Oxford Air Training
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boots, I've just penned a long reply and lost it. I don't have time to re-write it.
Suffice to say I have nothing against Oxford; I just wish to help people see past their preconceptions and dispel some of the marketing hype. As for my role here, it is very much as an advisor. I have run the busiest UAS as the Chief Flying Instructor, which included interviewing and selecting candidates, teaching and examining them, writing reports on them and helping promising students get into the airlines when the RAF closed its gates. Some of my RAF contemporaries are now senior people in the civilian flying training world; others are in positions of power in the airlines. I have also been through the business of taking the ATPL exams and obtaining a job in the airlines myself in the not too distant past, and I have an information-giving role in my airline's recruiting drive now (which you can read for yourself in T&E). I was asked, many years ago, to join the Pprune team in Wannabes precisely because of that experience and those contacts. My role here is most certainly not as referee! (Though it is in the rest of the site).
Scroggs
Suffice to say I have nothing against Oxford; I just wish to help people see past their preconceptions and dispel some of the marketing hype. As for my role here, it is very much as an advisor. I have run the busiest UAS as the Chief Flying Instructor, which included interviewing and selecting candidates, teaching and examining them, writing reports on them and helping promising students get into the airlines when the RAF closed its gates. Some of my RAF contemporaries are now senior people in the civilian flying training world; others are in positions of power in the airlines. I have also been through the business of taking the ATPL exams and obtaining a job in the airlines myself in the not too distant past, and I have an information-giving role in my airline's recruiting drive now (which you can read for yourself in T&E). I was asked, many years ago, to join the Pprune team in Wannabes precisely because of that experience and those contacts. My role here is most certainly not as referee! (Though it is in the rest of the site).
Scroggs
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,805
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to put my two penny worth in here because I am one of Oxford's competitors and I am obviously biased so you know where I'm coming from, but then I also compete with FTE, CABAIR, Naples, BCFT, etc and have no issues with them.
Oxford's marketing is unparalleled in the industry. Its very well funded and they genuinely believe what they say. They actually believe their training is better than anyone else's, they believe it so much they don't look at the statistics which say Oxford's pass rates are at best, average and, at worst, poor. They genuinely believe Oxford candidates stand a better chance of getting a job in the face of any evidence to the contrary. Actually CTC wipe the floor with them. CTC only take 2% of their applicants, every one that passes gets a job. The OAT apologists' response is to say "Well, if you want to apply to an organisation with a 98% failure rate, go ahead". CTC use us for modular groundschool. The CTC cadets' pass rates are better than any similar group of cadets in the past, including Oxford's BA sponsored cadets, from back in the days when sponsorship existed. The response? "CTC groundschool is self-study, you are just left to get on with it". OAT believe the JOC is important and use this to justify the price differential from other courses, they ignore its irrelevance to the licensing process and then cheerfully say its the most profitable part of the APP. We're dealing with religious conviction here, which is why folk get sucked in. The whole thing is so wierd its scary. If you go to FTE or CABAIR you will get exactly the same quality of training and exactly the same chances of employment, or not, what you won't get is the Stepford cadet syndrome.
Oxford's marketing is unparalleled in the industry. Its very well funded and they genuinely believe what they say. They actually believe their training is better than anyone else's, they believe it so much they don't look at the statistics which say Oxford's pass rates are at best, average and, at worst, poor. They genuinely believe Oxford candidates stand a better chance of getting a job in the face of any evidence to the contrary. Actually CTC wipe the floor with them. CTC only take 2% of their applicants, every one that passes gets a job. The OAT apologists' response is to say "Well, if you want to apply to an organisation with a 98% failure rate, go ahead". CTC use us for modular groundschool. The CTC cadets' pass rates are better than any similar group of cadets in the past, including Oxford's BA sponsored cadets, from back in the days when sponsorship existed. The response? "CTC groundschool is self-study, you are just left to get on with it". OAT believe the JOC is important and use this to justify the price differential from other courses, they ignore its irrelevance to the licensing process and then cheerfully say its the most profitable part of the APP. We're dealing with religious conviction here, which is why folk get sucked in. The whole thing is so wierd its scary. If you go to FTE or CABAIR you will get exactly the same quality of training and exactly the same chances of employment, or not, what you won't get is the Stepford cadet syndrome.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London & Los Angeles
Age: 54
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But isn't the CTC scheme part sponsored by airlines so by the very fact that they are accepted means they have a job at the end of it? So isn't that why so many people throw themselves into the applicaton process and they have such a high failure rate? I know a couple of people who failed and then went on to do their fATPL at one of the other big three FTO's and had to pay for it.
