Pilot/OAT pamphlet DO NOT BUY!!!

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!

I will not be purchasing Pilot any more. Discuss.....

1. Fed up of only seeing articles of how OAT are the dog's and every other FTO is Crap.
2. " Articles on how to be an airline pilot" - sponsored by OAT
3. It's a fantastic plane and a snip at 125,000 quid!! (honest)
4. Edited by ... OAT
5. Is it me ? Flyer is a better mag anyway.

Discuss.......

TWIT-TWOO !!!

[Kengineer-130]

Interesting, it does seem to aim at the higher end of the market, but one of my fav bits is the "how to fly like a proffesional" series, which in my limited experience is a very good read, and seems to offer sound safe advice. Also, the buyers guides seem to be quite sensible and pretty well researched. I have a love of all flying things, and I suppose its a bit like reading Evo magazine, whilst its probably more relevant to read horrible boring diesel car monthly, it is occasionally nice to read about £,000,000,000 worth of exotica being driven/flown etc.

And I must start buying flyer as well :ok:

I do agree the OAT article is a bit OTT though, I can think of far more interesting "development" stories to follow, but hey, if you don't like it turn the page

[porridge]

Have to agree with you on this. However, you need to remember that this company makes Mandelson and Campbell look like mere 'babes in the wood' when it comes to marketing hype and spin.
Certainly when it comes to the type of wannabee they attract it proves a number of the old adages: i.e. - 'one born every minute' and 'a fool and his money', etc.
However if someone wants to be spoon fed and shoe-horned into the job - then they must expect to pay a hefty premium for their lack of initiative. The ones who have more chance of making it to the left hand seat rapidly are usually people who have used a great deal of initiative, researched and taken their training seriously and spent their resources wisely. Consequently they are the people who have good leadership and interpersonal skills and thus are the right commander material.
Yes, if Flyer maintains it’s integrity then it’s probably going to be the better choice.

[High Wing Drifter]

Whatever happened to that other big name training institution cronie who wrote for Flyer? I don't recall reading the 'Commercial Training News' column lately.

[RVR800]

These magazines get a lot of revenue from OAT etc so its in their interest to say 'yes its well worth the cash; you'll easily get a job.

What you will never see are articles about the reality of how much the real cost of training is.

[InTheAir]

Oh come off it, which aviation mag these days isn't full of OAT stuff?

[Sans Anoraque]

I noticed on the 'Pilot' website last week a congratulatory blurb from the OAT marketing department explaining what a grand magazine 'Pilot' was.

It now seems to have disappeared. Pprune embarassment?

Or possibly they've changed their name to 'Piloat'

[moo]

I think you’ll find porridge that for the vast majority of people at Oxford, no one is expecting to be spoon fed/shoe horned into a job. Don’t get me wrong, there are sorts who probably think it’s owed to them (I’m sure those people are everywhere) but certainly all the people I know are more than aware that the effort is 99% of getting a job is yours. Oxford provide some opportunities (whereby they are approached for low-hours pilots by some airlines) and if you are lucky to be put forward, you’ll be up against other people, will have to attend at least an interview and a sim ride (and possibly an aptitude style screening selection) and if you get through it all, then of course, you are good enough for the job… (I think that figures).

As for:

“The ones who have more chance of making it to the left hand seat rapidly are usually people who have used a great deal of initiative, researched and taken their training seriously and spent their resources wisely”

Everyone I know at this school takes their training seriously, (even the fortunate few who’ve had their parents fork out for it all) I spent many, many years of research working things out in this career (before there was such thing as internet) and many years of working hard and saving harder. There are people from all walks of life at Oxford, hell, there are high-flight professionals from careers that take 5 times as long to train for as long as this one does, and 5 times as long again to get yourself established. They chose Oxford because it was (they felt) the right place for them to train. I don’t think you can question their initiative, they’re much more cynical and (extremely) switched on. The “spoilt brat” is present at Oxford/Jerez/Cabair/everywhere else, but in the extreme minority.

I went to the schools that I thought I wanted to train at, asked some questions, got some answers (didn’t just ask HR & Management either) went down to the halls of residence, or the smokers room and found out the about the real school. At the end of it all, I sat down, with my wishes in one hand, my hard earned finances in another and kneaded it all together in a ball………it was certainly not a question of “I want to go to Oxford because they’lll get me a job”……I feel I “spent my resources wisely” on a school that was right for me.

