Is modular that much better?

[pilotho]

I have just been accepted onto the Oxford course (yes another one!). Anyway, it seems to me that whenever Oxford comes up as a subject people immediately brings up the money matters and suggests modular route straight away.

Now my point is, since so many people are relating to modular, is it actually that much better compared with an integrated course or is it just the cost? People seem to continiously regard integrated pilots as people who don't know the trade compared with a modular pilot who may have the same amount of hours.

I personally think that if I just focus on the task and do well in all the tests then I am just as competent as any other pilot. Paying the extra money in my opinion is to take advantage of the facilities and guidance from exprienced personel. Surely, I have not made the wrong decision in wanting to go to Oxford right?

[Mercenary Pilot]

Flaming starts in T-minus:

10

9

8

7....:E

[pilotho]

lol, I will help you with the countdown because I am expecting some to be honest,

so thats 6, 5, 4, 3........

[bri1980]

It depends what is better for you. For me, I don't have £60k to lay out instantly (or over 2 years) so modular better for me!

For you-only you can answer that. All I will say is don't be sucked in by the clever marketing tactics. True, integrated does get you there faster, but once you are out in the job market it's dog eat dog!

Don't be as naive as some I have seen, and talked to, thinking they will get straight into an airline flight deck after training at Oxford-some will but many won't. Be realistic!

Bri

[pilotho]

bri1980, I totally agree with your comment. That cockpit job will definetly not come straight to me but the reason I have chosen Oxford is because of the help that they provide.

Just like they say in CRM, utilise all resources!

After graduating from Oxford I would never think I was better nor worse than anyone else. That's my personal approach anyway!

[maxdrypower]

Am I getting deja-vu or here , merged ad nauseum springs to mind

[bri1980]

But is the help that they provide really all that effective? I'm not convinced as an outsider who knows a few of their graduates-ones who have jobs and ones who don't.

If I had the cash I'd probably go to one of the integrated schools myself for the reasons you have given.

At least on the modular path I can take on my CPL as a personal achievement, and not have to worry about paying a huge loan back. Thats my logic.

B

Am I getting deja-vu or here , merged ad nauseum springs to mind


Yes please!

[pilotho]

Well while working at the airport, I have spoken to quite a few pilots and conincidentally, they graduated from Oxford. I asked them about the training and the course overall and they all admitted that the help they got from Oxford did lead them in the right direction.

I suppose they did work hard themselves but from that evidence, I am convinced the help is worthwhile.

[bri1980]

Is it worth the £30k you are paying for it over the modular route though?

If you have got in at Oxford recently ask to be considered for the NetJets scheme that has just started!

B

[A and C]

As a captain of a jet airliner I find the modular guys are generaly slightly better at hand flying and more balanced pilots overall, this leads me to question the wisdom of parting with £30,000 more for what adds up to a job placement.

If you all dug your heals in and went modular the airline industry would be forced to recrute in the traditional way rather than having the OAT or Cabair force feed them and you young hopefulls would be £30,000 better off!

[AlphaMale]

If I was on the NetJets scheme then I'd be happy to pay the £30k just for the job at the end of it.

I don't have £70k so I'm not even going to apply. So I'll keep my head down and keep saving, I don't want too much debt after seeing the pays some instructors/pilots are getting.

Horses for courses.

[v6g]

It's all about "return on investment".

The return is insufficient to warrant the additional investment.

[bri1980]

My point exactly. I'm happy to pay for it modular over a number of years-indeed I'm proud to go modular. To achieve it all because I want to, not because I have to in order to pay off the debt.

[v6g]

The risk of failure (to get a well paying job) is also significant. In some cases, new pilots could have crippling debt for most of their adult life.

Risk is calculated by the cost of the consequences of a particular bad outcome multiplied by the chance of that outcome occurring. By going integrated you may be reducing the risk of failure, but you're also magnifying the financial consequences if that failure occurs.

Risk management is what aviation is all about.

