The Reality of OAA's Employment Statistics

[cfwake]

Can I again ask people who are interested to look at the course costs for CTC iCP, FTE, Cabair AND Oxford and then come back when talking about costing?! As far as I can see, they're all pretty much of a muchness and all inclide some things that the others don't and visa versa! In fact, looking at OAA, the argument that it is outrageously expensive seems somewhat false - the other courses cost the same!

And i know that they don't include some things such as accom and food whereas some do, but you tend to pay the same amount for it once they make the course more expensive!

[BerksFlyer]

cfwake,

Don't jump to conclusions.

I'm talking about the vast differences in cost when compared to modular training. No need to jump on the defensive, I've got nothing against OAA or any other integrated school for that matter. Just think it's interesting that so much more is charged for a course that is the same as a one stop modular type course but with less flying! Especially as a few of the integrated schools do a lot of the flying in the US where it's much cheaper...

[phil1mac]

Adding to wango, how long does it take from zero hours to your first job through a modular route? (hope this isn't too off topic)

[cfwake]

BF

Sorry buddy wasn't referring to any specific post, just a general whinge!

[99jolegg]

Modular route can take anywhere from 18 months to 36 months or more. Time constraints apply once you have completed some sections. ATPLs must be completed within 18 months and once you have done your ATPLs, I think you have to pass your IR within 36 months - did I read that somewhere?

It'll cost from £35,000 to £50,000 inc everything depending on how well you plan and where you do your training.

[HappyFran]

I agree with 99 on the cost estimates, I am sure some super economic penny minder will quote £2.50. But £35 -£50K is realistic to get good training at a reputable school(s).
Don't see why it takes 18 months through. I can see my way to completing in ~ 12months. I'm doing a joined up modular path. .

Though given current economic outlook and WWW constant gleeful prediction of immenient end of world, I am considering slowing down pace to minimize risk of finishing with shiney f(atpl) and zero job prospects.

sorry even more thread drift

[99jolegg]

Because at a minimum, if you are a fast learner, the ATPLs will take 6 months. That leaves you 6 months to get your PPL, night rating, hour building, CPL, ME and IR. Not too long.

[Abbey415]

PPL, Night Rating & hour building prior to ATPLs would be a good idea, which leaves CPL, MEP & IR which can be done in 6 months after ATPLs if all goes to plan. It really depends on the structure that your chosen school works to.

[modern monkey]

CFwake. Could you please clarify for me what you consider "being trained to think in an airline way" actually means?

Also, may I ask how many of your instructors have airline experience?

[MIKECR]

I know someone who did all their ATPL'S recently in 2 months. All first time passes with an average overallscore of high 90's!! It can be done very quickly on a modular route.

[MIKECR]

Admittedly, he did a lot of study beforehand. He is however an incredibly intellegent and capable guy.

[clanger32]

sorry, I hate these threads, but nevertheless another thought (or two)

1. There will always be people who are exceptional and achieve ridiculously in the ATPLs....either in terms of knocking them out quickly, or in terms of getting stupidly high marks...like the recent OAA grad who finished them all with only 2 questions wrong in 14 papers and a 99.8% average....
2. Ryanair is NOT a neverending supply of low hour jobs. Those who think the OAA guys going there is humouress in that they've spent so much more to get the job than a modular guy, might care to consider that those 44 (?) jobs are 44 that DIDN'T go to modular students....and as far as I can tell FYR seems to be the holy grail [or best chance for a jet job, if you prefer] for most mod students. So, if you can't get into FYR because the integrated students have taken the spots that you may previously have had and none of the other companies who ARE recruiting will take modular (BA are still hiring, Flybe are hiring, but getting very picky on modular), is your thirty grand saving worth a piss in the ocean?

It's a rhetorical question. Yes, FYR will continue to hire mod pilots and that's a good thing, but people seem to get obsessed with the "vast savings you make on a mod course"....but then forget, as 99jolegg alluded to earlier, that that saving is only actually a saving if you manage to get a job at all....and there in lies the crux.

It's kind of like all those people claiming they made ten kazillion on their house through the property boom....no they didn't, because to realise it, they'd have to buy somewhere else which has equally risen in value.

[757drivergla]

Gentlemen,
If a company has a choice of product then they will choose the most reliable/reputable one first almost every time, all costs being equal. It remains exactly the same when an airline takes on a 200 hour pilot. As the product of a reputable integrated course, delivered by a reputable flying school, the pilot is a known entity to the airline. They are familiar with all aspects of his training and as such can rely on him/her fitting in and performing to a specific standard. That is not to say that a self-improver/modular pilot will be any different; they merely remain unknown and unproven entity to the airline. Therefore the risk to said airline is vastly reduced by taking on the tried and tested product of the integrated flight school.In this case, with all pilots holding the same qualifications required for the job, the cost to the company in choosing between a modular and an integrated pilot is nil and as such 9 times out of ten the latter would appear to be a more reliable aquisition. Not necessarily a better one by any means but a safer prospect.

