CTC McAlpine/easyJet/JMC Sponsorship Selection
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ethansa
You seem a confused individual. You start a post with this
Offer this regarding the easyJet open day
Ask this in Medical and Health
Then state this
Request this poll
And then ask a question like this
And then precede to tell everyone how you wouldn't waste your time on the CTC selection scheme.....
So with what authority do you pronounce that
As when I was at jmc/ Thomas Cook they were looking to recruit ALL their low houred pilots through CTC. As for the 'million to one chance', I think that is a slight exaggeration, apart from the fact it doesn't come down to 'chance', it's about ability and market forces.
What
How would you know if you are still planning your career?
Short term yes, but in terms of an aviation career span, long term, definately not.
There's a lot of misleading comment on the hallowed pages of pprune and I agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion. That was, however, my opinion of the previous post.
If you can get sponsorship with CTC McAlpine then jump on board. Nuff said.
Good luck Wannabes.
PP
You seem a confused individual. You start a post with this
HoUrS
The Hours for an ATPL are 1500 and 500 MCC. how long does it take as in weeks months and years to complete the 1500?
Assuming that after 1500 the ATPL is unfrozen and captaincy it issued.... is this instantly or is another 'something' needed to get captaincy.
Im just trying to work out my career plan in terms of an estimated timescale.
The Hours for an ATPL are 1500 and 500 MCC. how long does it take as in weeks months and years to complete the 1500?
Assuming that after 1500 the ATPL is unfrozen and captaincy it issued.... is this instantly or is another 'something' needed to get captaincy.
Im just trying to work out my career plan in terms of an estimated timescale.
open day
what open day and where???????
could anyone let me know???????
what open day and where???????
could anyone let me know???????
ive had asthma since i was small.i only need an inhaler when im running or get flat out doing something.
will this affect my class 1?
also i sneeze alot when the air is damp. will this affect flying an aircraft?
will this affect my class 1?
also i sneeze alot when the air is damp. will this affect flying an aircraft?
AS IM ABOUT TO EMBARK ON THE 3RD STAGE OF CTC MCALPINE'S SELECTION PROCESS. DOES ANYONE KNOW ABOUT THE MENTAL ARITHMETIC OR HAND-EYE-FOOT TEST. HOW IS ONE SUPPOSED TO PRACTICE THE LATTER???
I know that alot of questions are being asked about whether the flight trainning and costs of trainning and where to go and which course and and and etc etc etc.... are all worth it at the end of the day.
Lifes Is Quality? When a pilot has the days off, is it spent sleeeping or spending cash? I know that its a stressful career but what happens with the time off? Its obviously given for a specific reason.
So with what authority do you pronounce that
Theres a better chance of going to do a self sponsored/funded scheme to get a job that has higher pay than to to linger around CTC's million to 1 chance.
looks more pro too commin on board as a direct
How would you know if you are still planning your career?
otherwise your rightful property of Easy for a long while in the long term.
There's a lot of misleading comment on the hallowed pages of pprune and I agree that everyone is entitled to an opinion. That was, however, my opinion of the previous post.
If you can get sponsorship with CTC McAlpine then jump on board. Nuff said.
Good luck Wannabes.
PP
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CTC are looking for hard working, determined, motivated people and those who don't give up. From your post Ethansa, it seems you tried CTC, even though you believe it's a waste of time??? I don't think so. It is true to say that there are not many sponsorships going around at the moment. Should this not lead to the conclusion of jumping at every single one that comes along? Of course it does. Never give up. If you fail, then try, try again. You learn from previous experiences and use the learning curve to improve on your next result. That's what I did and am now a happy bunny sitting in New Zealand with a nice career ahead of me.
It is not right to tell other wannabee's what they should and should not do. Let them decide and let them give it a go and see where they get to. So long as you are hard working and self-motivated and can show this to CTC then you at least stand a chance. Remember CTC want you to succeed - they want to help you achieve your goals.
Good Luck to all Wannabee's and hopefully will be seeing you soon.
PA
It is not right to tell other wannabee's what they should and should not do. Let them decide and let them give it a go and see where they get to. So long as you are hard working and self-motivated and can show this to CTC then you at least stand a chance. Remember CTC want you to succeed - they want to help you achieve your goals.
Good Luck to all Wannabee's and hopefully will be seeing you soon.
PA
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
chipm,
more or less. I was told that re-application is by invitation only and thus might be quite likely if you crash and burn at stage 4 but unlikely if you fail stage 2 (the aptitudes). Don't let this worry you too much. Remember, you're competing against a standard. If you meet it, you're in.
Cheers
Rod
more or less. I was told that re-application is by invitation only and thus might be quite likely if you crash and burn at stage 4 but unlikely if you fail stage 2 (the aptitudes). Don't let this worry you too much. Remember, you're competing against a standard. If you meet it, you're in.
Cheers
Rod
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lancaster
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
625PA
Couldn't agree more, and with an attitude like that it's no wonder you're in NZ with a glittering career ahead!
I was a person, who, for all my life, was told "there is the sponsorship route, but don't bother with that cos there's too many applicants for too few places"...well, I went for BA aged 18, and failed the aptitude tests. Was the statement really true??!!
Having learned my weaknesses from BA, and sorted them out, I applied to CTC McAlpine...and am on the november course going out in 7 weeks.
It wasn't luck. It was pure determination to get where I want to be. If you are self motivated enough and can prove you have the passion, drive and basic ability YOU CAN DO IT.
Never give up. I didn't and it paid.
All the best to everyone. I know how much flying means to us all!!
Couldn't agree more, and with an attitude like that it's no wonder you're in NZ with a glittering career ahead!
I was a person, who, for all my life, was told "there is the sponsorship route, but don't bother with that cos there's too many applicants for too few places"...well, I went for BA aged 18, and failed the aptitude tests. Was the statement really true??!!
