The never-ending 'Modular vs. Integrated' debate - merged ad nauseam

[umzy]

Originally Posted by Cirrus_Clouds

Loving it.

You will obtain the same qualifications, but a higher "possible" (so airlines say) chance of a job at the end if doing Integrated, but again not guranteed.

Ok, now you ping another issue ... what if Already Graduated ( IT, Engineering etc etc) and go for Modular .. at end u still got Graduated degree with all other modules... Does this help ?

[stuharri2002]

Integrated Training Advice

Hi,

I completed my PPL in Sept 2003. Since then I have been working to pay off the loan and saving for the next stage. I have decided to go for the integrated course at OAT. However, in the past 2 years, due to the cost of repaying my loan I have not been able to keep current. Also I think that it will take me another 2 years to save the remaining money for the OAT course, during which time I doubt I will have any spare money for flying. Due you think my lack of currency will be a problem for the OAT course? Also should I think about doing the ATPL ground school and exams during the next 2 years to keep myself sharp? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

thanks

stu

[Blinkz]

Don't forget that the OAT integrated course is ab initio and so most people on it won't actually be able to fly at all. It is desgined to take you from no hours to CPL standard. As such I don't think you will have much problem if you don't fly before it.

As for doing the ATPL groundschool, if you do them yourself before going to OAT then you won't be allowed to do the integrated course, you would have to go down the modular route.

[Lucifer]

All the integrated courses make allowances for previous flying hours, and PPL holders. Reworking the basics is never a bad thing, to solidify that knowledge.

[badboy raggamuffin]

If you went modular your financial concerns would be eased considerably, you already have a ppl so why not just carry on from that?
Is the perceived adantage of going integrated really enough to compensate for the apparent hassle you face in doing it?

The debate continues

[Wannabe1974]

Integrated

Originally Posted by badboy raggamuffin

The debate continues

It does indeed. This is just my personal view, so please no fiery attacks saying I'm talking rubbish! I'm starting at OAT in December on the integrated course for a number of reasons:
1. I have a PPL but it has now lapsed (so I guess I don't really) which can only really give me an advantage as the hours spent learning to land the thing shouldn't really be needed and I can hopefully go onto harder stuff, quicker.
2. Modular courses are great, but you can't escape the facts: The big airlines seem to like integrated.
3. I want to get it done quickly instead of messing about for years.
4. Most people's arguments for modular seem to be that they did it and therefore it must be better.
5. The arguments for integrated seem to be mostly that people thought it was good. I prefer to go with the positive argument!
6. I'm not exactly a spring chicken, so I want to maximise my chances of getting a job.
Hope this helps your thoughts. As I say - just my reasons for doing integrated. Some people might think I'm nuts, but I'd like to think my brain is able to weigh up the options and make a good decision!

[Lucifer]

Originally Posted by BaronBlue

Don't forget the real cost of going integrated i.e. 18 months or so out of work - while being modular you can reduce that cost dramatically. I have two friends who went modular in the states did the IR at a good school and both walked into jobs one jet, one TP. Total cost £35,000 + 3 months out of work. I've also known people integrated who failed their given interviews with airlines upon graduation. total cost £60,000 + 18 months lack of income - real cost say £90,000. Of course going integrated does open doors for you if your lucky but if your smart so can going modular and less time paying back your bank manager and more time enjoying your hard earned cash.

Always a salutory lesson if you are self-selected, and not assessed for your personal skills and ability to pass the interview under either route.

[Dr Eckener]

I want to get it done quickly instead of messing about for years

That about sums up the reasons why lots of people end up in lots of debt with no job, and enables airlines to ask for TR's etc.

[Wannabe1974]

Originally Posted by Dr Eckener

That about sums up the reasons why lots of people end up in lots of debt with no job, and enables airlines to ask for TR's etc.

