Lets get Pilot training sorted out

[steven]

Hi everyone I'm here with a niggle that we all know. The amount of times that I come on this site and hear of people either confused, broke, complaining about sponsorship, or just stuck in terms of learning to fly.
The soon to happen implementation of the PPRuNe fund is a god sent. Yet why has there never been a properly established state fund Pilot Training Institution. I probably sound stupid, ignorant or just unfamiliar with the industry but I don't belive that to be true. There has to ways you can do it. Why is it that if you want to become a doctor or a lawyer you go to university with everyone else and get you degree in the profession you want to take up. Instead would be pilots go to uni to study something totally irrelevant to flying and get themselves in debt and then have to go through all the c%*p of learning to fly. Why can't there be a big pilot training centre(s) affiliated to universitys where the training is fund for the applicant. The selection would be tough as it should be just like for doctors and lawyers yet it would be a stable course of study with accomadation provided and perhaps a degree could be gained in conjuction to the ATPL. I know city uni have done something similar but that is still in conection with a flight school where you have to pay 50K. Am I so radical that it is mad not to expect to pay 50 K for training.
May be the CAA could fund these courses. Sound far fetched but in the last recession the CAA put their prices up by 5%. I wish I had a business where the price went up in a recession. With the amount that the CAA charge the airlines in air traffic fees, they would only have to put the price up a few pence to the airlines each time and this would probably fund all costs. Simple.
The airlines are crying out supposadly for quality pilots yet all the hard working self improvers are not seeing any joy. There must be a problem with training iof the airlines are not getting what they want. So cant all the major organisations in the industry take the bull by the horns and organise a proper school or there will be no solid pilots left in ten years time. If you want to be an Air Traffic Controller you have your training payed for by the government if you go through NATS and this costs up to £200,000.
So why can't my far fetched yet possibly plausible idea be used.

get back to me,

steven.

[Ham Phisted]

The cynical answer is that there is no need whatsoever for funded pilot training. There are two reason for this. Firstly, the military already funds a large number of pilots who are available to the airlines at the end of their military engagement. Secondly, self-improvers are still willing to spend hige quantities of their own money to fund pilot training. And there is, of course, the sponsorship programmes currentyl offered by the airlines.

[VFE]

Interesting post steven.
Ham Phisted is right - whilst there are affluent folks around willing to stump up the dosh then why should the CAA or the education authority worry?
It seems that flying is not a job the government feel is of significant financial reward to the country even though pilots tend to be in the top tax brackets!
It could be very easy for the CAA to set something up for pilot training but unfortunately they are not in the charity business. Safety is their main concern and surely things like improved seating and adequate aircraft exits are of more priority. The cost of widening exits would see airlines suffer a financial loss, they don't want the hassle of that so paying for Joe Bloggs licence? Forget it. (Sponsorhip airlines excluded).
As for training costs, I can tell you that flying schools don't see much of the £50k it takes to train a pilot. If I wanted to buy a business I would be just as well to burn my money than buy a flying school!

I cannot belive that to become a pilot you either have to be very lucky with sponsorship or stump up the cash yourself. If this was the case with all professions there wouldn't be any doctors for a kick-off! The looks I get when people ask how I intend to become a pilot - they must think I'm mad!

Looks like we have to make do with sponsorships and bank loans - unbelievable state of affairs I know.

Good luck, VFE.

PS: I will be out of the country for five days so I won't be able to post on this thread unless I can find an internet cafe.

[This message has been edited by VFE (edited 12 February 2001).]

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

And of course if the tax man did take a lot of the burden out of training then the pay and conditions for those doing the job would decline.

Can't win really.

WWW

[steven]

A reply to one of the above posts is that there are less and less RAF pilots going into the airlines these days. This is for many reasons yet the cas at the moment is that a recent study showed that 65% of Airline pilots are self improvers which means the sponsorship oportunities are few and far between. It is very easy to say that the government etc will not fund training for ATPL's as there are people willing to pay for their training themselves but the fact is there are still more people with licences than there are jobs yet the airlines still need pilots.
This seems to me like their is a problem with training. If the airlines are not getting what they want.

[RVR800]

The costs of flying training are large
and Universities do not get the level of
funding to provide for it.

The most expensive University courses
are Medicine & Dentistry and these are A
rated for funding provision within the HE sector by the HEFCE the UK funding council.
The voters can see benefit from more Doctors

To provide finance for flying training would IMHO be politically impossible because of its
cost and the voter would not buy in

HMG has just binned the RAF Flying Scholarship Scheme so its actually going the other way i.e. less cash

Universities could collaberate with the private sector and the armed forces however in the future to provide a mechanism for training though but funding would have to come from the private sector...

[rolling circle]

The problem the airlines have at the moment is that they see themselves being short of pilots over the next year or two but not of low hour CPL/IR holders. The shortage is expected to be among jet experienced F/O's needed to replace those moving into the LHS. There is insufficient lead time to allow low-hour, piston qualified people to gain the experience necessary to fill the vacancies.

The most likely medium-term fix will be an arrangement with the MOD whereby, in return for a fixed length of service (probably 12 or 16 years), retiring QSP's will sit a simplified set of exams for the JAA ATPL and will be taken on by the airlines as DEP's with jet and in many cases multi-crew, large aircraft experience. That way the government ensures sufficient pilots in the services with no retention problems as well as safeguarding a steady stream of qualified and experienced pilots into the RHS of the airlines. All this without any increase in the training budget.

I understand from a contact in the MOD that talks between the CAA and MOD(Air) concerning such a scheme are at an advanced stage.

[scroggs]

Rolling Circle,
the maximum number of pilots leaving the services is in the order of 150 annually. I'm afraid that is not sufficient to seriously dent the requirements of the UK's major airlines, especially when a significant number of those 150 is leaving at an age where airline service may no longer be an option. Many more are helo qualified only, which makes them ineligable for many airline jobs. As you say, the major lack is of jet-qualified youngsters in the 1000-1500 hour bracket. These guys will mainly come from the regionals, but the trouble is there aren't enough regional jet-equipped airlines to provide the numbers, even with the military output! At some point the irresistable force of the market will demand an industry training system to make up the shortfall, funded by all the aairlines collectively. It may take some time, and it may well include some element of candidate funding contribution, but it will happen, I believe.