"Return on investment" is also why, in the current industry environment, I've decided not to pursue an aviation career. In my judgement, it doesn't have sufficient return on investment to warrant a change from my current career (and I've already completed my training). That's not to say that it might not offer sufficient "return on investment" for others.

I wish you well in your decision making.

[IRRenewal]

Despite what Oxford tell people, not everybody ends up at BA.

I work for a large low cost operator flying 737-800s. I have met a few Oxford modular chaps there and some Oxford integrated chaps as well. The modular chaps do the same job, have the same career prospects and are 30k better off.

[pilotho]

from what i have read on the comments. this discussion is heading in the direction of what i anticipted from the beginning. it all leads to thr saving in money.

is there an actual reason for why the cost is so much less when the training or amount of flying is the same? is it just due to the time scale?

for me, i still think integrated is the way i would like to train because thats the way i learn best, to a schdule. that wouldn't make me a worse pilot would it?

[bri1980]

If I have a product that you desparately want and I don't have a huge amount of competition I can charge you whatever I like...can't I?

B

[v6g]

Remember also, that as this forum is the worlds single biggest internet focal point for pilot training discussions and so will be read regularly by the managers and marketing professionals from the big integrated schools, they're sales pitches will be directly aimed at allaying all the anti-integrated views and comments. This site is in effect the arch enemy of their business model.

[bri1980]

Pilot Mike,

I stand corrected! That is a seriously impressive rate of progress: if only I had the cash to be able to do that!

As you said-and I said right at the start-take the route that suits you and your circumstances best.

Bri

[Treeshaver]

A and C is right when he says that you are paying the additional 30,000 pounds for what adds up to a job placement.
I would like to ask OAT students where they think the additional 30k goes?

It does not go on your training, the majoirty of the training is done in the US, where the cost of running aircraft is about half the cost of the UK.

It does not go on instructor wages, I know that OAT instructors are paid more than instructors at other flying schools, but not 30,000pounds per student more.

It does not go on advertising and marketing, whilst they advertise and market more than other training organisations they do not spend 30000pounds on advertising per student.
It must go somewhere.....................

Now hows this for a theory. I stress at the start that I am not making any accusations against integrated course providers or anyone else and that what I am about to say is pure speculation of somebody with a cynical mind.

Could it be possible that an integrated course provider might use some of the money they get from students to give "back-handers" to somebody at their "partner airlines" in return for getting students interviews?

Think about it, lets say that of the 30k extra one of their students pays for the course the school pays somebody important at airlineX say 5k to "influence" recruitment policy to get interviews and the odd job for the school's students.
Everyone is a winner.
The school still has 25k left to pocket and it can say "we get our students interviews at airlineX..." and thus get more people to cough up their extortionate fees. The guy at airlineX gets is onto a very nice little earner as the students flow through his doors and the students think they are winners because they have got interviews at airlineX!
It would be a virtuous circle from which everyone seems to benefit.

"Ahh dont be rediculous" I hear you say "airlineX and integrated course providers are too reputalbe for such skullduggery to go on!"
Don't bank on it, we live in a dirty and corrupt world and where large sums of money are at stake all sorts of corruption can take place, even in so called reputable organisations such as airlines and flying schools.

My theory would explain a number of things, such as where the additional cost charged to integrated students goes, and why airlines are prepared to take completely inexperienced people on with less than 200 hrs total and 50hrs solo flying time, whilst knocking back vastly more experienced pilots.

These are all just thoughts however and I stress again that I am making no allegations against anybody. I just love a good conspiracy theory.
If such a scam were taking place it would surely be one of the most diabolical things ever to have happened to aviation, with hundreds of people having been fleeced of their cash.

Alpha Male, you say "If I was on the NetJets scheme then I'd be happy to pay the £30k just for the job at the end of it."
Why do you think it is ok to essentially pay for a job? This attitude is typical of a number integrated students who think they can take a shortcut by essentially buying their way to a job. If you want a pilot job then why not work hard and get one, instead of trying to beat someone else to the rhs just because you have more money than them.

