oxford

[apple]

I trawled this but did not net any info...

Concerning ATPL at OAT:

What would be the difference between a structured inhouse Modular done back to back at Oxford and their intergrated course barring the cost and accepting they can be done in the same timeframe

:confused: :confused: :confused:

[The Boy Lard]

Apple,

I've just finished the modular course at OATS.

The main difference with the modular is that you need 150 hours (min) before you can start the Mod course.

On the Intergrated course, after the phase 1 exams, (POF, AGK, Inst, M&B, AP, HP) you then go off to Tyler in Texas for your PPL through to CPL, then back to OATS for phase 2.

On the Modular you dont go to the states so is generally the quicker option.

The Mod guys and gals have the option (at a cost) to then go to Tyler for the CPl then back to OATS for the IR.

So in essence there is no difference, Mod have 150 hours and Intergrated generally dont, thats about it!

Hope this helps

Cheers

TBL:D

[apple]

Thanks

But do you get the same quality of tuition as an intergrated and er (changing my tune..) what would the total cost be for a modular and intergrated

If you could spend time away from home which course would you opt for?:)

[Send Clowns]

Apple

Most schools offering both modular and integrated routes from zero experience to fATPL have a price difference of the order of £10,000. This is due to the extra resources that must be available to the integrated course, I do not know the exact detail but I am reliably assured that the cost is higher for the schools to provide the service, they are not ripping you off. That said, the licence looks the same and you'd finish the modular course with an extra 60 hours or so.

[The Boy Lard]

Apple,

Both sets of students get the same instructors for the ground school and the flying.

The price difference comes from the fact that as Modular you already have a PPL therefore dont need to go for a nice jolly to the states to get it.

I found that there was no distinction in the level of service you recieved. The two groups are run seperatly, by that I mean that there are seperate offices but I am sure that this is purely for admin purposes.

The Mod ground school costs £5450 as for the rest call Dena Dove on 01865 840334, she's really helpful and will get you the answers you want (Dena is the Modular secretary and is a diamond!)

If you have the required hours take the Modular route (unless you want to spend time in the states!!!)

Cheers

TBL:D

[Mike Allen]

Send Clowns is correct in that you will gain a frozen JAA ATPL. The choice is yours with regard to time and cost.
In our experience an Integrated course will take about 14 months, whereas the modular route will be longer. To start a modular route you must have a PPL, and then a total of 150 hrs before starting the CPL skills course. Allow 1 year for the ground exams and then 5 weeks for the CPL (if you go to the USA). CPL in the UK can take longer depending upon the time of year and the weather.
The IR training must be done in the UK and you should allow 3-4 months. The MCC is a quick 2 weeks. Anybody gaining a modular license in under 18 months is doing well.
The bottom line is "will I get a job". The major airlines have assured us that a Modular student will not be discriminated against. If you are good enough, and get satisfy their criteria - of age and background - then you should be in fair competition.
At Oxford you can do the ground study either by distance learning or full time. If you go for the full time course the teaching will be identical to an integrated course. The flying is with the same instructors - so you will have achieved your license, in a longer time frame, but much cheaper.
Just to round off - and no doubt start another major discussion!:
So far this year (Jan to July) the Oxford modular students have achieved a first time pass rate, for individual exams, of 81.4%. The Integrated pass rate is 89.1%. Total exams sat 2,688. These figures are direct from the CAA’s statistics and not massaged by Oxford. Maybe the other schools would like to publish theirs?

[Alex Whittingham]

But Mike, your website says the pass rates are over 90% for all courses except distance learning, shurely shome mishtake?

[Mike Allen]

Alex,
The web site quotes for all integrated exams since they began. Two and a half years worth. I have quoted the CAA's figures for this year only. It is only fair to quote “like for like”.
You will remember that the Jan/Feb exams were "nasty" and over a short 6 month period depressed the averages.
It is not representative to quote our distance learning figures because many students disappear and do not tell us their results (good or bad). I am only prepared to publicly quote the figures, from the CAA, which are full and accurate.
Integrated results are accurate because we have the full results from all the students.
Since JAA started Oxford Integrated students have sat 6,923 exams with an overall first time pass rate of 92%.

[Alex Whittingham]

Look at your own website, the 'marks' you put up there show consistent improvement in the period you are talking about with the exception of one month, June and that followed a 9% (!) improvement in May.

This is not the proper place to have this conversation, Mike. You can answer queries without blatantly puffing up Oxford, it is advertising. These 'statistics' are inconsistent to say the least and have been the subject of at least three complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority in the recent past. More will follow if you keep on.

[T-key]

Interesting comments. At least Oxford are prepared to publish their results.
Alex - where are your results?
If Oxford can get full results from the CAA why cann't you?
Without your results Oxford has my vote.
I've done brush-ups at Oxford and wish I'd done the whole course with them.