Having learned my weaknesses from BA, and sorted them out, I applied to CTC McAlpine...and am on the november course going out in 7 weeks.
It wasn't luck. It was pure determination to get where I want to be. If you are self motivated enough and can prove you have the passion, drive and basic ability YOU CAN DO IT.
Never give up. I didn't and it paid.
All the best to everyone. I know how much flying means to us all!!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Greece
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all,
I have registered for the PPruNe forum in order to submit this post because most of the people here seem to think that the CTC scheme is either totally rubbish or absolutely excellent. Neither statement is actually true.
A few points worth making:
1. CTC cannot loose on the deal. Why? Consider the two possibilities:
First possibility:
The cadet takes a loan for £60k and gives it to CTC McAlpine. CTC McAlpine then spends much less than this on the training of the cadet (say £30k). IF CTC McAlpine succeeds in finding a job for the cadet then CTC McAlpine sells the cadet for tens of thousands of pounds to the airline. The cadet’s £60k is handed over to the airline. The airline then pays the £60k back to the cadet over 7 years to prevent the cadet leaving for a better paid job.
Second possibility:
The cadet takes a loan for £60k and gives it to CTC McAlpine. CTC McAlpine then spends much less than this on the training of the cadet (say £30k). IF CTC McAlpine subsequently fails to find the cadet a job then CTC McAlpine keeps the cadets money and STILL makes a handsome profit because the money spent on training is nowhere near the cadet’s £60k deposit.
2. The “high standard” of selection is arbitrarily set on a monthly basis so as to allow the, currently small, number of cadets through each month. Last time I checked, CTC was selecting 14 cadets per month. No more, no less. The only way of doing this is to set the standards arbitrarily. They just draw a line under the name of the 14th best applicant and anybody below this line is deemed unsuitable whilst everybody above that line is deemed ideal. Don’t get it into your head that if you get rejected by CTC McAlpine then you aren’t good enough.
By the way, I know that CTC claim that they spend over £100k on the cadet’s training. This is simply not true. Training for one private individual here in the UK costs far less than this. Imagine the savings CTC makes by sending cadets to one of the cheapest countries (for aviation training) in the world (New Zealand). Imagine the tax breaks, imagine the cost savings. There is no way CTC spends £100k on your training.
In short, CTC are in this for the money. Pure and simple. They don’t take any risk. The associated airline doesn’t take any risk. The cadet takes all the risk. This is the direction the industry is moving in. Imagine what things will be like in 20 years.
I have registered for the PPruNe forum in order to submit this post because most of the people here seem to think that the CTC scheme is either totally rubbish or absolutely excellent. Neither statement is actually true.
A few points worth making:
1. CTC cannot loose on the deal. Why? Consider the two possibilities:
First possibility:
The cadet takes a loan for £60k and gives it to CTC McAlpine. CTC McAlpine then spends much less than this on the training of the cadet (say £30k). IF CTC McAlpine succeeds in finding a job for the cadet then CTC McAlpine sells the cadet for tens of thousands of pounds to the airline. The cadet’s £60k is handed over to the airline. The airline then pays the £60k back to the cadet over 7 years to prevent the cadet leaving for a better paid job.
Second possibility:
The cadet takes a loan for £60k and gives it to CTC McAlpine. CTC McAlpine then spends much less than this on the training of the cadet (say £30k). IF CTC McAlpine subsequently fails to find the cadet a job then CTC McAlpine keeps the cadets money and STILL makes a handsome profit because the money spent on training is nowhere near the cadet’s £60k deposit.
2. The “high standard” of selection is arbitrarily set on a monthly basis so as to allow the, currently small, number of cadets through each month. Last time I checked, CTC was selecting 14 cadets per month. No more, no less. The only way of doing this is to set the standards arbitrarily. They just draw a line under the name of the 14th best applicant and anybody below this line is deemed unsuitable whilst everybody above that line is deemed ideal. Don’t get it into your head that if you get rejected by CTC McAlpine then you aren’t good enough.
By the way, I know that CTC claim that they spend over £100k on the cadet’s training. This is simply not true. Training for one private individual here in the UK costs far less than this. Imagine the savings CTC makes by sending cadets to one of the cheapest countries (for aviation training) in the world (New Zealand). Imagine the tax breaks, imagine the cost savings. There is no way CTC spends £100k on your training.
In short, CTC are in this for the money. Pure and simple. They don’t take any risk. The associated airline doesn’t take any risk. The cadet takes all the risk. This is the direction the industry is moving in. Imagine what things will be like in 20 years.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Norwich
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, CTC arent taking any risks- but thats business. Minimise risks.
It should be realised as well that graduates of the CTC scheme will be paid a cadet salary for seven years. So say you start training at 22, that lasts two years, followed by a further 6 month period of £1000 pcm, then onto your cadet salary. So basically a CTC grad will still be on cadet pay when he/she is 30 years old.
However it will still be a good job and ok pay, better than many other jobs and the skills you have will be invaluable, so Im dying to get onto the scheme.
Plus EasyJet are now starting to operate to the canary islands, like Tenerife etc. If I could get onto that route Id be well happy!!!
I wouldnt mind flying a brand new shiny airbus either.
Worthwhile scheme, but not as rosy as it first appears!!
It should be realised as well that graduates of the CTC scheme will be paid a cadet salary for seven years. So say you start training at 22, that lasts two years, followed by a further 6 month period of £1000 pcm, then onto your cadet salary. So basically a CTC grad will still be on cadet pay when he/she is 30 years old.
However it will still be a good job and ok pay, better than many other jobs and the skills you have will be invaluable, so Im dying to get onto the scheme.
Plus EasyJet are now starting to operate to the canary islands, like Tenerife etc. If I could get onto that route Id be well happy!!!
I wouldnt mind flying a brand new shiny airbus either.
