WX Man
17th Mar 2001, 23:14
OK, I'm reading a whole load of posts that seem to be saying "don't go to the USA", and even though I am one of this forum's biggest proponents of USA flying, I can't help but agree with some of the sentiments expressed by the sceptics.
So we've got the impending economic slow-down, combined with this article in flight (haven't read it yet...). Presents itself to me as a problem:
I am currently starting the process that will hopefully give me the right to live and work (at least temporarily) in the USA*. Once out there, I plan to do my CPL and IR, and get a job flying rustbuckets in and out of backwater mountain airports. However, in doing so, I eat up my savings and therefore will not be able to afford JAR training afterwards.
What's the consensus on this one? Do I spend money on FAA training and risk putting myself in a virtually unemployable position (or in a position where I'm thinking about where the next meal's going to come from)?
* right to live and work... it's 'cos I'm getting good at the old computing lark, and there's a bit of a shortage of people who can programme coupled GCM/EBMs. Climatology basically.
So we've got the impending economic slow-down, combined with this article in flight (haven't read it yet...). Presents itself to me as a problem:
I am currently starting the process that will hopefully give me the right to live and work (at least temporarily) in the USA*. Once out there, I plan to do my CPL and IR, and get a job flying rustbuckets in and out of backwater mountain airports. However, in doing so, I eat up my savings and therefore will not be able to afford JAR training afterwards.
What's the consensus on this one? Do I spend money on FAA training and risk putting myself in a virtually unemployable position (or in a position where I'm thinking about where the next meal's going to come from)?
* right to live and work... it's 'cos I'm getting good at the old computing lark, and there's a bit of a shortage of people who can programme coupled GCM/EBMs. Climatology basically.