[Alex Whittingham]

Don't get me wrong, Oxford are a very good school and Mike's a nice guy, this is marketing and he knows it.

Mike says they can't quote distance learning figures because they can't get accurate numbers. Now, all we do at Bristol is distance learning so how are we going to compare those stats?

I really don't want to get into this arguement but if you want to, here we go.......

Since May the CAA have provided raw statistics to FTOs, they omit the students that don't need to do approved courses like the Ansett pilots converting their licenses and include anybody who put 'Bristol' on their application form. Nobody knows what anybody else's pass rates are, these figures could be made up and you couldn't prove it. To be absolutely clear, I am not claiming these as our pass rates, this is just a report from some spreadsheets the CAA sent me.

The CAA stats show averages as:

Months 1 to 4 79.9%
Month 5 82.5%
Month 6 78.6%
Month 7 79.9%

Which is an (approximate) average of 80.1%. You can see that these numbers are very close to what Oxford claim, and they include in their figures their classroom courses. So what has that proved?

My point is that Oxford are blowing smoke, there's nothing special about their pass rates and they shouldn't pop them into bulletin boards everytime someone asks a question. If you want to advertise, you should pay for it, and make it clear its an advert.

[er82]

Ok. Someone came on here to ask a relatively simple question that needed a simple answer. Mike Allen responded, and so what if he included %'s for the exams taken at Oxford? It may be advertising, but if the guy who originally asked the question had not been to Oxford's website and seen the results for himself, he would not be aware of the obvious very high standard of tuition at Oxford.

Yes, I am en ex-student. I don't want to get into an argument about advertising and whether average %'s should be included in any post. In answer to the original question :

I was on an integrated course. The continuous process for the whole course ensures that you stay focussed without taking a break between sets of exams and flying. The instructors all do their job extremely well and are available anytime to give you any extra help you may need.
If the cost of the course is not an option, the integrated one seems like the better choice.

On the application form for CitiExpress, it asks "Have you successfully attended a fully integrated (NOT MODULAR) JAA or CAA approved flying course?".

I guess that helps to answer the question.

[vicarofdibley]

I guess it does if you want to fly for CitiExpress...

[PFD]

Alex said

These 'statistics' are inconsistent to say the least and have been the subject of at least three complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority in the recent past. More will follow if you keep on.

I have searched the ASA website (from 1999), who publish full reports of all 'Upheld Complaints' and I can find none against Oxford. However I did find one informally resolved complaint dated 10th July 2002 which means that someone had a moan and ...

"After consideration of complaints received, the ASA gave advice to the following organisations, all of which agreed to suitable amendments"

So I would just like to ask, where are the other 2 recent complaints?

Stating that an organisation has been the subject of at least three complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority is surely negative advertising if not Libelous when printed in a Public forum such as this.

er82 is right, Mike just answered a question in his fashion, and he is rightly proud of his figures so he stated what they are, he didn't even state the higher ones (with explanation) from the Website.

If I wanted I could post rather damaging facts about particular FTO's, but I am above that sort of behaviour, and was rather hoping that all staff from FTO's were.

For apple, please read the posts, but ring or email the relevant FTO's you are interested in, do your research and make up your own mind. No one FTO can guarantee you a job, but they will all (I hope) do their best to make sure you are prepared for one. I will email you personally with further info.

Regards to all, and I mean all.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

All this thread really proves is that in the absence of an independent (CAA) set of agreed public statistics on FTO"results" there is little point in Wannabes seeking such statistics.

There are too many variables to make such statistics particularly useful anyway.

Joe Wannabe should be satisfied that both Bristol GS and OATS GS are excellent schools with many satisfied customers. Other FTO's have similarly good credentials and an hours research would highlight who they are.

I am satisfied that all posters on this thread have nothing but good intention.

Wannabes should be mindful that with little to choose between top schools by far the most imortant issue is their own degree of application to the syllabus.

Cheers,

WWW

[PFD]

Agreed WWW

[Dr.Evil 2002]

Why oh why has this thread been turned into an Oxford v Bristol debate?!?!?!?
Mike has the decency to post a reply and at the end of the day it's up to the potential student to weigh up the facts and figures and make an informed choice. If that choice is based on PPruNe info only then more fool them!
The both of you (Mike and Alex) should have your tantrums in a more appropriate place and the moderators should not let a decent thread be brought down to such a childish level.

Now as to Apple's original question, I agree (my opinion only) with TBL. Just to add however you do fly 40+ hours twin on an integrated course compared to 21 hours twin on a modular. Integrated courses are approx 14 months, My modular course from groundschool through to IR took 1 year 1 month!
Ask Oxford (and the other training providers) what their pass rate for the IR is as thats the one you want first time!
Also, the majority of Airlines do take modular students, it is only a very few now that do not look at modular folk!