Worthwhile scheme, but not as rosy as it first appears!!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Malaka,
Interesting post. Several points to pick up on though:
Firstly, Under your point numbered 1 the first possibility (ie ctcmcalpine being able to sell the candidate to the airline) results in CTCMcAlpine making "tens of thousands of pounds" more than if the second possibility is true. Therefore perhaps one can reasonably assume that they will do their utmost to sell the candidate to make more profit. And they're pretty good at it (CTC have been doing so for years with their ATP scheme).
Secondly, You suggest that the cost of training is well under £100k. Where is the proof? Flying may be cheap in New Zealand but you have to remember several things: Firstly, the candidate is flown to and from New Zealand 3 times (not cheap even with a good corporate rate); Secondly, the course entails 45 more hours training than a standard integrated course (total 195 hrs); Of the 195 hours 100 are multi-engine - considerably more expensive than single-engine time (this is 50% more multi engine time than the standard JAA course); The training is conducted in brand new aircraft; Not all of the training is conducted in the NZ - there is a lot of training in the UK including the multi-engine IR phase - at MATs brand new training centre (not sure if it's open yet?).
Even if all this (and i'm sure i've miss some) doesn't add up to £100k i can't see they'll be making a killing on the £60k bond.
Thirdly, if it really is the candidate that bears all the risk, ask yourself why HSBC would lend £60k pretty much no questions asked to any candidate who needs it. At 6 candidates a month, assuming only 5 take the loan, this adds up to £300k a month. With the course lasting 20months that means they'll shell out £7.2million before even seeing a penny of it paid back. And, given the loan is paid back over 7 years, their exposure is massively bigger than this figure. Banks don't generally piss away that kind of money unless they think there's a damn good, if not 100%, chance they'll get it back. And I would imagine if the second possibility you suggest is true then most candidates certainly wouldnt be in any position to pay back the loan.
Lastly, a quick correction, they start one course a month with six people on each. Not 14. They have selected enough candidates so there is now a 4 or 5 month gap between selection and starting training and will close selection if this gap gets too long. They select anyone who meets the standards and do not lower them just to fill a course.
If you have evidence to suggest otherwise please reveal it.
Cheers,
Rod
Interesting post. Several points to pick up on though:
Firstly, Under your point numbered 1 the first possibility (ie ctcmcalpine being able to sell the candidate to the airline) results in CTCMcAlpine making "tens of thousands of pounds" more than if the second possibility is true. Therefore perhaps one can reasonably assume that they will do their utmost to sell the candidate to make more profit. And they're pretty good at it (CTC have been doing so for years with their ATP scheme).
Secondly, You suggest that the cost of training is well under £100k. Where is the proof? Flying may be cheap in New Zealand but you have to remember several things: Firstly, the candidate is flown to and from New Zealand 3 times (not cheap even with a good corporate rate); Secondly, the course entails 45 more hours training than a standard integrated course (total 195 hrs); Of the 195 hours 100 are multi-engine - considerably more expensive than single-engine time (this is 50% more multi engine time than the standard JAA course); The training is conducted in brand new aircraft; Not all of the training is conducted in the NZ - there is a lot of training in the UK including the multi-engine IR phase - at MATs brand new training centre (not sure if it's open yet?).
Even if all this (and i'm sure i've miss some) doesn't add up to £100k i can't see they'll be making a killing on the £60k bond.
Thirdly, if it really is the candidate that bears all the risk, ask yourself why HSBC would lend £60k pretty much no questions asked to any candidate who needs it. At 6 candidates a month, assuming only 5 take the loan, this adds up to £300k a month. With the course lasting 20months that means they'll shell out £7.2million before even seeing a penny of it paid back. And, given the loan is paid back over 7 years, their exposure is massively bigger than this figure. Banks don't generally piss away that kind of money unless they think there's a damn good, if not 100%, chance they'll get it back. And I would imagine if the second possibility you suggest is true then most candidates certainly wouldnt be in any position to pay back the loan.
Lastly, a quick correction, they start one course a month with six people on each. Not 14. They have selected enough candidates so there is now a 4 or 5 month gap between selection and starting training and will close selection if this gap gets too long. They select anyone who meets the standards and do not lower them just to fill a course.
If you have evidence to suggest otherwise please reveal it.
Cheers,
Rod
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Emirates Living - The Meadows
Age: 79
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can anyone complain about opportunity.
Just to chip in on the turn that this thread has taken off late.
Unless I am mistaken there seems to be a similar tune to the should we self sponsor type rating threads.
At the end of the day applicants apply for a scheme administered by CTC. If CTC say they are good enough they become cadets and are roped into a scheme that means they do not get full pay untill they are 7yrs down the line so around 30 yrs old.
So what!! No one is forcing them to apply, if I was 18 again and had that sort of scheme available I would jump at the chance. They are probably going to be earning far more than thier non-flying peers for the first 5 years of work and then they have the best possible indoctrination available on the market.
So CTC make some money, well they are a business not a charity and those with money make money. If you are a millionaire you can invest in enough things that your money will be fairly secure if you have nothing then you can't invest at all hence why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer everyday.
If like me age 18 you went to uni chances are you were worse of over 3-4 years to the tune of 30k. Admittedly with a degree to show for it and I believe an invaluable life experience but there were no guarantees of success and whilst I have some friends who have utilized thier degrees to the max and are now surgeons, barristers, etc I also have friends who are working in supermarkets or unemployed with their degrees.
Life is short, times are hard so heres your morning wake up card.
Life doesn't owe you a living if someone is fortunate to get onto a scheme that gives them a guaranteed job in this day and age however poor you may think the wages then I applaud the scheme and am jealous of them.
There are still people out there who do want a secrure job for life with little change. I for one would happily take a pay cut in exchange for such security. If you think about it would'nt you?
Unless I am mistaken there seems to be a similar tune to the should we self sponsor type rating threads.
