CTC Killing the INDUSTRY!! eJ, Monarch, Thomson and ????

[futureTP]

Hi all,

I'm sure everyone is aware of what's happening to the industry but a lot of folk still have rose tinted glasses on, that includes new guys coming in at the bottom and experienced folk out flying the line.

It's time to wake up and stand UNITED or leave the likes of CTC and AIRLINE MANAGEMENT to truly kill this "PROFESSION" what a great career this is turning out to be...

The following email is about a year old... don't shoot the messenger and make of it what you will...

My interpretation... CTC coffers/bank balance get richer while the young naive cadet gets screwed over from behind working his ARSE/ASS off on the line!!!!



"Dear CTC Wings/ATP Pilots,

As an organisation, we are in deed a little cautious when it comes to announcing new ideas or initiatives;however, when we do go forth, the concepts are well researched, innovative and effective. When we devised the ATP programme, that concept was unheard of in the industry. When we unveiled the Cadet programme some 8 years ago, the degree of selection, under writing of the training and the bond repayment mechanisms were totally novel. Our competitors have now followed suit.

FlexiCrew is a response to the current economic climate, but more importantly, it is what some airlines want. Most of our Customer Airlines (not just the Wings Partner Airlines) are looking for a way to make their operations leaner and more financially viable. Crew costs are a significant part of an airlines cost base and the seasonality within some airlines leads to in efficiencies on occasion. Of course this is not the case for all airlines, but we have listened to a great many who would like to see an initiative such as FlexiCrew.

FlexiCrew can be used to provide airlines with complete crewing solutions from training captains, low hour pilots through to cabin crew if required. As I mentioned in my last update, it is intended for type rated pilots; however, we did not want to exclude Wings pilots be they in training or indeed, already in airline jobs. This goes for Cadets and ATP alike. It is fair to say that the climate has changed in aviation in the UK and most of Europe for that matter. I'm not sure anyone could have predicted the speed and severity of the recession, but it is important that CTC responds with solutions. There is some speculation at the moment as to the structure of things to come. Will airlines be hiring in 2013?

Will Cadets and ATP pilots be offered type ratings and line training? Will those pilots then move into employment seamlessly as in previous years? Unfortunately my crystal ball is no bigger or better than yours and I cannot answer those questions for certain. Ultimately it is the airline's decision. However, we can influence, and we do. In providing initiatives and forward thinking ideas, we can assist the airlines with finding cost effective solutions AND at all times look for the very best opportunity for you. The last part of that sentence might seem a little idealistic, but it's not. CTC Wings success has been built on the reputation of providing highly skilled,capable and personable pilots to our customers. We are able to do that because we find the best candidates - you!

You come to us because we will provide you with the best possible chance of a placement. This is a three way relationship between you, the airlines and CTC. As you are aware, we have recently commenced xx Cadets on the Airbus TR and yesterday, easyJet confirmed that xx have joined the airline in the New Year. As is always the case, the airline cannot commit beyond the 6 month period. It is a fact that those Cadets might not be kept on after the 6 months, but it is also possible that they might. What is for certain, however, is that they will have completed a TR on an Airbus and will have gained 300 to 400 hours on type. Of the 32 pilots who were recently stood down by eJ and Monarch -some have secured positions with eJ Swiss, some have passed selection for GulfAir (no help from CTC).

For the remainder, we are in discussions with other Middle Eastern airlines, Far Eastern and Australasian airlines, plus some European carriers.These discussions are not casual chats; they are in depth negotiations that are looking to secure the best possible packages for those pilots. Most important are the ongoing discussions that are taking place with eJ, to secure a return to the airline for those pilots who were stood down. There is a strong proposal for those guys to return to eJ, albeit to a base possibly outside the UK. When we reach the right point in the negotiations with the airline, we will, of course,contact all of those pilots (ATP and Cadets) and discuss in detail what the options are.

I have gone into this detail because it is very important to understand the facts. FlexiCrew is merely offering additional options to CTC Wings pilots and is not at all mandatory. CTC cannot predict the nature of placements into the future with some operators, and more than that, it would be wise to anticipate a possible change to the way in which some airlines will look to crew their aircraft in the future. There is a real possibility that eJ will be re-engaging those pilots who were recently stood down, though it might be outside the UK. Whatever the economic climate and whatever state the industry might be in, CTC will act relentlessly when it comes to representing you and seeking opportunities for you. We continue to be flexible, innovative committed to providing solutions to the industry.

All the best,

L"

[PT6A]

If they had not gone via CTC where would these pilots be? Sat at home with no ours on a modern jet...

Or paid money to go and fly at a 3rd world operator?

At least they have gained some valuable experience with a "proper" operator.

I don't lik the situation... But the industry is changing and I think your better of being in bed with CTC / easyJet than finding your own path with EagleJet and a banned airline in Indonesia.

[Bealzebub]

It's time to wake up and stand UNITED or leave the likes of CTC and AIRLINE MANAGEMENT to truly kill this "PROFESSION" what a great career this is turning out to be...

So re-hashing a poorly reproduced email that is purported to be "about a year old," is your idea of "waking up"? I don't know about ""shooting the messenger" but given your tardiness in keeping up with discussion on this subject (of which there has been a lot,) I am not sure you really are a "messenger."

[talkpedlar]

Here we go again.. another post containing RANDOM capitals, underscoring and BOLD type from someone peddling an OLD story and wanting to change THE world......

1 IT'S not an industry my friend...

2 All of the folks who have paid a fortune for their training and licences...and PTF in many cases... have made a lot of bad decisions and
choices.

3 Your energy would be better directed against the many training establishments which have, for many years, promoted their training courses as almost guarantees of prompt, prestigious and lucrative airline employment

4 It also must be recorded here that there are very many unemployed fATPL holders out there of unspeakably poor quality who will most likely never secure employment at the pointy end.

5 Maybe those who are so disgruntled should try to rearrange the following words...

kitchen...heat...if..like...don't... you...the...in..out..get...:ugh:

[Wirbelsturm]

It also must be recorded here that there are very many unemployed fATPL holders out there of unspeakably poor quality who will most likely never secure employment at the pointy end.


This is quite possibly the most pertinent point of all!

The old system of Cadets and selective enrolement meant that if you were rubbish and not up to standard you got thrown out of the training system. The Cadet system was run along similar lines to the Military (In most cases the instructors/examiners were ex-mil, look at Prestwick!).

Now the ability to complete a course, if the student is average/below average, is the ability to continue to pay for it. Admittedly the atrocious are still (hopefully) weeded out but the 'poor' still continue to follow through to the end of their 'course' and 6 months with a carrier to be bounced out for the next 'cash paying' co-pilot. The abiliity to pass a course is, in many ways, no longer dictated by ability more by how deep the applicants pockets are.

As a friend of mine who works as a TSC for one of these placement airlines says, he is flying single pilot in many cases. Always with a new, inexperinced, if enthusiastic, Co-pilot who struggles with SOP's, aircraft handling and lack of familiarity with destination airfields. He then coaches them through 6 months with almost certain knowledge that they will not be given a contract. He has complained to the company that it is both extremely hard work for him and very unfair on the co-pilots.

Sadly the rot will not stop from the Trainees as they are only trying to get a rung up the ladder, understandably so. The movement needs to come from the CAA who should be taking a stance on airlines making profit from passengers being flown by a trainee who is not being paid to fly commercially. Unfortunately, as with the EASA FTL's and BALPA's weak willed stance, the CAA/BALPA are toothless dogs that roll over at the first sign of conflict.

Until we have our own 'Colgan' the public will want seats cheaper per mile than a local bus and won't give a damn who is poling them around the sky at Mach 0.79 with no option to 'pull over to the side of the road'.

