New Sponsorship (ish) scheme OAT
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My, this argument has become interesting!
There are a lot of factors at work here, and this scheme is designed to attract those who like 'ready-made' solutions, regardless of cost. Nothing wrong with that per se; that's why restaurants exist, and goodness-knows how many other services that present you with a turnkey product. That's certainly the appeal for TCX - and they get the additional guarantee that OAT's reputation relies on the product (the student) being acceptable.
As a way of getting into a jet airline, and bypassing all that tedious job-searching, air taxi and turboprop time, this is as good as they come. However, you do need to seriously think about how you will feel in a few years' time when the ex-modular guy beside you at check-in is earning considerably more money and has less debt. You may well say, "Who cares, I'm flying a jet now and that's all I wanted, whatever the cost." Well, it may seem worth it at this end of the process, but you'll have a long time to regret not maximising your earnings potential! Whatever you feel about it now, you will come to see flying as just a job, and the practical day-to-day considerations of how you pay the mortgage, keep the wife/kids/girlfriend happy, repair the car and put food on the table will assume far greater importance than whether you cruise at 200kts or Mach 0.855. Believe it.
Now, to the other aspect of the arguments above. The future of flying training is still being decided by the market, but the days of the unselected, self-sponsored pilot are surely limited. How limited I don't know, but if airlines see the standard of new hires dropping (or there becomes a perception that that is the case, whatever the reality), they will have to do something about it, and the likely course of action will be to progress to pre-selected students from courses such as this OAT one or the CTC Wings course.
If aviation continues to expand, as it seems highly likely to (fuel sources allowing), airlines will need to look to a more structured training industry with a more standardised, high-quality output. Courses like this one and CTC's are the first steps towards this, and I believe they will become the norm (though with a different structure) in the future.
That is not to say that they are necessarily the right way ahead for an individual while options exist. I suggest that for the majority of you, modular courses taken full-time and consecutively to completion would be a better value-for-money solution. and that is likely to remain the case for some time to come.
Scroggs
There are a lot of factors at work here, and this scheme is designed to attract those who like 'ready-made' solutions, regardless of cost. Nothing wrong with that per se; that's why restaurants exist, and goodness-knows how many other services that present you with a turnkey product. That's certainly the appeal for TCX - and they get the additional guarantee that OAT's reputation relies on the product (the student) being acceptable.
As a way of getting into a jet airline, and bypassing all that tedious job-searching, air taxi and turboprop time, this is as good as they come. However, you do need to seriously think about how you will feel in a few years' time when the ex-modular guy beside you at check-in is earning considerably more money and has less debt. You may well say, "Who cares, I'm flying a jet now and that's all I wanted, whatever the cost." Well, it may seem worth it at this end of the process, but you'll have a long time to regret not maximising your earnings potential! Whatever you feel about it now, you will come to see flying as just a job, and the practical day-to-day considerations of how you pay the mortgage, keep the wife/kids/girlfriend happy, repair the car and put food on the table will assume far greater importance than whether you cruise at 200kts or Mach 0.855. Believe it.
Now, to the other aspect of the arguments above. The future of flying training is still being decided by the market, but the days of the unselected, self-sponsored pilot are surely limited. How limited I don't know, but if airlines see the standard of new hires dropping (or there becomes a perception that that is the case, whatever the reality), they will have to do something about it, and the likely course of action will be to progress to pre-selected students from courses such as this OAT one or the CTC Wings course.
If aviation continues to expand, as it seems highly likely to (fuel sources allowing), airlines will need to look to a more structured training industry with a more standardised, high-quality output. Courses like this one and CTC's are the first steps towards this, and I believe they will become the norm (though with a different structure) in the future.
That is not to say that they are necessarily the right way ahead for an individual while options exist. I suggest that for the majority of you, modular courses taken full-time and consecutively to completion would be a better value-for-money solution. and that is likely to remain the case for some time to come.
Scroggs
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to illustrate the point re: tax relief I've come up with a simple scenario comparison:
Scenario 1: Borrow £30000 at 6.75% (HSBC rate) and repay from full FO salary over 7 years.
Scenario 2: Borrow £60000 at 6.75% and repay from reduced cadet FO salary and £1000 tax free payment over 7 years.
Result:
Scenario 1: Total repayment = £37280, total take home after tax = £209,200.
