Line Training Is Destroying The Airline Pilot Industry

[That_Guy]

I have noticed heaps of posts in these forums about the topic of line training. All us pilots who do fly big jets we all tell you wannabe airline pilots to not pay for line training. This message isn't getting accross at all. You wannabe pilots don't realise what you guys are doing. What you guys are doing is causing airlines to decide that "Hey, Airline X doesnt need to pay their f/o's all they do is suck desperate pilots in by getting them to pay to do the job, lets copy this cost saving idea". Have you wannabe pilots ever thought of what the airline pilot industry may be like in 10 years time, how it is going to be impossible to make a career of being a f/o at an airline.

This might sound stupid but we need to do something about banning line training to save the airline pilot industry. Is it possible to get FAA, JAA, CASA etc to help ban this? Could this issue go through parliament? Should they make it compulsory for airlines to worn passenger that they are getting flown by an inexperienced pilot who has paid to fly this plane?

Lets hear your thoughts.

[m500dpp]

Interesting first post!

Non pilot so feel free to delete if appropriate.

Whilst I understand where you are coming from I'm really none too sure what can be done to prevent the downgrading of pilots/FO jobs. Its happening in virtually all industries as companies sole interest is making money they will seek any way they can to cut costs.

Remember your local bank manager 30 years ago? A person of some standing in the community, and a highly paid senior manager? Many branch managers today are clerical grade and even those on managerial grade are on the lowest tier.

Long standing wedding photographers are currently moaning like hell about amateurs encroaching on "their" world, the fact is there are fewer barriers to entry these days and most photographers have to work a damn site harder to earn their living.

As an outsider I have seen quoted on here wide ranging salary bands for Pilots and FOs (approx £55k up to £200k and more). From a harsh financial point of view, a pilot who has 5 minutes experience, is equally able to take an aircraft with passengers from one place to another, and why would a company in a fiercely competetive market want to pay the top end.?

What you are proposing is to artificially keep pilots pay above a market determined rate, and whilst that has merit, I am afraid its futile as market forces alone will determine what future pilots are paid. The simple fact is if there wernt enough FOs seeking training then companies would have to pay, as it is there are lots seeking the experience so we have them paying to fly.

As for telling passengers, a newly qualified pilot is still qualified......so no...

(I really dont like the business world we are in today, but that wont make it go away so we have to deal with it)

[bfisk]

Firstly, let's differentiate between the good and the bad:

Line training is in itself absolutely nescessary. The structured move from out-of-the-sim-ready, to being line qualified, to being an experienced FO allowing pairing with fresh skippers should IMHO be a systematic process. Who are we kidding when we think that 50-odd hours of a flight simulator will prepare an FO for everyday operations?

Then there's "line training". I see an ad about 10cm above what I'm writing, where Eagle Jet offers "300 and 500 hour options avaliable". What the ****? What determines the length of the line training? If you're not ready to be released to any line captain in 300 hours, what difference will another 200 make? This to me has nothing to do with line training, and everything to do with exploitation of those willing to pay to "skip the queue".

We see that the common denominator in most (recent) accidents and incidents is pilot error, in some form or another. We're talking about a lack of proficiency is a lot of relatively basic flying skills - and I'm not surprised! 8 hours in the simulators every year? That's just barely enough to run through each required maneuver one or two times; as far as I can see not even close to enough required to practice and become proficient and confident. The harsh reality in a competitive market is that the regulations will be the lowest common denominator. No company can simply afford to surpass the standards to any great extent for a lengthy period of time. This didn't use to be the case pre-deregulation (from what I've heard from my superiors).

To me, the answer is simple: we need better regulation. And I'm not talking about minor adjustments; not tinkering with doing 3 V1-cuts instead of 2, not raising the min.required hours for CPL issue from 190 (or whatever it is for an integrated program) to 200. I'm talking about a major restructuring of the way we think about training. Sim twice a year? How about 4 times, 6 times a year? Or how about doing 2-3-4 training passes before every (O)PC? A combination? How about getting regulators with enough balls to tell shoddy companies with a large pilot turnover (read: paying for line training) that not keeping experience in the airline is a safety issue? Outlawing paying for flying?