[talkpedlar]

...could this be the same Future TP (Test Pilot? 230 hours? Oh please!) who, throughout 2009 and 2010 was chasing, enquiring and lusting after CTC selection... but in 2012 is trying to crucify them? Could there be a slight whiff of rejection/failure here?

Sorry young fellow but your immaturity shines through your posts and threads... Haha..LOL...Haha..Mate...guys... Haha...LOL..

You are, or profess to be, a prospective professional pilot...Maybe the time has come to behave and communicate like one! :ugh:

[Artic Monkey]

His motives are largely irrelevant, he has a point though.

[BUGS/BEARINGS/BOXES]

I'm sure that anyone who has attended one of the Flyer shows, that have been going for some time now, will have seen the huge effort CTC put on the 'capture' element of their marketing. Any prospective student will be bombarded by lots of tantalising facts and figures. An analytical mind would rapidly see costs/vs income in EZY et al and believe this is a quick one stop shop to success and, in time, command.
At the end of the day it is up to the student to do their homework, and use such events to check on all available options and decide what is best for them. We live in the 'have now' generation. It really is no surprise. CTC are very good at marketing.

[Enecosse]

Actually I think it is a number of factors combined that has changed the industry in the manner complained about.

a) CTC, b) LoCo, c) the Internet, d) fuel costs and e) (which has always been there) job perception.

[pudoc]

I understand the need for cheap pilots during hard economic times, and I'm not really going to argue that. But the question is when the economy is back to normal and recovered, will there be an end to flexi crew and airlines doing their best to get pilots as cheap as possible? Probably not.

In that letter it sounded to me like they were indirectly saying that flexi crew will become the norm one day and pilots can enjoy crap pay and will be released when they're not needed. Surely there's no way that can happen, how will people survive for food?

Am I hopeful in saying I hope the future of pilots returns to some normality? I don't mean sponsorships or it becoming easy to get a job but when one does get a job they are paid above minimum wage and aren't told to go away during winter.

I wish I could see the future.

[mendicus]

My friend died last year trying to build hours the 'classic' way as he hated the likes of CTC. He spent 9 years flying with (he was cabin crew) Captains that believed in the grass roots of aviation and NOT CTC. Going the classic way FI,Turbo prop etc. We all know that BA etc need their cadets but when the greedy individuals who never paid for their own training start to cross the line and move the goal posts, then there is a problem. Flexicrew is a disgusting direction and makes this industry on par with banking. I don't question the ability of the individuals that went to CTC or CTC training but when Airlines only take from them its a sad pathetic situation.
He died a hero and with principles, the same principles that many Captains have but money is the game and it is for CTC my advice don't pay CTC avoid them. Go classic.

[Wirbelsturm]

True or not, there is still not enough of a stigma attached to trying to enter the profession this way. It should be metaphorically marked on their forehead forever.

That is completely the wrong approach IMHO. Treating those you work with as 'Scabs' effectively will never, ever be a soloution.


Whilst those who are willing to spend thousands and thousands of pounds in the belief that they will get a 'leg up' the ladder are a part of the problem they are not the biggest part of the problem.

The whole training system needs to be grass roots regulated from the bottom to the top. The FAA's idea of introducing a mandatory 1500 hour minimum will put pressure on the P2F brigade as the required hours will, in effect, be unachieveable from their own pockets.

Until there is some concrete law preventing the exploitation of (naieve) inexperienced pilots by ruthless companies for profit then there will be nothing to stop those same companies from increasing the pressure to push through candidates.

Once they are in the right hand seat, on a full contract, irrespective of how they got there it is our responsibility to mould a professional Co-Pilot who will become a professional Captain in the future. I might be retired in the back by then and would like to see the result of my efforts!!!

Creating division and derision within our profession benefits no-one.

[PT6A]

Yes but the FAA put a clause in the new regulations reducing the 1500 hour requirement if you attend a school along the lines of CTC.

The FAA system and the European Cadet / CTC system are two very different things.

My personal stance is I think the CTC route is fine, however I don't like it being open to private sponsorship. If an airline was selecting and paying for the cadets training then I'm sure there would be no accusations real or otherwise of anything but talent being the deciding factor if someone makes it through the course.

Again personal opinion, but I think flying around the pattern counts for very little, if someone had worked for a TP operator then by all means have a method of entry as an FO for them.

What the FAA have dreamt up will do nothing to increase flighty safety, they would of been better banning pilots commuting to work.

[BlackandBrown]

Never was such crap spoken by so few to so many.

[Wirbelsturm]

PT6A,

If an airline was selecting and paying for the cadets training

As you say, if the scheme chose potential candidates based upon their innate ability not just their ability to pay then I'm sure it would be fine/more acceptable.

The days of Airlines paying for full training are, IMHO, sadly gone. An airline wants a payback now for it's risk/investment and it will take a fundamental ethos shift for that to change in the future I'm afraid.

[Drakestream]

The FAA still require 1,000TT from those that have gone through pre approved programmes. These are mainly 4 year degree courses. The only other exception to the 1,500TT requirement is ex-mil guys who are allowed into the flight deck with 750TT. I think that is easily justified by the standard of training they have received and the hoops they have had to jump through to even have the chance to fly a military aircraft.

It is vital to the survival of our profession in Europe, in particular the UK, that we get rid of pay to play flying. CTC cadets are undoubtedly declining in quality. I have first hand experience of this.

Too many good pilots are being overlooked in order to put these guys in the right seat. Many are capable, but many others have no business being in the right seat of a 156 seat jet.

[BlackandBrown]

Originally posted by futuretp:

futureTP
*
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: above clouds
Posts: 30
Got a reply from ctc anyone else heard anything??



That explains it then - and applying when there was no unsecured loan! Vote lib dem or labour do we, you champagne socialist. Do as I say, not as I do.

[PT6A]

Does anyone actually think it will improve flight safety by someone having 1500 hours in light aircraft, for arguments sake as a flight instructor?

Because mark my words... You will see every 2 bit flight school in the states start to offer 1,500 hour CFI internships. Basically forced labor where the flight school gets CFI's for free as all other routes to an airline cockpit have been effectively cut off.

This may even cause a further reduction in the quality of applicant.

[Artic Monkey]

My gripe is that they are stopping perfectly capable experienced pilots from moving on. A natural step for myself would be to Easyjet. It would be ok if it was a balanced playing field, some CTC, some experience, but it isn't.

[BlackandBrown]

No I am certain it won't. But it will keep the lefty , inefficient bureaucrats happy.

PERFECT practice makes perfect - not just practice. Something I learnt from my previous career. Continually practicing something incorrectly, unchecked, can make you extremely dangerous. Contrary to popular belief we FALL to the level of our training not RISE to the level of our expectations.

[BlackandBrown]

One point i will say against CTC is that it should not be the only way into a company and certainly not all the companies. If you screw up one interview which is entirely possible then you are excluded from pretty much any airline worth flying for in he UK. That is just not right.

[PT6A]

Artic,

easyJet did recently take on some First Officers. Although maybe not ideal they are also taking on Captains and First Officers via an agency for non UK bases.

[Artic Monkey]

PT6A

That's all well and good mate, but not when you hold a Q400 Type Rating instead of a 320 rating. The ones they took on must've been "rated only".

[PT6A]

Artic,

That's just the market at the moment. Look at Monarch, must of flown for UK airline and also be rated.

When things pick up maybe they will look at non rated.

[Wirbelsturm]

That's all well and good mate, but not when you hold a Q400 Type Rating instead of a 320 rating. The ones they took on must've been "rated only".

Consider it a 'buyers market' for the employer. Whilst customers demand cheaper and cheaper flights and the competition is always there ready to give it to them then we, as pilots, will only ever be a massive cost to be trimmed back year after year.

Ticket prices need to reflect real world costs, until they do, we're all going to get our T's & C's attacked.

Have a look at IB Express!

