The never-ending 'Modular vs. Integrated' debate - merged ad nauseam
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Groundloop I think you missed my point in your defence of this university. So you come out with a full or modular ATPL then what? What are you qualified to do in the time that it takes to secure that first job? Whether they are good or not at teaching aeronautics doesn't really matter. I happen to think that the ex RAF navigator who is teaching me POF by distance learning is quite good too but in the context of the 14 ATPL's who really cares.
My point was if you went to a recognised University and did something that earns you a fair salary then you are in a much better position than to get your frozen ATPL and have studied the intricacies of how load factors and the Galileo reservation system work. Instead you could have a profession behind you (law, engineering, accounting, corporate finance etc) and within a few years of graduating be easily earning 30-40k or more a year which will also give you more to talk about at a job interview and doubtless make paying for the ATPL's less of a worry. It also means you have something to fall back on should the need arise.
The problem with generic degrees is that the graduate doesn't have a specialism as such.
Edit: I have just seen your profile Groundloop, all has been revealed.
My point was if you went to a recognised University and did something that earns you a fair salary then you are in a much better position than to get your frozen ATPL and have studied the intricacies of how load factors and the Galileo reservation system work. Instead you could have a profession behind you (law, engineering, accounting, corporate finance etc) and within a few years of graduating be easily earning 30-40k or more a year which will also give you more to talk about at a job interview and doubtless make paying for the ATPL's less of a worry. It also means you have something to fall back on should the need arise.
The problem with generic degrees is that the graduate doesn't have a specialism as such.
Edit: I have just seen your profile Groundloop, all has been revealed.
"The problem with generic degrees is that the graduate doesn't have a specialism as such."
What do you mean by generic? Have you actually looked at the content of the courses you are deriding?
Okay, so you now know who I am. The content of our course was agreed after a series of Steering Committee meetings which included representatives from GAPAN, the CAA, British Airways and the FTOs. We didn't just dream it up - we were actually asked to create the degree.
Oh, and 85% of our graduates are working as pilots.
What do you mean by generic? Have you actually looked at the content of the courses you are deriding?
Okay, so you now know who I am. The content of our course was agreed after a series of Steering Committee meetings which included representatives from GAPAN, the CAA, British Airways and the FTOs. We didn't just dream it up - we were actually asked to create the degree.
Oh, and 85% of our graduates are working as pilots.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that potkettleblack means something different from that implied by the "generic degree" label than that which you are assuming groundloop.
I think that he is driving as an analogy with say a journalism degree - which, although very interesting and completely valid academically - will not enable one to obtain a job as a journalist in many places (e.g. the Economist will not employ a journalism graduate, but instead someone with a politics, science, language degree etc with an interest in journalism).
Returning to the main point, what is valid academic study may or may not be useful in the end result of getting a job.
I could not comment in this case, however if desgined in consultation with employers then it would not appear to fit the generic degree description.
Groundloop - you could perhaps clarify however whether - specifically - the degree was created following BA asking for such a product, or vica versa and the steering committee approched relevant people for their opinion after the idea of the creation of the course had been considered at the university? You are ambiguous in the following:
Clarification of which approach from whom came first may help applicants to decide whether it would be more favourably viewed than a straight-up fAPTL in the eyes of that employer mentioned.
I think that he is driving as an analogy with say a journalism degree - which, although very interesting and completely valid academically - will not enable one to obtain a job as a journalist in many places (e.g. the Economist will not employ a journalism graduate, but instead someone with a politics, science, language degree etc with an interest in journalism).
Returning to the main point, what is valid academic study may or may not be useful in the end result of getting a job.
I could not comment in this case, however if desgined in consultation with employers then it would not appear to fit the generic degree description.
Groundloop - you could perhaps clarify however whether - specifically - the degree was created following BA asking for such a product, or vica versa and the steering committee approched relevant people for their opinion after the idea of the creation of the course had been considered at the university? You are ambiguous in the following:
The content of our course was agreed after a series of Steering Committee meetings which included representatives from GAPAN, the CAA, British Airways and the FTOs. We didn't just dream it up - we were actually asked to create the degree.
