Question regarding training on modern aircraft

[JB57]

Hi All
This is my first post and have a couple of questions that I would like some advice on especially from those who have done similar. I have recently finished my ATPLs and I am currently hour building and am considering where to do my CPL/IR.
I am thinking that I would like to do it on Modern Glass Cockpit Aircraft so the Diamond Aircraft comes to mind as it seems to get good reviews. One thing that bothers me is am I right in saying that the DA42 only has two levers that control the power and pitch ie the pitch is all done automatically for you is this a disadvantage when trying to get a job ? Obviously you could do differences training on a conventional Twin.
Also speaking about Diamond Aircraft there is only a few places you can do this in the UK and I also notice on this forum that someone has mentioned Diamond Flight Academy in Kalmar my second question is it a disadvantage to do you training outside of the UK if you are looking for a job with a UK Regional Airline, would you be at a disadvantage when it came to getting a interview assuming you were lucky enough to get one ?
I also had thought about Tayside Aviation as they have a G1000 Tecnam Twin


Many thanks for you thoughts and feedback PM if you like

[paco]

One point that spriings to mind is that the glass cockpit in the diamond is not the same as used in larger aircraft. A nice machine, but I wouldn't worry about levers when job hunting. As many cheap hours as possible is a good bet.

[parkfell]

Your light aircraft flying is simply a means to an end ~ the issue of a CPL/IR

The critical phase is the MCC/JOC course. This is where the device you choose can be important; and also how well you do on the course. The demonstration of CRM etc etc

Where in EASA land you train is mainly irrelevant. What is important is the quality and reputation of the ATO.

[parkfell]

There is a school of thought that would suggest that the Seneca is a more superior platform for the IR.

There is on doubt that the DA42 is far easier to operate compared to the PA34, and is ideal for weekend flyers with PPL/IRs.

So for those of you who are " an ace of the base " it is irrelevant what type you train on as you will simply sail through the course and test irrespective of type.

But for those very marginal people, you will succeed (just) on the DA42, but probably not on the PA34. It is not just having less levers to push and pull. You are demonstrating basic skills such as TRIMMING, and TRIMMING well. Other aspects are AIRMANSHIP and SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, not to mention CAPACITY.

So you decide to take the path of least resistance, obtain your licence with a MEP(land) endorsement and think YES, I have made it. Phew.

So the very marginal person now undertakes the MCC/JOC. Struggles and might even find it an overwhelming experience depending upon the complexity of the device. Just proving a bit too much? But MCC certificate issued.

Interview followed by a disappointing sim ride................need I say more.

The writing was probably on the wall at an early stage even before the twin engine flying started. You need a honest discussion with the training team before you spend your hard earned money in the first place.
PPL training is one thing.......proceeding to professional training is clearly a different matter.

[jamesgrainge]

What a long winded and unpleasant post. Why such negativity?

OP, do whatever you are most comfortable with. If you pass PPL no problem, ATPL exams no problem, why would you struggle with any other part of the ratings? Fly the most convenient aircraft which gives you the best grounding in your chosen path. Only listen to peoples OPINIONS that seem to be based on a little fact and not just pure speculation.

[Martin_123]

are you suggesting people to train on PA34 simply to see if student has what it takes to land a jet job? Is PA34 some sort of a magical device that will weed out weaklings?

[parkfell]

I taught on the Seneca for 8 years when British Aerospace were at Prestwick.
It was a suitable platform for the multi engine phase.
There are others: BE76, PA 44 to name but two others. The DA42 does not necessary increase the first time pass rate.

"Landing the jet job" is to a large extent dependant upon how you perform on the MCC/JOC, and the sim ride, post interview.

If you doubt this, then speak to those who are involved in the process.

[Reverserbucket]