[clanger32]

For once, there seems to be some semblance of balance in this discussion. However, whilst I will fully (really, really!) agree with the maxim that each individual must find their own route and go the way that works for them, theres a couple of points that I think are often missed.

Firstly, I get fed up with this "it's £30k cheaper to go modular". No. It's not. It MAY be thirty grand cheaper, but the only figures I've ever seen from Modular students brave enough to ACTUALLY compare and publish the true cost of training like for like, tends to come out between £45 and £50k. Now, don't get me wrong, poke me in the eye with a sharp stick rather than save £15k....this is STILL a considerable saving. But it's WAY too easy to make a sweeping statement that it's that much cheaper.
[I should add, that I suspect it can be done for C.£35k all in, but I don't really care that much that I need to be proved wrong - if you did it for that, good on you. The point is that this is NOT representative, IMHO, of the normal modular cost]

Secondly, and this ties in with my first point, people who go the modular route almost always seem to start from PPL with a fair few hours - this is conveniently forgotten, when it comes to costing. It is ALSO forgotten when it comes to statements such as "....tend to have better hand flying". Does it not stand to reason that someone with 1000 hours will be a better pilot than someone with 200? If this ISN'T the case, why can you only attain command with experience? Thus it is unfair to compare the two IMHO. The fact that a modular student may have >500 hours when they first get a Jet RHS job will make them a better pilot perhaps than someone with less hours, but when the person with less has the same hours will the same ring true? (i.e. compare an integrated student with 500 TT and a modular with 500 TT will the Modular student still have better hand flying?). I personally suspect there will be no more than a Gnats nadger in it. Therefore, this argument boils down to whether carriers should agree to take anyone at 220 hours....which is in turn irrelevant, as the carriers do take 220 hours grads of either method. Could you not even make a cogent argument that an integrated student who has reached 1000 hours, with (say) 750 on type is a better pilot (for that aircraft) than a modular student who has 1000 hours with only 250 on type ?

Finally, one thing that I do feel is consistently missed on this subject is that the argument almost always boils down to the relative cost.
However, let's make some huge assumptions here, accepting everyone is different and that some integrated students will never work in avaiation and some modular will walk into a job the day they finish their MCC.

Assume an average modular cost of £40k and an average integrated cost of £60k (because, let's face it here, OAT always gets a bashing and gets used as the litmus test, but you can go to Cabair or FTE cheaper). It is OFTEN mentioned on here that Mod students take 18 months/2 years of FI work AFTER they finish their studies to get that first Jet RHS ride. If we assume 2 years to complete a modular course of studies, then that's four years in which you will maybe make £30k gross from FI work and have spent £40k
If an Integrated course takes two years to complete and place in a jet job, then averaging £30k p.a. means in that same four years you will have spent £60k and earned £60k, not to mention two years extra seniority.
You can see from this example that if this scenario occured, a four year plan to get to the same place would see you net £10k down through modular and all square integrated. Food for thought, is it not.

The £40k modular route is ONLY a bargain if you can get a job as quickly.

I should finally add, I don't have anything for or against either route, both are a fine way of getting there, just let's stop the bull of comparing apples with blue whales...if you want an answer get the comparison fair, and that means from nothing to RHS...

Now fully expecting to be flamed to hell.

[pilotho]

finally, i think someone has a similar way of thinking as me. the reason for me to start this post is to find out which way of training is better and as i said from earlier posts, i wanted to avoid the continious argument regarding cost.

what would people think? 2 pilots with the same amount of exprience but came from integrated and modular respectively, which would be the better pilot. i would say that the one with the better personality and attribute would be.

also, since modular students tend to work while training up for the license, wouldn't an integrated student tend to be more current?

the final note to make is time to the RHS as clanger32 mentioned.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Look. Its so simple a monkey from the Indus could grasp it - yet Wannabes never seem able.

Both routes teach you the same stuff so as to pass the same test.
As an OATS graduate or Integrated student there is not magic moment where you are taken into the chapel and shown the magic fountain.