At the end of the day applicants apply for a scheme administered by CTC. If CTC say they are good enough they become cadets and are roped into a scheme that means they do not get full pay untill they are 7yrs down the line so around 30 yrs old.
So what!! No one is forcing them to apply, if I was 18 again and had that sort of scheme available I would jump at the chance. They are probably going to be earning far more than thier non-flying peers for the first 5 years of work and then they have the best possible indoctrination available on the market.
So CTC make some money, well they are a business not a charity and those with money make money. If you are a millionaire you can invest in enough things that your money will be fairly secure if you have nothing then you can't invest at all hence why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer everyday.
If like me age 18 you went to uni chances are you were worse of over 3-4 years to the tune of 30k. Admittedly with a degree to show for it and I believe an invaluable life experience but there were no guarantees of success and whilst I have some friends who have utilized thier degrees to the max and are now surgeons, barristers, etc I also have friends who are working in supermarkets or unemployed with their degrees.
Life is short, times are hard so heres your morning wake up card.
Life doesn't owe you a living if someone is fortunate to get onto a scheme that gives them a guaranteed job in this day and age however poor you may think the wages then I applaud the scheme and am jealous of them.
There are still people out there who do want a secrure job for life with little change. I for one would happily take a pay cut in exchange for such security. If you think about it would'nt you?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi PPRuNe'ers,
I sent off my answers to the 4 questions last week. Having read this entire thread, i'm really excited about the whole application process and I hope I make it to stage 2! I'll keep you guys up to date
I sent off my answers to the 4 questions last week. Having read this entire thread, i'm really excited about the whole application process and I hope I make it to stage 2! I'll keep you guys up to date
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Greece
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rod Wren,
I have to be brief, as I am not getting paid to follow this thread.
You said
”Firstly, Under your point numbered 1 the first possibility (ie ctcmcalpine being able to sell the candidate to the airline) results in CTCMcAlpine making "tens of thousands of pounds" more than if the second possibility is true. Therefore perhaps one can reasonably assume that they will do their utmost to sell the candidate to make more profit. And they're pretty good at it (CTC have been doing so for years with their ATP scheme).”.
Fair enough. I don't dispute that CTC are good at selling cadets to airlines and I don't dispute that this is the method by which they make most money. However, the risk is taken by the cadet, not CTC. That is all I wanted to point out.
Then you said
”Secondly, You suggest that the cost of training is well under £100k. Where is the proof? Flying may be cheap in New Zealand but you have to remember several things: Firstly, the candidate is flown to and from New Zealand 3 times (not cheap even with a good corporate rate); Secondly, the course entails 45 more hours training than a standard integrated course (total 195 hrs); Of the 195 hours 100 are multi-engine - considerably more expensive than single-engine time (this is 50% more multi engine time than the standard JAA course); The training is conducted in brand new aircraft; Not all of the training is conducted in the NZ - there is a lot of training in the UK including the multi-engine IR phase - at MATs brand new training centre (not sure if it's open yet?).
Even if all this (and i'm sure i've miss some) doesn't add up to £100k i can't see they'll be making a killing on the £60k bond.”
I believe that the training costs CTC well below £100k. You want proof. You know I don't have time to research this and provide mathematical proof. However, when I go over the costs of training in my head it strikes me that CTC most definitely pays less per cadet than a private self sponsored cadet would at Oxford for instance, which is less than £100k. However, I AM willing to concede that the cost of training along with all other administration costs (wages for Mary Brown etc) might amount to £60k per cadet and thus CTC are not definitely “making a killing on the £60k bond” as you say. However, if the worst comes to the worst and the cadet is not placed with an airline it is the cadet that looses £60k, NOT CTC McAlpine or the airline. It would be fairer if the cadet, CTC and the airline were to share this risk by investing £20k each.
Your penultimate argument was
“Thirdly, if it really is the candidate that bears all the risk, ask yourself why HSBC would lend £60k pretty much no questions asked to any candidate who needs it. At 6 candidates a month, assuming only 5 take the loan, this adds up to £300k a month. With the course lasting 20months that means they'll shell out £7.2million before even seeing a penny of it paid back. And, given the loan is paid back over 7 years, their exposure is massively bigger than this figure. Banks don't generally piss away that kind of money unless they think there's a damn good, if not 100%, chance they'll get it back. And I would imagine if the second possibility you suggest is true then most candidates certainly wouldnt be in any position to pay back the loan.”
I do admit that HSBC ARE taking some risk. But it is not “no questions asked”. CTC McAlpine ask all the questions over a period of several weeks at considerable cost to the cadet. The small risk taken by HSBC is nowhere near so great as that taken by the cadet. If the cadet is not placed with an airline by CTC, then every penny they earn (at tescos maybe?) will still go to HSBC for a very long time. Don’t try to suggest that the cadet will be terminally unemployed because of not getting a job through CTC McAlpine. The cadet would finally get a job of some description and would spend a very long time paying off the HSBC loan, regardless of CTC failing to find an airline job for the cadet.
Your final point was
”Lastly, a quick correction, they start one course a month with six people on each. Not 14. They have selected enough candidates so there is now a 4 or 5 month gap between selection and starting training and will close selection if this gap gets too long. They select anyone who meets the standards and do not lower them just to fill a course.
If you have evidence to suggest otherwise please reveal it.”
Correction about course numbers being as low as 6 per month accepted. I didn't say that CTC lower standards just to fill a course. Think about it. EXACTLY six cadets were being selected per month from several hundred. How can a selection process be so efficient that it reliably accepts EXACTLY six cadets per month? It cannot. Therefore, logically, because exactly six cadets were being accepted per month the standard of selection must have been arbitrarily set on a monthly basis so as so skim off the best 6 applicants. Not more, not less.