Total take home after repayments = £171,920.
Scenario 2: Total repayment = £74560, total take home after tax = £232,600.
Total take home after repayments = £158,040.
Implication: Scenario 2 is more expensive than Scenario 1 by approx. £13,880.
Notes:
1) TCX salary scales from http://www.thomascookjobs.com used for comparison between 'cadet' and 'non-cadet' scales.
2) Constant interest rate used. Increased interest rate will make scenario 2 more expensive still.
Obviously Scenario 1 is intended to illustrate a modular route and Scenario 2 intended to illustrate the CTC/OAT schemes. At one time the CTC scheme 'partners' contributed an extra £5000 for the training year towards living expenses, which would also obviously reduce the effective extra cost of this route. I'm not sure whether this is still the case. So, to me the question is whether the conditional job offer is worth sacrificing an extra ~£14000 over the first 7 years of your career.
Other things I haven't taken into account:
1) Pension. Obviously on a reduced salary the company get to make less of a contribution to your defined contribution pension. In my case this would amount to approx £1000 a year less in my pension pot.
2) Promotion. You will notice from the TCX website that there is a single cadet salary scale, with no difference between FO and SFO. That means that when you unfreeze your ATPL you get no extra money, but continue to move, year on year, up the cadet scale. An equivalent 'non-cadet' would move to year 1 SFO effectively bypassing 1 year or so (depending on how long it takes to get the ATPL) of the FO salary scale.
I'm sure there's more, but beyond the scope of this intentionally simple comparison.
Scenario 1: Borrow £30000 at 6.75% (HSBC rate) and repay from full FO salary over 7 years.
Scenario 2: Borrow £60000 at 6.75% and repay from reduced cadet FO salary and £1000 tax free payment over 7 years.
Result:
Scenario 1: Total repayment = £37280, total take home after tax = £209,200.
Total take home after repayments = £171,920.
Scenario 2: Total repayment = £74560, total take home after tax = £232,600.
Total take home after repayments = £158,040.
Implication: Scenario 2 is more expensive than Scenario 1 by approx. £13,880.
Notes:
1) TCX salary scales from http://www.thomascookjobs.com used for comparison between 'cadet' and 'non-cadet' scales.
2) Constant interest rate used. Increased interest rate will make scenario 2 more expensive still.
Obviously Scenario 1 is intended to illustrate a modular route and Scenario 2 intended to illustrate the CTC/OAT schemes. At one time the CTC scheme 'partners' contributed an extra £5000 for the training year towards living expenses, which would also obviously reduce the effective extra cost of this route. I'm not sure whether this is still the case. So, to me the question is whether the conditional job offer is worth sacrificing an extra ~£14000 over the first 7 years of your career.
Other things I haven't taken into account:
1) Pension. Obviously on a reduced salary the company get to make less of a contribution to your defined contribution pension. In my case this would amount to approx £1000 a year less in my pension pot.
2) Promotion. You will notice from the TCX website that there is a single cadet salary scale, with no difference between FO and SFO. That means that when you unfreeze your ATPL you get no extra money, but continue to move, year on year, up the cadet scale. An equivalent 'non-cadet' would move to year 1 SFO effectively bypassing 1 year or so (depending on how long it takes to get the ATPL) of the FO salary scale.
I'm sure there's more, but beyond the scope of this intentionally simple comparison.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: india
Age: 43
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oxford aviation
Originally Posted by bishop99
Oxford have teamed with TCA to produce a sponsorship (ish) scheme. (you will see what i mean once you have read the page on:
www.oxfordaviation.net
This shows that airlines do like OAT for their quality training, and are willing to take the Financial risk with them!!!
Good luck to all who try!
www.oxfordaviation.net
This shows that airlines do like OAT for their quality training, and are willing to take the Financial risk with them!!!
Good luck to all who try!
thank you very much .......
i have applied for this ....thanks for the information.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North West, UK
Age: 56
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This shows that airlines do like OAT for their quality training, and are willing to take the Financial risk with them!!!
It took about 5 years from beginning to end whilst still working full time earning around £20,000 - £30,000 a year.
I cannot believe why anyone would get involved with a £60,000 loan with NO guarantee of a job. Its crazy.
Scroggs, I totally agree with you on this one.
This shows that airlines do like OAT for their quality training.