Trust me - I've taught student to fly for their CPL IR under the modular and the integrated paths and ** major shock alert ** the lessons were the same, only the fees varied..

Now.

In a booming marker of international airline expansion it CAN be worth going Integrated because *** and I have been in the room when this happened *** an airline Head of Flight Ops will just call up and ask for ten guys by a fortnight on Wednesday.

The Head of Flight Ops was in a meeting and it was agreed there, quite out of the blue, that Commercial see a profit in establishing 4 flights a day to Oasis. So an extra aircraft is ordered, in fact two and thus Head of Flight Ops now needs to put 12 Senior FO's on Command courses and recruit 12 new First Officers.

The quickest and easiest way to do this (assuming you are not Virgin who need thousands of hours as a minimum) is to pick up the phone and call OATS Cabair Jerez and speak to the Head of Training.

You say:

"I need 12 guys for the second week of Jan who are OK to take a type rating, give me a list of 24 by next Thursday and we'll interview them all and pick half, cheers, thanks for the Golf weekend last month by the way..".

the HoT says:

"No problem, we have loads of excellent young thrusters and we'll pick the best 24 this afternoon for you to interview and don't worry about the golf weekend, we'll do it again soon and this time we'll go somewhere REALLY exotic..".

HoT then calls the CFI who then gather together his instructors. He then huddles up nd decided who are the best 24 students graduating in late Dec to late Jan. This list is then sent to the Head of Training.

The HoT then takes this list and alters it so that the premium customers who paid most for their training are put forward. After all, we have to protect the revenue stream that pays all the mortgages.

And SO. It is worth going Integrated at a time of airline hiring boom. Because you are in the place where names go on lists who go into airlines. Your premium buys you that POSSIBILITY.

Me. The odds are too long on a £30k bet for my liking. You can do a Modular course for £40k and you'd be lucky not to spend £70k on some of the Oxford courses.

As airline hiring crashes to a halt (as it is doing) the odds only get longer.

But you go on and persuade yourself that you are older or more suited or whatever and go and spend the money.

WWW

[Philpaz]

Can i just ask the modular guys who go FI. Are you full time instructors or part time, ie, do you have a 9-5 and instruct as and when. I only ask as the average FI is on a very basic wage. One that in todays climate will have you on a baked beans diet in your Pikey van.....or so i'm led to believe............

[clanger32]

WWW - Thankyou. An excellently written piece and actually what I was trying to say. The only thing I'd slightly disagree with (and would accept I'm not really in a place to comment one way or the other) is that Once again as always happens in this tedious debate ad nauseum, you've fallen into the trap of comparing what seems to be the minimum you can do modular for, with the max you could spend at Oxford (the most expensive of the integrated courses). So REALLY not comparing like for like, which is both an unfair comparison and misleading to those looking for information.
My overall point is that I'm sure the instruction is the same whatever route one takes and I'm also sure that if you can complete and get a job through modular having spent less than £40k you're laughing, but none of us should ever forget that spending £40k and NOT getting a job is a hell of a site more expensive than spending even £70k and having one....

As always, it's up to the individual to do their own homework, investigate all the possible routes and choose which fits their personal circumstances best. All routes give you the same piece of paper - it's just what you do with it at the end that makes the diff.

[bri1980]

Trust WWW to take 20 odd posts that are all dancing around similar issues and condense them in to one coherent post that hits all the major points!
Marvellous! ;)

B

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

but none of us should ever forget that spending £40k and NOT getting a job is a hell of a site more expensive than spending even £70k and having one....

I agree. I'd take the £70k course with a job at the end every time.

Some marketing departments posture to suggest that is what they are selling.
I'm pointing this out. What you do is up to you.