I've flown both the Thielert and L360 DA42's as well as the PA34 (II, III, IV and V). The PA34 is, in my opinion, a stable instrument flying platform that prepares a student reasonably well from a handling and capacity perspective compared to hand flying a B737 or A320 type during MCC/JOC. The DA42 is light by comparison and the high aspect-ratio wing gives it fairly forgiving but 'floaty' handling characteristics in the flare that are not typical of transport type aircraft. Another point to note with the DA42 is that it is not equipped with a conventional T/C and therefore it's not possible to practice unusual attitude recoveries in the traditional sense; with greater emphasis on recognition, prevention and/or recovery from upset conditions now being mandated by the regulators, I find the absence of this basic instrument surprising in an aircraft used for initial instrument rating training. As said, the G1000 is a nice piece of kit but quite unlike the EFIS you will find in a transport type - it's as much to do with the architecture and philosophy of the system as the presentation, in my opinion.
I don't think the lack of pitch levers on the Thielert engined -42 is of any concern unless you plan to fly other piston twins with prop/mixture controls. In that sense, the power levers are more akin to the thrust levers (or throttles in old money) on the types typically used for MCC but without the spool-up and larger pitching moment.
jamesgrainge
If you pass PPL no problem, ATPL exams no problem, why would you struggle with any other part of the ratings?
In fact many do, as although a PPL is a great foundation if the training is good, the CPL and multi-engine IR require a different skill set, greater capacity and application. Bear in mind as well that the ability to pass theoretical knowledge exams is no indicator of practical potential and some high achieving graduates do drop out of the practical phase. I would agree with parkfell's opinion in this regard.

[paco]

I definitely prefer the PA 34 over the Diamond. It gives you a much better sense of what is going on, and a better foundation.

[Martin_123]

I taught on the Seneca for 8 years when British Aerospace were at Prestwick.
It was a suitable platform for the multi engine phase.
There are others: BE76, PA 44 to name but two others. The DA42 does not necessary increase the first time pass rate.

"Landing the jet job" is to a large extent dependant upon how you perform on the MCC/JOC, and the sim ride, post interview.

If you doubt this, then speak to those who are involved in the process.
I didn't mean to doubt you, it was just difficult to decipher what it is that you're saying. I have no opinion on this myself, I don't have any experience on either of machines, but as someone who is looking forward to my own ME/IR in a not too distant future, I'm genuinely curious. You mentioned airmanship, trimming, situational awareness, capacity (mental, I suppose?) can you not demonstrate/develop these skills on a DA42, if so - why?

[parkfell]

You should be developing the "skills" during the single engine flying.

Threat&Error management is also a feature of the learning process.

The process is similar to osmosis. It takes time. It cannot be rushed.

[paco]

It's a bit like driving an old Bentley instead of a new car. You have to give some of yourself into the process. Much more satisfying.

[parkfell]

Or thornycroft airport fire appliance. Manual gears requiring double declutching:ok:

[Martin_123]

It's a bit like driving an old Bentley instead of a new car. You have to give some of yourself into the process. Much more satisfying.


if the ultimate goal is to drive a double decker, what difference does it make whether your initial training was done in an old bentley or a new car?

Don't get me wrong lads, but are we being sentimental here?

[JB007]

'Experience' is what's been said here Martin! - having flown with Parkfell, both him and Paco are experienced instructors/examiners, I've been out of the training system a long time but totally understand the point been made...

I'm a B757 Captain and my FO's with high skill levels have a background of 'tradition' and then there are those focused on automation...

[paco]

I would say that the Bentley (or Thorneycroft!) experience would be great for a Routemaster, but with those you operate the clutch after you change gear....

[Martin_123]

you know why am arguing here, don't you? I had my eyes all set on a certain DA42 school but now I'm gonna have to go back to the drawing board thanks to you chaps

[Piltdown Man]

The easiest thing I ever did was to transition to glass. It is a non event. Unfortunately, some recruiters believe only God's chosen few can make this "difficult" transition. So it all depends on who you apply to. What I will say, is it is a damn site more difficult going back to steam.

[parkfell]

Jamesgrainge

You might think that my glass is 'half empty' rather than 'half full'

What I am trying to convey to junior birdmen is the reality of what it takes to succeed in the profession.
There are certain key stages which to go through, and it is important that a HOWGOESIT takes place with the training team to give you a honest assessment as to your progress, and whether you have developed a suitable learning curve to succeed within normal acceptable time scales.
First time passes might well be one indication of potential.
Completing the flying within the prescribed course minimums might be another. There are others.......
The standard 5 'O/GCSE' (including Maths,Physics,English) & 2 'A' {English system} or equivalent, as the minimum educational standard to attempt the 14 EASA exams. A high mark in Gen NAV is always a good indication that your brain is hard wired correctly.

Significant retakes/overruns might suggest that all is not well.

Far better that on completion of the PPL a sensible decision is made if appropriate. I see little point in someone struggling on, not enjoying it, and just making it by the skin of their teeth after a number of attempts of the "hoops".
The MCC/JOC phase would be a nightmare for all concerned.

[jamesgrainge]

Jamesgrainge

You might think that my glass is 'half empty' rather than 'half full'
.

Your glass is unbelievably half empty.

I don't think anyone who sets off down this path looks at it and thinks "this is an easy ride to a big salary"?

