Beazlebub,
Just out of curiosity, what are your learned thoughts on those of your many colleagues who have come through the modular/self-improver route?
A very
off topic and slightly strange question? My thoughts about what particularly?
If you turn the clock back 15 years or more, you would have found the well trodden path to an airline career was travelled by two major groups of applicants. They were the military career changers (leavers) and the self improver CPL/IR's. A small section of the marketplace was satisfied by the "approved"
ab-initio training schools (commercial and linked) into a small number of specialized airline cadet programmes. Hamble (BEA/BOAC/BA) was perhaps the most famous, but there were others (Oxford, AST Perth,) that satisfied the requirements of a small number of airlines cadet programmes. These were expensive programmes even in those days, and in some cases provided the fast track input into an airline career.
Outside of the small number of these programmes, recruitment was satisfied almost wholly by the military leavers and the "self improvers." Taking the case of the latter, what was meant by the term "self improver?" As I recall it was often used in slightly derogatory terms, but in reality it meant somebody who had worked their way up through the system, often through a number of "stepping stone" jobs. The basic licence itself involved nearly
three times the experience levels of todays "modular CPL," at around 700 hours! Even then , that was not nearly enough to qualify for most airline vacancies. Most "self improvers" went through the "stepping stones" of flight instruction, air taxi, aerial work jobs, until they found themselves at the door of the second and third tier airline operations, where many got their first look in at heavy turboprop experience. For most "jet jobs" the vacancies were satisfied by these "self improvers" obtaining promotion from the turboprops, or by jumping ship when they had amassed the requisite experience sought. This experience was minimally in the 2000-3000 hour range (often more) with
at least 500 hours turbine time.
As I mentioned, the term "self improver" was often used in a derogatory manner, but in reality the "self improvers" were just that. They improved themselves through what was more often than not a difficult and demanding self financed apprenticeship. It took time to work yourself up to the experience levels demanded of the first tier operators. Nevertheless, a lot of people achieved their goals, and the industry requirements. Indeed it was the most common route into an airline career. The fast track "approved" programmes provided a small market segment, but even four decades ago, they were doing so at the 250 hour level.
So back to your question? My thoughts on the many colleagues who came through the "self improver route?" My answer. I have only the greatest respect for them and anybody else who has worked their up through a system that has always been extremely challenging and one with a very high attrition rate. As I have already stated, it was the principal route into a first tier airline career, and whilst (as is always the case) some were lucky, well resourced, and seemed to have the advantages, most worked extremely hard to get where they are.
However.......
That isn't todays reality. With the introduction and
harmonisation of J.A.R. The CPL/IR became more of a basic licence. In effect it became an "aerial work" licence. This brought the system into line with that existing in most other ICAO nations, and particularly the USA. The "modular" requirements in terms of flying experience was slashed by two thirds. The licence became a benchmark requirement for aerial work jobs that (in the UK) could previously have been done with merely a PPL (such as flight instructing.) Obviously it was now much cheaper and easier to obtain a CPL than it previously had been. This opened the floodgates as more and more people were seduced or enticed into obtaining a licence that they believed was the benchmark qualification for the right hand seat of an airliner. Two problems with that. The first, even the previous 700 hour licence was never the benchmark for those type of jobs. The second, the number of hopefuls expanded exponentially. You only have to wade through these forums to see that more than a decade later, people still believe this.
The one aspect that didn't change (fundamentally,) was the previously niche "approved school" fast track CPL/IR. This was a full time course of integrated training geared specifically towards the very steep learning curve of a low hour airline apprenticeship. Established and new operators moved into this market around 15 years ago and expanded the concept to provide the selection and quality that airlines found attractive in new recruits. Such was the success (pre-recession) of some of these schools, that money was freely available to fund many of those candidates who were successful at selection. Airlines have always needed to maintain a supply curve of experienced pilots to satisfy their left seat requirements. This was always achieved by the induction experience levels of those well qualified military pilots and similarly experienced "self improvers." However, at around the same time the licencing system was undergoing its JAR induced metamorphosis, another major regulatory change was taking place. That change, was the extension of a pilots career by anything up to
10 years! This took pressure off the airlines to maintain a linear experience curve, and allowed them to switch a much more significant segment of their recruitment over to the cadet input.
First tier airlines never had a particular requirement for 700 hour CPL/IR's. A few took "approved" 200 hour fast track cadets. The majority they sourced from the experience growth of those 700 hour CPL's. That is to say when they had "stepped" through the system and "self improved" to the 2000-3000 (500 turbine) base level. The reality is that has changed little. They certainly don't have a requirement for 250 hour CPL holders, and the problem is, that the exponential hoards of these new wannabes in many cases simply cannot find the stepping stones with which to amass their experience. Even when the lucky few do, the growth in "cadet programmes" and the competition awaiting them at that level, simply increases the difficulty in finding jobs at any ascending level.
Many wannabes have cemented the idea that you get a CPL/IR and you are fair game for the airline vacancies that might arise. That was never the case, and God knows (for all the reasons I have proffered and more) it certainly isn't the case now. The cadet programmes do provide a fast track opportunity, indeed they always have. However the idea that "it is the same licence so why bother" simply fails to take into account the realities.
In two decades the world has moved on. In airline recruitment things have moved on. At the
ab-initio level airlines are increasingly looking towards tailored input. The current evolution into MPL training programmes is simply the natural evolution of that tailored input. If my son or daughter came to me and said "what is the quickest and most likely route into the right hand seat of a first tier airline? (or indeed any airline with a good career horizon,) then I would give them the same advice and observational background that I would on these forums.
It doesn't bother me one bit what anybody actually decides to do. I completely understand the limitations, differences in aspiration, and the practical and economic realities that underscore and usually define an individuals choice. I see what I see from a good vantage point. I (and many others) have watched the evolution of the market for three decades and more. Take it on board, discard it, argue it, ignore it. It makes no difference to me. However read these forums and a few others in the neighbourhood and the context and reality of the comment and advice should become clear.
These forums are often a pit of gloom of despondency, when in fact there are a few bright spots out there. They may be few and far between, but they do exist. I know they exist because I work with them everyday. I am truly pleased for anybody that succeeds at their goals however they achieve that success. I understand why some rail against the system and simply close their eyes to reality, but unfortunately it doesn't change that reality.