WWW

[EvilKitty]

clanger32 wrote:

Assume an average modular cost of £40k and an average integrated cost of £60k (because, let's face it here, OAT always gets a bashing and gets used as the litmus test, but you can go to Cabair or FTE cheaper). It is OFTEN mentioned on here that Mod students take 18 months/2 years of FI work AFTER they finish their studies to get that first Jet RHS ride. If we assume 2 years to complete a modular course of studies, then that's four years in which you will maybe make £30k gross from FI work and have spent £40k
If an Integrated course takes two years to complete and place in a jet job, then averaging £30k p.a. means in that same four years you will have spent £60k and earned £60k, not to mention two years extra seniority.
You can see from this example that if this scenario occured, a four year plan to get to the same place would see you net £10k down through modular and all square integrated. Food for thought, is it not.

The £40k modular route is ONLY a bargain if you can get a job as quickly.

and also:

The only thing I'd slightly disagree with (and would accept I'm not really in a place to comment one way or the other) is that Once again as always happens in this tedious debate ad nauseum, you've fallen into the trap of comparing what seems to be the minimum you can do modular for, with the max you could spend at Oxford (the most expensive of the integrated courses). So REALLY not comparing like for like, which is both an unfair comparison and misleading to those looking for information.

You also have fallen into the trap of not comparing like with like - you have fallen into the trap of assuming that integrated go straight into jobs, but modular students don't. You've also assumed that modular students don't earn anything whilst studying - but the abilty to learn whilst earning is one of the big advantages of that route.

Apart from the potential difference in cost, the major difference between the two (briefly touched on by both pilotho and bri1980) is learning/teaching style.

Modular students - especially those doing distance learning - require more self discipline for the studying. The courses are less regimented, the pace of learning (whilst within set boundaries) is dictated by the student, you are studying alone and not in a group (except when on residential courses), and maintaining motivation can be very hard. A big plus is you have more flexibility in the timing of when you take the courses, and it is easier to fit it around a full time job.

Integrated study is more disciplined, the timings of the course are set as is how you work through the material. You are learning in a group environment with more instant feedback, and motivation can be easier to maintain. But you are fixed into the course structure and timetable of that institution and it is impossible to maintain a full time job whilst studying (although part time may be possible).

So whilst looking at the cost is important (after all its a big financial commitment), you also need to think very hard about the style of teaching/learning that suits you. Which is why you should never choose a course simply on cost - always look at how the courses operate as there can be big differences between institutions offering the same type of course (i.e. integrated or modular) which may affect your decision.

But whichever path you choose to take - good luck! And don;t let the naysayers here tell you you chose the wrong path - as long as you are sure you chose the right one for you. :ok:

[Dreamshiner]

Be aware that Chief Pilots get a stiffy about integrated courses.

I went modular and it suited my circumstances, pocket and outlook. With hindsight I think I would have definetly tried for CTC but no point in looking back.

I still don't think I would have went to Cabair, Oxford or Jerez though. In my humble opinion, the £30k extra you spend would be better spent buying a share in a twin for £20k and using up £10k on flying expenses such as fuel and boosting your hours out, then sell your share, afterwards its the minefield of buying a type rating or not. Possibly pick up a bit of work relating to the flying to subsidise it such as photography, parachutes, etc. but count that as a bonus.

There is also the option to be a FI, in real terms its hours in the logbook which aren't usually questioned, in my eyes I have to question how valuable flying CFR in a traffic pattern in a 152 is to a future airlines career. No doubt I'll get grief over that statement.

Cue abuse!

[Frank Furillo]

Not really wishing to dip my toe in here.... I promise not to get too heated..
To compare like for like...really

Oxford APP First Officer Program @ 3/11/2007 NB this seems to be the ONLY integrated course on their website.

68 Weeks approx

Cost £61800.00.

Included, Insurance, Accommodation in the USA, return Flights, Nav Equipment and Headset.

Not included,
Accommodation at Oxford say 50 weeks at £130 Pw as per oxfords website (20 weeks in the US)
Cost £6500
Food and general costs.