The costs alone put off the average individual, not to mention the intense study. Do you really think someone who didn't really enjoy it would even attempt a CPL/IR.

Often people struggle with examinations, the basic skills are developed in PPL stage very early. Anything that makes the art of flight easier allowing the candidate to concentrate on procedural flying surely is a good thing?

Personally it took me 4 attempts to pass my Driving test. Yet 5 years later I was achieving success driving race cars.

Forever fight for your dream, ignore the naysayers and the jaded old pilots, if you have the capacity to achieve, and the determination, you will.

[JB007]

As I'm 40 this year, I don't consider myself an "old jaded pilot". And I've known Parkfell since 2003 and has never been "glass half empty"! I think he makes a very black and white and sensible point regarding training...too much money involved now and the opportunities are generally one-sided.

Forever fight for your dream, ignore the naysayers and the jaded old pilots, if you have the capacity to achieve, and the determination, you will

I agree, although a little immature with today's costs/opportunities ratio. Keep throwing money at it you'll probably make it, and those jaded old pilots will also expect a certain level of respect that you can't ignore!

Good luck!

[jamesgrainge]

Thankyou. The costs/opportunities ratio doesn't have to be skewed,as long as you are sensible and approach with the best plan for yourself an if you can train for the same amount as you will earn in your first year then that has to be worth it.

And i agree regarding the one sided training fees, but as long as people keep believing the idea that the major schools keep selling where you plan on paying 2.5 times to train what you will earn in your first year as well as having the interest to cover. But I digress to another thread......

[Reverserbucket]

The costs alone put off the average individual, not to mention the intense study.
Have you considered BA FPP or the Easyjet or Flybe MPL or other selected schemes James? This way you could undertake an assessment to determine suitability rather than forever fighting for your dream? It might save you a lot of heartache later.
Do you really think someone who didn't really enjoy it would even attempt a CPL/IR.
Believe it or not, yes, there are many integrated students who have never touched the controls of an aircraft before enrolling on a CPL/IR course. I have met numerous who have almost zero interest in aviation but have either been guided by family who fly or because they like the idea of being an airline pilot but in reality are entirely clueless as to what that entails and how to get there. This started as a discussion about training in modern aircraft and following experience based advice offered by a few instructors here, rather predictably we have spiralled into a debate about dreams and ambition based on minimum standards and low budgets. If you seek an airline career and are not fortunate enough to secure a place on a so called 'tagged' scheme, in my opinion, find a school that is known to the airlines you intend to target but overall, not least from a financial perspective, as parkfell said, What is important is the quality and reputation of the ATO.

[jamesgrainge]

Thanks for the tips but no I have never considered any kind of tagged scheme. Firstly I'm probably too old and secondly I wasted my education when I wad young and foolish. But not only this I have no interest in a scheme where you graduate without even a PPL to your name. I love flying and aircraft too much to waste £100,000 that confines me to one type/airline/no pay cheque. Equally I don't think there is one particular type of person who is a "good" pilot that will show up in an "Aptitude Test". I think if you have a passion for aviation,are a reasonably nice person, the intelligence for 2 A levels (not exactly a high bar, lets be honest) and a way to get the golden ticket at minimal cost then you stand a good chance of flying for a career.

If those kind of people exist then good on them, they have almost no chance of finding a job, doesn't take away my place in the future.

[Reverserbucket]

These are precisely the types that do find work though as most airlines are not looking for misty eyed enthusiastic dreamers but properly trained, qualified individuals with a proportional level of professionalism and sadly, these days, the hard cash to self-fund a type-rating and maybe pay for the odd 500 hours worth of line experience. I have seen even the least gifted of students make it without too much effort to the right-hand seat of a number of European airlines (some sadly with nothing more than the social skills of an amoeba), largely because they were in the right place at the right time (or the right ATO) and the airline needed to fill seats on type-rating courses - it's all about market forces in this game. If you are good or even exceptional, perhaps you will find yourself in a training or standards role but ultimately, it's just a numbers game and when the time is right, the jobs are there. Now is the right time but two years from now...?

I wish you luck James - have you considered flying instructing?

[jamesgrainge]

It worries me that the least capable students find job. There's me assuming the aviation game was based on quality and safety.

No I don't think that's for me, I'm not a patient teacher unfortunately.

[parkfell]

They are not necessary the least capable, just those who can access funding for the licence & a rating. So what you get is a mixed bag. Some are very good, and some less so. A large spread of ability. Think random number theory.