I won’t try and sell mine or any other school on here, if you want to have a look at it, then go and have a look at it, if not, then don’t. At the end of the day, the flying school you choose is a massive decision (as is modular vs integrated) and anyone reading an article on pprune or in a flyer magazine as a basis for spending a hell of a lot of money, frankly lacks the basic judgement to become an airline pilot in the first place!

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!

MOO ,

I think your missing the point of the thread. It's not about the students or the decision/ reason made to enlist at OAT but the biased reporting in Pilot Mag.

You state judgement is a necessary skill to become an airline pilot. I suggest so is the ability to analyse and digest opinions/topics from a discussion.
Anyway,

TWIT-TWOO!! (is sexier than MOO!!!! )

Sorry couldn't resist - been on the Pop!!

[moo]

My reply was directed at Porridge, (as I stated) who's post wasn't about the quality of the mag....:ok:

[porridge]

And mine was about the ability of companies to manipulate the media to their advantage, New Labour or OAT it's al the same thing.
Explain to me one thing what does the massive premium you have to pay get for you in any heavy branded product? If it's Kelvin Klien or Levi's it is still the same pair of jeans when you wear it.
With government you still get the same bunch of liars, just a new flavour of liar.
I could digress in to a number of small service industries/business who still provide me with better quality goods in my neighborhood these days and at a better price than the branded superstores etc.
My rule of thumb is that the quality of service provided is always inversely proportional to the level of marketing and advertising spin!

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!

Sorry you two but as stated been on the pop!
So are you too still going to buy the propaganda called "Piloat" or are still going to beat about the bush?

Porridge
Don't understand how level of service is inversely proportional to marketing/spin ?
BA are pretty good and deliver 99% of the time so do easyjet. OAT marketing very good but so is Bristol. Both give good service but at half the cost.
It's a very difficult subject but at the end of the day.........

DON"T BUY PILOAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TWIT-TWOO !!!

[KrazyKraut]

Well, porridge - I wouldn't go as far as calling it an inverse relationship. If you buy a (heavily branded) Audi A6, you get a much better car than if you buy a Mondeo. If you go to (heavily-branded) Oxford, you get much better training than at certain budget, US-based, JAA schools.

But the point is this: Those who do NOT research schools wisely and carefully may be led to believe that by paying a HUGE premium at OAT their chances are MUCH better to get a first job. For the majority of APP cadets, I would doubt whether that's the case. Do they get good value? As far as I'm aware, Oxford does not publish how many APP cadets *don't* get an FO position upon completing the programme - only how many *do*.

This is not to discredit the quality of the school. I spent much time there myself, and Oxford is an excellent FTO.

But for those apsiring pilots not in the know, how can they make their training decision wisely and without bias? By reading mags that clearly favour Oxford - for the obvious reason of massive advertising expenditure? Or by speaking to a "career advisor" from that school? By trusting ads with big jets and in them or a glossy "skills directory"?

As Moo said - you have to go there, speak to staff and students, check the facilities and airplanes. If you think the school is worth its money and right for you, by all means enroll. But those things alone should be the factors on which to base a decision. And do not let yourself be biased by the type of marketing that only Oxford can afford. This stuff costs money which isn't going towards your training.

KK

[moo]

Agree with KK wholeheartedly, good post

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Its very similar to the world of motoring journalism. The magazine price covers the costs of production, distribution, taxes and retailers profit. The profit and pay of the journalists comes entirely from the ad revenue.

Now if you look at historical relationships between a car makers reviews and a car makers magazine advertising spend you will see a correlation. In effect the car magazines have a gun to the manufacturers heads as they have x-100thousand potential customers reading and believing their opinions.

For example. Post 1990 Porsche was losing money and cut back on its magazine advertising. For the next few years the 911 became 'eclipsed' the 928 was slagged mercilessly and the 944/968 never got anything but lukewarm praise for the niche race models. Then Porsche started spending on ads - big time. You will now rarely pick up a copy of Autocar, Top Gear or Evo without finding Porsche having the first page doble page glossy as adspace. The most expensive real estate in the ad business. If not the front two pages they will be in number two position on the back page. Their spend is huge. For each car they sell they outspend a rival such as BMW by 8 times.

You've not read a bad review of their products for some years now.

Peugeot cut down its level of magazine ad spending and I doubt you've read a good review since.

With this in mind you have to remember that flying magazines work just the same. Garmin never get a bad review do they? Ever seen a flying mag say that Breitlings are overpriced technically mediocre watches viewed by many people as a cliche to be avoided? Of course you haven't - that back page "Breitling NaviSpaceAdventure" is paying the Editors mortgage.