[angelorange]

PT6A:

Suggest you look at this thread rgds FAA ruling:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/478555-faa-seeks-raise-airline-pilot-standards.html

and

Technology may be eroding pilot skills - chicagotribune.com (http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/traffic/ct-met-getting-around-0319-20120319,0,701014.column)

By the way who taught you to fly? An Instructor?! What was he paid? £7 per flying hr? Where is the incentive for young pilots to become instructors or even older ones to work for such low wages?

The usual "burning holes in the sky" argument doesn't really wash when it's 1500h!
Afterall who can afford to do that even in the USA on a C150?

Then again, I'd much rather take on an FAA MEP CFII with 1000h instructional experience in all weathers, dealing with busy Class C ATC, Wake turbulence separation, more mountainous terrain than the UK, than a post 2008 CTC cadet or EZY MPL with barely 100h of real flying experience. A lack of real flying skills, a shallow depth of knowledge and 1000s of hours of automation over-reliance is what is killing western airliner passengers these past 11 years.


See: http://www.boeing.com/news/techissues/pdf/statsum.pdf page 22/24 of pdf.

Mendicus: You should question CTC's training in recent years. Too much CBT and multi guess questioning (yes CAA/JAR also to blame here): CHIRP 01/2012 :

"I find the present bunch of junior First Officers very keen
and motivated but sadly woefully undertrained. They
have been taught to master the Flight Management
System but not taught the basics of flying or landing the
aeroplane."

[High'n Fast]

CTC

My experience with CTC.

Had a really 'cheesy' Interview with 'Fly Dubai'. The initial interviews were being run by CTC last year. I have to say it was very unprofessional. The day was run by two ex Flight Attendants that had no idea what so ever about what they were doing. They were more concerned about picking up their kids from school that day, and if they had a ladder in their tights ....

On Arrival:

1. I was not asked for any identification at all

2. None of my details checked, ie Licence log book etc

3. They knew nothing about Fly Dubai in the initial welcome briefing and couldn't answer any questions from any candidate, ref Housing, Licensing etc.

4. One of the Interviewers was thought she 'still had it' ....? Nah, she didn't:mad:

I got invited to leave at lunch time on day one. After testing (computer based, reminder of Biggin Hill) I was told I wasn't going to make a pilot ! At the time I had 15K TT B737NG, BBJ, Corporate Jets, G550 / G4 / Global Express and Military Fast Jet experience.

A very experienced A320 Captain went with me (he just walked out) which left guys with no Boeing rating and <1000 hrs. What were CTC doing ? Not the best for their customer Airlines especially 'Fly Dubai' .... A very poor show CTC ! Indeed they are killing the industry in the UK and makes me angry that you have to pass the CTC screaning in many cases if you want a job in the UK / Europe. I am not bitter that I got canned, but the way the day was handled. I was the only one from the UK and everybody else was from USA, Canada, Poland, and New Zealand. What was their impression ?

I now am a flying as a 777 Captain for another operator in the Middle East, had a very fair professional interview process, and first class training. (EY)

[fwjc]

High n Fast

It's interesting that you didn't do so well on the Computer tests. I had a similar issue, particularly with hand-eye coordination, for the BA FPP. The implication was that I couldn't fly an aeroplane. I don't profess to have even 10% of your depth and breadth of experience, but it says a lot that when I went back for the remainder of the assessment for in-house, I was able to pass the sim check to a really high standard and day two with marks that I was more than happy with.

I'm not convinced by the validity of all of the computer based tests, and neither are several colleagues ranging from experienced TPs to major airline Captains to Airshow Formation aerobatic pilots. However, them's the rules, and that's the way it is for that slice of the industry. I'm sure they get plenty of good ones, plus a few that have spent too much time playing computer games.

As had already been pointed out, it's ability to pay rather than flying aptitude and ability that counts these days.

[Joe le Taxi]

When I did the JetRepublic CTC selection, they sent home a Frecce Tricolore leader and a few other FJ pilots after the silly computer games. Absurd.

I vaguely remember some ex F/A, and a nauseating ex BA guy. Neither had the first clue about business aviation. Biggest berk was on the door - Chastised me like a school boy for chatting to an old friend and not immediately filling in his stupid form.

Awful place; best left to snot-nosed school leavers with more money than sense.

[MrKipling]

Can someone confirm that CTC used to train Thomson pilots a few years back but stopped using them because they wernt happy with the quality of training?

If that the case it seems ironic that they are now going to take several of their cadets, who have had the same training and are probably skint and stressed too!

Will they be allowed to sleep in their cars like the Easy cadets do? ;)

[Tommy Tilt]

A very experienced A320 Captain went with me (he just walked out) which left guys with no Boeing rating and <1000 hrs. What were CTC doing ?

When experienced professional pilots are “interviewed” by mutton dressed as lamb, glorified receptionists and red nosed, pot-bellied ex BA Captains still yearning attention, you can expect those experienced pilots to dismiss the interview for the pantomime it is, leaving only those poor creatures desperate for the job to feed the grossly inflated egos of the Condescending Trumped-up C**ts conducting the interview.

[fmgc]

That's all well and good mate, but not when you hold a Q400 Type Rating instead of a 320 rating. The ones they took on must've been "rated only".

Why would somebody type rate you when there are guys and girls out there with type ratings? That's nothing to do with CTC just the way the market is at the moment.

I don't have a problem with cadets but what really gets my goat is that you go to CTC and they arrange a loan for you. Then, on the flexicrew scheme, they don't even pay you enough to cover your interest payments on said loan, especially in the winter when it is power by the hour.

That is just immoral and CTC have no interest in anything other than just profiteering and feathering their own nest.

FlexiCrew is a response to the current economic climate, but more importantly, it is what some airlines want.

What rubbish, they created that market and so now to compete airlines have to do it!!

CTC have a very unhealthy and far too large influence in the aviation market and should have their wings clipped (pun intended).

Just for the record I have no problem with the cadets themselves and they have been well trained. It's the way that they have been treated that is my issue.

What can we, as a profession, do about it?

[SAXONBLOKE]

Well said fmgc.

I'd like to think there was something that could be done to reverse, or at least slow down, the current trend but sadly i think its un-stoppable.
I'd like to think europe would follow the FAA ruling on 1500 hours min experience, but theres more chance of hell freezing over. It may help, but as has previously been mentioned, new money making rackets / packages would only spring up to circumnavigate it anyway.
Big business is big business and some people are making substantial amounts of money from the whole thing. Its a shame that many of those people used to be pilots - more often than not human nature will rapidly release its grip on any sense of morality when big financial gain is to be had.

At the lower end, we have the idiots who suddenly find themselves with a bit of power within the selection process, the likes of whom we've read about in the above posts. Still, every industry has its sad no-marks i guess.

Obviously, its not just CTC. Parc , Oxford, Easyjet, Ryanair etc etc etc have all a case to answer for where we are. It aint gonna change for the better anytime soon :{

[fmgc]

Its a shame that many of those people used to be pilots

Two founders are ex Britannia. One of them is a really nice guy, the other a slimy arrogant :mad:

Despite teaching CRM apparently he was awfully sarcastic and a bully on the FD.

[Weary]

One of them is a really nice guy

.........sure, as long as you ignore the fact that he set up a training vehicle with the sole purpose of making profit by pimping the most vunerable and naive to the industry.
Of course, when he was starting out he didn't have to pay for any of his training - he had a full-time job to go to before training commenced, had a permanent contract of employment after training ended and after serving his probabtionary period, and enjoyed a full-fat salary and Defined Benefit Pension ("Final Salary") for the rest of his time with Britannia.
I bet he claimed to be a pious and principled member of BALPA too whilst he was enjoying it all.
And CTC is his legacy - "nice guy" indeed.:yuk:

[wingreencard]

now you pay for everything,from pp to atp,soon to trte.

its not going to change.

one word: QUIT!