CTC is just as expensive as self sponsorship at a top school and if things go wrong it is equally as financially destructive for the cadet. However, there is (supposedly) a better chance of getting a flying job with CTC than by self sponsorship. If this turns out to be true (and we have yet to see any cadets enter into employment) then CTC is worthwhile, but not nearly so worthwhile as any of the previous sponsorships offered by BA, Aer Lingus, BMI, Britannia etc
I have to be brief, as I am not getting paid to follow this thread.
You said
”Firstly, Under your point numbered 1 the first possibility (ie ctcmcalpine being able to sell the candidate to the airline) results in CTCMcAlpine making "tens of thousands of pounds" more than if the second possibility is true. Therefore perhaps one can reasonably assume that they will do their utmost to sell the candidate to make more profit. And they're pretty good at it (CTC have been doing so for years with their ATP scheme).”.
Fair enough. I don't dispute that CTC are good at selling cadets to airlines and I don't dispute that this is the method by which they make most money. However, the risk is taken by the cadet, not CTC. That is all I wanted to point out.
Then you said
”Secondly, You suggest that the cost of training is well under £100k. Where is the proof? Flying may be cheap in New Zealand but you have to remember several things: Firstly, the candidate is flown to and from New Zealand 3 times (not cheap even with a good corporate rate); Secondly, the course entails 45 more hours training than a standard integrated course (total 195 hrs); Of the 195 hours 100 are multi-engine - considerably more expensive than single-engine time (this is 50% more multi engine time than the standard JAA course); The training is conducted in brand new aircraft; Not all of the training is conducted in the NZ - there is a lot of training in the UK including the multi-engine IR phase - at MATs brand new training centre (not sure if it's open yet?).
Even if all this (and i'm sure i've miss some) doesn't add up to £100k i can't see they'll be making a killing on the £60k bond.”
I believe that the training costs CTC well below £100k. You want proof. You know I don't have time to research this and provide mathematical proof. However, when I go over the costs of training in my head it strikes me that CTC most definitely pays less per cadet than a private self sponsored cadet would at Oxford for instance, which is less than £100k. However, I AM willing to concede that the cost of training along with all other administration costs (wages for Mary Brown etc) might amount to £60k per cadet and thus CTC are not definitely “making a killing on the £60k bond” as you say. However, if the worst comes to the worst and the cadet is not placed with an airline it is the cadet that looses £60k, NOT CTC McAlpine or the airline. It would be fairer if the cadet, CTC and the airline were to share this risk by investing £20k each.
Your penultimate argument was
“Thirdly, if it really is the candidate that bears all the risk, ask yourself why HSBC would lend £60k pretty much no questions asked to any candidate who needs it. At 6 candidates a month, assuming only 5 take the loan, this adds up to £300k a month. With the course lasting 20months that means they'll shell out £7.2million before even seeing a penny of it paid back. And, given the loan is paid back over 7 years, their exposure is massively bigger than this figure. Banks don't generally piss away that kind of money unless they think there's a damn good, if not 100%, chance they'll get it back. And I would imagine if the second possibility you suggest is true then most candidates certainly wouldnt be in any position to pay back the loan.”
I do admit that HSBC ARE taking some risk. But it is not “no questions asked”. CTC McAlpine ask all the questions over a period of several weeks at considerable cost to the cadet. The small risk taken by HSBC is nowhere near so great as that taken by the cadet. If the cadet is not placed with an airline by CTC, then every penny they earn (at tescos maybe?) will still go to HSBC for a very long time. Don’t try to suggest that the cadet will be terminally unemployed because of not getting a job through CTC McAlpine. The cadet would finally get a job of some description and would spend a very long time paying off the HSBC loan, regardless of CTC failing to find an airline job for the cadet.
Your final point was
”Lastly, a quick correction, they start one course a month with six people on each. Not 14. They have selected enough candidates so there is now a 4 or 5 month gap between selection and starting training and will close selection if this gap gets too long. They select anyone who meets the standards and do not lower them just to fill a course.
If you have evidence to suggest otherwise please reveal it.”
Correction about course numbers being as low as 6 per month accepted. I didn't say that CTC lower standards just to fill a course. Think about it. EXACTLY six cadets were being selected per month from several hundred. How can a selection process be so efficient that it reliably accepts EXACTLY six cadets per month? It cannot. Therefore, logically, because exactly six cadets were being accepted per month the standard of selection must have been arbitrarily set on a monthly basis so as so skim off the best 6 applicants. Not more, not less.
CTC is just as expensive as self sponsorship at a top school and if things go wrong it is equally as financially destructive for the cadet. However, there is (supposedly) a better chance of getting a flying job with CTC than by self sponsorship. If this turns out to be true (and we have yet to see any cadets enter into employment) then CTC is worthwhile, but not nearly so worthwhile as any of the previous sponsorships offered by BA, Aer Lingus, BMI, Britannia etc
Last edited by malaka; 8th Sep 2003 at 23:53.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not Rod Wren and i'm not getting paid to read/post on pprune (I wish!!).
The risk a bank faces when lending money is that of default. In my view this would be quite likely in the case that a candidate is not offered an airline job as a large majority of the applicants tend to be low (or negative) net worth individuals, recently graduated with large student debts. To lend a £60k unsecured to such a candidate is risky. CTCMcAlpine must have convinced HSBC that the risk of failure to find employment is low (or zero), otherwise they simply wouldn't do it.
Maybe I am a very trusting person, but if CTCMcAlpine tell me the training costs a total of £100k then I believe them. If they'd have told me it costs £60k and the bond is for the full cost of training it wouldn't have detered me at all (nor I would imagine would it deter any other applicants).
Remember the BA sponsorship cost BA £120k per cadet - much of the training conducted in the USA (flying costs fairly comparable to NZ). The structure of this scheme is not dissimilar to the BA one. Maybe you (or I) can't quite see how it cost BA so much per cadet but I beleive them (what incentive would they have to lie?).
I'm not trying to start an argument, you're entitled to your opinion and me mine, just don't agree with you i'm afraid.