The drums are beginning to sound. Many within the industry are not of the same opinion.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scroggs
Whatever you feel about it now, you will come to see flying as just a job, and the practical day-to-day considerations of how you pay the mortgage, keep the wife/kids/girlfriend happy, repair the car and put food on the table will assume far greater importance than whether you cruise at 200kts or Mach 0.855. Believe it.
Scroggs
Scroggs
You should carve that on a stone tablet and hang it at the entrance to wannabes.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGCC,
With all due respect, why would anyone necessarily want to spend 5 years and £35,000 going modular with no guarantee of a job at the end of it either?
You could have a PhD/Msc or MBA for less than the cost of going modular and in almost half the number of years. That might also not be everyones cup of tea, but given an fATPL and no job is about as useful as tits on a bull anyway everyone is in the same boat.
One of the prime arguments against this scheme seems to be a potential for lack of recruiting and/or substantial job losses in 5-10 years. If that is to occur, having done a one year intergrated "career-break", blasting yourself 60K into debt followed by a return to the work force if it all goes wrong might not be such a silly idea. A lot can happen in 5 years after all.
I wouldn't throw £35,000 or £60,000 into either, considering there are no hard statistics on employment potential, increasing political and environmental pressures on aviation, not less that most market booms (such as aviation is seeing) generally experience similar sized downturns.
At the same time, there is very little else out there in the way of schemes that offer even a conditional guarantee of employment and such easy access to finance. I'm sure anyone even considering an ATPL will have some kind of financial reserve so for just how many is this scheme actually going to put them 60k in debt?
With all due respect, why would anyone necessarily want to spend 5 years and £35,000 going modular with no guarantee of a job at the end of it either?
You could have a PhD/Msc or MBA for less than the cost of going modular and in almost half the number of years. That might also not be everyones cup of tea, but given an fATPL and no job is about as useful as tits on a bull anyway everyone is in the same boat.
One of the prime arguments against this scheme seems to be a potential for lack of recruiting and/or substantial job losses in 5-10 years. If that is to occur, having done a one year intergrated "career-break", blasting yourself 60K into debt followed by a return to the work force if it all goes wrong might not be such a silly idea. A lot can happen in 5 years after all.
I wouldn't throw £35,000 or £60,000 into either, considering there are no hard statistics on employment potential, increasing political and environmental pressures on aviation, not less that most market booms (such as aviation is seeing) generally experience similar sized downturns.
At the same time, there is very little else out there in the way of schemes that offer even a conditional guarantee of employment and such easy access to finance. I'm sure anyone even considering an ATPL will have some kind of financial reserve so for just how many is this scheme actually going to put them 60k in debt?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: England
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys,
Just reading some of the posts on this forum and I thought I would add my own thoughts.
I went through the CTC scheme, and yes there are some downsides e.g. less paid into your pension, but I simply cannot complain. I am 26 and sitting in the right hand seat of a 757 with 500 hours and having a great time.
I agree over the 7 year period I may be £14000 down compared to a modular guy, but I choose the sponsored route for some good reasons.
1. At least through a decent selection scheme like CTC's you will be told whether or not you are good enough to make it as a commercial pilot.
2. There is a lot of hastle with arranging all your own training - and if you chose the wrong training provider your training maybe of a diminshed quality, and a prospective employer may frown on not using a reptible organisation.
3. Going along the modular route you have no guarantee of a job at the end of the training. I know guys who started training the same time as me (2 years ago) and whereas I am now happily flying they are still looking for jobs - with interest on their loans increasing all the time.
4.Coming from a self improver background - modular - you are more likely to get a turbo prop job than a jet job. Through CTC you are almost 99.9% guaranteed to get a jet job with an airline as long as you pass the training.
5. All the hastle of organising the training is taken away from you, and you are given a sense of security with a sponsored agreement as opposed to a feeling of very much being on your own through a modular training course. There is a great deal of support from a sponsoring training company.
6. Sponsored schemes are generally more accelerated. I.e. I was sitting in the right hand seat of the 757 after only 20 months of training - and as I went through the CTC scheme this inlcuded many more hours training than the minimum required by the CAA (which is generally what modular guys have at the end of their training).
I have to add that these are only some of the plus points and I could go on and on. So from where I am now sitting a £14000 difference over the 7 years is more than worth it. Trust me. If I had to do it all over again I wouldnt change a thing. The choice is obviously yours so dont let my experience sway your decision in anyway. But I thought I would counter some of the negative arguments already posted.
