The unions have little interest in opposing self sponsored type rating schemes and while I would recommend union membership for certain reasons, it certainly will not help with regard to ending self sponsored type ratings. Infact both IPA and BALPA websites offer advice on undertaking self sponsored type ratings.
While I don't necesarily agree with self funded line training schemes, I will accept that everyones situation is different and you need to use whatever resources you have to get that first job. The fact remains paying for a rating for many can be economically more viable option than spending a year or two on instructors pay followed by a three or four year bond in a turbo prop job on a fairly meagre salary.
Adverse Bump, you say don't pay to fly, when I was a full time instructor I had to use savings and a credit card to support living expenses, the job did not pay enough to live on, as such it was costing me money to do the job (hence I was paying to fly) not to mention the enourmous pay cut I took to become a full time instructor. If I was still in my turbo prop job I would still be borrowing money to support my living expenses (especially as I have a family to support now)
If I wanted to get air taxi work I would need to go and pay to fly hours on a piston twin to meet the single pilot ops requirement, so ineffect is there any difference between someone hiring a twin to build hours to get air taxi work and someone paying for hours on a 737.
Philpaz, not eveyone was born with a silver spoon, some people actually have had sucessful careers and earned the money to fund training. The free market system that has allowed you to undertake self funded training for a CPL/IR has also spawned the SSTR.
Last edited by portsharbourflyer; 27th Feb 2009 at 18:35.