[Full Left Rudder]

Whether all this negativity is right or wrong in a factual sense, there is no way any of it will change with a continued negative attitude.

I agree that the CTC deal is not great to start with, but I am now 3 years since graduating. Using a bit of imagination you can definitely still achieve all that you set out to at the start of training. I more than comfortably earn enough now for a range rover and a Breitling, and all living in the relative comfort of Europe. As I said, it just takes some imagination and a positive attitude.

That's indeed why you won't find many ex CTC trainees having a rant on pprune. Only those on the outside who frankly don't have much grasp of the reality of the situation.

[silvercare]

Using a bit of imagination you can definitely still achieve all that you set out to at the start of training. I more than comfortably earn enough now for a range rover and a Breitling, and all living in the relative comfort of Europe. As I said, it just takes some imagination and a positive attitude. Basically you were aiming to get a Breitling and a Range Rover... In any case in respect to a guy with a bigger connection, who didn't pay any type rating and was moved immediately on a big jet thanks to his Captain friend you are still a loser because he can drive a Porsche and a got Rolex on his right or left hand. In case you know or meet those kind of guys , and there are a many, don't come back disappointed opening your mouth about how the life is unfair because you have helped the system to destroy the economy, social life, democracy in Wester World and the civil aviation and pilot profession, simply doing anything you could to move forward in the quickest way without caring too much if you were destroying your own future too.

Basically you are not too different from a whore.Think about it next time you wear your wonderful Breitling. Looser!:=

[Narrow Runway]

Says it all really. CTC wonder kid.:ugh:

How is your pension plan? Or your critical illness cover?

[Coffin Corner]

What choice do these people have?

Don't do the training :ugh:

[BerksFlyer]

Full Left Rudder,

Things were a bit different when you finished training through CTC were they not? Did you get a bond repayment and a full-time contract?

Flexicrew has neither of the above and is most probably here to stay.

[Full Left Rudder]

Priceless stuff. Silvercare, you really need to get that chip off your shoulder.

I made an investment in order to get a return, on top of which I get to do something I enjoy doing. This is no different to many of the self employed people around the world, entrepreneurs or students on long degree courses (doctors and architects spring to mind). Aviation has changed. Training to be a pilot now falls into that category. You wouldn't call an architect student who trained for 7 years only to earn a modest salary a whore now would you? Most of those students probably chose that line of work because they enjoy it and it offers long term rewards, just like most errrr...... aspiring pilots. Wake up to the real world.

Narrow Runway - seeing as you asked. I pay 6% of salary into my pension pot, and my company pays 12%. My company funded Critical Illness cover is 120,000. If you think that equates to getting shafted then I am not sure what planet you think you live on.

[Full Left Rudder]

BerksFlyer, to answer your question I did not benefit from a loan repayment scheme, and I worked as Flexicrew for over 12 months.

[Narrow Runway]

Monk 360: I am glad you've got the sense to ensure your future by saving, rather than p!ssing it away and boasting of Breitlings and Range Rovers. You are, at least, a realist.

Full Left Rudder: You didn't get any of that with easyJet did you? You joined BA and gained those terms and conditions. Slightly disingenuous of you to portray that your company pension and loss of licence had a single thing to do with CTC. You are fortunate enough to have left low cost and joined legacy.

You have done extremely well from the new system, but that doesn't mean it all beds of Roses. It is a pernicious influence on all our futures.

The fact is that CTC has irrevocably damaged the terms and conditions in our industry. They won't improve any time soon and the sooner we all realise that the better.:mad: including the CTC wunderkind who believe that how they are treated and what they are earning is a good deal. It is not.

[flash2002]

acyually narrow runway, that is easyJet in france.

[Full Left Rudder]

I agree it is not all a bed of roses. I never said it was, only that a positive outlook on it all goes a long way in dealing with the issues.

I don't own a range rover or a breitling, I only said I could afford them. Instead I am investing my money sensibly for the future in these uncertain times.

Contrary to your thoughts, I do still work for easyJet, and they provide me with all those said benefits and a high salary (and actually a salary much higher than CTC ever promised at the beginning of training). I saw the opportunity offered in the European bases and bit the bullet. I knew it would be tough to move abroad, into a new culture and a new language, but I was positive enough to take that step rather than doing nothing about being in a bad situation, expecting the good life to be presented to me on a plate because somehow that was the God given right of a pilot, and then proceeding to moan about it for the rest of my career when that inevitably didn't happen.

Like I said in my first post on this topic. CTC is not perfect, but it is the reality now (and a good reality in many ways, as supported by several other posters on this thread). Combined with a positive outlook the overall result can still be very good.

It's a shame that some of the posters on this thread seem to believe a good old rant about CTC and the supposed eventual implosion of the entire universe will actually achieve something.

[Poose]

I think what some people fail to see is that CTC has almost entirely closed the door for Modular students.
CTC is now the default route when a lot of the prominent airlines are short of pilots. If an individual cannot pay for an Integrated course, he's pretty much left out in the cold now. The chances of him securing employment now are slimmer than ever.

So... I'd like to say a big thankyou to CTC and all of those who had to fly a jet ASAP - you've pushed me and most of the recent Modular students out of the running for the forseeable future... :mad:

[Narrow Runway]

FLR,

I stand corrected, congratulations for seeking out the current value in the easyJet pack of cards. You have done well for not necessarily staying close to home.

It is good that easyJet France offer such terms and conditions, but I suspect that is more to do with French law than anything else.

The real shame of it is that, not all pilots in easyJet have such rewards.

Now wouldn't it be nice if they did?

[Cloud9.5]

Guys, Come on now CTC had no power to destroy the T’s&C’s you did that all by yourselves by not standing up to the company when the idea of Flexi Crew was first suggested i.e. you should never have agreed to any form of contractor flying your companies airframes. (We need to include Ryan Air Crew in this too).
I don’t see any contractors driving main line and tube trains etc because of their solidarity in support of their union.
Unfortunately the L&RHS ‘well it doesn’t affect me’ brigade is the culprit here.
In every industry from IT to construction and even the armed forces the introduction of contractors has wrecked the T’s & C’s of the workforce.
When are you lot going to grow a pair and actually do something about it?
Actually its not just CTC but all of the agency providers (Brookfield, Rishworth etc), this is an industry all of its own now just look at Serco in public services sector and AlexanderMann in IT services to see where you are headed.
So EZY guys here are some suggestions, in your Merlin negotiations instead of spending all of your efforts to improve the RHS package, insist on limiting flexicrew to say 10% of total pilots with a minimum of hours per year, scrap the random roster and define the salary levels based on experience/ seniority etc. just like the legacy airlines do.
If you are not prepared to do this, stand by and watch whilst further erosion takes place.

[greenedgejet]

Cloud 9.5:

CTC are now a contractor for the military at Brize Norton

CTC are the only route into Monarch, TCX, EZY and a host of others abroad.

At EZY 60% of RHS is CTC/Flexi overall and 70% at Gatwick. Many LHS are now CTC trained.

Why should they do anything?

Do they care about Modular folk or Flybe Captains adn FOs stuck in their Q400 careers?

Do they care about the decline of GA and olde school Flying as a route into flying?

Do they care if experienced ex Military or Biz Jet pilots are ignored?

FTL:

Your Architect example does not hold water in comparison to CTC and the like post 2008.

What architect pays to go to work like those that paid to fly passengers for 100h with EZY and bmi?

What apprenticeship scheme do CTC cadets go through - especially the new MPL ones? They are poorly trained (minimum actual flight time, and lowest cost to CTC and EZY) straight into the RHS of an automated JAR25 machine without a real understanding of the systems (CBT is a poor method of learning) or how to fly raw data/manually. On the line it is about saving fuel so no time to get a feel for the aircraft. Is it any wonder that some can't land the aeroplane?

