It shouldn't make any difference but in the U.K. airline industry , OATS does seem to . Largely I believe because in the days when there were fewer approved schools Oxford was held in some high esteem rather like CFS or Hamble . But the standard of any school must be measured on success not past reputation & this depends not just on instruction given but also the hard work & dedication of the students , & perhaps most importantly continuity & practice . Unaware of any of these schools having a reputation for poor flying instruction I would seek a training provider who addresses the considerations of weather , fleet & instructor availability . Add to that good , comfortable accommodation , reasonable food at a reasonable price & an approachable , working chain of command & I would feel somewhat satisfied .
I don't think any of the schools offers anything near the ideal suggested but a couple do try - I agree with Send Clowns go & see some schools for yourself & most importantly of all , try to talk to some students .
Thankyou Send Clowns for the clarification - my drift was more along the lines of why Oxford seems to have this reputation not suggesting that a modular graduate would be in the same boat as a sponsored one , just that the OATS name would be known at interview . By the way , often the instructors teaching modular are the same individuals who teach integrated at OAT these days , picking up work as required .
Last edited by Johnny 7; 25th November 2002 at 23:10.