Integrated vs Non Integrated CPL

[Jobin]

Hey all,

Yep, one of these threads again. I did use the search before considering this post but it seems like the last searchable discussions were in 2005. Guys & Girls in the industry, what are your thoughts on pilots coming through the 150hr vs 200hr course? Are they equally employable afterwards? I'm 30 years old, don't particularly want to go to the airlines and already have a degree so don't fancy going back to uni either. My local flight school does the 200 hour course which I'm considering. It's a big commitment for my wife and I but she's on board and we can afford it. We know the first job will probably be somewhere remote and that's fine too.

Jo.

[Stickshift3000]

I can’t offer much advice, however I have noticed many advertised jobs require 250 hours minimum, so forget the cost saving of 200 (Part 141 school) vs 150 (Part 142) flying hours.

In my opinion, the benefit of the non-integrated course is you may have more flexibility around the time you wish to fly. I commenced in integrated but think I’m soon going to switch to non-integrated. The quality of the instruction is far more important to me than paying minimum cost.

Some interesting relevant reading here:
https://aerocircus.com.au/snag-in-sausage-factory/

[Climb150]

I would say do the 200 hour CPL at a small to medium sized school. The big integrated schools have no real contacts with any GA operators. Most just claim that they can get you into Qlink.

[Okihara]

Do the 200h and find somebody to hire an aircraft and negotiate a preferential rate dry or wet but on flight switch. Don't hire the aircraft through the school.

Here with Moorabbin figures assuming you get your PPL around the 75h mark and a C172

Integrated 150h, leaving 75h at VDO rate at $280/h => $21,000. However note that some of those 75h left will be at dual rate which will be around $380/h.

Nonintegrated 200h, leaving 125h at a FS rate of $200/h (wet). That adds up to $25,000. However total flight time includes ground time and ground time is on average total time – 0.2, hence a further saving. Including myself, I know of two other blokes here who did the maths and made the same decision. The flight switch rate that you'll get from private hires will usually be dry and will hover around the $130/h mark. If you commit to hiring over many hours, you'll always have a strong argument to negotiate a bulk discount.

If you're not looking into VET loans and can afford to self fund your training, the nonintegrated is definitely a very interesting option, especially as Stickshift3000 mentioned, it gives you greater flexibility. You will probably not get your CPL for considerably less money but you'll definitely have around 50 additional hours PIC, most cross country, which you would anyway require for your IR. And, indeed, quality of teaching far surpasses any savings considerations you should have.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Many of my staff instructors are ex-Integrated schools and they tell me that all but the most talented trainees need 180-220 hours to get the CPL anyway. The "savings" in a 150 hour course are illusory.

As Okihara says, you can do plenty of Night, IF, Aeros, Tailwheel and other things in the 160 hours between PPL and a 200-hour CPL.

[Cessna 200]

As others have suggested, non integrated seems to be the way to go for flexibility and cost savings. There are private owners out there willing to rent their more complex machines to the right people. Most are not interested in casual hours but a bulk hire block can usually be negotiated. Feel free to PM for suggestions. :D

[Flying Bear]

Integrated courses, by and large, are a shambles... just look at the thread surrounding one of Australia’s “largest” flying schools as a more extreme example of the money-grabbing culture of the sausage factories...

Plus, history shows that the “admin fees” etc to support those courses outweigh the cost of the additional 50 hrs flying. Better to spend the cash on numbers into your logbook / additional training and experience.

i know for a fact a 200 hr CPL (all done in “real” aeroplanes, completed in C210) with SE NVFR can be done for $80,000...

+1 from me for every comment made above.

[Kundry]

Integrated courses, by and large, are a shambles... just look at the thread surrounding one of Australia’s “largest” flying schools as a more extreme example of the money-grabbing culture of the sausage factories...

Plus, history shows that the “admin fees” etc to support those courses outweigh the cost of the additional 50 hrs flying. Better to spend the cash on numbers into your logbook / additional training and experience.

i know for a fact a 200 hr CPL (all done in “real” aeroplanes, completed in C210) with SE NVFR can be done for $80,000...

+1 from me for every comment made above. Except SOAR doesn't deliver an integrated course... try picking out a school that fits your narrative next time.