And the airlines are tying to reduce the MPL 12 landings requirement on cost grounds!!!:ugh:

Yes we all have to pay to get a frozen ATPL but why pay more to improve the CEOs bonus?

An architect pays to follow their career path initially (but a lot less than £120k) and they are paid for their designs - they don't pay to use a CAD machine per hour or rent office space to complete site plans for a profit making firm.

[alpha.charlie]

CTC are the only route into Monarch

Incorrect.

[fmgc]

Let's not blame the cadets. It is CTC who are to blame and ezyJet for coming up with the FlexiCrew scheme and Ryan Air for forcing the market to such depths of wretchedness in the first place.

[BlackandBrown]

CTC are the only route into Monarch, TCX, EZY and a host of others abroad.

Monarch have taken people recently from other airlines, TCX are currently recruiting so fill your boots and EZY take from Parc, CTC and have taken directly into Lisbon and EZS recently. Don't make the facts fit.

[Full Left Rudder]

It is also incorrect that CTC is the only route into EZY and TCX. Far from in in fact. Although I do agree CTC has a large market share there.

Are you really sure an architect doesn't pay best part of 120K to train? That figure you quote is after compound interest is taken into account, and even then is substantially inflated above reality. An architect student will study for at least 5 years unpaid. That doesn't come cheap and will require loans to pay Uni fees and living costs. That could very conceivably equate to about the same as the initial outlay a trainee pilot makes. They too then have to pay back interest across a long time frame. Can't think there is too much difference in the end.

Narrow Runway - I agree. It would be better if all easyJet employees had great benefits too. Aside from Flexicrew I believe that everyone is on a reasonable deal though. Flexicrew is a regrettable reality, but an individual is not on the scheme for long. The benefits in Spain and Switzerland are also excellent too. I would argue that it is not just the French law making France an exception.

[Cloud9.5]

@ greenedgejet
CTC are the only route into Monarch, TCX, EZY and a host of others abroad.
Not true but you have completely missed the point here. It is the companies that CAN go for lowest priced option (low hour fatpl's) because the incumbent crews at these airlines have not stood up to their managements strategy (rush to the bottom). In the days when management were ex pilots this would not have happen.
There was nothing intrinsically wrong with CTC/ Oxford integrated training* it is just that the hiring mix has been slewed by bean counter management and crews - you let it happen, this blood is on your hands.

* this may not be the case now as it seems the bar to entry is being lowered to allow those who can rustle up the money as the only selection criteria. (this most definitely was not the case up until about 18 months ago). Not sure waht to say about Oxford as there was always a suspicion of rich brats hobby there.

[Poose]

If you're not experienced and are a Modular fATPL, then I'm sorry but CTC has blocked your entry.

If anyone has any ideas how I can find employment when airlines keep 'lazily' dialling up CTC for their low hour bodies, then I'm all ears.

A few of the prominent airlines do occasionally take EXPERIENCED pilots from other sources; but if you're a Modular fATPL then you're pretty much screwed in the main nowadays. Not impossible, but pretty much. :uhoh:

[BigNumber]

Not true Poose.

If the money saved following a modular route (when compared with integrated) is used to buy some time on type then it might be argued you are placed rather ahead. Assuming 300 to 500 hours achieved.

[BigNumber]

Monk,

I beg to differ because of the probable individuals involved.

Daddys precious 18 year old enrolled on an integrated course. Bought and paid for on the back of the remaining equity in his parents house.

My money is on the chap with some life experience; working hard to pay his own way throught the modular route whilst paying his own bills.

The chap I will fly with tomorrow is a licenced engineer that followed a modular route and hour built "mincing" around in Florida. A top fella.

Your Cassocks are in the vestry!!! Run along, your mums got your milk bottle and bed ready!:=

[Narrow Runway]

I don't know who is correct about which is the better route to becoming EXPERIENCED, but:

The correct spelling is EXPERIENCED.

It could be that Monk360 is correct, but it is entirely subjective to suggest that 200 hours integrated training is better than 1000 hours "mincing" in a C150.

Plenty of DFO's, Chief Pilots and TRE's would attest to this fact.

It could be that as of this very moment, Monk360 is correct. But probably not forever.

However, in that BA/EK/QR/BY/VS interview he/she may be very, very incorrect indeed.

And if Monk360 is a CTC Cadet, perhaps that says it all.

[MrHorgy]

monk,

Your post offends me. I have 4000 hours and fly a 737 - I completed modular training, after weighing up both the options. I did not 'mince around' during training. I cannot comprehend how CTC/Oxford/FTE et al can charge nearly DOUBLE the price of most schools as they churn out pilots and there still be people to pay it. Most of the course fee would appear to be devoted to marketing in Airliner World with pretty pictures of pilots wearing said discussed Raybans.

During my hour building, I flew different length legs, I flew into different countries and different weathers, and different airfields. From what I know of most integrated schools, you have to have your flightplan 'approved' by some faceless office goon who gives you 'permission' to fly your chosen route assuming it's not too dangerous. You then 'mince around' as you put it, in the middle of Arizona where there are hardly ANY weather issues to contend with and pretend your learning, while you fly to nice paved runways that are over 1000m long. How is that learning? There is nothing better to teach you lessons than watching the low fuel light go on because you f***** up your headwind calculations and had to explain yourself to radar when you screw up their arrivals as you need priority. Mistakes are made and that is how you learn.

Contract agencies should be for short term pilot shortages, not to screw genuine pilots seeking a dream whilst fattening the wallets of management at airlines and the schools. I can't wait for the day when the UK bans this pseudo-employment farce that is FlexiCrew/Brookfield, and I say that as a contractor to an agency.

Horgy

[BigNumber]

A rather more erudite rebuke than my offering!

Still prefer my last line

[systematically]

MrHorgy is quite correct and to ad to his statements the quality of training (especially at the NZ school) in CTC has been hugely sacrificed. CTC built a good reputation and poured lots of money into building a good reputation for years. Now the directors/shareholders (Clarke) want that money back with interest! since 2009 2010 the syllabus and quality was slashed. CTC will make lots of money over the next few years until the industry realises what has happened. There may even be some serious safety concerns.

[michaelmedley]

I can just see how it all begins:::

"Low houred pilot causes Horror around Heathrow!

"today a low houred pilot fresh out of training from CTC caused havoc when he forgot how to land a aircraft. Sources say he saw "clouds" and panicked. "

TONGUE IN CHEEK GUYS! but seriously all it takes is there to be one related incident that hits the press and CTC may start to falter???

Just a theory!!!!!! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Narrow Runway]

No. I don't think so.

CTC Cadets, in the absolute VAST majority, are NOT incompetent.

The fact is, they are broadly probably pretty good.

It is the fact that the current CTC schemes, and hence the generally very wealthy cadets therein, are assessed by only 2 main criteria: can you pay over the odds for training, and can you afford to work for not a lot for a good while?

CTC Cadets will NEVER have an accident in a 2 crew operation because they saw, or flew into a cloud.

[michaelmedley]

Narrow Runway


I was just having a bit of fun as it seemed to be getting a bit out of hand this thread.....my view is at the end of the day...the license is a license.

IF i had the amount of money required to do CTC integrated then i would. Just because i don't have the cash doesn't mean im going to sit here and moan....it means i now have to go Modular and make sure i stand out from the CTC guys/gals. which i will!

Nobody should be on here slamming into the cadets because none of it is their fault, in my eyes they arent doing anything wrong. Good on them!!!!!

As the saying goes....dont hate the player, hate the game!

CTC to blame??? maybe..maybe not......RYR and other lowco T&C's to blame??? YES!!!!!