I knew it wouldn't be long.....
How do you figure that? How does modular mitigate for this not happening (xmt that it is cheaper)?
I've weighed up the risks and potential benefits and reckon its worth it. I'm swapping a life of dullness for something I have wanted since I can remember. Even if it does make me poor.
I have to say the amount of negativity on this website is a bit boring, but thankfully doesn't put me off. I think many Wannabes (probably me included) would be better off without reading it really. Sometimes you have to take risks in life! All you can do is be aware of the risks. You only get the one chance...
I'm well out of my comfort zone financially for the first time in my life and I love it!!

[Gufo]

Originally Posted by Dr Eckener

That about sums up the reasons why lots of people end up in lots of debt with no job, and enables airlines to ask for TR's etc.

It's not necessarily about going integrated or modular. You can as well go integrated and THEN take your time to work your way up the ladder, from aerial work and the lot. But you need a sort of commitment to patience, because the temptation of buying this and that to skip some steps will be, and unfortunately IS, strong. The modular route somehow helps in keeping a more natural pace. Note: I'm an integrated guy! The point is -and what I think Dr Eckener meant- that the aforequoted attitude ("I want to get it done quickly instead of messing about for years") is completely wrong, it's dangerous both for the individual and for the other thousands of wannabees, to say the least.
I can't help repeating: don't think an ATPL is a route to the airlines. It is NOT. Although it might eventually happen that you find that kind of job when you're finished, what you're buying by the FTOs is the chance of being a PILOT. THEN you have to develop this initial chance from the bottom of the stair, not trying to take ANOTHER chance by jumping at the top (or so they say..). Enjoy your climb; it's tasty, possibly one of the best parts of your career: and again, being thrown in a shiny big jet like a bowl-fish in the ocean, without tasting the joy of that "previous" experience, is really like missing something.

My 2 pennies

P.S.: And oh, Wannabe1974, when you say

I'm swapping a life of dullness for something I have wanted since I can remember.

That's great, it's so damn right to chase your dreams. But try not to sell your parents and things like that on the run, because..

Even if it does make me poor.

One day you might have a different opinion

[Dr Eckener]

Gufo sums it up very well. I did not make any distinction between integrated and modular, just your attitude of 'I want it now!' I wish you all the best, but do not think that buying licences and ratings is the key to getting a job.

[Wannabe1974]

Originally Posted by Dr Eckener

Gufo sums it up very well. I did not make any distinction between integrated and modular, just your attitude of 'I want it now!' I wish you all the best, but do not think that buying licences and ratings is the key to getting a job.

Why would I think that? And I'm not buying anything - I'm sacrificing lots and I'm prepared to work bloody hard.
The key to getting a job, any job, is marketing yourself well. There are lots and lots of people who've gone straight into a job after integrated training. I think I'm big enough and have enough experience to be a fantastic candidate for employment. And if I'm not, then I'll just have to work round it. I'm not the kind of person that gets stopped by problems. There's always a way round in my experience.
The point about having a different opinion later is not lost on me. I have a different opinion of the career I am in at the moment from before I began it. Life is full of uncertainty, risk, blah blah blah. The point is that I know that I will regret it if I don't take the chance now. Is that wrong?
I'm sure none of this will be easy, but I would say that I have been to plenty of flight training organisations and met lots of students who think the world owes them a living because they can fly a plane. Big deal! It takes more than that to get a job. And I know that I have loads to offer. So, please, no more negativity! You know what they say - if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all!

[George Foreman]

Quote > "6. I'm not exactly a spring chicken, so I want to maximise my chances of getting a job". -from an earlier post

Hmm. This was my reasoning too. I had a career before aviation and when I chose an integrated course at the tender age of 32, this was was one of the things that swayed me. Though I passed all the aptitude/selection tests etc and jumped through all the hoops, it has to be said that the leading integrated course providers do like their "charges" to be young.

I was the oldest on my course by a mere couple of years and there were less than half a dozen older in the school. I addressed it directly before I enrolled and my age wasn't seen as much of an issue before they took my money. However I do recall a few negative comments from staff/managers about 'age' during the course...