[Jobin]

Lots of good feed back here, thanks heaps. I think I'll go with my gut and do the 200 hour course, It'll be fun flying around Australia building hours too. There's really only the one place to hire a 172 in my (small) town. Solo rates are $265/hour which doesn't seem unreasonable.

Thanks again!
Jo.

[thorn bird]

Of course you could go overseas.

I know a young lady who went to the USA, completed her CPL, Multi IR in around 8 months, all for considerably less than you could in OZ.
She aint coming home anytime soon, got herself a slot with a regional over there and is living the dream. There are alternatives to Australia's screwed up system.

[snoop doggy dog]

Do your PPL, get the command hours (night and day) to do your ME CIR and then do your CPL, no NVFR

Will be over 200 hours, however, you will learn to fly better early in your career.

[Climb150]

Thornbird
How did this person make it o 1500TT for a US regional?

[Okihara]

Of course you could go overseas.

I know a young lady who went to the USA, completed her CPL, Multi IR in around 8 months, all for considerably less than you could in OZ.
She aint coming home anytime soon, got herself a slot with a regional over there and is living the dream. There are alternatives to Australia's screwed up system.

All for considerably less than in OZ? In the US? Really? I'm in the US now and I don't find hire or instructor rates to be overly cheaper than Aussie ones.

South Africa, however things look quite different. I know of this school http://www.mbsf.co.za (http://www.mbsf.co.za)which quotes CPL + ME IR for R 394,000 or A$ 39,000 at today's exchange rate. And that is no bogus school.

[Flying Bear]

Except SOAR doesn't deliver an integrated course... try picking out a school that fits your narrative next time.

Wasn’t aware of that, Kundry - so I stand corrected and take your point. Now I’m confused as to what, exactly, SOAR offers that is so popular... because they aren’t cheap (based on what I hear) and their level of customer satisfaction seems to be lacking. Another story for another thread, perhaps...

However, that doesn’t detract from my point - and to get back on track and reiterate my point despite the confusion I may have created...

Integrated training, by and large, is a shambles. The concept is fine, in theory, but the execution in industry by the sausage factories is poor. Reducing the minimum flight experience requirement to qualify for CPL by 25% simply because a trainee does their theory in a certain sequence doesn’t really make sense - and doesn’t work when most of the instructors at the sausage factories are really junior pilots themselves, with little or no commercial experience, often simply graduates of the previous course... Nowadays they are being mentored by “senior” instructors who have worked at the school for a year or two - and nowhere else. This doesn’t lend itself to quality “integrated” training - which would / should heavily rely on the context that only experienced and well trained instructors can give. Sorry to be harsh, but that’s the state of the industry now...

Related to this, VET FEE is one of the worst things that ever happened to flight training in this country. Again, the idea is great - helping those who would otherwise struggle to afford flight training - but the sausage factories often use it as a vast money grabbing scam to the detriment of those the scheme is supposed to help. Further, these kinds of operators may go beyond potentially being grubby little opportunists and may soon possibly start hurting people. What did I hear happened yesterday? Bloody lucky not to have ended in tears, in my book...

Plus, with the increasing difficulty and cost to insure GA charter aircraft of all sizes, very few will employ a 150-170 hour CPL graduate of the sausage factory. Certainly, I won’t.

So...

Do a 200 hr CPL. Do it in an aircraft that will set you up for what you will likely fly in industry. Do it with a school that has dedicated instructors who care - and preferably are current in flying commercial operations outside of the circuit / training area... these schools are still out there, and likely still will be long after certain others have gone by the wayside. Perhaps that school might have contacts that will help you get a start (as a pilot, not an instructor) after you finish training.

[havick]

Of course you could go overseas.

I know a young lady who went to the USA, completed her CPL, Multi IR in around 8 months, all for considerably less than you could in OZ.
She aint coming home anytime soon, got herself a slot with a regional over there and is living the dream. There are alternatives to Australia's screwed up system.

Just out of curiosity how did she get the hours from bare FAA CPL to ATP mins to join a regional in the US?

I’m assuming something along the lines of F1 or M1 visa to work as an instructor and the E3 with a regional?