That is why sponsorship by the big players historically got the most suitable. Not constrained by financial clout. Something which Aer Lingus are attempting to aspire too. And of course the military would not consider anything but quality.

Unfortunately the beancounters rule the roost, and concentrate purely on the bottom line and the cheapest training costs possible.

[Bealzebub]

It worries me that the least capable students find job. There's me assuming the aviation game was based on quality and safety.

No I don't think that's for me, I'm not a patient teacher unfortunately.

A shame, because good First Officers who progress to being good captains usually are patient teachers, because that is a significant part of what the job entails.

The "least capable" candidates are not the ones who get the jobs. It is usually the most capable. That is why the selection procedures are set up the way they are. A career as an airline pilot isn't a right, nor is it suitable for a great many people. There are plenty of people who fly as a hobby, or are involved with aviation in a whole spectrum of other spheres. Some of the advice above is spot on.

[jamesgrainge]

Thank god for hearing you say that. There is still hope for talent outweighing a paycheque?

[parkfell]

It was always the case that the better students will find employment.
They are capable, and pass the sim rides.
The weaker ones will not succeed irrespective how much money they spend.
All this will be apparent during the first 20 hours of flying.

As for integrated courses, no previous experience is necessary,
and usually regarded as best.(no previous, that is)
Nasty habits, poor techniques etc, can be acquired prior to the professional course and are often hard to remove, and it is the most frustrating aspect for the instructor.

[JB57]

Some good information passed on here Thanks Guys. However now am confused more than ever on what's best, maybe Glass is not the best option. However after looking at various schools in UK there seems to be more and more are using the DA 42 certainly for the IR at least even the big main schools are using them. Not sure now whether to go Glass or Conventional Cockpit more investigating I think, cheers Parkfell for the honest advice

[paco]

There's nothing wrong with using the DA 42 or its glass cockpit - just be aware of its characteristics. It won't stop you getting a job, but will maybe create a little extra work, is all.

[EC DKN]

Skybus requirements were 300 PIC and ME/IR without a glass cockpit aircraft! And certainly two of the best modular schools in UK AFT (Exeter) and PAT (Bournemouth) don't use glass! But anyway, you should be looking for the quality of instructors rather than the type of aircraft!

[Reverserbucket]

It was always the case that the better students will find employment.
They are capable, and pass the sim rides.
The weaker ones will not succeed irrespective how much money they spend. Whilst I agree parkfell that better students may have more success finding work, it is my experience that in recent years, consistently underperforming students with the capacity to pay for type and line training do find jobs predominantly on B737's in the UK and EU. Whereas I do subscribe to the idea that weak students may improve with practice and experience, I could offer you two large low-cost airlines who employ (albeit as contractors) pilots who were unsuccessful in both the first series and second series of the CPL and IR Skill Tests and who struggled through MCC in a way that I can only describe as unethical. It is my view that such weakness and ineptitude would never have been deemed acceptable to even the lowest of training establishments in the past. Any wonder that EASA is pushing to lose the 'Safety' part of it's title?

[parkfell]

What we are considering is the simple question of supply and demand.

The last time I can recall demand exceeding supply was 1986-1989. Gulf war 1 started in August 1990 and turned the 7 year historical cycle on its head.

I recall someone at Oxford (700 hour route) in 1986 being offered a job in anticipation of passing the IR followed by licence issue.
A further newly qualified CPL/IR had an interview at Leeds lasting 3 minutes.
"show me your licence......... That's fine. Can you start Tuesday?" Reply "yes".

So the "cutoff" as to who you employ is a function supply and demand. So in the good times, the less able do get an opportunity. They take longer to complete the line training etc, as their learning curve is not as good. They might eventually become competent.......

[Alex Whittingham]

I agree with parkfell's post above. Both of us were in the training system in the early '90s the last time there was a boom like this and both of us also watched the slump that followed. Since then there have been lesser booms and slumps. Whether there is a real 7 year cycle or not I am less sure because, historically, when the market slumps it is always following an unforeseen 'black swan' type event such as 9/11, SARS, the sub-prime mortgage crisis or the Gulf War.

Right now demand is close to exceeding supply, to the extent that candidates dumped from integrated school's holding pools several years ago after repeated failures to find jobs are being called back into the system. The market is certainly close to a historic high although jobs are not yet being offered on the basis of 'show me your license - you're hired'.

[paco]

I do remember back when Air Europe went down that you couldn't get on a training course for four years - Perth, etc. were all fully booked for that long. If you had a letter saying you were on a course you had a job! As it hapens, I don't believe that that shortage has really gone away.