Muddy Boots
Muddy Boots
Muddy Boots - No, the CTC scheme is not 'part sponsored' by the airlines. The distinction of the CTC scheme is that it depends upon an objective selection process (i.e. nobody who fails to achieve the objective standard is accepted into the scheme). The OAT selection process, on the other hand, is a purely commercial process whereby applicants are accepted, in order of merit, until the course is full, irrespective of their objective standard. This, along with the design of the course, accounts for the significant difference in pass rates.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London & Los Angeles
Age: 54
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, I am a little wiser in terms of CTC but as I said, on my assesment there were guys there with good money wanting to attend who didn't meet the desired standard and were turned away. I was e-mailed yesterday to inquire when I would like to start and I know there are places available for the March course. If it was purely commercial as you suggest they would be taken just as cannon fodder to fill the gaps.
In addition of previous grads that I have chatted to, there are nearly at a 100% pass rates among their courses.
In addition of previous grads that I have chatted to, there are nearly at a 100% pass rates among their courses.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's fine to have a sensible discussion about FTO's such as OAT but there are two many people here dishing out advice about a school they have no experience of! Where did all this "military style", "regimented", "stepford cadets", etc talk come from? Not OAT students/graduates that's for sure! In my entire time at OAT I didn't hear one student complain about military style regimentation - there are a lot of outspoken students each with their own grumbles as you would get at any school but this was never one of them!!!
Most people who go to OAT go for the expertise and reputation. I was prepared to pay a premium for that (no rich Daddy!!!) - it has been suggested that some of the fees go towards marketing, but it's the marketing that builds up the reputation and the reputation that helps you get a job! I went in with my eyes open and was fully aware of what I was paying for. Actually I was different to Hedges81 as I was going to go for Cabair but after visiting both schools and also CTC and Jerez I went with OAT. There isn't a big price difference when you break down what each school includes in the course. I spent hours at the bank going through all of this for my loan as my bank wasn't familiar with airline training courses.
I've said in an earlier post that I don't regret my decision to go to OAT - I got some great training and a job very soon after graduating, so I feel it was right for me. Being totally honest the part of the course I didn't consider necessary was FOF. I didn't come straight from school and had been given CV advice, economics talks etc before. It didn't need to last 2 weeks - the four days at the start with the CRM stuff is great but I didn't get anything out of the remaining time. However the APP course comes as a package and as I was really happy with the rest of the course I just had to accept the FOF.
Hedges 81 - it really sounds as though you disliked OAT from the start! I can't imagine that a presentation about the school can demote OAT from top of your list to you absolutely loathing it! Did you actually talk to students while you were there and ask their opinions? They are not all school age - my class of 18 or so ranged from age 20 to 35 and that seems to be the case in most classes.
I can't say if OAT instructors are any better than anywhere else as I've only ever trained there! But this comment really is ridiculous - they may all be subjct to the same JAA/CAA training but what about years of experience in an airline or instructing?? Surely that makes a difference? OAT instructors have mainly been airline pilots for bmi, Monarch, Britannia, BA and more - they have an incredible wealth of expertise. Anyone looking at which FTO to go to should consider experience of instructors.
Most people who go to OAT go for the expertise and reputation. I was prepared to pay a premium for that (no rich Daddy!!!) - it has been suggested that some of the fees go towards marketing, but it's the marketing that builds up the reputation and the reputation that helps you get a job! I went in with my eyes open and was fully aware of what I was paying for. Actually I was different to Hedges81 as I was going to go for Cabair but after visiting both schools and also CTC and Jerez I went with OAT. There isn't a big price difference when you break down what each school includes in the course. I spent hours at the bank going through all of this for my loan as my bank wasn't familiar with airline training courses.
