to whom? This would only be applicable if a student was being sponsored by an employer and, as we know, the only operator who has done that is Bond.
The groundschool is thorough, often provided by lecturers with years worth of personal experience. This is a particularly significant point. The amount of material to learn for the JAA ATPL syllabus is significant. Trying to digest all the information by reading it on your tod is some feat.
All groundschools will have lecturers with years of experience. I did distance learning on my tod - it was tough but no "feat". I went to a school that does integrated aeroplane course (but not rotary) - does that make them better or worse in your eyes?
the employers can also gauge the quality of the flight instruction quite easily.
They can also do that with pretty much any UK school. It's a small world and any employer will know the reputation of the flight school you attend whether integrated or modular. Of the two integrated schools mentioned so far, one of them does not have the best reputation going and the other has a certain amount of bias against it because of the location.
but trying to dum down that there is little or no difference in whether you've been trained in a modular or integrated way is a little naive if you ask me...
In what way naive? What experience have you of recruiting in the offshore industry? Have you been to see any of the North Sea Operators?
Cheers
Whirls