So the chances of you finding in the magazines a well balanced factually researched article about the pros and CONS of attending OATS or FTE Jerez or CABAIR are frankly pretty small indeed.

Given that the debate on these forums for night on 8 years has raged about the choice of Integrated or Modular (509 vs Self Improver before 1999) it is wonderous that no magazine has ever run such a feature. Why not get two journalists on two pages arguing for one of the two options? It would be a good read, easily written and highly useful to its readers...

But it will never happen.

Cheers

WWW

ps - Go Modular, save £25k, you'll still get a job in this market and with the saving you can pick up a Boxster S and then be a real airline pilot in your very first year! ;)

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!

WWW
Well said. Can't wait to get the Porsche.

TWIT-TWOO!!!

[Sans Anoraque]

Pilotowl,

please stop that.

[mad_jock]

I would disagree that you have a MUCH better chance of a job with oxford than any other training provider.

After using the numbers on http://www.oxfordaviation.net/career/career-03.htm

In a previous thread and using there own data to say that you only had an additional 5% extra chance of a job doing intergrated APP program. They quite quickly changed the format so it wasn't so obvious that even with there own students there wasn't really much difference between Intergrated and modular. Now the data on the page is a bit miss leading the numbers are now lumped together so you can't tell if its modular/ intergrated or if a graduate is classed as flying training done or just ground school done. The year I got a job I was included in the statistics even though I had only done distance learning with them. And for the numbers to be of any use they would have to publish how many graduates a year are going through the school.

For the OAT guys that are there how many pilots are getting trained just now?

Also the fact that they now have started an enhanced modular course themselves tends to tell me that they have now relised that the old intergrated market isn't what it used to be just now.

I bet there are small modular schools out there with a higher percentage of jobs within 6 months than oxford. I would have a sneaky suspision that anyone who has got on well with the chaps at ontrack will have access to way more contacts and airline information than the OAT graduates.

Even if you do go to oxford its only the top percentage of each class get put forward for the BA, Cityexpress, BMIbaby and flybe jobs. And to be honest I know of a few other companys who have employed more low hour pilots in the last year than the last 3. And 2 of them arn't even mentioned in the OAT list.

The waypoint program sounds pretty good to me to be honest.
£25k for CPL/MEP/IR/MCC is quite a good price. Even if you don't included all the marketing bull****e that they would have you believe. Should be able to get the whole lot done for 40k.

But to be honest its all hedging you have to decide whats going to happen in 2 years time. All sorts of things could happen Green taxes could come in which will knackar the jets another 9/11. You just have to decide if you want 40k's worth of debt or 70k's worth of debt if it all goes wrong. And if it all stays as it is with everyone getting jobs it means that you have saved 30k.

MJ

[porridge]

Well said WWW, ditto Mad Jock!

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!!

Sans Anoraque - TWIT-TWOO!!

Is it getting to you? Good.:E

[High Wing Drifter]

TWIT-TWOO!!!

Sans Anoraque - TWIT-TWOO!!

Is it getting to you? Good.
It seems a sharabang from the local
nutcase emporium has arrived.

:\

[scroggs]

Mad Jock has it about right, in my opinion. Oxford is a good school, without a doubt, but it has very large overheads and is thus more expensive than schools with lower costs. Like any aviation-related school, Oxford has to make some hay while the sun shines because income is hard to get when the market goes through the low point of its cycle, as it always does - and, thanks to its airfield, buildings, and high staff levels, Oxford is not well placed to strip out costs when the market turns against it. Add to that the 'brand factor', and you can see how Oxford justifies (and needs) its high charges.

WWW makes an interesting point about the links between advertising and magazines, and one which is probably highly pertinent in the somewhat limited market of aviation training (though, as a long-time 'Car' subscriber, I could argue the facts about Porsche's advertising ;)).

As w always say, don't believe any marketing hype; do your own research and go for the FTO that best suits your requirements and budget.