Oh, but the airlines will cry and say it's not economically viable, and everyone will go bust. Well - as long as it applies to everyone, no one is unfairly disadvantaged, except the £10 holidaymakers which now will have to pay perhaps £12. Remember that the crew cost only makes up for about 20% of the airfare.

Oh, but the higher prices will deter the public from flying, and jobs will be lost, the pilots cry. Yes, basic economic theory says that when the price increase, the volume will reduce. Perhaps a slight overall price increase will stop "one or two" members of the public from flying. Remember however, two points: firstly, travel is not necessarily a luxury commodity. I agree it's not like food, water or energy, but air travel is necessary in today's society. Just like people won't stop driving their cars just because the gas price goes up (they say they will, but no one does), people won't stop flying alltogether. Secondly, if pilot jobs will be lost, this may be an acceptable price to pay. Having a pilot job is not a human right. Every organised pilot knows that it's not worth doing if the price isn't right. What the right price is is a whole different story, but it surely as hell isn't negative.

You can't really blame the airlines. It's a competitive market, and every sensible manager will do the best to balance employee interest with shareholder interest, while staying legal. While we pilots are quick to judge our superiors for being in the pockets of the shareholders, we need to remember that without shareholders there would be no airline -- go ahead and try to privately fund a startup and see how it goes. We are working for the shareholders, ultimately, but as I said -- we shouldn't do it if the price isn't right. It's the regulator we need to push, not the companies.

[Tolan]

Also, get some perspective on this. It isn't NEARLY as widespread as made out on these forums. If you look a little deeper, you will notice it's the same two or three posters bringing up the subject again and again in different threads.

[maybepilot]

It's an accident waiting to happen, only then the public will start wondering what's going on just like in the ColganAir case.

20 years old 200hrs pilots pay their way into the right hand seat of a jet and are then trained like monkeys to deal with normal everyday operations on a fully functioning brand new aircraft with a fit and alert Captain.

One day one of these fully functional variables will change the result of the equation and if you throw in some weather, tiredness and other operational factors adding them up with the absolute lack of previous experience and the normal immaturity of a 20 years old youngster then the outcome can only turn out being tragic.

[dontdoit]

Any offers for who was the first to start SELLING jet type ratings in the UK, I'll start the bidding with "British Midland on the 737" about 1990, but standing by to be corrected...

[MichaelOLearyGenius]

P2F schemes allow pax to fly to Spain et al for £20 return or less, to be honest the passengers are paying less than the FO for the trip.

I do also believe that, legally, the pax should be informed at the booking stage that the FO is paying to fly the plane and they have a choice to not fly/book.

[Herod]

Backdate it a bit further. Air Cymru on the 1-11 in about 1986.

[A37575]

As far back as 1962 Ansett Airlines gave preference to inexperienced general aviation pilots to go straight into the RH seat of a DC3 and F27. Some of these pilots had just a CPL and 160 hours on Tiger Moths or similar with no twin time. Certainly many did not hold instrument ratings.

RAAF pilots anxious to get an airline job were frowned upon by Ansett management for no good reason except they preferred inexperienced young pilots and placed the burden of training these pilots on the captains. But in those days the airlines paid for all training including type ratings.

Point being, inexperienced copilots sat in the RH seat. So things haven't changed really. The name of the captain and copilot were placed in a prominent position so passengers could see the names. Of course, like now, the passengers wouldn't have a clue of the experience level of the second in command. Maybe where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise..

[redsnail]

I think the OP is talking about people paying for line training, thus denying a pilot a paid job.

[411A]

RAAF pilots anxious to get an airline job were frowned upon by Ansett management for no good reason except ...