[systematically]

That's true the cadets are mostly very smart and highly motivated to succeed. But they are not trained very well any-more. Instructors were told to not teach things because it was taking too much time and money. The syllabus was dummed down and cadets are taught on a need to know basis to pass the flight tests. (there was even a data base kept on examiners pet questions and scenarios). Cadets don't know what they are missing out on because they don't see the old syllabus. Instructors were not happy with the standards drop and felt like they were ripping off the cadets.

[jhr187]

systematically - I'd be interested to know the source of your views.

[fmgc]

But they are not trained very well any-more

That's not been mu experience. The cadets are very well trained.

[systematically]

The source of my information is from being there when the syllabus was changed and being told to not teach techniques. I have also posted elsewhere with more information on the syllabus. Anybody who was there from 2008-2009 knows about it all.

The cadets were very well trained. The syllabus hours were cut from 230 hrs to 163 to compete with Oxfords training. But costs to the Cadet went up at the same time.

[Alycidon]

Quote:
But they are not trained very well any-more
That's not been mu experience. The cadets are very well trained.


That was my opinion too, I was impressed with the standard of the majority of cadets, but I had an interesting debate during the cruise the other day with a SFO with command upgrade hours about which aileron to use during a crosswind takeoff.

Either he was winding me up (quite possible) or he didn't know.

Now, what is the use of a guy who diligently calls out the OM height check on every ILS approach regardless of whether we are in cloud or not and calls out every speed deviation, even if it is only the speed trend vector and not the real airspeed, but doesn't know that you need to put the aileron into wind?

Please let's not have any tosh about avoiding spoiler deployment with neutral control wheel input as I've checked the FCTM and it advises into wind aileron as required.

In fact, I'm not sure I've flown with anyone in the last 3 or 4 years who has used any into wind aileron at all either on takeoff or on landing.

Cadets are probably expected to pick this skill up on the line, but I can't see the evidence yet.

[Poose]

Your views on CTC/OAA may very well change when you've actually made considerable sacrifices or indeed find yourself looking for employment, only to find that the majority of operators that recruited all of your contacts only a few years back are now defaulting to CTC for all of their low houred pilots.

As for "moaning on forums" and "standing out from the crowd", I'm only pointing out the current reality, as regards to CTC etc.

The truth isn't pleasant at the minute for Modular students.

Stand out from the crowd? How does several years working in a Flight Test environment on a CS-25 aircraft suit you? Or perhaps a degree in Mechanical Engineering and leadership/management experience gleaned from Sandhurst and a stint in the Army... :E

I'm sorry, Michael - but there comes a point in this game where the eventual bottom line is whether or not you have access to cash for a Type Rating and can live off peanuts for your first year or so.

Now before someone advises me to network, I already have a broad range of contacts in some great operators - who unfortuneatly now turn to CTC for their new, low houred blokes and are powerless to help...
I'm going to continue networking and chasing the dream - but see my point?

Anyway... good luck! :ok:

[Coffin Corner]

Nobody should be on here slamming into the cadets because none of it is their fault, in my eyes they arent doing anything wrong. Good on them!!!!!

How do you work this out? It is as much their fault as it is CTC themselves. We (well, not me) all bang on about supply and demand as to why this industry is in a state, well it's the same argument for the CTC sausage machine. The only reason CTC are alive and well with this scheme is because the cadets are feeding it, the supply to CTC is there for them to operate their business model. If cadets don't sign up for it, then it won't exist, simple as that. As someone else wrote on here last year, it's the reason why they charge you 3 x the price for flowers during Valentines day.....why.....Because us muppets are prepared to pay it. Don't over complicate it, and certainly don't exonerate the cadets of all blame. :=

[BlackandBrown]

Alycidon, check again.


OM-B 2.69

For crosswind takeoffs, routine use of into-wind aileron is not recommended. In strong crosswind conditions, small amounts of lateral control may be used to maintain wings level, but the pilot should avoid using excessive amounts. This causes excessive spoiler deployment, which increases the aircraft tendency to turn into wind.


FCTM-NO-50 p1/8:

For crosswind takeoffs, routine use of into wind aileron is not necessary. In strong crosswind conditions, small lateral stick input may be used to maintain wings level, if deemed necessary due to into wind wing reaction, but avoid using large deflections, which increase the aircraft tendency to turn into the wind (due to high weight on wheels on the spoiler extended side), reduces lift and increases drag. Spoiler deflection becomes significant with more than a third sidestick deflection.

From Airbus safety bulletin:

http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_gallery/files/safety_library_items/AirbusSafetyLib_-FLT_OPS-TOFF_DEP-SEQ06.pdf

In the case of crosswind, the flight crew should minimize lateral inputs on ground and during rotation, in order to avoid spoilers extension. If the spoilers are extended on one wing, there is a reduction in lift combined with an increase of drag, and therefore, a reduction in tail clearance and an increased risk of tailstrike.

I could go on listing them but they ALL recommend, outside of STRONG crosswind conditions, not to use into wind aileron. As the SFO has a crosswind limitation which would not fall into the category of strong crosswind (below 25kts) he or she is correct the he or she would not use any in to wind aileron on a crosswind take off.

In fact, I'm not sure I've flown with anyone in the last 3 or 4 years who has used any into wind aileron at all either on takeoff or on landing.

That's because they are following the procedure and this demonstrates the great training, high standards and quality of information we are provided with.

If you don't mind I'll rely on airbus and easyJets recommendations rather than an incorrect anonymity on pprune. As always be extremely careful about what you believe on pprune. And I mean no offence by that.


Poose do the CTC ATP scheme then - if you cant beat them join them.

[michaelmedley]

I suppose every situation is different......


If the only option is to pay for a type rating then our hands are tied for the moment until it becomes a choice. Just another fee that's going to cripple me/us/you for even longer.

Im not yet into the big bad world of job seeking so i really do not want to say what's right or wrong if im honest so i shall steer clear of that one until im in THAT situation.

I will try and make myself (as the rest are) as available as possible as i am fortunate that i don't yet have commitments that force me to stay in EU.

i shall state that i do not knock CTC cadets or ANYONE training as we are all going to be sat in the same boat at the end of the day regardless of contacts/partners ect........ its a dog eat dog business.

If you cant beat them.....Join them

Kind Regards

[BigNumber]

Yes yes; what an erudite post Michael.

Send us your money plenty quick :D

[Cloud9.5]

Just to be clear, CTC does not block modular guys (& gals) in fact recently EZY and others have cleared out the AQC CTC hold pool and they are all going through their line training etc. most are modular with varied experience as FI's, meat bombers, tug pilots and the like in all age ranges and second careers etc.
CTC do not BLOCK modular/ self improver but are the only conduit to certain airlines.
I will say again that the full time crews have let this situation occur and continue to allow it to get worse.
For example objections around Merlin almost entirely are related to the seniors whinging that they are not getting RPI related increases, not anything about random rosters for the newbies or the over reliance on Flexi crew.

[greenedgejet]

Ctc only way (unless you are very experienced on type) into ezy and many other uk airlines is the truth for the past 4 years. Monarch prefer cadets and rarely take on experienced non rated crews. Oxford / are similar to ctc but seem to have slightly higher standards though costs are extremely high.

GB£ 120k was not inflated it was info from cadets 4 years ago. Just look at the ctc arl deal with ba and you will see actual costs are far more than 84k initial outlay.


Cloud 9.5 mentions folk from other backgrounds but states these are ctc hold pool. Also they had to pay for TR with ctc and more through flexi crew scheme. Ezy did look at high hour on type pilots late last year due to over reliance on cadets of late.

Truth is many ctc cadets were abused on 6 month contracts on min wages then laid off and told not to apply elsewhere in case ctc wanted them to work again.

One cadet managed to escape to aer lingus at the time. Good on them.

All ctc cadets were given the answers to the a320 type rating papers unofficially after death by CBT. They were given more sim sessions for Lst than the trss guys. None were allowed to borrow fcom or take paper tigers home for revision usage. Some that failed LST were given further training and re tests.