I won't name names but "26 at beginning of training, or 28, not any older" was once suggested, and I distinctly remember a 27 yo colleague recounting with some horror a story she had heard from one staff instructor, on the subject of the potential future shortage of flying instructors, that they would look to their graduates because "anyone over 26 and not airline sponsored doesn't stand much chance of getting a job with an airline" ! I also remember attending talks by visiting recruiters, and their maximum age limits kept being revised upwards!

It might not be published policy and they probably won't say it to your face, but the people who say these things do have some influence over your career and they do mean them. Don't get me wrong, I don't actually have any issue with ageism and as an economic liberal I think recruiters should be allowed to employ whoever they want, for whatever reason. As it turns out I have been fairly fortunate in the course of action, the choices I have made, and the opportunities which have come my way within commercial aviation since I completed my integrated training. However, if you aren't exactly a spring chicken I would caution against making the assumption above about the integrated route.

While aviation is clearly experiential pursuit and there clearly are limits, I personally don't think I was too old and if I was then I'm pleased I haven't let it get to me too much !

I have always sought in life to get myself a place at the very best educational establishments so as to achieve the best training in the best learning environment, and for my efforts in meeting those standards to be recognised through the good name of the institution. I am happy to defend the elitist proposition that educational establishments with known standards and a good reputation *can* open doors in life, and I shall never know to what extent having an integrated course on my aviation CV has helped (or possibly hindered?) me in my aviation career moves to date.

Whilst it probably hasn't done any harm, aviation is an increasingly diverse business where one size certainly does not fit all any more. I see all this as more of a cultural than a standards-driven argument. There are legitimate alternative routes, ie some smaller schools where the proprietors have good personal connections, an excellent reputation for training, high technical standards, and for mentoring their customers towards an airline career. I would stress that you do need to feel comfortable in your training environment in order to perform to the best of your abilities, and for that reason I would say this is a case of "buyer beware".

Again, just for consideration, and to stress that this is merely a personal point of view.

Happy Landings
George.

[Antonio Montana]

Originally posted by Wannabe1974

2. Modular courses are great, but you can't escape the facts: The big airlines seem to like integrated.

and alligators make great baby sitters, right.

Can anybody back this up with a few REAL WORLD cold hard facts??????

At the airline I fly for the vast majority of pilots are ex-modular. But then we are not the size of BA.
Just a thought.
Antonio

[Lucifer]

Originally Posted by George Foreman

I won't name names but "26 at beginning of training, or 28, not any older" was once suggested, and I distinctly remember a 27 yo colleague recounting with some horror a story she had heard from one staff instructor, on the subject of the potential future shortage of flying instructors, that they would look to their graduates because "anyone over 26 and not airline sponsored doesn't stand much chance of getting a job with an airline" ! I also remember attending talks by visiting recruiters, and their maximum age limits kept being revised upwards!

Don't worry - that is utter BS. Even BA does not believe that. They retrained a large number of flight engineers as pilots through BAe Systems when it was at Prestwick. A large number were successful, desipte ages of up to late 40s.

[George Foreman]

Originally Posted by Lucifer

Don't worry - that is utter BS. Even BA does not believe that. They retrained a large number of flight engineers as pilots through BAe Systems when it was at Prestwick. A large number were successful, desipte ages of up to late 40s.

Jolly good to hear it, though from my post I guess that is already quite clear!
Personally I don't need to be persuaded; as a career changer I am my own living proof that one's ability to learn, train others and ultimately move on to a jet fleet does not end at 30! However it does require dedication and it can be just a tad tougher on the liver than some other careers!

However I also have some idea, through first hand experience, of some of the prejudices out there and where they lie. I can confirm that the quotes I used are accurate, and were said in the context indicated at the time. However this was a good few years ago now, and the quoted remarks will have been said in the context of the market at that time, when the "green shoots" of recovery were barely evident and ab-initio schools were not placing such large proportions of their graduates with airlines, as they are now.