Of course they were frowned upon...they were ex-military.
Always a bad idea, with some exceptions.:eek:

[protectthehornet]

I wish you would define your terms. Line training...what does that mean?

In the US, we have something called: LOFT or Line Oriented Flight Training. 20 year veterans still take this training. Its just a regular flight in real time with a minor problem thrown in for good measure.

Do you refer to people paying to be a copilot, after passing some simulator check ride? Just to build time?

That sort of thing is not done at major airlines in the US. There are regional airlines that have hired very low time pilots to be copilots, but they are still being paid...albeit not much.

A few years ago I had heard that some of the cruise ship airlines had unpaid copilots.

The only way to stop something like this is to expose it to the light of day.

Dear Passenger, do you want your flight crew to have to have training wheels?

[bfisk]

protectthehornet: the line training we're talking about here is not LOFT (which we also do in euroland...), but what you would call IOE stateside (Initial Operating Experience).

[TOGA!]

411a you are a moron. Can you back that statement up with any hard facts or are you just spouting off? In my past experience, I can tell a military guy from a civilian in about 2 minutes. Not saying military trained aviators are supreme or saying civil trained are inferior, just different.

[McBruce]

The problem does not lie with the wannabes, it lies with us! the established guys in this industry. The wannabes have no voice as a collective... No point in telling them not to pay for a type rating as lets face it, this seems to be the only way to enter this industry only because the experienced guys let this practise continue because it didn't affect them. Now its erroding the terms and conditions from the ground up, guys are now starting to complain and blame the wannabes... If we want to stop this practise then its upto us, not them.

[A320rider]

line training= slavery,

nothing else.

who to blame?: gov, CAA,department of transport.

and who cares at the end?, we are all a bunch of stupid pilots who pay to fly for fun... this is what they think of us at the CAA at gatwick!!!!

[I'm Off!]

Agree with TOGA!, 411A you are a moron. Expressing a personal opinion like it is fact without anything to back it up. Stop talking bollocks or go elsewhere.

[Neptunus Rex]

Just ignore 411A. He thrives on controversy, but he's banging the same few drums every time. He has probably forgotten the gist of most of his 7,000+ posts.
Onset of Alzheimer's perhaps?

[goaround737]

who to blame?: gov, CAA,department of transport.

I suggest to you that it is not the above that is the cancer of the industry or even the likes of Eaglejet, as without the individuals willing to pay the cash they would be merely opportunistic businessmen.

The real cancers of our industry are those willing to pay their way onto the flight deck as they lack the character and quality to get there through normal means.

[Garba51]

A320,

It's even worth, slave don't pay anything! Now, people pay to work... Which world are we living in? It's like we are in a flying club, paying to fly.

Aie aie aie


Garba.

[maybepilot]

I disagree with maybe pilot about the immaturity of a 20 yr old. That is absolute nonsense,i myself have seen many older first officers with the sense of a child, It has nothing to do with age its personality and ability that would be the issue when you take away your so called "variables"

ALLOW,
one can be immature at any age but a 20 years old/200hrs pilot is obviously more likely to be one than someone who has the same amount of hours but has seen a little more of the world (traveled,done other jobs,got a mortgage,bought a car,paid his bills,had a couple of girlfriends) or someone who has the same age but a few more hours flown in other airlines, dealing with ops/pax/wx/FTL's/T&C's and so on.

I fly for an airline with a cadet scheme and sometimes find myself having to act more like a father than a Captain.....

[A320rider]

ahah when all these little micheymouses had pay for their 500h, they will look for a job when requirement will be higher. 1500h- 2000h TOTAL at least.

Then airlines will propose them to "upgrade" to 1500h TOTAL on their jet at a special rate of 29'000 euro.

during interviews, there will be 100 pilots for 3-4 jobs only. most pilots will have 500h jet, 800h TOTAL, begging and whining that the world is not right.