Gook luck Apple and enjoy it!;)

[Tosh McCaber]

Dr. Evil,

That's impressive. How did you schedule your course over the 13 months?

[sally at pprune]

Dr Evil 2002

I did ask Oxford (and just about all the other schools) what their 1st time pass rate for the IR is (and CPL); they refused to answer. Funny that they make such a fuss about their groundschool pass rates (and let's face it, they and BGS do seem to get consistent thumbs up for groundschool), but they are unwilling to talk about flying results.

There was an exchange here some months back between a couple of OATS instructors that suggested that the 1st time pass rate for the flying tests was not very good there. Perhaps that's why they won’t publish figures.

The whole subject of output results of FTOs has been debated here many times; the usual conclusion is that the populations at the various schools are not standardised, so output results (such as 1st time pass rates) would be misleading.

Oh well back to the books.

[Dr.Evil 2002]

Hi Tosh,

Ok, Groundschool took 8 months in total, that included a short break over Christmas. I passed all exams at the first attempt (I was lucky!!) and literally flew out to the States the following day after results were published and took 4 weeks in obtaining my CPL. 1 week off and onto the IR whick took 2 months = grand total 1 year 1 month and if I hadnt had a delay over xmas and had the week off could have been finished in a year I think so it it possible if you pull your finger out and are lucky enough not to encounter any delays.

Sally,

Yes, I agree most schools are very happy to publish groundschool results, and indeed it is a lot harder to get facts/figures with regard to flying pass rates. I know Oxfords figures to be low (exact figures not known) but its been put at around 60-70% for the IR and I have heard (rumour rumour rumour!) that Bristols is at about 80-90%.
Like anything..... You pay your money you take your choice!

Dr.E

[foghorn]

Just to follow up on the discrimination against modular licence holders mentioned by Mike, BACE ask for either

an Integrated Frozen ATPL

or

a Modular or non-approved Frozen ATPL and 1,000 hours TT

as their application minima. So there is still discrimination against modular licence holders. They quickly modified this about nine months ago from being an 'approved vs non-approved IR' discrimination when they realised that there is no such thing as a non-approved IR under JAR and modular licence holders have an approved IR.

cheers!
foggy (modular frozen ATPL).

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Again - lets not bandy about "pass rates" for IR's as there is no such data compiled by anyone.

Its meaningless anyway.

Lets see. Exeter has a lot of ex-mil students converting their military quals to CAA. As you might expect I guess their 'pas rate' is way better than average.

Does this mean as Joe Wannabe looking for a Modular IR course you should book there? Would you have more chance of a first time pass there than at - say - OATS?

Similarly I can think of lots of schools that have an odd intake; Ravenair have quite a few instructors do their IR there with a view to getting a foot in the door for an air taxi job afterwards. So perhaps a lot of their students have 2000hrs - whilst nearly all OATS students have <200hrs.

Guess what that might do to first time pass rates.

All you need to do is:

a) Draw up a shortlist that meet you budget.

b) Go and visit each.

c) Ascertain what kind of school it is, what is their average students background.

d) If the test can be done on the airfield then thats a big plus.

e) TALK to lots of current students. Spend a day there if necessary to do this - not just half an hour.

f) Make your decision, if its a tie go to the nearest one to home.


Thats pretty much all you need to do. Agonising over which is *the* best is pointless. Recommendations from ex-students of different schools here is also of very limited value. Everyone tends to champion wherever they trained. I know I did with PAT (I stand by that - I am an instructor so I'm allowing myself to do that).

WWW

[crispy banana]

Way off topic I know :) but maybe WWW can answer:

Does the aircraft you train in have an effect on pass rates/time taken to get up to speed?

ie a Dutchess in comparasion to a Turbo Seneca... the dutchess being alot simpler and slower and therefore easier to get to grips with?

I know which one I'd like to do my IR in!! :)

Thx

[Send Clowns]

WWW has cut to the essentials. The most important: visit the schools. This is a big outlay!

---

I would have to disagree with Mike on one point - less than 18 months is a very reasonable target for a modular course, as long as you book each module in good time.

Many students are passing groundschool in the 6-month minimum now as I did, or little more, so my own case is not atypical. I sat a one-month course that is not strictly necessary, was off flying ill for 5 weeks and took my CPL over the winter, so had the flying interrupted by weather and the Christmas break. Yet I finished in 15 months. With a summer CPL and no illness and not sitting the supplimentary PPL groundschool 12 months would not have been a problem.

---

I also support Alex's point that results cannot be compared. Even if the modular schools knew full results (students don't have to tell us!) they don't show anything unless you know the individual students. All schools vary as to their intake, each class varies as to its character. At SFT we had one class half of which spent every weekend and some weeknights in For Your Eyes Only (a strip club, for those few innocents out there) in Bournemouth (you know who you are lads ;) ). How do you interpret their results? :D Not much we as a school could do about that!