Cheers,
Rod
The risk a bank faces when lending money is that of default. In my view this would be quite likely in the case that a candidate is not offered an airline job as a large majority of the applicants tend to be low (or negative) net worth individuals, recently graduated with large student debts. To lend a £60k unsecured to such a candidate is risky. CTCMcAlpine must have convinced HSBC that the risk of failure to find employment is low (or zero), otherwise they simply wouldn't do it.
Maybe I am a very trusting person, but if CTCMcAlpine tell me the training costs a total of £100k then I believe them. If they'd have told me it costs £60k and the bond is for the full cost of training it wouldn't have detered me at all (nor I would imagine would it deter any other applicants).
Remember the BA sponsorship cost BA £120k per cadet - much of the training conducted in the USA (flying costs fairly comparable to NZ). The structure of this scheme is not dissimilar to the BA one. Maybe you (or I) can't quite see how it cost BA so much per cadet but I beleive them (what incentive would they have to lie?).
I'm not trying to start an argument, you're entitled to your opinion and me mine, just don't agree with you i'm afraid.
Cheers,
Rod
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Doha, Qatar
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 100 k is probably an accurate figure when you consider everything that they are paying for. Most training schools that charge the 60 k train you up to CPL level (usually including the IR).
CTC not only train up to this level but include the night rating (not all schools offer this in their 60 k) but also include full type rating on either the 737 or the A319. Please correct me if i'mm worng but that is quite expensive (approx. 500 quid and hour).
CTC also pay for the full thory and incase of any problems encountered, also pay for resits.
If you can find anyone that can get from nothing to fully type rated, first officer in an airline on a one year intensive course with all flying, theory, accommodation etc paid for with only #60,000, he/she's done something dodgy !!!
CTC not only train up to this level but include the night rating (not all schools offer this in their 60 k) but also include full type rating on either the 737 or the A319. Please correct me if i'mm worng but that is quite expensive (approx. 500 quid and hour).
CTC also pay for the full thory and incase of any problems encountered, also pay for resits.
If you can find anyone that can get from nothing to fully type rated, first officer in an airline on a one year intensive course with all flying, theory, accommodation etc paid for with only #60,000, he/she's done something dodgy !!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Pennyworth
I applied to the scheme as I recognised it to be the best option for me. I got to the final stage of selection but was unsuccessful. I’m not an expert on the intricacies of the scheme, but this is my perspective:
The figure quoted of £100,000 includes allowances, insurance, additional training, airfares, a type rating, etc, etc, etc. I have researched self-funded training in considerable depth – I am now part way through my own. I have no doubt that the figure is accurate. If you have researched what is in the CTC McAlpine Scheme (over 250 hours of training, more than ½ of which is multi-engine + the type rating + the ‘extras’ like cars, and allowances and……), you would not be comparing it with £30K training, which is theoretically possible, but unrealistic but for a few (goldenballs, living at home, PPL holders) to achieve. There is also this little matter of a job……
I met Rod Wren during my selection. I remember distinctly him pointing out the risks in the programme for every “stakeholder” involved: CTC McAlpine, the Cadet, the Airline and the Bank. I got the impression that he was pretty chuffed to have found a way of giving an incentive to everyone to perform their bit. He was also pretty pointed about the risks involved for the cadet. I even asked him if he was trying to put us off. His answer was yes: he’d rather run a course light than take on people who were not committed. He also talked about selection and the ‘cut-off level’. I wonder if that is where you got your ideas about a moving goalpost. If you were at the same selection as me you’ll have head him saying that flight schools who are selling courses to the public have to fill their slots come-what-may, whereas CTC McAlpine train only to the numbers that the airlines require. Therefore they have an absolute cut-off rather than a moving target. You, like me, obviously failed the absolute level.
CTC McAlpine spend more than £60,000 on the cadets’ training. If they fail to place you with an airline, they loose money. If the cadet fails, CTC McAlpine pay the first £30,000 of training costs and the cadet walks away with no debt (but most of the way to a licence). So how is it that they never loose?
If the cadet fails after £30,000 has been spent, or defaults on the contract, there is a significant financial penalty. Stay the course, and you get free training and a jet job. Yes, you are bonded for 7 years. But I remember the BA scheme; that involved similar pay scales and 5 years bonding. It was the best sponsorship scheme around, as, like the easyJet, Thomas Cook and CTC McAlpine Schemes it was 100%. Whereas British Midland, Air 2000, KLM UK, flybe, Aer Lingus but to name a few required tens of thousands of your own money. Self sponsor, and what are your chances of a jet job on graduation? Grow up!
The Airlines are required to contribute up front to the allowances and pay for the type rating whether they take the cadet on or not. So if they sponsor someone and do not employ them, they loose a lot of money, and the cadet is pretty well placed as they are still in CTC McAlpine’s ‘pot’, but now have a type rating and a few 100 hours on type.
The bank’s commitment is obvious. HSBC offer this loan to lots of ‘self-funded’ student pilots and some flight schools even advertise that they will put you in contact with HSBC. However, the major difference is that the normal limit is £30,000, and you have to convince them to get the lot. I have; I researched the loan thoroughly on this site. Unfortunately, I do not have a sponsor who is going to pay the capital and interest for me, on top of my wages.
This site is about information. I’ve left a good career to chase my dream of becoming a professional pilot. I’ve done it after exhausting my sponsorship chances. What really annoys me is people like you who have failed the sponsorship selection, just as I have, who then slag the mouth that didn’t feed them. I am going to succeed as an airline pilot, unlike the 80% who start out on this road, through determination and application rather than top flight natural ability. I was inspired by my experience through CTC McAlpine’s selection, not embittered. I met true professionals at CTC McAlpine, who convinced me that I wanted to be amongst them. I both envy and applaud those applicants who have achieved the fast track and I’ve done my sums and know that they will be miles above me in the seniority lists. But I’m blowed if I would be put off by twisted arguments like yours, and I’m sad that you might influence someone who is using this site to research the possibilities like I did.