Scroggs

[porridge]

Scroggs - entirely spot-on with your analysis!
Everyone has made some good points. However in defence of my ‘inversely proportional' statement re: marketing how about these criteria?
1) A company that doesn’t advertise much an relies on referrals and word of mouth
2) A company that gets good results
3) A competitive, but not cut-price, scheme of charges
4) A friendly, customer orientated company
Just a few that I could think of. To meet these criteria the organisation needs to be relatively small to provide a customer-orientated service and because they are small they need to rely on referrals rather than marketing extremes. They have relatively low overheads too, so they can afford to ride out the lean-cycles too,
Now there are more than a few of these around. I like to think I am associated with a company along similar values. However, rather than mention the organisation I work for let me mention a company that has these values that I have absolutely no association with at all and have never met anyone involved with the said company and that is Professional Air Training at Hurn. But needless-to-say there others like them out there – wannabees need to look at FTO’s like these rather than the over hyped big pilot-factories to enjoy their training experience and get value for money.
Happy hunting everyone!

[Mercenary Pilot]

Interesting thread, that page in pilot mag has been full of bulls-hit from day one and not just in OATS favor. Agree with Scroggs and Madjock.

WWW
How can you be a REAL airline pilot and drive a boxter!:p

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Not many cars claim to be a better sportscar than a Boxster S..

My experience is this. I did my CPL and various ratings and Multi and IR at a variety of schools. They were all small having no more than half a dozen aircraft and they were based in scruffy buildings which each contained a very scruffy kitchen with boasting a 1970's stained steel kettle for communal use.

I then went on to be a flying instructor at such a school.

I then went on to be a flying instructor at a big shiny prestigious school having dozens of aircraft based in a marble floored air conditioned purpose built building containing dozens of computers and a collection of well stocked vending machines.

And do you know what?

Straight and Level 1 is the same lesson conducted in the same way at both types of school.

So are Medium Level Turns and Circuits. So is VFR Nav 1 & 2, and Stalling 1, 2 & 3. The radios work the same and the checklists are identical. Principals of aerodynamics remain unchanged and the examiner at the end of the training is the same for each type of school. The license issued is the same colour from the same building regardless of whether you paid £40k or £60k.

If I had a son and if he wanted to be a pilot and if the repeated beatings had not dissuaded him then I would NOT contemplate using a large FTO based on my insight into the business. Its not worth the premium and its not even the best training available.

I think the most distinct difference between small and large FTO's is that you are one of 9 students in the former and one of 95 in the latter. You have far more power and influence in the smaller FTO. Time and again large FTO's are accused of being sausage machines, of having terrible management and being poor at communicating. It seems a universal constant at large FTO's.

Go and look at the large players but MAKE SURE you also go and look at a few smaller schools. Start at an airfield near you. There are some real gems out there and they can save you money.

Cheers

WWW

[Sans Anoraque]

Don't worry HWD, when you look at where Pilotowl's from, it all becomes clear.

(For non-UK readers, the Forest of Dean is where 'Deliverence' would have been set, had it been filmed in England).

[mad_jock]

The boxster S is required by jet pilots so they at least get to do something fun with a machine in manual going to and from work. :=

Turboprop drivers have way to much fun as it is without having to resort to mechanical aids for self-gratification.

Volvo T5 turbo is the way forward and it has the advantage you can stick a ton of crap in the back with a trailer hooked up and has room for 3 folk in the back and still get nicked for speeding.

BTW If i had my time again I proberly would be seriously tempted by the waypoint modular course. I am not anti oxford in anyway just well anti people paying way over the odds with any of the providers for intergrated.

MJ

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO !!

San Anoraque are you a secret twitcher?

http://www.fweb.org.uk/dean/

WWW - been on the same path and I have little debt! RX7 RS though(AND ONLY 6K) :cool: . I'm into performance not posing! However, Maxpower did say the RX7 is the original Knicker Drencher!!

TWIT-TWOO!!!!

[MrHorgy]

WWW,

You say "If I had a son and if he wanted to be a pilot and if the repeated beatings had not dissuaded him then I would NOT contemplate using a large FTO based on my insight into the business. Its not worth the premium and its not even the best training available."

I worry because the more I browse the websites of prospective employers, the more I see "X airline selects candidates from this school"... I want to go to a small school as well but am worried that I won't get a look in now because I didn't mortgage my body to pay for a big branded school. So far I haev my PPL with Night Rating, from a combination of EFG at Biggin Hill, Multiflight at Leeds Bradford and OBA in Florida! You reckon it's a cause for concern?

Horgy

[KrazyKraut]

No cause for concern.

Despite what the OAT marketeers would have you believe, the majority of junior airline FOs do NOT come from the premium ab-initio programmes which are so heavily advertised.

Get your qualifications, stay focused, and you'll get a job. Modular or not.

