Current opinion on Cabair Distance ATPL Groundschool?

[vne10]

Hi all, I was wondering what the current consensus is on the Cabair distance ATPL groundschool? Their price is probably the lowest I've seen but there are also quite a few (dated) threads on pprune regarding the low quality of their textbooks. I don't particularly want to choose a low priced course just to have to buy BGS' text books to supplement the Cabair ones. Does anyone know what the current quality of the notes are?

I also read a post that said they may be revising their textbooks in July, does anyone know anything about this, and at what quality they'll be?

I'm also undecided between Cabair, CATS, OAA and Bristol, not quite sure how I'll decide! Living up in the wilds of Northumberland it's not really practical to go visit each school just for the distance groundschool.

Does the CAA publish pass rates for the schools? Would be good to have a kind of OFSTED for FTOs in my opinion to get an impartial view!

[vne10]

If anyone has any recent experiences of Cabair it would be good to hear your opinions please?

[PPRuNeUser0173]

All of them are good but like everything else its Horses for Courses. I did mine at Bristol Groundschool and am happy to recommend them every time. The other schools will have satisfied customers also. When ready for flight training there are some quality FTO's up north worth looking at.

[vne10]

Thanks for that, I'm leaning towards Bristol as it always seems to have good reviews and the quality of notes / software looks great.

I had a look into Multiflight, and they offer the training from Blackpool now, meaning I could stay with relatives while doing the CPL. Are there any other schools around Newcastle that could be recommended for CPL?

[cefey]

I started my residential ATPL with cabair (OFT) not to long time ago.
Im very very happy with it. 10 of 10!
Many guys in our class going for "bristoling" questions, just memorizing them, by taking online test 100 times. Be aware of that when doing distance learning.
You will pass test if you bristol everything (with score of 80-98), however, you will not be able to explaing, as example, why induced drag is lower with increased aspect ratio. And that may hunt you back on job interview (where there is no multiply choice answers) or while flying.

For distance learning, I belive Cabair use same manuals as for residential. They are decent, but not too good. However, they gonna get new ones within a month or two, which supposed to be much much better.

[Lightning Mate]

Does the CAA publish pass rates for the schools?

Only the individual results to the schools. The information is not in the public domain - quite rightly.

[rmcb]

The information is not in the public domain - quite rightly

An interesting viewpoint - should we rely on CFI or marketing managers' pitches for business as being gospel? After all, we all know they don't have hidden agendas such as bonuses and other benefits.

Open up the stats., say I!

[PPRuNe Towers]

Results tables are out there in the public domain for all schools including fee paying. There's more information on the quality of kindergartens than UK training establishments.

By far the most reprehensible and disgraceful aspect of UK FTO's is their collective, sullen refusal, along with the authority, to publish written and practical exam results. The feeble justifications regularly paraded out by the schools are simply an embarrassment and normally revolve around having little or no control of the quality of their intake. There's a terrible silence when that argument is reworded on their behalf - so what you're saying is you take anyone who can pay? The fact remains I can look up the results for Eton and compare them with any inner city comprehensive. The FTO's excuses are fatuous.

Strangely enough, it's your absolute right to read the statistics on every UK operators' flight schedules and performance. However, there's no way you are allowed to make an considered judgement before shelling out thousands on training. Seeing as the CAA have established the principle of users being able to view performance surely a wannabee with a reasonable legal or journalistic background and a working knowledge of the freedom of information byways could really set the cat amongst the pigeons:E They are taking your money but refuse to show you their past performance in context, set against the rest of the industry - an egregious luxury real, professional aviation isn't allowed.

Rob

[rmcb]

Rob - the consumer champion!!!!!!

I have been to the CAA regarding this travesty; while very happy to help with an FOI request, the parameters necessary to create meaningful information from data would be outside the cost they were prepared to cover.

And no, I couldn't come to the library to compile the information for myself; 'commercially sensitive data, dontchya know. Oh, and personal data - data privacy. Sorry.'.

Soooooo... if you are prepared to shell out a LOT of dosh to discover the truth behind that 'we had fourteen CPL IR first time and series passes last week - and that was a bad one' claim, then you will get what you need.

Otherwise belief is to be suspended from the hook outside the CFI's door.

[paco]

Rob - our average pass mark is clearly posted on our website - it hasn't really moved from 88% since we started. If people want more in depth info, we are only too glad to provide it, time permitting, i.e. they may have to wait a while while we dig it out!

Our typical figures are 4-6 failures out of 96 exams taken, mostly due to bad planning and running out of time. Only one person has not got his licence yet and that was because he was chopped at the flying stage, well after we had our sticky mitts on him! We've had two people run out of sittings and have to start again, but they still passed. The exact figure escapes me, but over 120 people have passed so far.

The above fugures do not include people who have enrolled and then proceeded not to submit progress tests! Go figure.

[PPRuNe Towers]

Comparison, across FTO's Paco,

Single, simple tables across locations.

You know, like real schools do. Have to do - they call it competition in an open market.