[thorn bird]

She's been there three years, have no idea how she built hours, I know she was working as an FO on corporate shuttle for a while.
From our brief chat she said there was plenty of work there though.

[Climb150]

Just dont want the wannabes or fresh CPL's to think that they can just hop over tp the USA and start working or training.

Far to often I hear people say they just "went to Europe" or "USA" to work without letting people know they are a dual citizen or Greencard holder.

[havick]

Just dont want the wannabes or fresh CPL's to think that they can just hop over tp the USA and start working or training.

Far to often I hear people say they just "went to Europe" or "USA" to work without letting people know they are a dual citizen or Greencard holder.

That’s what I was getting at, definitely more to that story because it’s not as simple as just going to the USA.

E3’s are there for guys that meet FAA ATP Mins already, but being in the USA prior to that to build up 1500 hours is a whole different ball game.

[Okihara]

There's a waiver to the work restriction on the M1 visa. How far that gets you in terms of loggable hours must be answered by someone else.
Alternatively, if you've got resources, you can also get a B2 visa valid and fly happily for six months in the US.

[Horatio Leafblower]

Flying Bear
I must beg to differ on this:
Nowadays they are being mentored by “senior” instructors who have worked at the school for a year or two - and nowhere else.

There is nothing "nowadays" about that - it was certainly rife in the Hunter Valley in the late 80s/early 90s. All 4 flying schools between Cessnock and Maitland suffered the same malaise.

Do a 200 hr CPL. Do it in an aircraft that will set you up for what you will likely fly in industry. Do it with a school that has dedicated instructors who care - and preferably are current in flying commercial operations outside of the circuit / training area... these schools are still out there, and likely still will be long after certain others have gone by the wayside. Perhaps that school might have contacts that will help you get a start (as a pilot, not an instructor) after you finish training.

100% well said that man.

[john_tullamarine]

it was certainly rife in the Hunter Valley in the late 80s/early 90s

Sad to hear that. I did my PPL at RNAC in the 60s (Stan Hone, Jack Blackwell, BJ, and their fine colleagues). Certainly not a case of junior newbies having much clout back then.

[Checkboard]

(as a pilot, not an instructor)
In what way are instructors not pilots? ;)

There is always this suggestion that instructors are too much "by the book", that they have no sense of "commercial reality". This implies that they are too "careful and slow" in normal opertions and don't accept the "requirements of the real word". This I assume meaning: carrying defects without writing them up, flying overweight and ignoring flight & duty limits.

Then elswhere you will find posts about dodgy GA operators, paying nothing and "forcing" pilots to fly overweight, with defects and out of F&D limits....

[Flying Bear]

In what way are instructors not pilots? ;)

There is always this suggestion that instructors are too much "by the book", that they have no sense of "commercial reality". This implies that they are too "careful and slow" in normal opertions and don't accept the "requirements of the real word". This I assume meaning: carrying defects without writing them up, flying overweight and ignoring flight & duty limits.

Then elswhere you will find posts about dodgy GA operators, paying nothing and "forcing" pilots to fly overweight, with defects and out of F&D limits....

Checkboard, that’s not at all what I was inferring! I am a proud Flight Instructor and have built my career on developing pilots - and have a diversity of experience in doing so.

My point was not to differentiate between pilots and instructors being as you suggest - but to identify that the first job should be as just a pilot. Consolidate and concentrate on your new skill, before trying to teach it.

In the words of my mentor “How can one possibly hope to teach a skill that they have not yet themselves mastered...”

[havick]

Checkboard, that’s not at all what I was inferring! I am a proud Flight Instructor and have built my career on developing pilots - and have a diversity of experience in doing so.

My point was not to differentiate between pilots and instructors being as you suggest - but to identify that the first job should be as just a pilot. Consolidate and concentrate on your new skill, before trying to teach it.

In the words of my mentor “How can one possibly hope to teach a skill that they have not yet themselves mastered...”

I don’t disagree with your sentiment, but the reality shows that the blind leading the blind method does work as evidenced by just about every country pumping out pilots this way.

[The name is Porter]

but the reality shows that the blind leading the blind method does work as evidenced by just about every country pumping out pilots this way.

The results of the blind leading the blind are really starting to hit its straps at one 'school' in Moorabbin!