[scroggs]

Mad_Jock, you been looking in my garage? 1 x Volvo V70 T5, present and correct. 155 mph, faster than an F348 from 50-70 and I get to take the kids along too. And I can still hear the music without deafening myself or them!

Scroggs

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!

MrHorgy,
As our American cousins would say "Do the math" (anoying I know).
There are loads of airlines in the UK, all at different ages ie. BA v Ryan air etc. There have to be at least 30,000 pilots in the UK (correct me if I'm wrong). It would be a physical impossibility for all of these to have gone to the big 4. I think BA use to sponsor about 20ish pilots a year. So where do the rest come from? RAF yes but the rest come from the independent FTO's . In the Co I'm with you can count on one hand the amount pilots that have done the big 4 all the way through. Most have taken the best parts ie. PPL ME IR CPL of different schools (either due to price or flexibility (time/availability)). The only comment I've heard about moving schools was about the IR. It's a high pressure course and it does look bad if you've moved schools half way through. It starts the recruitment people thinking that may be you can't handle the pressure/ personality problems etc. They don't want to see someone jacking in a Type rating course because of these reasons.
So overall - stop worrying!!
Look at all the different FTO's but my advice would be try to find one near where you live. You can save alot of money this way and get a little job in Tesco's at the weekend. You'll also have alot of support from family and friends (free beer!). Plus you'll get a break away from the airfield - trust me you'll need it on the IR.

If you need any help or want to know which schools I frequented just PM me.

TWIT-TWOO!!:ok:

ps. Don't buy PILOAT - before we all digress!!!

[porridge]

PILOAT - Great soubriquet!
Well done Pilotowl!
2'wit'2U2!

[High Wing Drifter]

Pilotowl,

According to the CAA stats, there are 12,000 ATPLs, 3700 CPLs and , so say 14,000 airline pilots..ish? Out of those, say 3000 aren't working for one reason or another, so say 11,000 pilots in total. Almost pure guesswork, but possibly not far off. Must admit, I thought there were more, but there you go.

BA has 232 aircraft. I would guess at an average of 6 crews per aircraft which is 1392 pilots. Extending the 2.5% rate who reached age 55 this year (from the CAA stats) and assuming a static growth then that is a requirement of about 40 pilots per year.

BMI has 41 aircraft. Assume avg 5 crews per aircraft, 205 pilots, 5 retire each year...at a guess.

OAT supplied 35 to BA and 5 to BMI this year. I can't be arsed looking up the rest, but I think there is sufficient to suspect that OAT have cornered a reasonable chunk of the market.

[scroggs]

I think your numbers are more than slightly out! BA's pilot strength is around 3000. A great many more than just those who reach 55 leave each year, for a variety of reasons; their declared pilot requirement for 2005 was (IIRC) about 140. BMI has around 600-700 pilots, who (like most UK airlines) retire - or at least leave the LHS - at 60. I'm not aware how many they need this year, but I'd guess 50+. Virgin have 650 pilots; our requirement for 2005/6/7 is around 80 per year (though we are expanding).

OAT's share of the market is significant, but is far from being a majority supplier!

Scroggs

[High Wing Drifter]

Scroggs,

You didn't spot the deliberate mistake then? Maybe once I get a type rating I'll realise that a crew size should = at least 2 :O

300 pilots for BMI now looks very low! Should be more like 400. In fact if six crews keep an aircraft operating for 12 hrs/day then nigh on 500.

That would more than 3000 pilots for BA too, assuming 7-8 crews/aircraft.

My basic point is that OAT do supply many fresh pilots - even if my on the hoof quess was trebled!

P.S. I'm really not this dull at parties you know :8

[Sans Anoraque]

PILOAT - Great soubriquet! Well done Pilotowl!
Unadulterated theft

Check post 7

[Craggenmore]

Don't worry HWD, when you look at where Pilotowl's from, it all becomes clear. (For non-UK readers, the Forest of Dean is where 'Deliverence' would have been set, had it been filmed in England).

http://www.s-plan.fslife.co.uk/deliverance/deliverance_guitar.jpg


;)

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!

A quick post I'm off to do some night shootin'!!

1 Sorry Sans - no meant to steaal but what about thes- "Todayspiloat" !!
2 Craggenmore - too attractive for the Royal Forest - he has 4 fingers we have at least six!! for the banjo!!

TWIT-TWOO!!

p.s Don't buy Piloat. Todayspiloat and definately don't go to OAT!!