Operators' preferences are a another thing..I would defend their entitlement to them of course (whatever the latest PC trend in legislation might be) and I can also confirm that the age stipulation which I quoted did come from a major UK carrier and it applied to their part-sponsorship scheme and ab-initio low hours cadet applicants at the time I commenced my own training. I hear that it has been substantially revised upwards over the past few years. All this suggests a supply/demand driven business, like any other, as opposed to a training issue.

Yes, so far as I am aware BA have always been one of the more enlightened; the lowest age limitation I have ever seen from them being 47, and even that was explained in terms of the economic return on training someone. A flight engineer is not comparable with an ab-initio cadet, though. My captain last week was ex-BA and formerly an RAF flight engineer...clearly it made good business sense to use their experience on the 2-crew flight deck .. after all as flight engineers they were often responsible for directly controlling 50% of the pitch-power couple already !

Anyway, I wish everyone in training all the very best. I'm going to back out here and maybe spend more time on the technical and lifestyle fora, and brush up so as to keep my own instructional abilities a bit more current! Basic training will always be a contentious area as people have positions to advocate and defend. Like most things in life, one size does not fit all and having been through t'mill I see some of the shades of grey between the black and the white, that's all.

George.

[FullTanks]

BA Flight Engineers as pilots

You should remember that all of the BA ex-flight engineers had many years of jet multi-crew flight deck experience, most had some and some had considerable personal flying experience, they had to pass the standard BA pilot selection procedure and the course at Prestwick was integrated (i.e. intense). Sadly some did not make the grade at one stage or another, including type conversion within BA. I think that they would all agree that the courses (PWK & BA) were tough, not least due to the fact that some were in their 40s - age does play a part in your learning ability. Of those who were successful some went on rapidly to command at LGW and even training positions - they were excellent - I know as I trained many onto the 737. A modular course will not adequately prepare you for the rate of progress during training that an operator such as BA will expect. Some years ago BA tried recruiting pilots who had spent years hourbuilding (one took 9 years to achieve 1000hrs), the result was not a success, and a process which my training colleagues & I would not wish to repeat. If considering embarking on a modular course - know what you are getting into & what the major carriers have previously experienced - they cannot afford to make expensive mistakes during the selection process.

[flyingmutant]

Modular Training at Intergrated schools

I wonder what peoples opinions are about doing a modular course at a FTO who also runs intergrated courses. That basically cuts it down to Cabair and Oxford.

Is it a bad idea? Will intergrated students get priorty during their training over modular ones?

I know it is definetly down to the individual to find that job but if there are any recommendtions put foward by the FTO to employers do modular folk have any chance?

[Cirrus_Clouds]

I am also considering this option, doing modular at Cabair or OAT. I've got to visit the schools anyhow yet to get a proper idea.
If you do modular at OAT (Waypoint Programme), you must already have a PPL and then do from groundschool -> MCC with OAT. Yet to look into these options more.

I would have personally thought that Integrated students would get prefential treatment by the airlines and maybe the college, so this is why I keep on questioning myself on this one and whether you can think of most well known Modular schools being about equal.

I do wonder if doing modular at these colleges might help as they have some links with the airlines, but then again, it's whether these things the schools say are true, especially for modular students. I personally think having a well known name on a CV helps.

Training is a difficult decision as you will only do this once, while all schools seem to claim their students have found employment.

I have heard of modular pilots having interviews with the airlines from OAT though.

[Gillespie]

Hi guys/girls,

When I was looking at schools for my training one of the most important factors for me was student to instructor ratio.

If you're thinking of going modular then I'd look around at as many schools as you can. Find one that feels right for you. Ideally you'd want a 2:1 student to instructor ratio. At the schools you mentioned you could be looking at 20:1.

If you ask my personal opinion - look at schools like Bristol, Exeter, Aeros etc. All have very reputable courses with good student to Instructor ratios..

Don't always be fooled by the marketing campaigns of the larger schools. From the outside they may look 'glossy', but it can be a struggle as a modular student on the inside.

At the end of the course you'll still have the same licence as everyone else. You said it, it's down to you to get that first job.

With whereever you choose, good luck and happy landings!