14 Ground school exams @ £62 each £868
All CAA Skill Tests
PPL £173.00
CPL MEP £712.00
I/R £712.00
Night rating £78.00
License issue
PPL £164.00
Night rating £78.00
CPL £216.00
I/R £108.00
R/T £65.00
Medical inital £310.00
Revalidation £125 at my AME

So lets say with exam fees and medical this would be:

Total Cost £71831.00

Assuming that you pass everything first time and minimum hours.

Modular via Multifilght, their Ab-Initio ATPL Course @ 3/11/2007

Cost £29950.00

Included, Faa medical and books and study guides,
FAA certification fees, all groundschool fees, FAA Groundschool test,
In the UK, all Ground school materials, Two, two week brush up school.

Not included,
Flights to and from the USA from Manchester to Orlando,
Virgin Atlantic £380.00
Accomodation in the USA say $30 per night 9 weeks, $1890 or £905.00 @ 3/11/2007
Headset DC 10-13 bought in USA $315.00 or £151.00
Nav equipment say £20.00
Crp-5 £75.00
UK Land and approach fees say £2000.00
Hire of Aircraft for test 4 hours @ £246 ph, £984.00
170A Test Fee 2 hours @ £130ph, £260.00.
Groundshool accommodation say £700
Food and general costs.
14 Ground school exams @ £62 each £868
All CAA Skill Tests
PPL £173.00
CPL MEP £712.00
I/R £712.00
License issue
PPL £164.00
Night rating £78.00
CPL £216.00
I/R £108.00
R/T £65.00
Medical initial £310.00
Revalidation £125 at my AME
MCC £1500.00, if done at Multiflight
JOC say £1200

So a similar cost comparison would be....

Total cost £41656.00

Assuming that you commute from home to Leeds

Now this too is based on first time passes and minimum hours, time to complete at your own speed, took me just over a year.

So to compare both you would have a saving of £30175.00
Enough to get a Type Rating and Hours on a Jet or that rather nice new car you always wanted....
So the £30175 question is this.....is intergrated really worth the extra £30175.00.Are you guaranteed in writing that you will be offered a job with the likes of BA after finishing.... Also BA DO charge you for the Type Rating even if you are ex Oxford, source BAPLA EOC a few weeks ago.

[Artie Fufkin]

I guess things have changed at Oxford since I went through? I paid 60.5K and that was it all included. All flight/ground exam fees paid, all accomodation in the states, medical renewed, licence issue, the lot. In fact, seeing as I had a few flight/sim hours spare, I actually got a small refund at the end.

Also, if you are going to compare like for like, why build into your comparison modular students commuting from home (with no commuting costs) and Oxford students paying 130 per week living costs?

Most modular students I met, depite more optimistic initial budgeting, usually admitted to spending approx 50k. Now that's still a substantial saving, but its not 30k and it certainly won't pay for a type rating.

So what return on investment did I get for paying a 10k premium to go integrated? All 15 of my classmates and I were in the RHS of a jet within three months of finishing training. I think it a reasonable statement to say that modular students on average take a few months extra to get their break than integrated students do (no, its not fair or right, but who ever said things were going to be fair). As I clear, on average, just over 3K per month I would say getting a job a few months earlier than I would have done via the modular route means I'm probably quids in on the deal.

In answer to to the original question - is modular any better I'd say no. But I wouldn't say integrated is any better either, its just a different version of the same thing. The price differential is overstated and as soon as you're type rated and employed no one neither remotely cares nor can tell any difference.

[pilotho]

I still haven't found the answer to my question. I have learnt very well that if I go modular, then I would be able to buy a new car etc etc.

What I wanted to ask was, which pilot would be better, bearing in mind that they have same amount of exprience.

Pilot A : Integrated

Pilot B : Modular

If you was the chief pilot wishing to recuit for that right hand seat, would you prefer the modular student because he managed to get that book despite the distractions or the integrated guy who just happened to be able to afford the training.