Safe flying guys and best of luck. I hope you all make it.
Just reading some of the posts on this forum and I thought I would add my own thoughts.
I went through the CTC scheme, and yes there are some downsides e.g. less paid into your pension, but I simply cannot complain. I am 26 and sitting in the right hand seat of a 757 with 500 hours and having a great time.
I agree over the 7 year period I may be £14000 down compared to a modular guy, but I choose the sponsored route for some good reasons.
1. At least through a decent selection scheme like CTC's you will be told whether or not you are good enough to make it as a commercial pilot.
2. There is a lot of hastle with arranging all your own training - and if you chose the wrong training provider your training maybe of a diminshed quality, and a prospective employer may frown on not using a reptible organisation.
3. Going along the modular route you have no guarantee of a job at the end of the training. I know guys who started training the same time as me (2 years ago) and whereas I am now happily flying they are still looking for jobs - with interest on their loans increasing all the time.
4.Coming from a self improver background - modular - you are more likely to get a turbo prop job than a jet job. Through CTC you are almost 99.9% guaranteed to get a jet job with an airline as long as you pass the training.
5. All the hastle of organising the training is taken away from you, and you are given a sense of security with a sponsored agreement as opposed to a feeling of very much being on your own through a modular training course. There is a great deal of support from a sponsoring training company.
6. Sponsored schemes are generally more accelerated. I.e. I was sitting in the right hand seat of the 757 after only 20 months of training - and as I went through the CTC scheme this inlcuded many more hours training than the minimum required by the CAA (which is generally what modular guys have at the end of their training).
I have to add that these are only some of the plus points and I could go on and on. So from where I am now sitting a £14000 difference over the 7 years is more than worth it. Trust me. If I had to do it all over again I wouldnt change a thing. The choice is obviously yours so dont let my experience sway your decision in anyway. But I thought I would counter some of the negative arguments already posted.
Safe flying guys and best of luck. I hope you all make it.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: A place where something is or could be located; a site.
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MBA,
Some very interesting and good points. It seems that you have chosen a route which is suited to you.
However, you seem to be comparing yourself to a modular student. I thought the CTC scheme was modular in NZ? It appears that you have paid 14k for a contiational job offer. If you think its worth it, then like I say, it was the right move for you. I personally would rather keep the deposit on a house.
Having said that, the CTC scheme (which is NOT sponsorship - you'll find your name on the loan agreement) is by far the best of its kind. This is mainly due to the fact that it's cheaper as it is modular. Last I saw was a loan of 50k covered it all (it may well be more now) compared to 60k plus 4k plus around 10 to 15k food and accomodation on the OAT scheme.
Basically, you got a better deal on a better scheme, perhaps 20k to 30k cheaper than this OAT/TCX scheme. Add the 14k you feel you lost out on compared to self-selected modular and it makes me shiver.
EK
Some very interesting and good points. It seems that you have chosen a route which is suited to you.
However, you seem to be comparing yourself to a modular student. I thought the CTC scheme was modular in NZ? It appears that you have paid 14k for a contiational job offer. If you think its worth it, then like I say, it was the right move for you. I personally would rather keep the deposit on a house.
Having said that, the CTC scheme (which is NOT sponsorship - you'll find your name on the loan agreement) is by far the best of its kind. This is mainly due to the fact that it's cheaper as it is modular. Last I saw was a loan of 50k covered it all (it may well be more now) compared to 60k plus 4k plus around 10 to 15k food and accomodation on the OAT scheme.
Basically, you got a better deal on a better scheme, perhaps 20k to 30k cheaper than this OAT/TCX scheme. Add the 14k you feel you lost out on compared to self-selected modular and it makes me shiver.
EK
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My previous post was just intended to show some facts, but I am of a similar opinion to MBA. I came through the CTC scheme a year after September 11th, when things weren't as rosy as they appear to be now, and with the 5 grand living expenses I'm worse off by about 9 grand compared to a modular student. For me, the conditional job offer from the sponsor airline, confidence from having passed a rigorous selection procedure and 30 grand money back if you flunk meant that keeping my nervous system in check for the year's training was probably, for me, worth the extra expense. I would not have been able to put myself through the same without the support I received from both CTC and my airline during that period. I appreciate that not everyone is the same in this respect.