I've said in an earlier post that I don't regret my decision to go to OAT - I got some great training and a job very soon after graduating, so I feel it was right for me. Being totally honest the part of the course I didn't consider necessary was FOF. I didn't come straight from school and had been given CV advice, economics talks etc before. It didn't need to last 2 weeks - the four days at the start with the CRM stuff is great but I didn't get anything out of the remaining time. However the APP course comes as a package and as I was really happy with the rest of the course I just had to accept the FOF.
Hedges 81 - it really sounds as though you disliked OAT from the start! I can't imagine that a presentation about the school can demote OAT from top of your list to you absolutely loathing it! Did you actually talk to students while you were there and ask their opinions? They are not all school age - my class of 18 or so ranged from age 20 to 35 and that seems to be the case in most classes.
I cannot comment on the instructors, but as all instructors are subject to the same JAA/CAA training, exams and continued career development, there is no reason why the ones at OAT should be any better than elsewhere.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Essex
Age: 54
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to add my two pence worth into the mix, with regard to the "30 grand" difference - it does exist.
I'll start out by saying that I am doing all my training part time, modular alongside my day job, so Integrated was never an option for me. Howver I have read oxfords brochures in my research for modular schools, and mighty impressive they appear to be. However contrary to the opinions of many Oxford converts, they are not the only school with professional instructors, and good quality fleets etc.
I'm doing my training at a well known modular provider near Stansted. None of the instructors are "hour builders" most are professional with thousands of hours, many are airline pilots past and current. The aircraft are top notch, the IR aircraft are brand new, as are the 2 simulators for IR and CPL instrument training. Many people give these as the reasons to go to Oxford, but this quality of instruction and equipment is available elsewhere. Yes not all modular providers are like this, and some are in a muddy portacabin with one tired old seneca, but not all are like this. Oh yes and the important bit?
I already had a PPL and I did my hour building for about 5 grand in a local group. ATPLs cost £2500 distance learning (including the exam fees) and the bill for CPL, ME, IR and an MCC on a full motion 737 is going to be about £20,000 including test fees. Add the PPL, hour building and ATPLs and I've still got change for 30k.
So yes you can get a comparable quality training for less than half the cost.
As for the career help thing, well only time will tell but I'm not convinced - and its certainly not worth 30K. for 25k I could get a speculative 737 type rating and 100 hours line training - which will get me a job much easier than a recommendation from a careers advisor.
I've got nothing against oxford and think they have a good product, but they are not the only ones out there.
I'll start out by saying that I am doing all my training part time, modular alongside my day job, so Integrated was never an option for me. Howver I have read oxfords brochures in my research for modular schools, and mighty impressive they appear to be. However contrary to the opinions of many Oxford converts, they are not the only school with professional instructors, and good quality fleets etc.
I'm doing my training at a well known modular provider near Stansted. None of the instructors are "hour builders" most are professional with thousands of hours, many are airline pilots past and current. The aircraft are top notch, the IR aircraft are brand new, as are the 2 simulators for IR and CPL instrument training. Many people give these as the reasons to go to Oxford, but this quality of instruction and equipment is available elsewhere. Yes not all modular providers are like this, and some are in a muddy portacabin with one tired old seneca, but not all are like this. Oh yes and the important bit?
I already had a PPL and I did my hour building for about 5 grand in a local group. ATPLs cost £2500 distance learning (including the exam fees) and the bill for CPL, ME, IR and an MCC on a full motion 737 is going to be about £20,000 including test fees. Add the PPL, hour building and ATPLs and I've still got change for 30k.
So yes you can get a comparable quality training for less than half the cost.
As for the career help thing, well only time will tell but I'm not convinced - and its certainly not worth 30K. for 25k I could get a speculative 737 type rating and 100 hours line training - which will get me a job much easier than a recommendation from a careers advisor.