"bouhh I paid 500h, and nobody want me!!!:{"

[bfisk]

Perhaps this thread should be renamed to "P2F" is ruining the industry, rather than "line training". I don't know any airline that doesn't do line training? (The fully paid transition from just having a TR to your final release to the line).

[Firestorm]

The people with the loudest voices in the airline industry are the shareholders, and the passengers. If only the press would take an interest in the story then the shareholders could be made aware of what is going on, and critically the passengers. However whilst from a pilot's point of view it is a scandalous practice it will not get any press attention (thus causing public reaction) because it is legal. Don't expect any support from BALPA, or it would seem any of the other pilot's unions.

Unfortunately I think that it is here to stay, but if anyone can convince me that they have a decent campaign that stands half a chance of ending these schemes I will definitely support them.

[BigNumber]

I agree with Firestorm; but further fear that 'Joe Public' cares little about the terms under which the grinning F/O appears. Safetly after all is the responsibility of the SRG. All companies are audited to this end.

I expect most of the 'GBP' are pleased to enjoy greatly subsidized air travel courtesy of our desperate little FATPL. How could you deny Rupert his rightful trip to the 'flightdeck' (via 'Wensums')?

P2F is absolutely here to stay. No hours means no job. "Rupert worked very hard at Oxford" - best Daddy gets his cheque book out.:E

[rogerg]

How could you deny Rupert his rightful trip to the 'flightdeck' (via 'Wensums')?

Rupert worked very hard at Oxford"

I know one who's name was John, does this apply to him? I detect a little yellow god out there.

[stansdead]

I had a PM a week ago from a guy who wanted to know when to start training.

He is an intern on a trading desk at a large investment bank.

His "passion lies in aviation".

He wants to start training at the optimal moment, because he's not into flying a quote "poxy cessna". He only wants to fly a jet.

That's passion.

Where did it all go wrong?

[27/09]

I had a PM a week ago from a guy who wanted to know when to start training.

He is an intern on a trading desk at a large investment bank.

His "passion lies in aviation".

He wants to start training at the optimal moment, because he's not into flying a quote "poxy cessna". He only wants to fly a jet.

That's passion.

Where did it all go wrong?


(We all know what obscene amounts of money are to to be made in the investment banking indusrty)

I think I might have replied a bit like this:

My passion lies in investment banking

I want to start my training at the optimal moment, I dont want to waste time on a poxy internship, I only want to be a partner in the bank. When should i start my investment banking career?

[stansdead]

No, you are wrong!!!

To be a Partner normally assumes you take some financial risk with your OWN money. If losses are made, partners can be liable.

Best to be an overpaid employee. That way you can p1ss away other people's (yours & mine) money with no comeback.

At least that's how it happened.....

Anyone see a correlation between this and P2F?

[BigNumber]

Now I am gutted... "a poxy cessna"

I take it the 'chap' concerned makes no reference to the venerable Citation Jet Series, or I'll have to get my coat!

[stansdead]

'Fraid not old fella.

The lowest jet he knows is a 737. And that would be beastly. The flightdeck won't fit his ego I fear.................:mad:

[SSTR Man]

McBruce’s post is the most sensible I’ve read on the subject in a long time – “The problem does not lie with the wannabes, it lies with us! the established guys in this industry.”

And I couldn’t agree more!

It’s YOUR Ts&Cs being eroded, it’s YOUR company eroding YOUR Ts&Cs, and it’s YOU who are letting them.

In the future, it will be the wannabe’s Ts&Cs, if and when wannabes get flying jobs. But until then, wannabes can only fall in line with what YOUR employers demand of them or offer them.

So quit blaming the wannabe, they do not have, and never will have, a collective voice in the industry, technically they are not even part of the industry yet! They have no influence over Airline recruitment or policy, and they can only take the opportunities which YOUR employers present to them….which at the moment includes SSTR and P2F.

However, you DO have a say. And your Unions DO have a say. But you choose to say all you have to say here on Pprune.