My advice - if you want to be an airline pilot, if you fulful the requirements, apply to this first, and listen to the feedback before spending any money on your own training. And above all, do not listen to wouldhavebeens.
The figure quoted of £100,000 includes allowances, insurance, additional training, airfares, a type rating, etc, etc, etc. I have researched self-funded training in considerable depth – I am now part way through my own. I have no doubt that the figure is accurate. If you have researched what is in the CTC McAlpine Scheme (over 250 hours of training, more than ½ of which is multi-engine + the type rating + the ‘extras’ like cars, and allowances and……), you would not be comparing it with £30K training, which is theoretically possible, but unrealistic but for a few (goldenballs, living at home, PPL holders) to achieve. There is also this little matter of a job……
I met Rod Wren during my selection. I remember distinctly him pointing out the risks in the programme for every “stakeholder” involved: CTC McAlpine, the Cadet, the Airline and the Bank. I got the impression that he was pretty chuffed to have found a way of giving an incentive to everyone to perform their bit. He was also pretty pointed about the risks involved for the cadet. I even asked him if he was trying to put us off. His answer was yes: he’d rather run a course light than take on people who were not committed. He also talked about selection and the ‘cut-off level’. I wonder if that is where you got your ideas about a moving goalpost. If you were at the same selection as me you’ll have head him saying that flight schools who are selling courses to the public have to fill their slots come-what-may, whereas CTC McAlpine train only to the numbers that the airlines require. Therefore they have an absolute cut-off rather than a moving target. You, like me, obviously failed the absolute level.
CTC McAlpine spend more than £60,000 on the cadets’ training. If they fail to place you with an airline, they loose money. If the cadet fails, CTC McAlpine pay the first £30,000 of training costs and the cadet walks away with no debt (but most of the way to a licence). So how is it that they never loose?
If the cadet fails after £30,000 has been spent, or defaults on the contract, there is a significant financial penalty. Stay the course, and you get free training and a jet job. Yes, you are bonded for 7 years. But I remember the BA scheme; that involved similar pay scales and 5 years bonding. It was the best sponsorship scheme around, as, like the easyJet, Thomas Cook and CTC McAlpine Schemes it was 100%. Whereas British Midland, Air 2000, KLM UK, flybe, Aer Lingus but to name a few required tens of thousands of your own money. Self sponsor, and what are your chances of a jet job on graduation? Grow up!
The Airlines are required to contribute up front to the allowances and pay for the type rating whether they take the cadet on or not. So if they sponsor someone and do not employ them, they loose a lot of money, and the cadet is pretty well placed as they are still in CTC McAlpine’s ‘pot’, but now have a type rating and a few 100 hours on type.
The bank’s commitment is obvious. HSBC offer this loan to lots of ‘self-funded’ student pilots and some flight schools even advertise that they will put you in contact with HSBC. However, the major difference is that the normal limit is £30,000, and you have to convince them to get the lot. I have; I researched the loan thoroughly on this site. Unfortunately, I do not have a sponsor who is going to pay the capital and interest for me, on top of my wages.
This site is about information. I’ve left a good career to chase my dream of becoming a professional pilot. I’ve done it after exhausting my sponsorship chances. What really annoys me is people like you who have failed the sponsorship selection, just as I have, who then slag the mouth that didn’t feed them. I am going to succeed as an airline pilot, unlike the 80% who start out on this road, through determination and application rather than top flight natural ability. I was inspired by my experience through CTC McAlpine’s selection, not embittered. I met true professionals at CTC McAlpine, who convinced me that I wanted to be amongst them. I both envy and applaud those applicants who have achieved the fast track and I’ve done my sums and know that they will be miles above me in the seniority lists. But I’m blowed if I would be put off by twisted arguments like yours, and I’m sad that you might influence someone who is using this site to research the possibilities like I did.
My advice - if you want to be an airline pilot, if you fulful the requirements, apply to this first, and listen to the feedback before spending any money on your own training. And above all, do not listen to wouldhavebeens.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Doha, Qatar
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sally at pprune, I have one thing to say to you !!!
Well done - The fact that you have so much determination is fantastic and I have no doubt that you will be very sucessful. I am very sorry you did not succeed with CTC. The fact that you have not given up is the one quality that will allow you to succeed as a pilot. I wish you every luck in your future piloting career !
Well done - The fact that you have so much determination is fantastic and I have no doubt that you will be very sucessful. I am very sorry you did not succeed with CTC. The fact that you have not given up is the one quality that will allow you to succeed as a pilot. I wish you every luck in your future piloting career !
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great post Sally, it says it all.
I look forward to flying with you someday. It will be a few years before we do but i have no doubt you will make it. A most refreshing post to read amongst the doom and gloom i usually read on this forum
Good luck
I look forward to flying with you someday. It will be a few years before we do but i have no doubt you will make it. A most refreshing post to read amongst the doom and gloom i usually read on this forum
Good luck
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheltenham
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1st september selection day
Hi,
I was just wondering if anyone who attended the CTC selection day on the 1st september got through to the third stage?
I was one of the '70%' that didnt make it unfortunately!
I still found it a useful day and worth paying the £165, unless you try these things you'll never know!
The day began at 9.30 and following a Q&A session we were split into two groups (labour and conservative!)
The morning then consisted of a group discussion, followed by lunch and then then the dreaded computer tests in the afternoon, a tip would be to brush up on your maths as id say easy points can be gained here.
I met some interesting people there, hope many of you made it through
all the best
Nick
I was just wondering if anyone who attended the CTC selection day on the 1st september got through to the third stage?
I was one of the '70%' that didnt make it unfortunately!
I still found it a useful day and worth paying the £165, unless you try these things you'll never know!
The day began at 9.30 and following a Q&A session we were split into two groups (labour and conservative!)