Do you have a problem with that? Why do FTO's refuse to allow it to happen but schools for 10 year olds have to?

Rob

[Felix Saddler]

I believe Northumbria Flying School are soon to start CPL training. Give them a call?

[RichardH]

PPrunE Towers et al.

Even if all the results were published it doesn't present the whole story. It only reflects the exams taken and NOT how the student got to sit them, see below.

In theory all groundschools SHOULD have their students sit a mock/practice/school final to prove to the CAA that the student has a good chance of passing the exam. How this is actually done is down to the school itself and its own internal system.

They range from those who won't let their student sit the exam unless they get 80% in a mock, some warn against taking the JAA if they get below a certain mark eg 65% and others just sign them off.

So unless they all sit the same mock and have the same go/no go criteria the results will never give a direct like on like comparison only a guide. Like any form of statistics, treat with care!

However the most worrying comment on this post is;

Many guys in our class going for "bristoling" questions, just memorizing

Hopefully any airline interview will weed this lot out.

Now can we close this post as it's losing the plot.

[Alex Whittingham]

The individual schools obviously know their own pass rates and some of us publish them, as Paco says. The problem is that leaves it open to FTOs to massage their results, or to be selective, to give a distorted impression and without public access to the raw data no-one can challenge them.

I'd be very much in favour of results being published across the board, but it would have to be done by the CAA or some other independent agency. As it stands it's not a case of the FTOs stopping the CAA from doing it, the CAA have decided for themselves not to do it (citing 'commercial confidence').

While you'e busy trying to encourage openness at the CAA, see if you can get them audited by the QCA in the same way that A level exams are audited - that would open a lovely can of worms.

[Lightning Mate]

Garbage!!!

The CAA will not, and will never, interfere with private businesses.

Publication of individual schools' success rates in the public domain is tantamount to advertising and perhaps would be considered favouritism.

I shall respond no further!!

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[PPRuNe Towers]

Get off that high horse old boy and take the patronising tosh with you. You do nothing but throw into sharp relief just how distanced the schools really are from actual professional aviation.

The airlines are private businesses and every aspect of time keeping and baggage performance is analysed, ordered and the results published for all to see. By airline name.

You really do protest too much. If you are any good why can't your results be seen against others?

That's how simple it is. Why are you too nervous to allow students to see how you actually do compared to other FTO's. Here in adult aviation we face that evaluation of performance for every for every flight during each recording period.

The question remains, why are students prevented from seeing which schools perform best for their students. Why is there more information on a nursery school than for an establishment training airline pilots? On what grounds can you support the outlay of tens of thousands of pounds without a single item of neutrally derived, independent information. Only in house marketing information allowed?

Rob

[Lightning Mate]

get off that high horse old boy and ...

ok
Language:=

HWB

[Alex Whittingham]

The CAA will not, and will never, interfere with private businesses

Ah the old school! They should, they have a responsibility for regulation that they don't take seriously enough, and they should also expose their own processes to scrutiny. All FTOs have to operate Quality Assurance programs. Ever seen the CAA's? Ever tried to complain to their Quality Manager?? The CAA is the worst of 1950s beaurocracy which has somehow been allowed to shamble into the second decade of the 21st century, probably through lack of interest on behalf of their masters. Come the revolution.......

[mad_jock]

The other thing they could do with producing which isn't linked to schools is the numbers of students who are in the training system at various stages.

And then how many ever get a type rating added to there CPL/IR.

The statistics the caa does publish seemed to be designed to be totally useless. They don't even provide a key to what the data fields mean.

[Adios]

Even if the CAA could be convinced to publish meaningful comparisons, the plug would be pulled on this when EASA comes on line. If you think FTOs want to protect their golden eggs, wait until each Member State jumps into the fray to protect the golden eggs laying in nests within their own borders. EASA would have to codify this in law and I give it zero chance of getting done.

[mad_jock]

I take that back slightly

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/Flight%20Crew%20Licensing%20Transactions%20April%202009%20to %20March%202010.pdf

is alot better than previous years. Still pretty shocking though. Just over 50% of rating issued compared to cpl issue, and quite a few of the rating issued will be experenced pilots moving fleets.

[rmcb]

The statistics the caa does publish seemed to be designed to be totally useless

Understatement of the year!

I don't understand the objection to making the stats. open; schools should be pepared to publish and justify their data. If it was presented to the CAA for validation and granted or refused a 'kite mark', that should surely be better than the current system?

The amount of data garnered at application must be used for something, or is it, as suggested, of the old school? The civil service touch that is neither Civil nor Service any longer.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I take that back slightly

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/175/Flight%20Crew%20Licensing%20Transactions%20April%202009%20to %20March%202010.pdf

is alot better than previous years. Still pretty shocking though. Just over 50% of rating issued compared to cpl issue, and quite a few of the rating issued will be experenced pilots moving fleets.

Some fascinating numbers in there - that there are less private than professional licences being issues does not look healthy for recreational flying, whilst I can't quite work out why three ATPL holders got issued with IMC ratings?

G