[clanger32]

EvilKitty,

I can see where you're coming from, but I promise you, I hadn't overlooked that aspect. The ability to "earn while you learn" is a great example of a major plus point of the mod route. However, the fact that you're earning whilst you train has little effect on the cost of training. For example, I worked bloody hard in my existing career to save the necessary funds for my training before starting, so it's not a consideration for me as I had no need to earn. Likewise, if you're prepared to put your kidneys as security and borrow the whole lot, again, it's of little consequence. I would assume however and this based only on my own knowledge of the intensity of the workload, that by working rather than full time modular, you would extend the time scale to complete (please note the "assume" in that statement)

Secondly, I have to pull up on the point about more disciplined. Says who? Can you name me one person ever who has completed both routes? Of course not...therefore all one can ever say is how disciplined you have to be on your own chosen route. I do not believe for one second that you need to be "MORE" disciplined on a mod route...the discipline required is different, that's all. For example, if you don't understand subsonic incompressible airflow on a Mod course, you just take a couple more days looking at it before moving on, you can't do that on the integrated route...so the discipline, in that regard at least, is greater (to ensure you understand it up front).

Frank - Absolutely right, I do agree with what you say. One thing I'm REALLY keen to get across is that I do not fall into EITHER camp. Both routes have distinct pros and distinct cons. For what it's worth however, I can't help but notice that you include £6500 worth of living cost for Oxford, but then add "....if you live at home and commute in" for your Mod breakdown... Now I know that's splitting hairs slightly given the magnitude of the cost difference, but it is demonstrative of the common problem...on this topic people ALWAYS compare the MOST expensive integrated course with all the bells and whistles to the cheapest mod course they can find with other bits missed off...

So then we get back to the other main point - time to employment. To be fair, I know a couple of mod pilots who walked into jobs pretty much instantly. I also know (of) an integrated guy who took two years before he found his first job. I'm sure there are plenty of other stories of people who went integrated and never worked in aviation also. But I also know a guy who sold his house, uprooted his family and spent £40k+ modular (doing as cheaply as he could) and, having just renewed his IR for the second time has been told by his wife that they can't afford to renew again if he doesn't find a job. In that circumstance, £40k suddenly looks BLOODY expensive.

Either way the general consensus seems to be that it takes longER to get that first job from the mod route. So yes, Multiflight might be £30175 (or £23675 if you include like-for-like accomodation...:}) cheaper than the most expensive integrated course, but what I was trying to demonstrate earlier is that that £23k is only worth ANYTHING if you land a job more quickly than a comparitive integrated student. This is NOT to say "integrated guarantees you a job" or anything like that....but I would refer you to WWW post above he clearly gives an example where that's EXACTLY what happens with some integrated students. The WHOLE point of integrated is to ease your route to the RHS - whether that works for a given individual or not.

If you add up the comparitive cost per career, getting into a jet job even a year earlier compared to a year of aviation photography, para dropping, FI work etc and then to a RHS I suspect that £23k difference will disappear VERY quickly with better salary, one years seniority etc...

Promise I'm not trying to be argumentative, just objective. Bottom line is you pays your money, you takes your choice.

Either way, my overall point, which I think both Frank and Kitty would agree with is that everyone needs to assess the routes for themselves and choose which route is the best for them. Unfortunately flight training is not something where "one size fits all"

[VNA Lotus]

Seriously I am very suprised that many guys on this forum still asking "who is the best ? modular or integrated ?"

Did you not understand that it depends of YOU ? only you.

Some people take modular route or integrated but are bad.

It is simple if you have got money that integrated if not modular...

But after the course (modular or integrated) you will be in the same boat like a thousands other CPL/IR/MCC.

I am taking the modulare route at the moment and i don't regret it. It is cheaper for the same licence.
Because I know a lot of friends (modular route) they found a job.

[clanger32]

PilotHo,
to TRY and answer your Q. .. there IS no right answer!
The problem is several airlines won't touch you with low hours if you're modular...BA won't and Flybe have just announced they'll only hire integrated students for two. However there are several hundred that WILL. Like for like (i.e. 0 hours to completing the course) I suspect you'd be a better hands flier through modular.