I've got nothing against oxford and think they have a good product, but they are not the only ones out there.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by High Wing Drifter
I've often wondered if flying in less than pristine aircraft actually provides a better quality of training.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not necessarily. Serviceability depends more on maintenance than age or equipment. In fact some issues arise with new technology, although this is not the place to start a row with the advocates of the relevant aircraft. If the number of students is fitted to the size of the fleet then there is no need for students to be delayed. That will become a problem, as the world requirement for pilots is forecast to excede the capacity of he training system!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: colchester
Age: 34
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OAT
JUST A QUICK QUESTION HOW MUCH DOES THIS COST I AM A BIT OF A LEPPER ON THE WEB AND CANT FIND OUT HOW MUCH IT IS!!!!!!! ANY SUGGESTIONS???/
(ive only bin 16 for a month and i still say im 15 sorry)
(ive only bin 16 for a month and i still say im 15 sorry)
Last edited by Jetdriver; 23rd Feb 2006 at 11:41.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: England
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presuming you are referring to Oxford Air Training, www.oxfordaviation.net should give you the information you require
WD
WD
Guest
Posts: n/a
This thread has become a joke.
It started out as someone who has chosen Oxford saying something positive. Then Scroggs, the moderator merged another thread that was a complete Oxford Bash Fest with it, thereby hijacking the original. How can he honestly claim to be a neutral moderator?
Then Alex Whittington, who runs Bristol Ground School, jumps in and bashes OAT in a rather obvious self promotional attempt. What he fails to tell you is that the promotional CD he sends out for his own ground school includes Oxford's marketing photos. I guess that is one way for him to reduce his marketing budget, but if OAT's such a crappy school, why does he want to be associated with it by including photos of guys wearing Oxford logos in his own promotional materials? Could it be his relationship with them soured when they cut the price of their own self study Ground below his so now he feels the need to bash them.
He also doesn't tell you the reason CTC's application pass rate is so low is because they are running a sponsorship scheme. He also doesn't tell you that CTC Wings is a Modular training programme. He also doesn't tell you that it costs the same as Oxford's Integrated programme. Quite a few have made a big deal that Modular training costs as low as £30K less than OAT's Integrated course, so why, may I ask, does CTC's Modular cost the same as an Integrated course? Could it be people are willing to pay more for the job security? Isn't that exactly why people choose Oxford and FTE? Why then is nobody bashing CTC like they do Oxford.
Nobody bashes an expensive quasi sponsorship (Yes quasi, because CTC cadets pay for their training) scheme, but they bash the one people have to pay for at OAT. Those same people would have given their left testicle to have gotten a seat on APPs predecessor when it was mainly filled with BA, BMI and Aer Lingus cadets, but now they complain about the price. It really seems to come down to those who can't afford spiting those who can.
Like Scroggs says, don't leave your critical faculties at home!
It started out as someone who has chosen Oxford saying something positive. Then Scroggs, the moderator merged another thread that was a complete Oxford Bash Fest with it, thereby hijacking the original. How can he honestly claim to be a neutral moderator?
Then Alex Whittington, who runs Bristol Ground School, jumps in and bashes OAT in a rather obvious self promotional attempt. What he fails to tell you is that the promotional CD he sends out for his own ground school includes Oxford's marketing photos. I guess that is one way for him to reduce his marketing budget, but if OAT's such a crappy school, why does he want to be associated with it by including photos of guys wearing Oxford logos in his own promotional materials? Could it be his relationship with them soured when they cut the price of their own self study Ground below his so now he feels the need to bash them.
He also doesn't tell you the reason CTC's application pass rate is so low is because they are running a sponsorship scheme. He also doesn't tell you that CTC Wings is a Modular training programme. He also doesn't tell you that it costs the same as Oxford's Integrated programme. Quite a few have made a big deal that Modular training costs as low as £30K less than OAT's Integrated course, so why, may I ask, does CTC's Modular cost the same as an Integrated course? Could it be people are willing to pay more for the job security? Isn't that exactly why people choose Oxford and FTE? Why then is nobody bashing CTC like they do Oxford.
Nobody bashes an expensive quasi sponsorship (Yes quasi, because CTC cadets pay for their training) scheme, but they bash the one people have to pay for at OAT. Those same people would have given their left testicle to have gotten a seat on APPs predecessor when it was mainly filled with BA, BMI and Aer Lingus cadets, but now they complain about the price. It really seems to come down to those who can't afford spiting those who can.