The reason Tcx send their cadets to flybe is due to the lack of airmanship and experience cadets have. Being keen, bright and loaded is not enough.

How many Flybe captains have joined ezy over past 4 years? That route has been blocked by these airline/school deals.

Thankfully qatar do not use this system.

Most cadets are poorly trained in minimum hours by so called approved schools. This is not the cadets fault. The schools have sold an image to the wannabees and then not delivered what used to be a fairly sound package.

Most do not understand that adding power at a stall does not aid recovery. It is a minimum height loss technique that only works if the AoA is reduced simultaneously and on its own power on will actually worsen the stall.

Most of the recent graduates have flown mutual "solos" instead of having to think for themselves during the light aircraft flying phase and this is being reduced further under Mpl.


Finally the term woefully undertrained is now in black and white in CHIRP reports instead of hearsay and pprune.

[greenedgejet]

Why should poose do the ctc ATP scheme if already qualified? Are you suggesting modular is so 2nd class citizen that someone has to do an integrated course as described above just to get a foot in the door of a loco job?

:mad:

[angelorange]

I have relatives in this profession. There are no huge upfront fees or pay to work in a design office deals in the uk. The training is in 3 parts.

Part 1 is standard university degree which is nowhere near the cost of an integrated ATP course.

Part 2 is very similar to engineering with chartered status requirements.

Part 3 is a final exam for professional status (equivalent to unfreezing an atpl).

After part 1 you start earning a salary similar to an Fo joining a turbo prop airline.

From info4study website 2009:


Q. How much will I earn?


A. There is no national salary scale for architects but for guidance, typical earnings after Part 1 graduation (before final qualification and Registration as an Architect - see below) are around £15,000 to £17,500. The average salary for a qualified architect with three years experience is approximately £33,000. Architects who are self-employed or partners have an income that is dependent on the fees earned by the practice (that are charged as a percentage of the cost of the buildings that the practice designs eg 20%

[Full Left Rudder]

Interesting. Fair enough. The figures are not what I thought they were.

The fact remains though that an architect makes an investment (albeit it a smaller one) for the purpose of gaining employment. Reasonably around 30,000 for a degree these days. He/she is then paid a terrible salary of just 15-17,000. I understand this can last for around 3 years, before they gain final qualification. 3 years after that (so almost 10 years after they started their training degree) their average salary is just 33,000.

If you ask me, that is as bad a deal as it gets. The average salary of an integrated student 10 years after commencement of training is considerably more. Many are even loco captains.

The fact still remains that many other professions (architects included) make a financial investment in order to pursue their chosen career.

[BlackandBrown]

Why should poose do the ctc ATP scheme if already qualified? Are you suggesting modular is so 2nd class citizen that someone has to do an integrated course as described above just to get a foot in the door of a loco job?

No but I am suggesting that people with your inability to assimilate information should not be allowed to be a pilot. For the record it IS my opinion that the modular route is woefully inferior. And I have experienced modular training as well before going to CTC. Just because something was 'the way back then' doesn't mean it's the way now. Things change, improve and adapt. It's a shame for you that you can't.

Alycidon I'm still waiting for your response with regards to aileron in to wind on the Airbus. Even more so specifically with respect to FOs not doing it given their crosswind limitations.

[Wirbelsturm]

Alycidon I'm still waiting for your response with regards to aileron in to wind on the Airbus.

The Airbus did require a SMALL amount of into wind aileron on take off in order to prevent the up wind wing from flying up during the T/O initial rotation. The amount, I seem to recall, was only the length of one of the arms of the control position indicator. So a pitiful amount even in very strong crosswinds!

On approach Airbus always pushed the 'Guide the path' mentality and the use of into wind aileron on a roll rate demand system was, indeed, discouraged. I was never too sure about the Airbus advice of not to pick up the roll in turbulence but let the FBW system do it, always scared the willies out of me! (LHR 27R strong southlies over the hangars!)

So, in this case, perhaps the speed calling FO would be correct.

Now, if we were discussing the Boeing .........

[BlackandBrown]

Yeah wirbelstrum, aileron is used to maintain centreline when decrabbed and maintain wings level but it isn't a die hard rule willy nilly. And there is less than no need up to 25kts crosswind to use aileron into wind on T/O from my experience - and that is what we are trained on airbus. Anything more than 1/3 side stick gives spoiler deployment and then you are defeating the point. Power against brakes is a fundamental no no. You clearly have far more experience than me as does alycidon and I'm not trying to be a cocky **** but with a lower experience the rules and SOPs are the safety net. And they work. As an FO we can't play with our train set, it's the captains and so we need to be predictable to keep a happy atmosphere!

[Wirbelsturm]

No accusations intended, just wanted to point out that there was a requirement for take off, although rarely used, and a stupid system on approach of trusting a laggy FBW system to haul your wing drop!

Nice plane to jaunt around Europe in though and I do miss my table! :{

[Alycidon]

Risking going off topic, here's the Boeing version:

(from the FCTM)

Rotation and Takeoff
Begin the takeoff roll with the control wheel approximately centered. Throughout
the takeoff roll, gradually increase control wheel displacement into the wind only
enough to maintain approximately wings level.
Note: Excessive control wheel displacement during rotation and liftoff increases
spoiler deployment. As spoiler deployment increases, drag increases and
lift is reduced which results in reduced tail clearance, a longer takeoff roll,
and slower airplane acceleration.
At liftoff, the airplane is in a sideslip with crossed controls. A slow, smooth
recovery from this sideslip is accomplished by slowly neutralizing the control
wheel and rudder pedals after liftoff

You will note that in my post I used the word "control wheel", this would tend to refer to aircraft fitted with a control wheel, ie not an Airbus, the advantage of the control wheel is that it can be used, by the pilot, to fly the aircraft!

Another advantage of a control wheel is that when the other pilot is flying the aircraft, you can see where he (or she) is pointing it.

Without wishing to compare apples with oranges, you'll see from this that I fly the Boeing, not the Airbus but in response to your post where, if I may quote

If you don't mind I'll rely on airbus and easyJets recommendations rather than an incorrect anonymity on pprune. As always be extremely careful about what you believe on pprune. And I mean no offence by that.



I am relying here on over thirty years and many thousands of hours of flying, gliding, SE instructing, and as a LTC, TRI and TRE and I am sure therefore that every aircraft I've flown that is fitted with a tailfin will weathercock and lift the into wind wing on a crosswind takeoff until messrs Airbus and easyjet et al. change the laws of physics.

Your post about the Airbus was very enlightening and I thank you, although not applicable to my post which was referring to the Boeing but if I can point out:

a. you didn't read my post fully

b. that the manual is only right if you are on the right page in the right manual

thank you for your time

[BlackandBrown]

Ok I didn't realise we still had 737s, I thought they were all gone. On the airbus we use full stick forward to 60, reducing to half stick to 80 and neutral by 100. This helps keep directional control on the ground by keeping more of the weight on the nose for longer. This works because there is a logic where by steering (achieved by movement of the rudder pedals) blends from nose wheel steering ( no yaw and thus no secondary roll effect) to rudder at around 130 kts I.e fully aerodynamic directional control. It's a different concept. Sorry for my assumption.

[MM6473]

There are no boeings left, followed the final one out of LTN about 6 months ago

[Shell Management]

The CTC type arrangement does seem to be a necessary action in order to maintain pilot demand. One assumes that a proper safety case has been prepared...

[BlackandBrown]

Exactly, so, DO you fly the Boeing for easy or DID you fly the Boeing for easy? If you are now on the Airbus, let the Boeing **** go - there is nothing worse than people carrying things over. They are two different philosophies as you can see from this case. Given your qualifications I'm not trying to be insubordinate or to teach my granny to suck eggs.