TWIT-TWOO!!
A real quicky before Mrs Pilotowl does shoot me.

We are on a 4 strip rating!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TWIT-TWOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dlav]

Pilotowl

What have you got against OAT? Why do you say that we shouldnt go there?

FL370 Officeboy

Do you know that for a fact? Not trying to say your wrong but id like to know how you know that.

If that were the case, then the numbers quoted on the website seem very low. OAT puts through 200 grads a year on the APP. Each of them is put forward to 2 airlines only (As I understand it), that meaning that the figures quoted on the OAT website should be near the 400mark!

As you know, that isnt the case, so thats why I think the numbers on the website, are for actual job offers, not graduates put forward for selection.

Correct me if Im wrong, but thats the way I thought it worked

[High Wing Drifter]

dlav,

I tend to agree with you. That's what the page says too.

The table below left shows where OAT graduates have found employment in 2005 so far. These jobs were obtained in various ways. Some as a direct result of placement by OAT, others as a direct result of the graduates own initiatives and hard work, and others, due to a combination of the two.
http://www.oxfordaviation.net/career/career-03.htm

I'm nothing to do with Oxford, but I don't see the value in putting down a school for its accomplishments!

Going by my rough workings out and Scrogg's corrections, I reckon Oxford supplied the vast majority of BA's fATPL intake this year too.

I agree with other posters, WWW in particular, the training is probably same whereever you go and Oxford won't be able to teach you to fly smarter or better than the next place. But somehow I think that missed the point. If Oxford has established itself as a trusted supplier then why would a recruiter go to the trouble of sourcing candidates from hither and thither.

The old cliche that nobody ever got sacked for buying IBM is so very true, and IBM has never really been the 'best' hardware manufactuerer, but everyone knows it is good enough.

[CPL_Ace]

There must be one of you in this 4 bar arguement that is typing away with his OAT employee of the year certificate sitting proudly on the wall in front of you (or maybe not, why would you be here if you were Employee of the year?) who can tell us the truth about the actual numbers going forward and the actual numbers who get put forward and the actual facts.
There is far too much estimation and rough number speculation for any real conclusion here.
The OAT website does detail the number of known employments this year (there's probably others on top of that they don't know of too) Having said that, is anything governing how they present these numbers? I believe that graduates remain on their list for 12 months which suggests that their 169 jobs are from Jan 04 graduates up to November 05 Graduates.

How many have grauated since Jan 04?
How many graduates are accounted for?
How many times will a graduate be selected for interview in their 12 months

Oh Go on - tell us!!!!
;)

[Dozza2k]

office boy,

a minor point i know but you are wrong in saying that the number of SSP's to BA from Oat is single figures this year.

regards
d2k

[PILOTOWL]

TWIT-TWOO!!

dlav,
Sorry my last post was a bit of a rant. I was drinking potato moon shine before I went shootin'!!

Go to OAT (I wouldn't for my own reasons that have been mentioned by numerours posters).
The point of this thread was about Pilot/OAT pamphlet (hence the title) not about OAT v The Rest of the FTO world.

So in summary of the posts...

1 The best FTO is the one that suits you
2 Modular training at any FTO will suffice to get the first job
3 Pilot mag is now known as Piloat Mag.
4 Lies, Damn Lies and then pilot employment figures.
5 Royal Forest of Dean - great place to live and shoot outsiders!
6 6 fingers are better than 4
7 It's the same exams/ flight tests/ examiners
8 Save yourself 30k and go to another FTO.
9 Porshes are for possers
10 Merry Christmas and Happy New Year where ever you go!

TWIT-TWOO

:8

[Dave Martin]

Porridge, et al,

Fair points.

But, I have been researching the FTOs for the last 5 year an I am neither any closer to finding the money to pay for any of them nor any closer to finding which one provides more chance of a job (and preferably not a TP job, as much as I would like one, paying 18K a year!).

There are about 4 or 5 big name schools I have been watching and NONE can (are willing to) give you a percentage of how many jobs gained versus how many pilots trained. Absolute figures, yes - in which case OAT comes out best.

Sure, don't fall for the marketting hype, and I am sure OAT is at the top of the board when is comes to marketting, but few others even seem willing to give the basic figures on job prospects. There may be a certain amount of sour grapes on here by folks unable to pay Oxford's prices and feeling, rightly or wrongly, at a dissadvantage. How many of the posters on this threat have attained fATPL and gone onto an airline job?