So, depends on you. Integrated I suspect you will find easiER to find a job, IF YOU PERFORM WELL, Mod will be cheaper and may serve you every bit as well. Modular, you will need to be very disciplined and hardnosed, prepared to take a fair amount of rejection, integrated, you will need to conform to an expected norm, you won't get time to understand anything you didn't quite get first time round, cos you'll have moved on.

Bottom line, a LOT of airlines like the integrated method, and rely on it for their low hours recruitment. Likewise a heck of a lot rely on Mod and happily take the right kind of people from that route.

There IS no right or wrong answer on this one (IMHO), despite what some people would have you believe. you need to assess and make up your own mind which route, with all the pros and cons that go with either route, which suits you best.

[baskerville]

Flybe have just announced they'll only hire integrated students for two.

Clanger 32
Please explain

[clanger32]

Unfortunately just that. They've just announced that they will be only taking grads from FTE, Cabair, OAT and I think it was Atlantic from now on. http://www.oxfordaviation.net/news.htm and http://ask.oxfordaviation.net/viewtopic.php?t=4087 give about as much as I know, save for the bit that was mentioned that they will no longer take Mod (allthough having just dug a bit up on the Flybe website here: http://www.flybe.com/vacancies/pilots_sponsorship.htm it seems there is a slight loophole there...)

[baskerville]

Clanger - not quite so.
They will continue to employ from their training partners by:
a) Participation in one of their schemes (partial sponsorship Cabair/Oxford or MAPS at FTE)
b) By the recommendation process for
1) non sceme integrated students - from FTE, Oxford and Cabair
2) One stop modular students - from Atlantic Flight Training or Aeros
They will also recruit others via their website (opening November 12th) who satisfy the published criteria and are not necessarily from a training partner.
Obviously it would be an advantage to have a recommendation from one of the training partners.

[clanger32]

To be fair, I don't know the full situation, only what I have been told. I know a couple of guys at OAT and according to them, Flybe did a "roadshow" type tour there where Captain Ian Cheese apparently very distinctly said "we will no longer take Modular students" (which I will admit seemed odd, as the other key message seemed to be "we're choking for pilots"). Unfortunately, I wasn't there, so can't verify the authenticity of the statement or that it hasn't been corrupted in translation. However, the details on the OAT web page seems to be that details will be announced today, so I would expect to see further clarity in the next couple of days.

Either way it does seem that they are cutting down on the number of entry methods with them.

[kpd]

Also from OAT website

[/quote]

GCAT Flight Academy today announced that it has entered into an agreement to acquire Oxford Aviation Training (OAT) from parent company BBA Aviation plc for a total consideration of $63 million (£32 million). The deal is backed by GCAT Flight Academy's majority shareholder, STAR Capital Partners.

Specialist European investment fund Star Capital Partners have over £1 billion of equity under management and made their first investment in the flight training industry in February 2007 through the acquisition of a majority stake in General Electric Commercial Aviation Training (GECAT) and the entire share capital of SAS Flight Academy from SAS AB. The new group was named GCAT Flight Academy and overnight became the largest flight training organisation in Europe and the third largest in the world


So to be precise OAT is really part of GECAT and both are owned by an investment fund. Now I am not an expert in this but my understanding of investment funds was that they are there to make a profit?!

As for Treesavers

I would like to ask OAT students where they think the additional 30k goes?
Perhaps that answers that



Secondly is the fact that such a large group is formed not a cause for concern for smaller FTO's??? In other industries this would provoke a huge discussion regarding a monopoly situation. Why not here??

My search shows minimal comment so far

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=280996&highlight=GCAT+flight+academy&page=2

The question is not just is integrated better than modular but are all integrated courses considered equal???

[baskerville]

Either way it does seem that they are cutting down on the number of entry methods with them.

No - they are not. This was made quite clear at the Flyer show yesterday.

They have simply defined more clearly their sources for integrated/scheme and integrated non scheme/modular recommendation entry.

The rest can apply online as before