Like Scroggs says, don't leave your critical faculties at home!
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am neither for nor against Oxford. I merged the threads in an attempt to prevent thei forum becoming all about OAT. It is a common procedure; similar things have been done when other schools are the topic of the day. There is absolutely no value in having one thread 'pro Oxford' and another 'anti Oxford'; this is supposed to be a discussion in which different points of view can be aired. I will ensure that it stays that way.
As for CTC, it is rather a different animal. As you say, it is a structured modular course. The course has been structured to reflect CTC's priorities, which is to prepare students for contracted and confirmed airline places. Nearly all CTC's students enter having already secured a provisional place with an airline, that is why their failure rate at or before interview is so high. There are very few speculative students at CTC, and even those are accepted against places that CTC are reasonably sure will be there. As far as I am aware, no-one passes CTC to then join the job-searchers. That makes tham rather different from the integrated schools who are, at present, only training speculative students who have no job to go to at the time they start the course.
All that said, CTC is far from proof against criticism! There have been several threads here (though not necessarily in Wannabes) about the quality of CTC's output. This has been, as far as I can make out, a consequence of some concerns that easyJet had. Whether this is still (or ever really was) a problem, I can't say, but one thing you'll not see here is a thread called 'CTC cadets - still looking for a job?'! As for the price of the course, I believe it's more expensive than Oxford's - but it does include the type rating and line training. And it includes the allowance paid during the advanced phase of the course. And the cost is repaid by the contracting airline.
You are free to express your opinion of any FTO here. However, don't expect me to blow bubbles up the back passage of any particular school just because you like it. I will continue to call it as I see it, from the perspective of nearly 30 years' experience in professional aviation.
Scroggs
As for CTC, it is rather a different animal. As you say, it is a structured modular course. The course has been structured to reflect CTC's priorities, which is to prepare students for contracted and confirmed airline places. Nearly all CTC's students enter having already secured a provisional place with an airline, that is why their failure rate at or before interview is so high. There are very few speculative students at CTC, and even those are accepted against places that CTC are reasonably sure will be there. As far as I am aware, no-one passes CTC to then join the job-searchers. That makes tham rather different from the integrated schools who are, at present, only training speculative students who have no job to go to at the time they start the course.
All that said, CTC is far from proof against criticism! There have been several threads here (though not necessarily in Wannabes) about the quality of CTC's output. This has been, as far as I can make out, a consequence of some concerns that easyJet had. Whether this is still (or ever really was) a problem, I can't say, but one thing you'll not see here is a thread called 'CTC cadets - still looking for a job?'! As for the price of the course, I believe it's more expensive than Oxford's - but it does include the type rating and line training. And it includes the allowance paid during the advanced phase of the course. And the cost is repaid by the contracting airline.
You are free to express your opinion of any FTO here. However, don't expect me to blow bubbles up the back passage of any particular school just because you like it. I will continue to call it as I see it, from the perspective of nearly 30 years' experience in professional aviation.
Scroggs
Guest
Posts: n/a
Capacity
I think it could possibly be fantastic if demand exceeds capacity for the training system. It just might mean airlines start having to pay for the training again. Especially when the FTOs have to buy more airplanes and find they have to update to more modern fleets, for which they will have to charge even higher prices. This would likely send supply even lower temporarily, but once the airlines realize they are short on pilots, they will have to loosen up the purse strings!
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,805
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goodness Nimbus, that's a bit harsh. At least I post under my name so you can see who I am. All my statements are true, you can check them yourself if you do a bit of research. Check out OAT's forum for starters. Your points in turn:
1. It was not intended to be self-promtional, I'm sorry you see it that way.
2. I use OAT's pictures on our brochure CD, with their permission, to illustrate the options available to students, one of those is the full integrated course.
3. OAT did cut the price of their DL groundschool by 25%. It didn't affect us at all. I suspect we appeal to a different sector.
4. You have sort out whether you think CTC's scheme is sponsorship or not, because you say both things in your post. It certainly is selected, but I refer you to BilleBob's earlier post about the effectiveness of the two selection processes.