At the end of the day I am sure a trainee from any school can be the best there is....but if that school doesn't give you access to the job, then why go there? The hype might well work both ways - it attracts trainees and it also attracts airlines, in the same way Oxford, Cambridge or Eton attract both. You might not like it, but business works that way.

Ultimately, only one school has offered attractive sponsorship positions so far and that for me counts for a lot as it is the only way I could possibly undertake training.

[MrHorgy]

Going by my rough workings out and Scrogg's corrections, I reckon Oxford supplied the vast majority of BA's fATPL intake this year too.

I agree with other posters, WWW in particular, the training is probably same whereever you go and Oxford won't be able to teach you to fly smarter or better than the next place. But somehow I think that missed the point. If Oxford has established itself as a trusted supplier then why would a recruiter go to the trouble of sourcing candidates from hither and thither.

That's exactly why i'm worried. I appreciate this is maybe not the right topic, but the way people are selected it implies if you didn't cough up the money to pay your way to Oxford, you are not considered. As an ATPL wannabee, where will that put me in a few years time when ALL the fATPL intake is satisfied by OAT?

Also, if BA / BMI / *insert airline here* has a stream of graduates on tap, why would they bother looking at CV's or other app's from fATPL holders? More work for them, so in the end these places end up like factories churning out pilots, and it's a case of "if you can't afford it, then don't bother". THAT'S why i'm worried.

Horgy

[KrazyKraut]

In theory this is a worrying situation indeed.

The most worrying aspect is the cover-your-arse mentality of some airline recruiters. If they take on a cadet from an unknown school and (s)he fails the type rating, they might have to answer to superiors and justify why that person was hired.

But recruit someone from OAT, and if that cadet fails, then the recruiter will say - hey, they've been delivering good pilots to us for the last XX years, and the system has been working fine, so if an individual fails, it's not our fault! Kick'em out, problem solved.

Of course, in reality OAT don't produce better pilots than many other schools. But they deliver their pilots with a sort of unwritten guarantee which airline recruiters can fall back on if things go wrong during the type training.

But in pratice, the good news is, unless another Sept 11th happens, there's no way that all UK recruitment (never mind JAA recruitment in general) can be satisfied by the intergrated cadets of the top 2 or 3 schools alone - particularly if the projected growth figures for UK and European air travel over the next few years prove to be accurate.

Also, many recruiters don't want the type of 250-hr cadet who had daddy put up his house as security to get a loan for for the APP. The self-improver route still shows a great deal of dedication, determination and persistence which perhaps doesn't mean a lot to certain airlines - especially those with a cover-your-arse-mentality- but to others, I think it does.

Yeah,

KK


PS - Dave Martin - you make an interesting point. True, business might "work that way", "whether we like it or not" - but don't forget, so does marketing.
There simply is NO GUARANTEE that you will end up with a job upon spending 30 grand extra at Oxford. Further, there are NO CLEAR FIGURES in existence anywhere that show how much *better* your chances are. Talking of business? Talking of ROI? You need figures to make these decisions. This thread in itself is a reflection of the inconsistency regarding employment figures of APP graduates.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Trust me - nobody gives a damn. Most airlines that express a preference for Integrated graduates actually end up taking Modular guys.

Thinking never mind saying out loud that attending OATS gives you an advantage is likely to make you look like Alan Partridge to most involved in the industry. Its excruitatingly embarassing to hear it voiced..

Get BETTER training and POCKET the saving and FORGET the marketing hype.

Avoid Integrated completely would be my advice. The OATS waypoints product does appear to have some merit so if you are hell bent on learning to fly at a small muddy airfield in incredibly expensive Oxfordshire then maybe that is the product for you.

There are similar issues with an airfield in Bedforshire run by the sort of people who think Milton Keynes is an acceptable place to live; and also Jerez which is an excellent place to put a flying school were it not for the Spanish authorities, the weather and the 1000nms it is from most peoples home and loved ones.

Cheers

WWW

[Dan016]

I am thinking of going to OAT and doing the APP but what do yyou think is wrong with it? Would you recommend it? Have any of you been there so you can tell me some facts about whether or not OAT do give you a better chance of a job

[student pilot domain]

I would like to fly BA when I graduate from a flying school. To do that I MUST go to either OAT, CCAT or FTE, and complete one of their integrated courses.

They don't take modular students directly in from the schools.

Who said that? the head of BA pilot recruiting. And they have taken on 70 pilots via SSP this year, with slightly more from OAT (being the larger of the 3 schools).