[Parson]

One thing I would add re the new v old debate is that the Seneca is a lot more stable than the DA42 - worth considering if training/testing at a time of year when that may be of help.

[PPRuNe Towers]

Parkfell, Alex, and Paco are all so right,

'88 was my peak year in the training system and it really was a case of demand far exceeding supply. 20 applications and 19 interviews plus a Leeds based airline called Capital offering to pay for my IR.

However, I'm not writing to piss people off but add context to considerations regarding present day return on investment. My first job was on a jet for a very minor company beginning in Feb 1989 and my basic salary was £25,000. That would pay off a full mortgage with minimum deposit for a 3 bed North London semi in two years.

In reality I bought a terrace in scouseland for 12.5K. Experienced pilots warning you about present terms and conditions are not bluffing or trying to put you off. They've seen years of you guys arriving for courses and line training with colossal debt at a time in your lives where, all too soon, it's natural and normal for your life away from the aircraft to also become more expensive.

Think choice of aircraft through very carefully - is the DA cockpit actually totally alien to real commercial flightdecks? Are the basic skills in something like a Seneca a grounding that might help keep you away from the type of air transport accidents that dominate the statistics now?

Rob

[jamesgrainge]

Starting years at around 50k for working less than a full time job seems like a good deal to me. Such why I would suggest anyone going down this route is a smart cookie, not sucked in by the FTO reps on here or the bitter ex modulars, and subsequently does their training at the lowest cost possible for the best quality so as to minimise debt.

Best advice I have read was do whatever you want to get the CPL+IR and then do the MCC+JOC at a high quality school and turn up well prepared so as you don't struggle.

[parkfell]

Grasshopper

Any old CPL/IR route is high risk, as you need basic skills to flourish on the MCC/JOC course.
Without a solid foundation, you will be totally overwhelmed when stepping up from a 2T light twin, to say a 737-800 weighing in at say 60+T

Something about a silk purse..........

[paco]

Your basic grounding is soooo important..... It should not be skimped on.

[JB57]

Starting another question here who are top schools for MCC/JOC courses ?

[jamesgrainge]

Hence why PPL was done in UK with night and VMC. Also next school is top rated with candidates getting placed to airlines every week.

[parkfell]

And is this "top rated" school also in the UK, or elsewhere?

Let us know post licence issue how the MCC & type rating course work out.

Best of luck

[parkfell]

JB57

The MCC/JOC courses are undertaken following licence issue for modular people.

Some are part of the flying school (usually ATOs integrated) who might take modular students, or some are stand alone which are used following the modular route.

You pays your money, and takes your choice.

Contact me for possible options as advertising is not permitted on forums.

[jamesgrainge]

And is this "top rated" school also in the UK, or elsewhere?

Let us know post licence issue how the MCC & type rating course work out.

Best of luck

Noooo, I don't see any value in what the UK has to offer, unless you are tagged/sponsored you aren't getting into a flag carrier anyway, so its low cost, FR have very low recruitment from UK schools it would seem so its Sleazy or flybe, and man cannot survive on £500 a month on the chance of a 6 month contract.

The money im saving should get me to a Type Rating without debt, even doing the MCC at a "prestige" school.

[JB007]

Just from your above post alone, I'd do a lot more research before spending any money!

And you might want to start by not calling employers "Sleazy"...

Some serious issues here....

[jamesgrainge]

How much more researching would you like me to do? I have spent over a year reading listening watching asking, not just here but local real world commercial pilots. There is very little I could further research.

On the topic of "Sleazy" its a lighthearted comment. Do you think the Recruitment sit here reading pprune forums striking names off a list of potential future employees?

[paco]

You would be surprised......

When you do go for an interview you need to be aware that the receptionist is also on the panel, as is anyone you meet for lunch.

[jamesgrainge]

I'm pretty sure my next door neighbour is tattling on me to Ryanair as we speak :ok:

[parkfell]

Grasshopper

I personally knew of one somewhat hot headed Saab 340 FO who made a rather "unfortunate" post about a would be employer having just applied for his first jet job.
The fleet manager (SQ) read it, phoned up the individual within hours of the post........needless to say that was the end of that. He eventually ended up in the sandpit.

Junior birdmen need to be acutely aware that these forums are read by important people who may or may not post. BEWARE.

[jamesgrainge]

Ok Park cheers, ill bear it in mind. I have my eye on one particular type of aircraft in the future.

And just in case the airlines are reading ill remove my tinfoil hat and say I love all airlines ��