5. CTC is modular and their success is greater than that of any current integrated course measured by any parameter you choose.
6. CTC's students are required to provide a bond for, which I agree is just the same as 'pay', about £60K. The training takes them up to type rating, though, which Oxford's does not.
7. I'll leave it to someone else to explain again the difference between the marketing approaches of CTC/FTE/CABAIR and Oxford. I suspect that's why OAT take a bit of a bashing and the others do not.
Edited to ask: Why does your profile say you hold a CPL IR when you say on the previous page that you haven't decided where to train yet?
1. It was not intended to be self-promtional, I'm sorry you see it that way.
2. I use OAT's pictures on our brochure CD, with their permission, to illustrate the options available to students, one of those is the full integrated course.
3. OAT did cut the price of their DL groundschool by 25%. It didn't affect us at all. I suspect we appeal to a different sector.
4. You have sort out whether you think CTC's scheme is sponsorship or not, because you say both things in your post. It certainly is selected, but I refer you to BilleBob's earlier post about the effectiveness of the two selection processes.
5. CTC is modular and their success is greater than that of any current integrated course measured by any parameter you choose.
6. CTC's students are required to provide a bond for, which I agree is just the same as 'pay', about £60K. The training takes them up to type rating, though, which Oxford's does not.
7. I'll leave it to someone else to explain again the difference between the marketing approaches of CTC/FTE/CABAIR and Oxford. I suspect that's why OAT take a bit of a bashing and the others do not.
Edited to ask: Why does your profile say you hold a CPL IR when you say on the previous page that you haven't decided where to train yet?
Last edited by Alex Whittingham; 23rd Feb 2006 at 16:43.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: London
Age: 40
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as a recent graduate of oxford, i have heard alot of the (bad) rumours going around about oxford from current students from other FTO's and and some from within oxford its self. i personally feel that i got what i paid for, well worth every penny. and they do really work at getting you that job!
i think some ppl expect a little to much and think that for £60oddK that they will be spoon fed every single thing and then oxford will go and job hunt for you, which is not the case, from an airline point of view if oxford call up the airline saying "here is John Smith's CV he would really like a job" then the airline just thinks, why cant he call and do it him self......however what oxford do is get themselvs known to the airlines and i found that loads .. i mean loads of airlines call oxford for new pilots on a weekly/monthy basis and when that happend i got an interview yippee....i learnt i kind of need to pass them as well as attend, anyway i called oxford and a week or so later i was being put forward or 2 more.... i have no complaits about my time at oxford.
as for speaking up and getting your self know in a bad way. me and the guys on my corridor in halls complaind about not having any internet connection, they said there was an internet room in the main halls which is a 5 min walk away we were lazy so pushed a little harder and within a week there was a wirless broadband router in our corridor, i didn't sence any resentmaent and they certainly have not shunned me away.
anyway that my bit.
too all of you going to phoenix, try and get up to sottsdale and go to Devils Martini and Dirty Dogg Saloon (wednesday night with a fistfull of doller bills lol)
i think some ppl expect a little to much and think that for £60oddK that they will be spoon fed every single thing and then oxford will go and job hunt for you, which is not the case, from an airline point of view if oxford call up the airline saying "here is John Smith's CV he would really like a job" then the airline just thinks, why cant he call and do it him self......however what oxford do is get themselvs known to the airlines and i found that loads .. i mean loads of airlines call oxford for new pilots on a weekly/monthy basis and when that happend i got an interview yippee....i learnt i kind of need to pass them as well as attend, anyway i called oxford and a week or so later i was being put forward or 2 more.... i have no complaits about my time at oxford.
as for speaking up and getting your self know in a bad way. me and the guys on my corridor in halls complaind about not having any internet connection, they said there was an internet room in the main halls which is a 5 min walk away we were lazy so pushed a little harder and within a week there was a wirless broadband router in our corridor, i didn't sence any resentmaent and they certainly have not shunned me away.
anyway that my bit.
too all of you going to phoenix, try and get up to sottsdale and go to Devils Martini and Dirty Dogg Saloon (wednesday night with a fistfull of doller bills lol)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Nimbus 5,
First of all I say to you again, why would I waste my time making such an effort to attend, driving from chester to oxford and back in a day if I had already decided I did not like OAT?
