Porter,

I did my CPL at RMIT before it could provide the course on the taxpayers purse. You would think that such a reputable organisation would be an excellent provider of training before and after they were Fee help/HELP approved. I won't go into the details but many people left with big debts and no licence. They enrol far too many students for the facilities available.

This may be an isolated case you may say but according to one particular skills counsel I won't name there are more dodgy provers out there than you can poke a stick at. They arent the majority but they tarnish everyone. You porter may be at a good one but but with a system so broken something had to be done.

Just as there are both mediocre and good air charter operators, it has to be said there are training schools who turn out a quality product, and there are training schools that should not be in business as educators. In my opinion, the majority of training schools that should not be in business are propped up by VET fees.

I have heard comment about one VET fee endorsed training organisation which turns out pilots who are virtually unemployable, at a v-e-r-y high cost. I feel sorry for the students who have been taken advantage of, just as I sympathise with those schools who will be burned by this when they are doing the right thing.

Why are they virtually unemployable?

I will add to outnabouts comment on employability. This isn't directed at vet fee or not fee help schools either. Just observations.

Never landed on dirt and when they do the prop is the one who cops it.
They only ever did one route for navs so once the test is done and they have to fly to an unfamiliar place they crap themselves.

I could go on and on but won't.

Notabove500:
Training starts in a C172, and then (surprisingly soon) are moved onto a high performance single which is not generally used in GA.
No dirt strips or cross winds above 9 knots or flying with more than scattered cloud.
Cross country nav's are done over one or two routes, one of which will be the flight test.
Autopilot and GPS rule the cockpit.
On time departures are a foreign concept - the time of departure is the time you rock up to the airfield.
Anything under the cowl is for the engineer.
No one fails, ever, and no one is criticised ever.

Having written this, I realise that there is more than one school guilty of these sins but in my opinion newly minted CPLs are more likely to display these traits when coming from a VET fee school than from another school.

The former Chief Pilot of WrightsAir has set up a business called GA Ready, which is aimed at teaching newly minted CPLs the facts of GA Outback life and giving them some practical C210 time. An excellent idea, and I am sure the very experienced operator will provide much needed and practical experience. But isn't it a shame that training standards have fallen so far, and that GA has become so irrelevant to the training industry that this type of business is even required?

Agree, as far as I'm aware that's starting.

Anyway, should have some good news shortly

If this is the case, then maybe CASA needs to get involved. This would suggest there's a problem with the FE's?

Problem is most of today's pilots have the notion you owe them a job

When I looked for another pilot the number of applicants that TOLD me they could fly my aircraft because under part 61 they were endorsed

Rather pay over the odds and get a pilot who has what i call animal cunning. Probably what Trevor Wright is teaching

Maybe this provides a golden opportunity to extract more coin to get the student to the required level.

I am not in the flying training business so don't know all the ins and outs. I only work alongside the results - lucky me!

Some good points here.
I think a lot of these issues are applicable to some (not all) integrated schools whether they get fee-help or not.

First all CASA need to do is abolish in-house testing, all examiners for CPL should be independent, not on the payroll of the school.

Second, what outnabout has described is known here as The Bermuda Triangle, Jandakot-Narrogin-Cunderdin-Jandakot where many of the intergrated studes drill holes in the sky over and over again.

My (non integrated) studes are kicked out of the nest when they get their PPL, I want them to fly North where their first job is likely to be and build some hours, do some networking, I want at least one Nullarbor crossing with a selfie at Forrest, have some adventures, make some decisions, do the exams and come back with enough hours to get ready for the test. CPLs should be GA ready before the flight test, not after!

Unemployable is eg someone who walks into my office complete with epaulettes, ray-bans etc demanding to see the Chief Pilot. I tell them the Chief Pilot is only available by appointment. (They probably think I am the cleaner). They then tell me to give "him" their resume, with a covering letter addressed to "Dear Sir" with all the reasons why I should take them on as a charter pilot. I don't do charter. :ugh:

And of course, why would I take them on when Qantas will be snapping them up any minute? :}

Dehavilland Pilot, Trevor Wright is the owner and a Line Pilot of Wrightsair, not the Chief Pilot. The former CP who is at GA Ready is a very capable young lady now based in Albury (I think - definitely somewhere that's not the Creek)

Albury it is, Talia Ellis, GAReady . com . au Outstanding young lady, always recognised by the bessemer block in her kit to get the CoG where it should be. Oh to be so svelte.

Just checked out GA Ready and although it's good to see someone running this type of training, this is the stuff we taught at the flying school I worked at in the early 90's. We had a C182, C206 and a C210 and we would endorse CPL holders on them and give them 5-10 hours on them before they went north (Northwest) looking for their first jobs.

This is what the flying schools should focus on, rather than CPL pilots who have only flown Diamonds (and the like) and thing they will be an airline pilot after they finish their $90-100k course.

Clare Prop, and BPA, I could not agree with you more.

It would have been nice (may be the case?) if they could have limited professional development courses such as IR, FIR, NVFR etc. The latest I saw from one of the larger FTO was no previous experience required and all VET covered, that seemed excessive.

I think there are lots of good issues being discussed in this forum.

However, I do have a question... How much training is a GA employer willing to put into a new employee?

I'm sorry if this is a silly question but I come from a background in business and EVERY job I have ever had, there has been training involved (yes I've been to uni as well). I get that these programs churn out more numbers and attitude than they probably should but if someone from these providers came to you with a license and a willingness to learn and grow as a pilot, is that still no good?

While 30 years ago guys may have paid for the training themselves, that's not entirely viable for a lot of people today. But hey, people also bought homes with $300 in their bank account 30 years ago... Lets please not try and pretend times haven't changed.

not above 500,

We employ pilots, they are qualified but there still needs to be significant training, coaching, investment in the person to get them productive. It depends on where they gained the qualification. We have noticed a significant difference in standards depending on where they gained their instructor rating.

OVERWHELMINGLY, it comes down to attitude. I'll take somebody who's keen and willing to learn with a bit of common sense over the technically superior pilot who thinks they're ready for ME-IFR training as soon as they've got the hours for G2.

VIDEO: New generation of pilots begin training at TAFE - 9news.com.au

They trumpet it like it's a new, good thing!

Just had a quick look at the list of courses no longer eligible for VET FEE.

Unless I have missed something, it looks to me like Aviation students are still eligible for VET FEE support

Aviation will still be VET Student Loan eligible and will not be capped due to the high costs of delivering the training. Ie: Cant really be delivered for under $15,000.