This is what OAT and CTC provide the cadet with: a nice safe brand to sell to the airlines. Hence why you will find that the majority of those flying for airlines (who haven't come from a military background and are from certain generations) are from these schools. Having worked for two uk airlines who are established in the industry, I can count the number of self improvers that I have met on one hand. Frankly, I have nothing but admiration for them as it is a route that must be frought with difficulties and doubt and incredibly tough to deal with given the lack of backup that, having other people going through with you on the integrated course, provides. That said, those of you who are naive enough to think that integrated cadets have an easy life, you don't know how wrong you are; it is a high pressure-filled, time-critical environment that taxes most that are lucky enough to be a part of it.

It is not a case of one being better than another so those of you with elitist attitudes or chips on your shoulder I suggest you take a step back for a while and take a slightly wider look at life. Good luck to everyone though....it's a fantastic job and no matter how annoying the training, it only gets better, BELIEVE ME!

[BerksFlyer]

No worries cfwake

Not everyone wants to go straight to airline flying. Generally people who go modular already have a PPL so it makes no sense to go through 'foundation' stages again. Already having flying experience and possibly a few years worth of recreational flying means less money on hours building and then it's about £30k for the advanced flying stages and MCC. Of course not everyone is like that, but I think it's fair to say that a vast majority already have PPLs when starting at a modular school.

If all you want to do is fly airliners then no doubt places like OAA are better than the self improver route and if the price of an integrated course was similar to a modular course almost everyone who wants to fly airliners quickly would go integrated. However, with time and experience there's no reason why self improvers can't get to airlines. Believe it or not some even get lucky and a CV sent to an airline pays off - though when we talk about training we always talk about likelihoods, and the likelihood is that you won't get lucky. But then again you make your own luck.

What 757drivergla says is true, the big FTOs provide a trusted brand to airlines. Much like when we go to the supermarket we can trust Heinz to offer a solid, trusty sauce/soup.

[cfwake]

mm

In my opinion, and I freely admit I can't answer for how a standard small flying school would teach...

As far as I am concerned, an airline-like way is the extra level of planning and prep that has to be done that, in my experience of private flying, usually goes amiss...in the US, for example, even on singles, OAA students have to file a flight plan, fill out a plog, complete manual m&b sheets for all flights, get them checked out by the duty instructor, and especially turn up early or lose their flight, or fly and get a b*llocking, the logic being that for the job that you want it shouldn't make a difference to your approach what you're flying that day, be it a Warrior or a 737.

While I fully appreciate that there are small schools that will enforce these sort of things, the whole thing seems to be carried out on a more formal basis than most of the mod guys have experienced - as they say themselves. Most of the mod guys reckon that their experience of hours building has been more along the lines of 'hopping in and getting off'. Not that it makes integrated guys better pilots, of course, and of course, not all mod students are the same.

That's my thoughts, once you reach CPL and IR then of course all providers should be as professional as the other, but I still feel that the extra anality gets you into the swing of things.

As for ex-airline, not sure of the numbers, the MCC and JOC instructors are all ex airline, as would be expected, the IR instructors are a good mix of ex airline, ex RAF transport, fast jet, not very fast jet and one raspberry ripple jet, civvy senior instructors and examiners, including a few CFIs who've swapped sides. In short, they all have extensive experience of regimented flying routines (which having waffled on is probably what my ultimate definition of an 'airline-like way' would be). The US has a mix of mainly non-airline guys - some career instructors, a few who have and spend time in bizjets, some have flown for airlines and some who have worked for small operators.

A pretty eclectic mix!

[Adios]

Modern Monkey,

As for all OAA's foreign nationals getting jobs in other countries, that seems better than having them stay here to compete with the British FOs doesn't it? It also leaves fewer OAA graduates competing with those from other UK FTOs. It seems like a win win to me.

12x24=288, so assuming OAA fills every course, every year, the 253 that found jobs last year is an 87% success rate if all of them finish the course. I doubt that any of the above assumptions are perfect, but your 1 out of 3 claim is some very fuzzy maths.

I wonder if you are angry because you perceive that those who paid more for an integrated course may have jumped the queue on you back then, hence your "struggle for the first job."