Keep the dream alive! :ok:

If you wish to publicise a wbsite of your own on our open forums, it would be polite of you to ask us first. We generally have no objection to non-commercial aviation-related sites being linked to via your 'www' button, but don't push the privilege! Remember, advertising is specifically prohibited on Pprune unless you are prepared to pay.

Scroggs

[High Wing Drifter]

I suppose, if you are considering integrated just to get into a preferred airline, you must consider what will happen if you don't get the tap on the shoulder from the FTO.

One thing a modular student will never need to do is justify why they weren't placed.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

student pilot domain - now that's a very silly attitude that will do you no good at all.

You aspiration to become a commercial airline pilot is not too far removed from a schoolboys ambition to go out into the world and become a professional footballer.

Now this is hard, competition is fierce and many never make it. But if said schoolboy was determined that he only wanted to be a professional footballer only for Manchester United then you'd have to tell him that he was being unrealistically silly. That he was far better off trying to get signed by Coventry first then get a good agent and then look for a transfer to any Premier club.

If his career panned out he might end up in ManU but he shouldn't bet on it. BA is your Manchester United..


If the money for training really isn't much of a stretch and for many it isn't then by all means go Integrated and enjoy the benefits. However, don't go around spouting your desire to only work for BA/BMI/Virgin. It sounds like you consider other airlines and types of flying beneath you and when you have only 200hrs and know virtually nothing then people will jump to the conclusion that you are a twerp. This can be very career limiting.

Never ever Big Up how prestigious 'your' FTO was and never ever look down your nose at any professional piloting job. These things come back to haunt you. I've seen it happen.

Good luck,

WWW

[scroggs]

To add to WWW's post, Student Pilot Domain, it is not true that BA only recruit from the schools you mention. Several modular students have recently been employed by BA, and BA's Direct Entry Pilot scheme has for some time been accepting very low-houred guys type rated on BA's aircraft.

Ambition is great. Don't devalue it with incorrect assumptions or arrogance. And (as with your website) don't ty and run before you can crawl.

Scroggs

[Alex Whittingham]

Irrespective of what the BA recruiter says they do take SSPs from one modular school, CTC, and I would imagine that the majority of Direct Entry Pilots they have hired in the last year were also modular trained - aah, Scroggs, you beat me to it.

CPL_Ace Nothing governs advertising claims made on a company's own websites, they are specifically excluded from the scrutiny of the Advertising Standards Authority. You can make any claims you like, no-one can challenge them, no-one can check them. ASA Website Section 1.2 (q) (http://www.asab.org.uk/asa/codes/cap_code/ShowCode.htm?clause_id=1430)

On the other hand you have to give Anthony credit for OAT's marketing - its absolutely solid

[rjdude]

Trust me - nobody gives a damn. Most airlines that express a preference for Integrated graduates actually end up taking Modular guys.


WWW,

Unfortunately this is not always the case. Our mob, well our 'recruitment person' will only look at OAT 'graduates' for F/O positions, unless someone is already type-rated. Their justification is that OAT can provide a full training report for each candidate, which they claim would not be available for modular candidates. Ironically said individual came into the industry via the modular method.

[Blinkz]

These type of threads always amaze me. Some people really do seem to have such a blinkered view of the world. The integrated vs mod debate will never be settled because there is NO right answer. It is all down to what YOU as a student prefer and obviously your financial situation. OAT is a good school, Jerez is a good school, there are many many good modular schools. There really shouldn't be all this bickering between the modular and integrated courses. BOTH courses have lots of advantages and BOTH courses have their disadvantages.

This post isn't directed at anyone in particular but it just seems that it is impossible to talk about the two courses without it coming down to the modulars shouting that integrated is expensive and the integrateds shouting the mods won't get jobs! :ooh:

[Johny Speedbrakes]

Dear Dan016,

With regards to your earlier thread request about OAT info, pay a visit to OAT, get a brochure and for an accurate, indepth student insight to OAT buy a copy of Pilot magazine.

Written by my flyin' buddy Will (the reason for the start of this thread) you will gain a reasonaby good idea of how is is here.............you have to read between the lines of the article.

The job front is currently a little slow for most of us at the moment but at least 60% of the APP courses are being called forward for BA interviews BEFORE completing the IR or MCC.

Fingers crossed for more recruitment in the new year.

Good luck with whichever FTO you choose, modular or intergrated.:ok: