Why Are Integrated FATPLs Preferred?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
homerj
No apologies needed. As for ideas all I can say is keep on getting those applications in. I don't know if BACX have an on-going recruiting policy but I believe they have taken on guys from all different levels, low houred, high houred, modular and integrated and I think they were still interviewing or certainly sim checking last week.
The observations Mideast made in his post about BMI may well have been the result of one of scrogg's letters to the airlines which openly advertised for integrated pilots from certain schools.
I think that everyone is virtually on a level playing field now and wannabes (I can never spell that correctly first time round) can choose their training method which is best suited to them and/or their pockets and neither will be advantaged or disadvantaged when aiming for that first job.
hi5
No apologies needed. As for ideas all I can say is keep on getting those applications in. I don't know if BACX have an on-going recruiting policy but I believe they have taken on guys from all different levels, low houred, high houred, modular and integrated and I think they were still interviewing or certainly sim checking last week.
The observations Mideast made in his post about BMI may well have been the result of one of scrogg's letters to the airlines which openly advertised for integrated pilots from certain schools.
I think that everyone is virtually on a level playing field now and wannabes (I can never spell that correctly first time round) can choose their training method which is best suited to them and/or their pockets and neither will be advantaged or disadvantaged when aiming for that first job.
hi5
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My decisions to go integrated were simple: yes it is more expensive but I was informed that this is what the airlines prefer.
Of course each airline has there own personal preferences, some low houred (a pitty there's not more of them
), ex-instructors, air taxi pilots, integrated, modular.. foreigners (but we won't get into that
), the list goes on. Of course there is no difference between any of these pilots but its what looks best on paper.
I would still advise any wannabes to go integrated at an approved college (Cabair, OAT etc), if it's financially possible. But get around and talk to people.. see what those people in the know have to say, that is my advice.
Of course each airline has there own personal preferences, some low houred (a pitty there's not more of them
), ex-instructors, air taxi pilots, integrated, modular.. foreigners (but we won't get into that ), the list goes on. Of course there is no difference between any of these pilots but its what looks best on paper.I would still advise any wannabes to go integrated at an approved college (Cabair, OAT etc), if it's financially possible. But get around and talk to people.. see what those people in the know have to say, that is my advice.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad_Jock
>>If the intergrated boys want to kid themselves it gets them a push start just smile and humour them<<
I actually don't think integrated students kid themselves nowadays - we all know how hard it is to get an airline job these days. If being put forward for selection by a flight training school is down to having completed an integrated course, then it's a bonus.
>>But of course they have an additional 40k loan to repay unless daddy payed it<<
Why is it a problem that anyone's parents paid for their flying training? Had your parents offered you the money I am sure you would have accepted gratefully. I've got the impression from others before that because Daddy paid for my training, I am somehow a less worthy trainee, and because I didn't spend 5 years scraping the barrel to get the money, I am obviously not as dedicated. Total Cr*p!
I chose not to go to Uni, so the money that my parents would have spent on sending me there was put towards my training.
Oh, and don't forget it could quite easily have been MUMMY paying!
>>nobody down south has the hunger for the job<<
Again a rather wide-sweeping statement. Inverness is quite a way to commute, and also very long way to relocate families. It has nothing to do with hunger for the job - more to do with personal situations.
HomerJ
>>it takes determination and hard work to go the integrated route.But it takes that bit more to go modular,wheather you like it or not.<<
Not entirely sure how you came to this conclusion. Integrated students work to a syllabus set by the school. They have X weeks to complete the groundschool before taking the exams. From the way I see it, if a modular student decides that they aren't actually ready to complete the exams, they can relatively easily delay the exams, and not suffer too many consequences, therefore making it slightly easier on themselves. Far more difficult to do when on an integrated course.
>>If the intergrated boys want to kid themselves it gets them a push start just smile and humour them<<
I actually don't think integrated students kid themselves nowadays - we all know how hard it is to get an airline job these days. If being put forward for selection by a flight training school is down to having completed an integrated course, then it's a bonus.
>>But of course they have an additional 40k loan to repay unless daddy payed it<<
Why is it a problem that anyone's parents paid for their flying training? Had your parents offered you the money I am sure you would have accepted gratefully. I've got the impression from others before that because Daddy paid for my training, I am somehow a less worthy trainee, and because I didn't spend 5 years scraping the barrel to get the money, I am obviously not as dedicated. Total Cr*p!
I chose not to go to Uni, so the money that my parents would have spent on sending me there was put towards my training.
Oh, and don't forget it could quite easily have been MUMMY paying!
>>nobody down south has the hunger for the job<<
Again a rather wide-sweeping statement. Inverness is quite a way to commute, and also very long way to relocate families. It has nothing to do with hunger for the job - more to do with personal situations.
HomerJ
>>it takes determination and hard work to go the integrated route.But it takes that bit more to go modular,wheather you like it or not.<<
Not entirely sure how you came to this conclusion. Integrated students work to a syllabus set by the school. They have X weeks to complete the groundschool before taking the exams. From the way I see it, if a modular student decides that they aren't actually ready to complete the exams, they can relatively easily delay the exams, and not suffer too many consequences, therefore making it slightly easier on themselves. Far more difficult to do when on an integrated course.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are kidding yourself. If you have it in your head that the marketing department are right so be it. And for the very few people that do get the push in the right direction after paying for intergrated good for them. But the real life figures I would guess would be in the region of 5% of current intergrated students will get that chance. So thats 1 in 20 chance gamble for 40K. And currently at the moment the ranks of Instructors are going down quite nicely. So for 35k and living for a year on instructors wages you will be far more likely to be employed.
You might find that this impression is also held by alot of recruiting departments. Remember that the license is the same whatever way you did it. Airlines are looking for proven people skills, proven work history, degree of life etc etc. Which is not something a parental sponsered intergrated student can show easly. Apart from which alot of CP's and Ops directors got to the place they are now by hard work. And if they know it or not they will tend towards the person who has had to fight against the odds, than the person who they perceive to have had an easy time of it. So a mature self funded intergrated will have a advantage over a 20's parental intergrated.
As for the comments about moving North fair enough but personally after paying out 35K plus for licenses I would have moved pretty much anywhere. All the lads i know who have made the move have now got turbine jobs. I suppose its horses for courses. You can be a unemployed pilot in the south or flying a Bae146 for 35K a year out of Inverness with BA multicrew training behind you. If your hungry enough for a job there isn't really a choice to be made. There are enough, single, qualified pilots down south with 1000hrs plus to fill a 146.
Although I must admit I wouldn't particularly like to work in the SE again in any industry but I would have if i had to, to get that first job.
MJ
PS I do know you are working as a pilot. But for the majority of wannabies my opinions hold true.
I've got the impression from others before that because Daddy paid for my training, I am somehow a less worthy trainee, and because I didn't spend 5 years scraping the barrel to get the money, I am obviously not as dedicated. Total Cr*p!
As for the comments about moving North fair enough but personally after paying out 35K plus for licenses I would have moved pretty much anywhere. All the lads i know who have made the move have now got turbine jobs. I suppose its horses for courses. You can be a unemployed pilot in the south or flying a Bae146 for 35K a year out of Inverness with BA multicrew training behind you. If your hungry enough for a job there isn't really a choice to be made. There are enough, single, qualified pilots down south with 1000hrs plus to fill a 146.
Although I must admit I wouldn't particularly like to work in the SE again in any industry but I would have if i had to, to get that first job.
MJ
PS I do know you are working as a pilot. But for the majority of wannabies my opinions hold true.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Haywards Heath
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"And as for BA city express they will take any hairy arsed pilot who is willing to live in inverness."
There have been many references to getting employment on the Bae 146 at Inverness with BACX in this thread and others recently. I spoke to the INV base manager last week in LGW and he informs me that pilots without previous commercial turboprop experience have never been taken directly on to this fleet before and are unlikely to be in the future. Indeed, two available positions recently in INV have been filled with internal BACX pilots from other bases. Neither does the job pay as much as £35k unless one has several years service for BACX.
Having been involved in the recruitment process with a BA flag-carrying franchise some years ago, both CAP509 (integrated) and self-improver applicants were given equal opportunity for interview. Both have pros and cons when it comes to being trained in an airline environment. To imply that the integrated route is an expensive mistake is simply untrue; my experience has shown that many QFIs (NB not all) are much more hard work to teach an airline's techniques to than integrated students. The buffer of pride seems to get in the way. In comparison, CAP509 (integrated) students have been at times a little more unsure/nervous when compared to their self-improver counterparts, but can be taught more easily. All personal opinion based on personal experience - there is certainly no hard and fast expectancy on either "form" of candidate.
Your recent post Mad Jock re comparing a FI and an integrated student in a simulator being laughable certainly was for me a few years ago, though perhaps not with the result you imply. I watched a 2500hr QFI and a 250hr CAP509 student fly back to back in a sim during selection procedure. It was the QFI who left the gear down throughout the flight in the B747 generic sim and the CAP509 (integrated these days) who got the job.
Me? Self-improver.
"And if they know it or not they will tend towards the person who has had to fight against the odds, than the person who they perceive to have had an easy time of it. So a mature self funded intergrated will have a advantage over a 20's parental intergrated."
I am 99% sure you have never been invloved in pilot recruitment before MJ, as this comment is laughably untrue, and misleading to those who are just embarking on their careers.
There have been many references to getting employment on the Bae 146 at Inverness with BACX in this thread and others recently. I spoke to the INV base manager last week in LGW and he informs me that pilots without previous commercial turboprop experience have never been taken directly on to this fleet before and are unlikely to be in the future. Indeed, two available positions recently in INV have been filled with internal BACX pilots from other bases. Neither does the job pay as much as £35k unless one has several years service for BACX.
Having been involved in the recruitment process with a BA flag-carrying franchise some years ago, both CAP509 (integrated) and self-improver applicants were given equal opportunity for interview. Both have pros and cons when it comes to being trained in an airline environment. To imply that the integrated route is an expensive mistake is simply untrue; my experience has shown that many QFIs (NB not all) are much more hard work to teach an airline's techniques to than integrated students. The buffer of pride seems to get in the way. In comparison, CAP509 (integrated) students have been at times a little more unsure/nervous when compared to their self-improver counterparts, but can be taught more easily. All personal opinion based on personal experience - there is certainly no hard and fast expectancy on either "form" of candidate.
Your recent post Mad Jock re comparing a FI and an integrated student in a simulator being laughable certainly was for me a few years ago, though perhaps not with the result you imply. I watched a 2500hr QFI and a 250hr CAP509 student fly back to back in a sim during selection procedure. It was the QFI who left the gear down throughout the flight in the B747 generic sim and the CAP509 (integrated these days) who got the job.
Me? Self-improver.
"And if they know it or not they will tend towards the person who has had to fight against the odds, than the person who they perceive to have had an easy time of it. So a mature self funded intergrated will have a advantage over a 20's parental intergrated."
I am 99% sure you have never been invloved in pilot recruitment before MJ, as this comment is laughably untrue, and misleading to those who are just embarking on their careers.
Last edited by Ojuka; 29th Jun 2004 at 18:15.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we all need to sit back and take a deep breath. It is Wannabes and flying school marketing departments who think that fully integrated students stand a better chance of employment.
Yes indeed, some airlines express a preference for such students. Many have it in their advertising literature just because it was there many years ago and has not been changed, or they really don't understand how things have changed post JAR.
I personally think it makes little difference. Sure, some integrated students get put forward if an airline approaches a particular school where they did an integrated course. Obviosly that 'big' school are going to put their 'expensive' students forward to be able to use the marketing opportunity for selling more 'big' courses. Many integrated students finish 'at the wrong time' and get no such assistance.
Where do I get my opinion that it doesn't make much difference form then? Well, over the last 18 months I have had the pleasure of meeting many, many qualified pilots looking for either their first break or to move on up the ladder. Out of all of those who were looking for their first break I would say that approximately 2/3 were 'modular' and the others 'integrated'. I reckon the numbers of each that got their first break were a similar ratio to their 'training background'. Hence I don't think (job prospects wise) it makes that much difference which route you took to get the licence.
Incidently, out of those who were not being successful with their applications, the vast majority were not improving themselves in aviation terms. Many have now gone on to instructor jobs or air taxi etc in a realisation that if they did not get more hours they would be in the same position a year or two later; still no more desirable to an airline. These chaps (and a couple of chapesses) came again, from both forms of training. What I would suggest is that having to fork out another £5k for an instructor rating was perhaps less palatable to the 'Integrated' pilot, for understandable reasons. I think the 'Modular' pilots were banking on having to do it, some perhaps avoiding it unless they had to.
So there you go, don't get quite so wrapped up in 'this is what the airlines want', because in my experience they want the person and sure, some are biased toward one training route (wrongly so IMHO), but keep plugging away and netwrok like mad, because a word in the right ear WILL open doors.
Oh and while we're on about it, don't take adverts and websites as gospel, they're often out of date or incorrect and the goalposts can move very quickly in the aviation recruitment departments. Use a bit of common sense, don't think you will get into Virgin Atlantic with 200hrs, but don't believe the Britannia website when it says 'type rated only', that's just one example, there are numerous others, including BACE and their current requirement....................
Good luck
PP
Yes indeed, some airlines express a preference for such students. Many have it in their advertising literature just because it was there many years ago and has not been changed, or they really don't understand how things have changed post JAR.
I personally think it makes little difference. Sure, some integrated students get put forward if an airline approaches a particular school where they did an integrated course. Obviosly that 'big' school are going to put their 'expensive' students forward to be able to use the marketing opportunity for selling more 'big' courses. Many integrated students finish 'at the wrong time' and get no such assistance.
Where do I get my opinion that it doesn't make much difference form then? Well, over the last 18 months I have had the pleasure of meeting many, many qualified pilots looking for either their first break or to move on up the ladder. Out of all of those who were looking for their first break I would say that approximately 2/3 were 'modular' and the others 'integrated'. I reckon the numbers of each that got their first break were a similar ratio to their 'training background'. Hence I don't think (job prospects wise) it makes that much difference which route you took to get the licence.
Incidently, out of those who were not being successful with their applications, the vast majority were not improving themselves in aviation terms. Many have now gone on to instructor jobs or air taxi etc in a realisation that if they did not get more hours they would be in the same position a year or two later; still no more desirable to an airline. These chaps (and a couple of chapesses) came again, from both forms of training. What I would suggest is that having to fork out another £5k for an instructor rating was perhaps less palatable to the 'Integrated' pilot, for understandable reasons. I think the 'Modular' pilots were banking on having to do it, some perhaps avoiding it unless they had to.
So there you go, don't get quite so wrapped up in 'this is what the airlines want', because in my experience they want the person and sure, some are biased toward one training route (wrongly so IMHO), but keep plugging away and netwrok like mad, because a word in the right ear WILL open doors.
Oh and while we're on about it, don't take adverts and websites as gospel, they're often out of date or incorrect and the goalposts can move very quickly in the aviation recruitment departments. Use a bit of common sense, don't think you will get into Virgin Atlantic with 200hrs, but don't believe the Britannia website when it says 'type rated only', that's just one example, there are numerous others, including BACE and their current requirement....................
Good luck
PP
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete's absolutely right. Unfortunately, there are still a few around in airline recruiting departments who hold the same misconceptions as Ojuka appears to - that integrated is equivalent to CAP509, and modular students are equivalent to the old self-improvers. It's taking some time to get it through to them that not only do they hold the same qualification (CPL/IR/MCC), but that they jumped through exactly the same hoops to get there - which was not the case in the old days. Hopefully we'll get there in the end....
Scroggs
Scroggs
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Haywards Heath
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I stand corrected Scroggs. Would it be correct to assume that an integrated course is generally conducted at colleges of time proven high training standards (in the opinion of JAA/CAA), and that modular can be conducted at schools of the candidate's choice (whether excellent or poor)?
ie the OATS vs Portakabin School.
Pardon my extreme examples, but I am trying to find the differentiation.
Can't the 52 week course still only be referred to as integrated? In which case this replicates CAP509 to all intents and purposes.
As you have already read, I bear no preference to either avenue of training. I learned at a portakabin school. An idiot's guide explanation to the new choices would be appreciated.
To contradict one line in your post, CAP509 and self-improvers always did hold the same qualification, ie CPL/IR with frozen ATPL.
ie the OATS vs Portakabin School.
Pardon my extreme examples, but I am trying to find the differentiation.
Can't the 52 week course still only be referred to as integrated? In which case this replicates CAP509 to all intents and purposes.
As you have already read, I bear no preference to either avenue of training. I learned at a portakabin school. An idiot's guide explanation to the new choices would be appreciated.
To contradict one line in your post, CAP509 and self-improvers always did hold the same qualification, ie CPL/IR with frozen ATPL.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>Remember that the license is the same whatever way you did it<<
>>they will tend towards the person who has had to fight against the odds, than the person who they perceive to have had an easy time of it<<
Slightly contradicting yourself there.....
And I'd have to completely disagree that I had an easy time of it, and someone on a modular course had to fight against the odds. There are jobs out there today that pay an absolute fortune for reasonably little experience or hard work. So a modular student could quite easily have spent three years in a job that they actually liked, earning a decent salary, and were 'easily' able to then pay for the training.
(And before I get my head bitten off, I know that some have spent years scraping together the money. But whilst it's wrong to assume that someone who had Daddy pay for them is any less dedicated, it's also wrong to assume that all modular students had a really tough time of it).