From their borochure I was of the opinion that OAT could be the place for me. What the brochures do not convey however is the environment and atmosphere at OAT which is Corporate with a capital C. I do not like that anywhere in life, esp at a place where I might spend a year of my time.
You say that I claim to be a mind reader when I say that I could see what people were thinking. One does not have to be psychic to judge peoples thoughs. When I say that the OAT people gave answers to questions that the askers wanted to hear, that was easy to work out with a bit of common sense. For example, one of the questions asked was "How many of last years graduates have got airline jobs"? the answer that someone would want to hear from this would be something like "Most of them". The answer given was "oooh, dont know excatly, but I know a good few of them have". Such a "politician style" answer essentially tells u nothing, as if say 10 graduates had got jobs, that could be described as a good few, even if there were say 90 who hadnt. Such an answer could be interpreted by the asker, who is looking for evidence to back up their choice, as meaning that there is a good chance of them getting a job, which is what they want to hear.
Likewise you accuse me of "mind reading" when I say that the students and some of the attendees were sucking up to the gen manager. I have been sucked up to, and sucked up to people many times, it does not take a mind reader to notice such behaviour.
Regarding the millitary environment. In my opinion, a place where people are striped of their individuality and made to wear uniforms, with visual signs on the shoulders denoting their "rank" has a millitary atmosphere. Coupled with the fact that most of the instructors I spoke to were from RAF backgrounds, with their ingrained millitary attitude likely to be carried across to the school, I believe it was fair that I gained that impression.
I did ask questions to some of the students, but only in earshot of the tour guides, so they were un-likely to express any negative opinions if they had any. I have since been instructed for my PPL by an ex OAT student, who expressed a very negative opinion of the place, not the training which he said was very good, but of the way the students are treated in such a regimented manner.
Regarding the planes, yes, through reading their brochures and taking into account the price tag, which is considerably more than anywhere else, I figured that OAT must have superior state of the art planes, or else where would the money go? They were no better than Id seen anywhere else, indeed the twin senecas are actually inferior to the twin diamonds I saw at Stapleford, a modular school.
You say that my post is rediculous, why? All I am doing is expressing my honest opinion of the open day in a well though out manner.
You say that this thread has become a joke, because it started out as "a positive post for OAT" but has turned into an OAT bashing session. If you read this thread properly you will notice that no-one here has actually said that OAT is "crappy", all they are saying is that it is not vastly superior to many other schools, which is what a lot of people are led to believe. If all you wish to read is positive things about OAT, then I suggest you stick to their marketing brochures and keep out of the real world. Indeed they way you leap to the defence of OAT so vehemently is rather strange considering you do not have any personal connection with the place. I suggest this is because you have pretty much made up your mind to go there, and feel uncomfotable when you read things that make your decision not seem so good as you would like to think. Dont bury your head in the sand, if you do read negative things about OAT, take them seriously, and if you still want to go there then fair play.
Finally, for you own good I advise you NOT to choose OATs modular course. A number of people who have actually done/ are doing it have said some quite worrying things in this forum. Have a look at this excellent thread, started by King Rooney, the man OAT would like to silence, to see for your self. http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=204650
First of all I say to you again, why would I waste my time making such an effort to attend, driving from chester to oxford and back in a day if I had already decided I did not like OAT?
From their borochure I was of the opinion that OAT could be the place for me. What the brochures do not convey however is the environment and atmosphere at OAT which is Corporate with a capital C. I do not like that anywhere in life, esp at a place where I might spend a year of my time.
You say that I claim to be a mind reader when I say that I could see what people were thinking. One does not have to be psychic to judge peoples thoughs. When I say that the OAT people gave answers to questions that the askers wanted to hear, that was easy to work out with a bit of common sense. For example, one of the questions asked was "How many of last years graduates have got airline jobs"? the answer that someone would want to hear from this would be something like "Most of them". The answer given was "oooh, dont know excatly, but I know a good few of them have". Such a "politician style" answer essentially tells u nothing, as if say 10 graduates had got jobs, that could be described as a good few, even if there were say 90 who hadnt. Such an answer could be interpreted by the asker, who is looking for evidence to back up their choice, as meaning that there is a good chance of them getting a job, which is what they want to hear.