“The real cancers of our industry are those willing to pay their way onto the flight deck as they lack the character and quality to get there through normal means.”

Sorry, NO! It is the EMPLOYERS who accept P2F that are the issue here! Because P2F and SSTR are slowly becoming the NORMAL MEANS! And it is the EMPLOYEES who sit back and moan of diminishing Ts&Cs who are equally culpable. You cannot blame a company for trying to save money, even if it is at the expense of existing employee's if those employees let them. And you certainly can’t blame what is effectively a ‘graduate’ for taking an offer which YOUR airline is presenting to them.

Think what you like about Unite and BA, but there will never be pay-to-serve cabin crew at BA. The bottom line is that if you lot and your unions had any balls there would be no P2F/SSTR either.

All this P2F/SSTR/Flex-Contracts etc maybe short-termism, but right now it benefits the public because of cheaper tickets, it benefits the Airline because they can make more money, it benefits the government because the airlines are making more money, and it benefits wannabes because they can buy their way in. It’s a Win-Win scenario, so who’s complaining?….oh that’s right, you current Pilots.

So why do you expect someone other than YOU and YOUR union to stand up for YOUR terms and conditions !?

I don’t agree with P2F, I don’t agree with SSTR, but that’s where we are and it is YOUR airlines who are taking us there (our luggage is probably going elsewhere).

It is only the current pilots and their unions who can stop it, because EVERYBODY else, in some way shape or form, benefits from it.

[D O Guerrero]

Change the record...

[SSTR Man]

I would change the record....but someone keeps putting the one with lots of violins playing back on again.

[411A]

411a you are a moron.

Typical of some folks who can't tell the time of day...par for the course.:rolleyes:

Can you back that statement up with any hard facts ...

Hard facts as in....many ex-mil guys (nearly always fast jet prior) simply do not want to listen to reason, and follow simple company laid down procedures...as I have noticed in nearly twenty years of line training pilots...onto heavy jet transports.
Whereas...those ex-mil guys who came from transport ops...were very well prepared.

Case in point, of an ex-mil fast jet type who could not follow reasonable company procedures...PABLO whatshisface...who was sacked for inviting pax to the FD in direct violation of company and CAA directives.

It is nearly always better (from the airlines perspective) to train junior civil guys into the RHS, because...they don't constantly argue and backtalk.
In short, they DO as they are told, not go off on some tangent with a wild hair up their backside.

[BigNumber]

I'm Ex Mil - probably why I'm left only flying a "Poxy Cessna"!:}

[Mister Geezer]

Firstly, it is foolish to say that the line training that is offered to those that pay is to a lower standard. The CAA (or any other regulator) has no remit to get involved in abolishing or restricting the pay to train ethos that is being adopted nowadays. As long as the training standards are being upheld, then that is all that the regulator is responsible for.

The fact that those who opt to go down this route ending up as 'contractors' and not employees, does bring a degree of comfort to those employees and especially those who are well entrenched as employees with a period of service behind them. If you read a number of other forums, it is clear that a number of pilots genuinely do not feel that the 'pay to train' endemic is a direct threat to their own terms and conditions, especially when you are a Captain.

Many will still see this issue as a 'potential' or 'unseen' threat and that is why issues like rostering, annual leave or whatever, are seen as more pressing matters and this is what the unions will be getting approached with.

If crews start to face pay to train practices that affect them directly, such as paying for command courses and LPCs etc, then unions will get a earful and employees will stand up and fight. Of course by that time the rot will have set in and it will be too late.

In short, low cost airlines have been fantastic for the consumer and a disaster for pilots.

[169west]

Good Thread


... ask the Queen Of England or President Obama or whoever is running your beautiful Country if they want to be passenger of an Air Force One with a 50 hours total time co-pilot!
We all know the answer and the reason why they will come-out with that answer!
Now try to imagine to put the most important thing of your life on that plane with a 50 hours total time in the right seat! And correct me if I'm wrong but SOULS ON BOARD should be the most important 'things' for an airlines CEO!