The morning then consisted of a group discussion, followed by lunch and then then the dreaded computer tests in the afternoon, a tip would be to brush up on your maths as id say easy points can be gained here.
I met some interesting people there, hope many of you made it through
all the best
Nick
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mooney
Dodgy ground there old son................! I don't think you will find many of the 'girls who can't kick a football' managing to pass their IR, so I think it is a bit generalist to throw that one in when talking about female pilots in general, let alone when you have addressed sally directly in the sentence before.
I think it 'probably' has nothing to do with it. Remember a larger number of guys fail in the sim and probably did in that same test for a variety of reasons.
Just to counter though, have you ever seen a woman in full 'multi-task' mode? Much better than just about any man and that's a quality that is most desirable in a pilot. Strange how the 'perfectionist' males manage to get jobs as pilots then?
I think you will find that the relatively few females that do enter into this industry and pass their training are above average, certainly in the 'female ability' scale and probably generally on the pilot scale too. Not trying to be antagonistic, just pointing out a viewpoint.
PP
Dodgy ground there old son................! I don't think you will find many of the 'girls who can't kick a football' managing to pass their IR, so I think it is a bit generalist to throw that one in when talking about female pilots in general, let alone when you have addressed sally directly in the sentence before.
Perhaps thats why you failed the GH test in the sim?
Just to counter though, have you ever seen a woman in full 'multi-task' mode? Much better than just about any man and that's a quality that is most desirable in a pilot. Strange how the 'perfectionist' males manage to get jobs as pilots then?
I think you will find that the relatively few females that do enter into this industry and pass their training are above average, certainly in the 'female ability' scale and probably generally on the pilot scale too. Not trying to be antagonistic, just pointing out a viewpoint.
PP
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Emirates Living - The Meadows
Age: 79
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mooney12,
Have you gone quite mad? You say...
Either you are trying to start an online argument, plain narrow minded or just haven't had a huge exposure to aviation.
Some of the best pilots I have ever flown with were women, on my army pilots course the top pilot, quite deservedly, was a woman, (the only woman).
Don't get me wrong I have flown with and seen fly some low grade pilots both male and female but to come up with an all encompassing comment like the one above is at the least narrow minded and at worst biggoted.
I have heard that there exists a study from the US military that shows that a male pilots ability is represented by a standard gaussian distribution curve. Suffice to say there are some very poor, some very good but lots of average ones and that the same study showed evidence that female pilot's ability was represented by an inverse gaussian curve i.e. not that many average female pilots etiher rubbish ones or excellent ones and in all honesty that did seem to apply to the military and civilian pilots that I have met and worked with.
The numbers however do not show that professional pilots mil or civvy, male or female who have thus passed the minimum selection criteria and are flying the line can be differentiated so because that crieteria line cuts the distribution curve 2/3 of the way up thus of those female professional pilots whom you meet the chances are that they are better than you.
More to the point as they represent 52% of the GB population the airline trying to get its deomgraphic representation correct is more likely to take them than you so wind your neck in, get some time in and worry about stuff like how we are all going to get jobs before the bank takes our second mortaged house away.
VT
Have you gone quite mad? You say...
It has to be said that women have a harder time of becoming airline pilots simply because of a lack of co-ordination. Have you ever seen a woman trying to kick a football for example?
Some of the best pilots I have ever flown with were women, on my army pilots course the top pilot, quite deservedly, was a woman, (the only woman).
Don't get me wrong I have flown with and seen fly some low grade pilots both male and female but to come up with an all encompassing comment like the one above is at the least narrow minded and at worst biggoted.
I have heard that there exists a study from the US military that shows that a male pilots ability is represented by a standard gaussian distribution curve. Suffice to say there are some very poor, some very good but lots of average ones and that the same study showed evidence that female pilot's ability was represented by an inverse gaussian curve i.e. not that many average female pilots etiher rubbish ones or excellent ones and in all honesty that did seem to apply to the military and civilian pilots that I have met and worked with.
The numbers however do not show that professional pilots mil or civvy, male or female who have thus passed the minimum selection criteria and are flying the line can be differentiated so because that crieteria line cuts the distribution curve 2/3 of the way up thus of those female professional pilots whom you meet the chances are that they are better than you.
More to the point as they represent 52% of the GB population the airline trying to get its deomgraphic representation correct is more likely to take them than you so wind your neck in, get some time in and worry about stuff like how we are all going to get jobs before the bank takes our second mortaged house away.
VT
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Not quite sure
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mooney12,
You are talking complete bollocks! I am female, I can kick a football and infact I have competed at a reasonably high level. I also managed to come in the first 25% in the psychometric side of testing when I was down at Dibden. Unfortunately I was not successful but this wasn't because I was female and therefore must have a lack of coordination, it was simply because I was not good enough on the day.
I applaud Sally for her determination and I too will make it to that RHS one day. I haven't taken the plunge to self-fund yet, but like Sally, when I do I will be leaving a well paid job behind. At the moment I am putting all of my efforts into saving some money to allow me to realise my ambition. I am extremely dedicated and know that I will succeed. I am equally certain that there are many other women out there who are as determined and will succeed even if they have never kicked a football in their life!
WO79
You are talking complete bollocks! I am female, I can kick a football and infact I have competed at a reasonably high level. I also managed to come in the first 25% in the psychometric side of testing when I was down at Dibden. Unfortunately I was not successful but this wasn't because I was female and therefore must have a lack of coordination, it was simply because I was not good enough on the day.
I applaud Sally for her determination and I too will make it to that RHS one day. I haven't taken the plunge to self-fund yet, but like Sally, when I do I will be leaving a well paid job behind. At the moment I am putting all of my efforts into saving some money to allow me to realise my ambition. I am extremely dedicated and know that I will succeed. I am equally certain that there are many other women out there who are as determined and will succeed even if they have never kicked a football in their life!
WO79