The point that keeps coming up about CTC being a modular course is irrelevant. It has some implications for the way hours are logged and hour requirements for licence issue, but that is it. The 'bond' was never as low as £50000, it started at £60000 and I believe now there is a supplement to be payed if you are starting ab-initio, for the PPL phase. This puts the total basic cost at a level very similar to the OAT TCX scheme, excluding the issue about accomodation/travel costs.
The point that keeps coming up about CTC being a modular course is irrelevant. It has some implications for the way hours are logged and hour requirements for licence issue, but that is it. The 'bond' was never as low as £50000, it started at £60000 and I believe now there is a supplement to be payed if you are starting ab-initio, for the PPL phase. This puts the total basic cost at a level very similar to the OAT TCX scheme, excluding the issue about accomodation/travel costs.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I applied to the Thomas Cook sponsorship and, surprise surprise, I have been invited to the selection process.
If I have been invited (little flying experience, non perfect age for a cadet (over 27) , non-British passport, average education) then I am pretty sure everybody else will. The screening is so superficial that I'm sure whoever meets the legal minimum requirement will go through.
I don't think I want to spend 200 quid + travel + accomodation + time off work for this.. but I'll think about it. Honestly, if it wasn't for the huge fee, I'd give it a go. The 757 rating at the end of it makes it very interesting.
Incidentally, I have been invited to the NATS selection too.. and it's free, plus they refund your travel expenses. Goes to show that recruitment can be done without taking advantage of people's dreams and ambitions !
regards
If I have been invited (little flying experience, non perfect age for a cadet (over 27) , non-British passport, average education) then I am pretty sure everybody else will. The screening is so superficial that I'm sure whoever meets the legal minimum requirement will go through.
I don't think I want to spend 200 quid + travel + accomodation + time off work for this.. but I'll think about it. Honestly, if it wasn't for the huge fee, I'd give it a go. The 757 rating at the end of it makes it very interesting.
Incidentally, I have been invited to the NATS selection too.. and it's free, plus they refund your travel expenses. Goes to show that recruitment can be done without taking advantage of people's dreams and ambitions !
regards
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You lot really haven't worked it out yet have you?
Everyone will be able to spend 200 quid on the assesment day. Its part of the marketing plan. There is nothing on the assesment day apart from a bit of food which isn't already covered by the fixed costs of the school being open that day. Its almost pure profit. It also has a huge amount of marketing bull****e, if you make punters think they are having to be better than everyone else to "earn" a place on a course they are going to think that the course which they are going to spend there money on is better than everyone elses.
The Uni's learn't this about 10 years ago which was why all of a sudden they all started having interviews. The harder you work the student in the interview and the fact you only give them a conditional makes them believe that the course at xxx is better than yyy just because yyy gives then an uncondional with no interview.
There is only proberly about 5 chances of a job going (please note the word chance!!! ) There will be upwards of 100+ people applying. 20 grand easy money!!!!!!, Out of the 95+ that did apply and didn't get chosen proberly 10-20 will get conned into going self sponsered anyway.
Being a cynical git make sure you don't take your parents with you to the assesment day. When asked what do you parents do answer "my father is a bin man and my mother cleans for the council" I suspect there will be a bit of well if they don't get it they will do the course anyway if you answer my father is a broker and my mummy a GP. Thats another seat filled. If they think you can't afford it and you won't be coming if you don't get the tick you might have a different reply.
The whole thing is just a huge marketing ploy to get students and parents through the door on a promise. Once through the door then the full power of the marketing Power point can come into its own. Parents can be swoon by all the other cadets having fancy uniforms, bright flashy lights in that thing they call a 737 sim which in reality is just a FNPT2 . The old frasca down the corridor makes more difference to the students than the 737 thing but I bet they don't show them that. They will have RAF multi crews proberly wandering through to ops at just the right time. Parents get informed O the RAF get us to do all there multi training. Little do they know in 12 months time little johnny will be getting bumped off a trip because a RAF chap needs the plane to complete thier course.
Don't be gullable young prats see through the marketing and if you still want to go for it afterwards go for it but don't borrow and don't believe anything these marketing prats tell you.