... and we are in a kind of scenario that is better to fix problems when they come-out instead preventing unhappy ending!


Someone said that this problem is above their pay-check, but I prefer to remember that 'SAFETY IS PARAMOUNT!'

[BigNumber]

which is why we have a regulator. The SRG.....

[169west]

... but the most astonishing scenario is when a very experience military pilot goes into the trap of P2F in order to get a job?

[Mister Geezer]

Come on guys... it is a bit far fetched to say that F/Os will be sat in the RHS with 50 hours total time in the right seat.

Anyway, what do you expect the SRG to do? The CAA will not get involved with what are essentially 'ethical' decisions i.e. we don't like what is going on, because it is not fair. It is the unions that can really only make the first move but as you will see in my previous post, their members in the airlines concerned, have (what they view as) far more pressing issues to deal with.

[SafariChris]

I remember from the dim and distant past of my early days that "Jet" jobs were more difficult to secure because the companies concerned were hog tied by their insurance underwriters.

It was common to be told " You need 3000 hours total turbine time to come and fly our shiny jets young man, our underwriters said so"

1500 hours or so on multi pistons to get your first TP job etc, etc.

What i'm saying I guess is why aren't the unions lobbying the insurance underwriters? They more than anyone have the clout needed to redress this issue.
After all our car insurance premium reduces with experience and it used to be that way for airlines.

Just a thought :hmm:

.

[goaround737]

Sorry, NO! It is the EMPLOYERS who accept P2F that are the issue here!

I cant agree with this, and really i dont think you do either as you then go on to say "you cant blame a company for wanting to make money"( or something to that effect) Granted, accepting P2F is wreckless behaviour on the part of the company but for better for worse a company exists to make money and P2F is a money making racket just like the rest of it!

I believe the onus of responsibility is on the individual to reject these scheme's rather than fork out mum and dads dosh in order to skip the que. I daresay you'd soon find that the P2F providers would very soon shut up shop with no customers. I dont believe that its enough to pass P2F off as 'inevitable' or 'becoming the norm' simply because these oafs have made little or no effort to get a job and see paying thier way as a viable alterative!

[Shortflyer]

I have an idea, a bit like the tighter regulation one but cruder. Make all pilots retire after 30 years commercial experience, (I was going to state retire at 50). That way youve had a good innings and earnt some good money, less pilots able to fly = better t's and c's and if your a career changer like me at 37 with 250 hours you might get a job instead of an eviction notice whippee.....everyones a winner even the school boy who can spend mum and dads money.

I await the abuse!!!

[A320rider]

only flight schools who have "contract" with airline will survive.

the one who don't find any airlines to work with through P2Fschemes will slowly die as students will turn their head away.

it s not a win/win situation for pilots, but a win lose situation.

at the end of the "line training", you are out. and you have to start again a new line training, even if you have 2000000 hours of jet.


line training, what it is? it s a training to be familiar with the lines and the plane, before you are fully release as a copilot/ captain.

but in this system, you are not release as a copilot or captain, you are simply KICKED OUT!!! for th next one who take your job becasue he has a nice cheque in his hands...

anyway, if you are too naive to understand that, i wonder how you passed you written test. I wish you good luck to find a job with no money left...:}

nobody will give you a job anyway, as it s all P2F then OUT!

have fun in your carousel jet!

[rogerg]

A320rider. Its not all as bad as it seems. The last batch of Easy OAA self sponsord TRs have all been made permanent, after some time on the line and were paid during their line flying.

[pilotcop]

rogerg, the OAA Easy and Ryanair deals are not P2F, they are SSTR. These contracts are a different ball game. I agree with A320rider regarding the pay for line training system, line training is to familiarise the FO with the everyday running, operations and procedures of the specific airline, under the supervision of the line trainers before being released upon the rest of the companies commanders, it is not a transferable skill, move to another company after your time is up,you do more line training, learn different sops, etc....however some are successful in their endeavours with P2F and I wish them luck. Please don't confuse P2F with FR and Easy, whatever peoples views are, they offer some form of contract after completion of line training, and the FO receives pay during this period, a good way to get into the industry at the moment.