[modern monkey]

CFwake, so what you're saying is that Oxford make you fly in a more "regimented" manner. That certainly seems to be the case, however Id consider filling out a flight plan and doing a mass and balance sheet before every flight a bit pedantic to be honest. Once youve done them a couple of times you know how to do them and I dont really see what it teaches you. Ok, thorough planing is vital to conducting a safe flight, but flight plans do not need to be filed for VFR flights, and it is common knowedge that a warrior with full tanks and two averagely sized people on board will not be out of mass and balance limits.

There seems to be a myth in some quarters of the flying world that being an airline pilot involves some kind of millitary style, super regimented attutide and appearance, which I think comes from the influence of the millitary pilots which come across from the RAF, to either work in Airlines or instruct at places like OAT. In fact, it does sound like Oxford has the feel of a millitary academy, am I right? A lot of millitary instructors, uniforms and epaulets, "bollockings" for being late? Such things may be appropriate in the RAF, but in my opinion, not in a civilian flying school.

I remember reading during my MCC course that when the concept of CRM was first introduced, one of its primary aims was to overcome certain aspects of the attitudes of a lot of ex millitary pilots, which had been blamed for a number of serious acidents. Things like:
- too much respect for rank, resulting in too steep a command gradient;
- the maverick, single minded attitudes of captains which had come from single pilot fast jets;
- a lack of respect for "inferior" first officers;
were blames for a number of accidents where, had the crew worked as a team, the accident would have been easily avoided.

In relailty, being a pilot is a civillian job like any other. If you turn up on time, fit to fly, not looking like you've been dragged through a hedge backwards and do the job properly, then you're doing the right thing. It does not take Oxford style millitary regimentation to learn such an approach.

I have no beef against any of the Oxford students, however I am of the opinion that OAA exploit their sudents' career aspirations by feeding them a load of bull**** to make themselves rich. The exploitation of wannabees by FTOs and Airlines dusgusts me to be honest.

It has been said on here that from the statistics, 87% of OAA students get jobs. Ok that may be true, but one of my original points was that 40% of these people had gone/ will go to Ryan Air. This is by far the majority. If I had gone to oxford, and all I managed to get at the end of it was a job with Ryan Air, then I would feel very pissed off indeed!

One other thing, as part of the integrated course, how much solo time do you actually get? I mean real solo time, when you're the only one in the AC, not "supervised solo" or whatever else they might call it.

[cfwake]

OK, maybe I overcooked it somewhat! When I refer to bollockings, I don't mean anything like a full scale dressing down in front of the CFI, but like anywhere you're expected to turn up on time and you'll be told if you're not doing so!

OAA certainly does not have the feel of a military flight training facility, it is unmistakedly civvy, and the instructors are very aware that you are paying an awful lot of money for the course and will bend over backwards to help you through the course. A very pleasant group of people.

And while I am fully aware of the ex mil difficulties that were faced in the past (we do a 3 day CRM course as part of the APP run by an outside company), I have had no sense of a steep authority gradient and all of the instructors are, from our experience, extremely easy to sit in a cockpit with. I have to say that from what I've heard, ex mil mavericks are somewhat career limited these days and don't tend to last too long once it becomes clear that their attitude is not of an MCC manner.

So, again, perhaps I made it sound somewhat more regemented than it is, but it IS still more regimented than most smaller schools, and I'd argue that that's a good thing, personally I think that flying is very different from most civvy jobs and does require a bit more than you'd perhaps get away with in many other careers, due to what can go wrong and what is required of a person facing those issues.

And on the Ryanair note, don't believe everything you may hear. I have spoken to quite a lot of the people who have gone there - their pay is excellent, admittedly the first 4 months is unpaid, but if you can afford a course it's a fairly good bet you can afford to scrape by for that time somehow, the gear is brand new and the guys who have gone there have very, very few complaints. What we usually hear is very different from what goes on, it seems.

[modern monkey]

Cfwake, as usual this thread has reached no conclusion whatsoever, I think we are both right in some ways. I accept that OAAs traning is probably very good and that you do have a certain advantage in getting a job when leaving, however I maintain that they exploit their own reputation and people's fears of not being able to get a job to charge their students over the odds for their courses.

I'd say they are as good at pulling the wool over the airline recruitment departments they deal with as they are at pulling the wool over the eyes of their students.

If your happy with them however, then who am I to criticise. Good luck with the course and I hope you get a decent job at the end of it, ie one that does not cost you an extra 25grand!

[cfwake]

What a pleasant way to resolve the issue! I concur - I wish you all the best - even with dwindling job ops out there, people with balls - who stand their ground and argue their corner - have a damn good shot at getting the pick of the bunch!

Happy landings buddy!