Likewise you accuse me of "mind reading" when I say that the students and some of the attendees were sucking up to the gen manager. I have been sucked up to, and sucked up to people many times, it does not take a mind reader to notice such behaviour.
Regarding the millitary environment. In my opinion, a place where people are striped of their individuality and made to wear uniforms, with visual signs on the shoulders denoting their "rank" has a millitary atmosphere. Coupled with the fact that most of the instructors I spoke to were from RAF backgrounds, with their ingrained millitary attitude likely to be carried across to the school, I believe it was fair that I gained that impression.
I did ask questions to some of the students, but only in earshot of the tour guides, so they were un-likely to express any negative opinions if they had any. I have since been instructed for my PPL by an ex OAT student, who expressed a very negative opinion of the place, not the training which he said was very good, but of the way the students are treated in such a regimented manner.
Regarding the planes, yes, through reading their brochures and taking into account the price tag, which is considerably more than anywhere else, I figured that OAT must have superior state of the art planes, or else where would the money go? They were no better than Id seen anywhere else, indeed the twin senecas are actually inferior to the twin diamonds I saw at Stapleford, a modular school.
You say that my post is rediculous, why? All I am doing is expressing my honest opinion of the open day in a well though out manner.
You say that this thread has become a joke, because it started out as "a positive post for OAT" but has turned into an OAT bashing session. If you read this thread properly you will notice that no-one here has actually said that OAT is "crappy", all they are saying is that it is not vastly superior to many other schools, which is what a lot of people are led to believe. If all you wish to read is positive things about OAT, then I suggest you stick to their marketing brochures and keep out of the real world. Indeed they way you leap to the defence of OAT so vehemently is rather strange considering you do not have any personal connection with the place. I suggest this is because you have pretty much made up your mind to go there, and feel uncomfotable when you read things that make your decision not seem so good as you would like to think. Dont bury your head in the sand, if you do read negative things about OAT, take them seriously, and if you still want to go there then fair play.
Finally, for you own good I advise you NOT to choose OATs modular course. A number of people who have actually done/ are doing it have said some quite worrying things in this forum. Have a look at this excellent thread, started by King Rooney, the man OAT would like to silence, to see for your self. http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=204650
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hill Street Blues
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a Ex Modular student, who has got a job offer with in six months and flying a Boeing, I have read this thread and others like it with amusment.
I have no beef with Oxford or any other school for that matter, my problem is that there seems to be a great number of arrogant fools that have gone intergrated, or more importantly have not even started their courses yet and are gladly informing us all that they are the next Scott Crossfield
Well they might be, then again I am sure most of them would never have heard of him. It also seems rather strange that Nimbus 5 has been absent for a few days, anything to do with the minor point Alex Whittingham brought up????
FF
I have no beef with Oxford or any other school for that matter, my problem is that there seems to be a great number of arrogant fools that have gone intergrated, or more importantly have not even started their courses yet and are gladly informing us all that they are the next Scott Crossfield
Well they might be, then again I am sure most of them would never have heard of him. It also seems rather strange that Nimbus 5 has been absent for a few days, anything to do with the minor point Alex Whittingham brought up????
FF
Guest
Posts: n/a
nimbus 5, dear oh dear.
nimbus 5, ur not doing very well here are you?
First you post a series of very imature posts which don´t hold water, and then you are sprung for pretending to be a qualified pilot!
Furthermore, if uve read any of the posts (including the link I gave you) regarding OATs modular scheme, and their treatment of the mod guys, id imagine ur having a serious rethink about your training options. Back to the drawing board, in more ways than one, eh!
First you post a series of very imature posts which don´t hold water, and then you are sprung for pretending to be a qualified pilot!
Furthermore, if uve read any of the posts (including the link I gave you) regarding OATs modular scheme, and their treatment of the mod guys, id imagine ur having a serious rethink about your training options. Back to the drawing board, in more ways than one, eh!