[A320rider]

not too bad for now, but I know several companies who offer P2F and they don't give a job after the "line training". Yes, I got some offers but I am not interested to pay then be out of job after 6 months.

airlines will have soon to compete with these airlines who offer only P2F.

probably Oxford is the best deal in this tough environment, but how long they are going to keep their pilots when they will discover they can even rack more money from these poor wanabe jet pilots.

I know some guys who pay to fly, with no job guaranty at the end.
even no starting date guaranty and no refund guaranty.

So it s not what I hear on line about these people who say oxford is a good deal, that will change my mind.
I believe some guys here work for Oxford and say oxford is a good deal..

[SW1]

A320 rider

Your credibility diminishes every day my friend.

Have a look on the tech log forum where A320 rider is claiming to be a TRE on the A320 but isasking how to work out reciprocal headings and why holding patterns are based on inbound legs!!!! And youre asking how other people passed their written test!!!!

Sort it out......:ugh:

[Big Pistons Forever]

sooner or later the market will open up again and then they will be screaming for F/O and CPT again, so they will have to drop teh schemes and will have to offer better conditions again..

Another thread stated that there could be as many as 1000 FATPL wannabe's looking for work with another 120 joining the line every 6 months.

If you are a low cost airline executive the business case is too compelling to ignore. Instead of the airline training costs coming of the bottom line, it can now be a profit centre (as most type rating course are priced well above their actual cost to the airline). Plus DOC's can be reduced by having a pool of free (or even better P2F) copilots. Therefore it appears the new model for most new joiners will be self sponsored type rating followed by a period of no pay or P2F line training followed by a period of payed contract flying (only payed when actually working) hopefully eventually followed by a full time permanant position. The allready huge supply of desperate wannabe's can keep this sheme going for years and every new graduate from the airline puppy mills just perpetuates the atatus quo.

However I guess there is a glimmer of good news as it seems impalusable that you can run an airline with only lowtime FO's as training capacity, schedual stabilty, and replacements for retiring/leaving captains would seem to require a core of "traditional" full time permanant FO's.
Wannebe's best be prepared for a long hard slog before they can secure a "real" airline job, sadly it is the new reality.....

[hollingworthp]

rogerg, the OAA Easy and Ryanair deals are not P2F, they are SSTR

Not true actually.

FR is an SSTR - no argument there.

However, the current OAA/Easy setup is a £35k SSTR along with 75hrs on the line - that to me makes a line training package to give an insignificant number of hours on type perhaps with the illusion that you become more marketable than a 'basic' SSTR. You then MAY POSSIBLY become a brookfield-style contractor under Parc who may or may not get you any additional Easy hours at £50ph.

That being said, I read some/all of the initial intake of 20 are now on permanent (or at least better) contracts which is nice but by no mean guaranteed in the initial training contract.

[clanger32]

Phil,
Whilst what you say is 100% accurate, OAA does, in fairness - extend the "skills whatsitmethingy" to the EZY scheme - therefore I think I'm right in saying that if EZY subsequently don't take on the successful candidates after this line training, AP dips his hand into his pocket.

Whether and to what to degree that applies to any particular aspect, I don't know without looking into it and certainly the requirement to self fund 75 hours of line training is loathsome and places this scheme - IMHO - into some grey area between a SSTR and a P2F scheme. It's neither one thing or another.

[hollingworthp]

Clanger

Well I stand (well sit eating Tea & drinking Toast) corrected - I hadn't delved that deeply into the small print. Actually makes it a reasonable alternative to Ryanair in some respects then.