However anyone gets to the training school should make no difference. Yes, I went straight from school with Daddy's help, but (and without wanting to sound big-headed in anyway) I'm pretty confident that my "people skills" are a lot higher than some who have a "proven work history and degree of life".
>>they will tend towards the person who has had to fight against the odds, than the person who they perceive to have had an easy time of it<<
Slightly contradicting yourself there.....
And I'd have to completely disagree that I had an easy time of it, and someone on a modular course had to fight against the odds. There are jobs out there today that pay an absolute fortune for reasonably little experience or hard work. So a modular student could quite easily have spent three years in a job that they actually liked, earning a decent salary, and were 'easily' able to then pay for the training.
(And before I get my head bitten off, I know that some have spent years scraping together the money. But whilst it's wrong to assume that someone who had Daddy pay for them is any less dedicated, it's also wrong to assume that all modular students had a really tough time of it).
However anyone gets to the training school should make no difference. Yes, I went straight from school with Daddy's help, but (and without wanting to sound big-headed in anyway) I'm pretty confident that my "people skills" are a lot higher than some who have a "proven work history and degree of life".
Guest
Posts: n/a
Having thought about this a little more I think gross generalisations are unhelpful. Also, saying that the standard of training is the same at any FTO because the license is the same is not logically valid. All the license means is that you have acheived a minimum standard. It is therefore conceivable that some may have been trained to a higher or more appropriate standard. I wouldn't for a minute think that a modular course could not acheive this but the individual is probably the key factor in such a case. I think it is reasonable to assume, should an assumption be helpful way of recruiting, that the modal level of achievement is higher in a structured modular or integrated environment...as it would probably be in any learning process.
However, I have no problem funding my course but it is a slog. No holiday, flying or training nearly every weekend, studying every day, a demanding employer and still having a happy wife and children. Something had to give and it will be that the training will take me about 2 years end-to-end now (rather than the envisaged 18 months).
Anybody who thinks that somehow other people find this commitment easy (full or part time, integrated or modular) must be bonkers...IMHO.
However, I have no problem funding my course but it is a slog. No holiday, flying or training nearly every weekend, studying every day, a demanding employer and still having a happy wife and children. Something had to give and it will be that the training will take me about 2 years end-to-end now (rather than the envisaged 18 months).
Anybody who thinks that somehow other people find this commitment easy (full or part time, integrated or modular) must be bonkers...IMHO.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love this topic, it's always a good read and always seems to attract the same people in the same corner of the boxing ring (e.g. madjock), no offence MJ. 
I am integrated (still....yawn) at Oxford on the APP. I chose to do it because I don't think I would have the discipline to study all that cr*p at home as I am too easily distracted , pub today work tomorrow. I did that for my PPL and managed it but thought I would do the integrated route for the ATPL based on.
1. More hours on the APP.
2. The "hope" that Oxford will be more committed to placing me above a modular student. (sorry to say it, time will tell) Even though know many modular students I have met who are in my opinion definitely better pilots than me.
3. As mentioned some airlines, when low hours are on selection may prefer integrated. (rightly or wrongly) I am not saying it's right. As some say it's an old trait that has carried itself through though if that was the case I know what side of the line I would rather be on.
And that's about it. And as MJ says the price I pay for the above is significantly more than doing the modular route but it's my choice.
Given the choice again would I still chose Integrated APP ??
Now that I cant answer until I see what Oxford will do for me when my course is finished. However on the flying side of things if you do modular at e.g. Oxford all your ground school is the same (so no diff) the instructors for GS and flying are the same, and if you do everything at the same school as modular I don't see any difference in the quality produced at the end (maybe a few less oxford instructor hours). I think you come out in effect an integrated student that did all the training under the same roof same instructors same everything as the integrated student. I think the argument by airlines is when people segment their training, a bit here, a bit there etc etc.
I suppose someone could say you get the first-officer course on the APP too, but really I think that's more beneficial for people who dont have much "life experience". Sorry if that sounds rude but diplomacy and knowing when to speak up and shut up yes they are important and the course was a laugh but I think the people who would take "more" from it are those mentioned above. If the airlines would like ti that you a did a 2 week FOF course... who knows ?
No offence to anyone
Flystudent
I am integrated (still....yawn) at Oxford on the APP. I chose to do it because I don't think I would have the discipline to study all that cr*p at home as I am too easily distracted , pub today work tomorrow. I did that for my PPL and managed it but thought I would do the integrated route for the ATPL based on.