[Wingswinger]

I'm not quite sure what cross-wind take-off and landing technique has to do with CTC killing the industry but it's an interesting discussion nonetheless and illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding that exists among many A320 pilots. The misunderstanding is that into-wind side-stick inputs are not required on take-off or landing in a cross-wind, even a moderate one. Here are the quotes provided in an earlier post:

For cross-wind takeoffs, routine use of into-wind aileron is not recommended. In strong cross-wind conditions, small amounts of lateral control may be used to maintain wings level, but the pilot should avoid using excessive amounts. This causes excessive spoiler deployment, which increases the aircraft tendency to turn into wind.

For crosswind takeoffs, routine use of into wind aileron is not necessary. In strong crosswind conditions, small lateral stick input may be used to maintain wings level, if deemed necessary due to into wind wing reaction, but avoid using large deflections, which increase the aircraft tendency to turn into the wind (due to high weight on wheels on the spoiler extended side), reduces lift and increases drag. Spoiler deflection becomes significant with more than a third sidestick deflection.

In the case of crosswind, the flight crew should minimize lateral inputs on ground and during rotation, in order to avoid spoilers extension. If the spoilers are extended on one wing, there is a reduction in lift combined with an increase of drag, and therefore, a reduction in tail clearance and an increased risk of tailstrike.

Note that none of them say do not use into wind aileron. The expressions used are "routine use is not required" and "minimise". Furthermore it says that small lateral stick inputs may be made to keep wings level if necessary. To read that as "do not use" is incorrect. The meaning is that during the take-off ground roll, into-wind aileron is not used and this is the essential difference between the recommended Airbus technique and then recommended Boeing technique.

On take-off in a cross-wind, the aircraft will weather-cock into wind (they all do) so rudder out of wind will be required to keep straight. As the main wheels unstick, the down-wind wing will drop unless an into-wind lateral input is made. This is due not to the wind per se but to the secondary effect of the rudder input - roll. Maintaining wings level should be the aim. This input should not be excessive to avoid spoiler deflection and to do that only a gentle lateral pressure on the side-stick is required. As an earlier poster wrote, it is equivalent to about the width of the control position indicator (the cross) which is on the PFD in ground mode. Although the cross can still be seen on the PFD for a brief period after unstick it should not be the focus of the pilot's attention. The input should be made by feel as the aircraft rotates after having observed and felt on the ground how much stick input will raise the spoilers by reference to the F/CTL SD on the ECAM. The net effect is that the aircraft gets airborne with the controls slightly crossed. Once airborne smoothly centralising the controls in a co-ordinated manner while keeping the wings level will maintain the aircraft on the runway track.

On landing in a cross-wind, during the flare the drift should be removed with rudder (align the aircraft with the runway centreline) while keeping the wings level. This means lateral side-stick input into wind (which counteracts the secondary effect of rudder). The net effect is a touchdown slightly cross controlled. It is not good technique to touch down with drift on because it will reduce tyre life, increase gear leg fatigue and in extremis can lead to lateral excursions across the width of the runway. The reference in the FCTM to touching down with a partial de-crab and some bank applied is in relation to strong cross-winds alone.

[BlackandBrown]

As you are an instructor you'll have access to the following too - A320 instructors support manual issued by Airbus:



Take off roll:

- Use the rudder pedals to steer the A/C. The NWS will be effective till 130 kts. Don't use the tiller beyond 20 kts. - Avoid using the stick into wind; indeed this increases the natural tendency of the a /c to turn into wind.

I have never had any need to put aileron into wind. Ultimately you clearly know what you are doing, I know how the aircraft has felt to me and I know what I have been trained consistently and positively to do. The edge of the Maltese cross on the edge of the pitch dot gives max aileron into wind without spoiler deflection. That is what I believe airbus mean with their 'if necessary' advice.

For landing I always attempt to decrab. Note the word attempt!

The relevance of all this to the thread is that if one is going to talk down CTC cadets then at least make it for something they specifically have done wrong. We all have misunderstanding/ much to learn.

I am an ex CTC cadet and now SFO so you trump me on experience and qualifications!

[Wingswinger]

Hello B&B,

Take off roll:

- Use the rudder pedals to steer the A/C. The NWS will be effective till 130 kts. Don't use the tiller beyond 20 kts. - Avoid using the stick into wind; indeed this increases the natural tendency of the a /c to turn into wind.

Indeed. That refers to the take-off roll, not the rotate and lift-off. If you haven't ever used into-wind aileron, how did you prevent the wing-drop on lift-off in a cross-wind and keep the aircraft on the runway track? I suspect you may be doing it automatically and sub-consciously. Your interpretation of the position of the Maltese cross is basically what I wrote.

[BlackandBrown]

Yes as I said earlier when the aircraft unsticks I do whatever is necessary to maintain wings level. But I thought that what was being discussed was the take off roll. When the aircraft is airborne I fly it and the spoilers are roll augmenting not ground spoiling. The weight needs to be off the main gear or else it could be tailscrape territory. You clearly do it right and we mean the same thing.

[Alycidon]

If I can quote you once more:

Exactly, so, DO you fly the Boeing for easy or DID you fly the Boeing for easy? If you are now on the Airbus, let the Boeing **** go -


Read the thread title once more, slowly, then once more.

The thread is not about the airbus! It is not even about easyjet, it is about CTC and what they are doing to the industry, perhaps in terms of deskilling the pilot community in order that the airlines can drive down Ts and Cs.

Your testy response would tend to undermine your previous claim, I quote:

You clearly have far more experience than me as does alycidon and I'm not trying to be a cocky ****

My point is that while CTC cadets appear to be very well trained and are good with the manuals and SOPs, they are not necessarily picking up the basics, during initial qualification, eg. purely by way of example, crosswind takeoff techniques, but I could also give other examples, eg lookout in turns, or ndb tracking, or flying a holding pattern without the fmc and calculating drift outbound....

My initial post referred to a discussion about crosswind takeoff technique which I had with a CTC graduate during the cruise to liven up a 3hr sector, my colleague was advocating the use of left aileron when experiencing a crosswind from the right in order to counter the secondary effect of yaw.

Since I thought he was winding me up, I left it there, but it certainly made me think.

As he had spent an absolute fortune training to be a pilot I was expecting a little more.

[BlackandBrown]

Ok well my CTC colleague was almost certainly suffering from confusion in their own mind - not stupidity or a lack of experience and I'm sure if you had told thm why they'd have realised their error. My fault for the assumption re you flying for easyjet and on the Airbus. And the other inadequacies you point out are not limited to CTC cadets, the Airbus (clearly as you're on the Boeing!) or easyJet.

[Alycidon]

I'm going to stick to religion, politics and football in future.

[angelorange]

"No but I am suggesting that people with your inability to assimilate information should not be allowed to be a pilot. For the record it IS my opinion that the modular route is woefully inferior. And I have experienced modular training as well before going to CTC. Just because something was 'the way back then' doesn't mean it's the way now. Things change, improve and adapt. It's a shame for you that you can't."

So you are both Modular and Integrated? Must have cost serious $$$$

"I am an ex CTC cadet and now SFO so you trump me on experience and qualifications!"

............. maybe GEJ does too!

By the way this is a good read:

http://aerosociety.com/Assets/Docs/Publications/SpecialistPapers/So_You_Want_to_be_a_Captain.pdf

[BlackandBrown]

So you are both Modular and Integrated? Must have cost serious $$$$

Yes and I paid for/ am repaying the money to the bank all on my own. I did a PPL and then CTC. What's your point? Not a socialist are you?

As for the rest of your view it shows you clearly miss the point. Experience doesn't = technical understanding. And no technical know how throws your experience out of the window. It could be a monumental distractor in the wrong situation. If one wants to build their tower nice and tall they need to start with good, solid foundations.