To fly or to ATC, that is the question!
 

Hi everyone,

I haven't seen this topic before, so thought it may be an interesting discussion. Hope it doesn't start a war though ;)

I recently read a post in the ATC forum stating "you are better off becoming a pilot, it is easier than ATC". I'm not sure what this statement was based on.

I believe the testing is harder to pass to be an ATC, having sat tests for both ASA and QF. Although I also believe the commitment required to be an airline pilot exceeds that of an ATC. I know the training for ATC is challenging and requires commitment however.

I think the challenge of ATC and flying is quite comparable. I know of regional airline pilots who were once ATCs, and wannabee ATCs who have CPLs and some ex airline captains. I'm trying to be objective as I have a CPL and am interested in ATC.

Many people spend $40K for their training, find the going too tough and waste all that money and time for nothing. Is all the crap you have to go through to be a pilot really worth it? Why do it when you can try for ATC and earn a very good salary (I believe ATCs earn more than pilots except QF captains and some FOs) and have a comparably challenging job. You could indulge in your enjoyment for flying anytime by simply hiring an aircraft.

So, the big quesion: Would you rather be a pilot or an ATC, given all the pros and cons of each? I know it is hard to be objective, and I'm not taking sides of either, just wondering about your opinion.

Bye for now.







:D

I fly because i love to Fly, Flying & getting paid to do it as a job is even better, sure theres loads of BS & flight tests, lots of money spent & then at the end its hard to get a job, but if you really wanna be a pilot then you will find away through.

I did think about ATC right at the start sure the pay is good, but they sure don't have anywhere as gooda view as us & they don't have hosties to bring them refreshments. :D

I have mates in ATC and as navvies in the RAAF, both wanted to be pilots.

Both agree that their jobs are akin to watching your best mate shagg your girlfriend - kinda fun in a very warped way but youd rather be doing the shaggin yourself.

Have a bloody good mate in ATC....
Ex military driver and does the occassional civie sortie.

Good money at the moment but you gotta read between the lines. a lot of the stuff about how well paid they are is akin to the stuff that mentions how well paid pilets are! The big boys maybe, but bug smasher drivers, not necessarily so(depends on the company though-in case boss reads this! :D ) Not all ATC guys earn mega bucks and some of them get stuck in Enroute "Cubicles" (note Dilbert principle) for years....Nothing makes that seem like fun!

The changes of recent times indicate a gradual decline in the position of the ATC. As my good mate mentions, "yeah we might earn a bit more money, but is it better to have a full bank account at the end of the day, or a full fun account?"

It is into the latter category that most drivers fit. My choice is a fun account, although I must admit without a change in the current regime, most of us will never be able to accumulate sufficient to retire on......Superannuation is an illusion for the PAYG mugs like most of us, without the higher earning potential whether that happens to be in QF or AirServices Australia
It is not the industry so much as the fact that the working poor as a group are growing. you simply find it near impossible to accumulate sufficient to retire upon when you earn less than 40K per annum, no matter what the job. Unless you live on fresh air for 30 years....Coupled with the fact you spend huge dollars getting into this..

I'll hop off my soap box, fun account will be full hopefully when i retire, and I'll spend whatever is left before the kids get into it (if they come along that is!)

"9 iron james"

:D :D

Without a doubt the answer to this question is neither!
ENGINEER first then FLY...... Then you will make yourself one of the most bankable commodities in the business.
Unless of course its airlines your interested in for your driving career.

Cheers HH

Why not ATC first,
Then pay for the flying and claim this as a tax deduction, it can be done and has been in the past.

Quote

"I believe the testing is harder to pass to be an ATC, having sat tests for both ASA and QF. Although I also believe the commitment required to be an airline pilot exceeds that of an ATC. I know the training for ATC is challenging and requires commitment however. "

"Many people spend $40K for their training, find the going too tough and waste all that money and time for nothing. Is all the crap you have to go through to be a pilot really worth it? Why do it when you can try for ATC and earn a very good salary "

I have friends who have been through the GA approach to Airline Stardom and I can tell you that you guys can have that..dodgy aircraft, non functioning Navaids, pressure from operators but ATC is no easier..2 years of training,sometimes 3 years in some places to be told that you are not good enough, unfortunately you have highly specialised skills that can't be transported to any other profession. In Aus you only have 1 employer and if you don't get the rating you cant take it overseas to have a try there. If you get a Commercial Pilot Licence you have a skill that can be used by numerous employers not just one. In ATC you have one chance to make it or it is a complete waste of 2 years..although you don't have to fork out $40,000.

The replies are all relevant and accurate. As an ATC I believe I have the best compromise of both worlds. I get the view and I get the diversity. I have always found ATC to be constantly challenging and I am amongst the same sort of people as pilots ( have a look at the very small difference in personality profile between the two groups in the MBI system). Have a go at ATC if you want - that leaves plenty of time to revisit the option of a career in flying. Remember even if you find you don't like it you still have it as experience on your resume'. One last comment - I have also done the civvy and military ATC routes and MIL ATC is not to be discounted. RAAF ATC are moving forward in leaps and bounds with many facets of contemporary management practices and technical and safety aspects. The diversity is definitely better than civvy ATC and the cameraderie is unequalled.

Beat me up Scotty

The days of quick access to good ATC salaries are long gone.

The current salary structure has new entrants on $28k moving to $42 for final field training, then $56k upon initial rating (after approx 18 months). Salary is then subject to 12 annual increments up to $105k ($113k in Sydney).

Proposed structure has new entrants on $28k then 4 annual increments all the way up to $49k working as an assistant/trainee until initial rating. First rated salary has been dropped to $50k and there are 11 annual increments to the maximum of $90k. A new classification "Senior ATC" is then available subject to meeting eligability criteria and availability of positions (capped at 40-60% of all ATCs) which provides access to another 4 annual increments to $105k. New entrants can only reach the top salary level after minimum 19 years!

This new classification structure is one of the primary causes of the current industrial dispute at Airservices, despite the impact being only on new employees. Airservices is devaluing the ATC career path, ripping off new entrants but hoping (in vain, this time) to get the 'yes' vote from current staff because they don't get the raw end of the deal.