1. More hours on the APP.
2. The "hope" that Oxford will be more committed to placing me above a modular student. (sorry to say it, time will tell) Even though know many modular students I have met who are in my opinion definitely better pilots than me.
3. As mentioned some airlines, when low hours are on selection may prefer integrated. (rightly or wrongly) I am not saying it's right. As some say it's an old trait that has carried itself through though if that was the case I know what side of the line I would rather be on.
And that's about it. And as MJ says the price I pay for the above is significantly more than doing the modular route but it's my choice.
Given the choice again would I still chose Integrated APP ??
Now that I cant answer until I see what Oxford will do for me when my course is finished. However on the flying side of things if you do modular at e.g. Oxford all your ground school is the same (so no diff) the instructors for GS and flying are the same, and if you do everything at the same school as modular I don't see any difference in the quality produced at the end (maybe a few less oxford instructor hours). I think you come out in effect an integrated student that did all the training under the same roof same instructors same everything as the integrated student. I think the argument by airlines is when people segment their training, a bit here, a bit there etc etc.
I suppose someone could say you get the first-officer course on the APP too, but really I think that's more beneficial for people who dont have much "life experience". Sorry if that sounds rude but diplomacy and knowing when to speak up and shut up yes they are important and the course was a laugh but I think the people who would take "more" from it are those mentioned above. If the airlines would like ti that you a did a 2 week FOF course... who knows ?
No offence to anyone
Flystudent
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ojuka sorry, I missed your post!
The change to the modular/integrated system was an attempt to eradicate the perceived quality differences between the CAP509 and self-improver students, where (in the case of the self improver) formal courses could be substituted by extra time in the air - with all the ramifications of developing bad habits while gaining experience of possibly limited value. Yes, the final qualification was the same, but the method of obtaining it was very different.
Both the modular and integrated student must undergo each element of their course with a recognised and approved school. There is no substitution of formal training by hour-building. The modular student does have the option of completing each element of the training at different schools (most commonly separating ground and flying portions of the course) or, alternatively, of taking a training break between elements of the course. This caters for those who may need to continue to earn a living while training. Both integrated and modular students can complete the entire course in around 16 months, and will have a similar number of flying hours at the end. The main significant difference is that the integrated student will have completed all elements of the course at the same school, and will have been resident at the school throughout the course - and will have paid dearly for the privilege!
There is a great deal more regulatory supervision of the training than there used to be, which helps to ensure standards, and it's generally true to say that there is little discernable difference between a modular and an integrated graduate - except for their levels of debt!
Hope this clarifies things a little (though I've no doubt those currently training can fill it out a bit more).
Scroggs
The change to the modular/integrated system was an attempt to eradicate the perceived quality differences between the CAP509 and self-improver students, where (in the case of the self improver) formal courses could be substituted by extra time in the air - with all the ramifications of developing bad habits while gaining experience of possibly limited value. Yes, the final qualification was the same, but the method of obtaining it was very different.
Both the modular and integrated student must undergo each element of their course with a recognised and approved school. There is no substitution of formal training by hour-building. The modular student does have the option of completing each element of the training at different schools (most commonly separating ground and flying portions of the course) or, alternatively, of taking a training break between elements of the course. This caters for those who may need to continue to earn a living while training. Both integrated and modular students can complete the entire course in around 16 months, and will have a similar number of flying hours at the end. The main significant difference is that the integrated student will have completed all elements of the course at the same school, and will have been resident at the school throughout the course - and will have paid dearly for the privilege!
There is a great deal more regulatory supervision of the training than there used to be, which helps to ensure standards, and it's generally true to say that there is little discernable difference between a modular and an integrated graduate - except for their levels of debt!
Hope this clarifies things a little (though I've no doubt those currently training can fill it out a bit more).
Scroggs
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Haywards Heath
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think the argument by airlines is when people segment their training, a bit here, a bit there etc etc."
Correct!
"saying that the standard of training is the same at any FTO because the license is the same is not logically valid."
Correct!
Here lies the DIFFERENCE, perceived as however small, between INTEGRATED and MODULAR courses as far as some employers are concerned.
Correct!
"saying that the standard of training is the same at any FTO because the license is the same is not logically valid."
Correct!
Here lies the DIFFERENCE, perceived as however small, between INTEGRATED and MODULAR courses as far as some employers are concerned.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"saying that the standard of training is the same at any FTO because the license is the same is not logically valid."
PP