O aye the foot thing is usually a box and a ball which fannys around, a stick will do the up and down and the pedals do the left and right. It will slip both ways and you just have to change your input to keep it in a box. The other one i have done is you steer a blob through a set of dimonds trying hit as many as possible using you feet while you hands have to do something else which is always making you work cross controls ie if your left hand is down you will be controlling with your right foot and vice versu.
Everyone will be able to spend 200 quid on the assesment day. Its part of the marketing plan. There is nothing on the assesment day apart from a bit of food which isn't already covered by the fixed costs of the school being open that day. Its almost pure profit. It also has a huge amount of marketing bull****e, if you make punters think they are having to be better than everyone else to "earn" a place on a course they are going to think that the course which they are going to spend there money on is better than everyone elses.
The Uni's learn't this about 10 years ago which was why all of a sudden they all started having interviews. The harder you work the student in the interview and the fact you only give them a conditional makes them believe that the course at xxx is better than yyy just because yyy gives then an uncondional with no interview.
There is only proberly about 5 chances of a job going (please note the word chance!!! ) There will be upwards of 100+ people applying. 20 grand easy money!!!!!!, Out of the 95+ that did apply and didn't get chosen proberly 10-20 will get conned into going self sponsered anyway.
Being a cynical git make sure you don't take your parents with you to the assesment day. When asked what do you parents do answer "my father is a bin man and my mother cleans for the council" I suspect there will be a bit of well if they don't get it they will do the course anyway if you answer my father is a broker and my mummy a GP. Thats another seat filled. If they think you can't afford it and you won't be coming if you don't get the tick you might have a different reply.
The whole thing is just a huge marketing ploy to get students and parents through the door on a promise. Once through the door then the full power of the marketing Power point can come into its own. Parents can be swoon by all the other cadets having fancy uniforms, bright flashy lights in that thing they call a 737 sim which in reality is just a FNPT2 . The old frasca down the corridor makes more difference to the students than the 737 thing but I bet they don't show them that. They will have RAF multi crews proberly wandering through to ops at just the right time. Parents get informed O the RAF get us to do all there multi training. Little do they know in 12 months time little johnny will be getting bumped off a trip because a RAF chap needs the plane to complete thier course.
Don't be gullable young prats see through the marketing and if you still want to go for it afterwards go for it but don't borrow and don't believe anything these marketing prats tell you.
O aye the foot thing is usually a box and a ball which fannys around, a stick will do the up and down and the pedals do the left and right. It will slip both ways and you just have to change your input to keep it in a box. The other one i have done is you steer a blob through a set of dimonds trying hit as many as possible using you feet while you hands have to do something else which is always making you work cross controls ie if your left hand is down you will be controlling with your right foot and vice versu.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: CDG
Age: 38
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi all,
I've read many opinions since the beginning of this topic, quite hard to make a decision on my own. Though, since I've been looking closer to training courses (either modular or integrated) there will always pros and cons and there's not just one way of getting into a cockpit.
I thank you all for you different opinions, the only thing quite annoying, many of you are speaking from non official sources and personnal thoughts. Why not just wait till Stage 2 till we have official and written financial conditions.
I'll see you at Stage 2 anyways, but even though the assessment cost is quite huge, i'm giving it a go, that is still an interview and it makes good experience for the future.
Though, thanks to those with objective opinions !
All pros and cons opinions have to been taken into consideration, at least we won't have to complain like "I didn't know about..!". But I'll give it a go anyways.
Anyone knows an easy way to get to Oxford ? I'll be travelling from Paris CDG .
Thanks to all, good luck through stage 2.
I've read many opinions since the beginning of this topic, quite hard to make a decision on my own. Though, since I've been looking closer to training courses (either modular or integrated) there will always pros and cons and there's not just one way of getting into a cockpit.
I thank you all for you different opinions, the only thing quite annoying, many of you are speaking from non official sources and personnal thoughts. Why not just wait till Stage 2 till we have official and written financial conditions.
I'll see you at Stage 2 anyways, but even though the assessment cost is quite huge, i'm giving it a go, that is still an interview and it makes good experience for the future.
Though, thanks to those with objective opinions !
All pros and cons opinions have to been taken into consideration, at least we won't have to complain like "I didn't know about..!". But I'll give it a go anyways.
Anyone knows an easy way to get to Oxford ? I'll be travelling from Paris CDG .
Thanks to all, good luck through stage 2.