[D O Guerrero]

AP dips his hand into his pocket? I've never seen him do that for any reason other than to spend the money on AP.

[clanger32]

Ah, D O , I think you may have misunderstood my point....I MEANT "IF they fail TR then AP would have to"....hence OAA send only people they think won't fail....cunning ploy really!

:}

[Reverserbucket]

AP dips his hand into his pocket? I've never seen him do that for any reason other than to spend the money on AP.

Oh no, I think there are other occasions....;)

[covec]

You would have to hope that the Training Captains have the moral courage to fail someone who, despite their paying power demonstrate that they do not have the aptitude to fly commercially.

If they want to continue to burn money, failing Sim Checks, then great! Money into the Company!

Just keep up the legal, training paper trail to prove that the paying trainee is not up to it should Management come checking. Or is that being naive?

The military operate Operational Conversion Units (OCU) where ab-initios straight from Basic Flight School are inculcated with the ethos of flying operationally - commercially if you like i.e. the flying is no longer priority - now you learn to safely apply practically your knowledge through following mandated procedures in order to achieve an end result. Some do not progress beyong the OCU. They can fly but not apply, if you like.

Which brings me back to my first and second paragraphs.

I retire from the military in 6 years at age 55. I am non-pilot military aircrew but am a practising FI. I have also been an OCU Instructor.

If it appears that buying a Type Rating is the only way forward then I probably will consider it BUT I am under no illusion that I will be slower, that I am paying to be selected and that therefore it will be stressful to the extent that I might give-up, be chopped, not be employed!

I fully accept that gamble BUT I do believe - without conceit - that I have some modicum of safe ability (I have passed the PILAPT twice but eyesight failed me) and I know that my Airmanship is good - my Commercial Instructor and subsequently my IR Examiner commented favourably about that. However, where it might take some youngster 45 minutes to learn something, I know that it will likely take me the full 60 minutes plus I will be last to turn up at the bar due personal revision of the day's events!

Flying is not a game - it can bite. You have to intrinsically know what you are doing. No amount of cash can buy aptitude. Re my paragraph above - if, after fronting up cash for a Type Rating I come to my own conclusion that I cannot hack it then I WILL pull out. I do NOT want to kill anyone just because I have a dream. I just have to hope that other Type Rating payees have the same belief.

However, I will target my aircraft type carefully - maybe not even multi-engine, maybe not even a TP! Caravans, Pilatus, Let-410s, C404s, B1900s, JS31/41ss, SD360s, Kings, DHC-6s, BN-2s. I know little about these aircraft at the moment - it may be that they are too difficult to handle for a 55 year old, ex-FI. So be it - I will not try.

End!

Fly Safe, Folks.

[BigNumber]

Covec,

Please do not believe any of the complete twaddle regarding age ( and being replete there of ).

Granted, those 'with parents paying their dowry' into FR tend to be young, but many operators value guy's like you in their stable. Suggest you visit Biz Jets mate.

Their ain't anyone under 40 in our small private operation. ( all ex Mil )

Best regards,

BN

[Mikehotel152]

That Guy - are you trolling?

As others have noted, 'line training' is a clearly defined and structured stage of flying training where you fly solely with line training Captains who drills you with the company's SOPs. It only lasts about 100 hours until the Line Check is passed. After that point the 'learning' really begins.

Pay to Fly schemes presumably offer an hours package incorporating 'line training'. The extent and quality of that 'training' is debatable and I have only snippits of inside knowledge. Put it this way, I wouldn't fly as a pax on a budget airline outside Europe or the US.

Of little comfort to those who have an intrinsic dislike of loco operators but the honest truth in my humble experience: the relatively low hour Captains who joined straight from flight school and gained experienced at my airline before being upgraded are generally very good and safe, if a little anal due to the indoctrination.

The best AND worst Captains I fly with at my airline are those who arrived as direct entry Captains. Experience is important but there's no substitute for raw ability and common-sense. Having the hours in the logbook guarantees neither.