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I draw a personal analogy here.
I have a degree in Physics and worked in research for a year before I left to become a Chartered Accountant. The accountancy firm for whom I worked (one of the Top 4 now) specifically did not want people with Accountancy degrees.
The reasons were two-fold. Firstly, those with the Accountancy degrees had a fair amount of theoretical (very theoretical!!) knowledge which was of little use in the workplace and also had pre-conceived ideas of how things should be done without having the practical experience of being in the workplace.
Secondly, they preferred to ahve graduate recruits who knew something else other than figures - it might indicate that they have some outside interests, a life and, more importantly could bring some specialist knowledge to the firm. In my case, I was always sent on the stocktakes for any scientific/electronics companies as I knew a transistor from a capacitor.
So, I think potkettleblack has some valid points and my personal experience, although not in the field of aviation in this contaxt, might bear that out.
As a helicopter pilot studying for CPL, things are very different anyway!
Cheers
Whirls
I have a degree in Physics and worked in research for a year before I left to become a Chartered Accountant. The accountancy firm for whom I worked (one of the Top 4 now) specifically did not want people with Accountancy degrees.
The reasons were two-fold. Firstly, those with the Accountancy degrees had a fair amount of theoretical (very theoretical!!) knowledge which was of little use in the workplace and also had pre-conceived ideas of how things should be done without having the practical experience of being in the workplace.
Secondly, they preferred to ahve graduate recruits who knew something else other than figures - it might indicate that they have some outside interests, a life and, more importantly could bring some specialist knowledge to the firm. In my case, I was always sent on the stocktakes for any scientific/electronics companies as I knew a transistor from a capacitor.
So, I think potkettleblack has some valid points and my personal experience, although not in the field of aviation in this contaxt, might bear that out.
As a helicopter pilot studying for CPL, things are very different anyway!
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: ENGLAND
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What realistic % of non integrated pilots get jobs
I was just wondering if anyone could inform me as to what are the realistic chances of someone who has not gone down the integrated route but is doing dl and then training in America for example in getting a job with a fairly good airline. I have tried searching but have not really found any relevant info. many thanks.
Thats a fairly general question. Are you asking how many modular pilots go into jet employment after they finish? Or turbo-props?
You really need the same figures about integrated students to compare them.
And i know that although the integrated schools are always willing to post up their job success for students, they carefully gloss over how many students were on the course that 4 have just gone to ...... (insert airline here)
Putting the effort in wherever you studied puts you in a better chance of getting a job afterwards. Also without putting a downer on it. Just because a few people might be getting jet jobs at present dont get your hopes up. There is nothing wrong with Para dropping, small and large turbo props and instructing. They are all jobs
You really need the same figures about integrated students to compare them.
And i know that although the integrated schools are always willing to post up their job success for students, they carefully gloss over how many students were on the course that 4 have just gone to ...... (insert airline here)
Putting the effort in wherever you studied puts you in a better chance of getting a job afterwards. Also without putting a downer on it. Just because a few people might be getting jet jobs at present dont get your hopes up. There is nothing wrong with Para dropping, small and large turbo props and instructing. They are all jobs
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FunFlyin
Just because a few people might be getting jet jobs at present dont get your hopes up. There is nothing wrong with Para dropping, small and large turbo props and instructing. They are all jobs
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Up North
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would loved to have done the para dropping. The instructing and TP's were great fun though. If you have the time and can service your training debts then enjoy yourself for a bit.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cyberdog
You have as a good a chance of getting an airline job having gone modular as you do of getting one off the back of an integrated course. This sort of question comes around every five minutes and we always get the same range of answers.
People who say you are much more likely getting that first job having gone integrated (there are some on this thread!) are either
a) On an integrated course, or
b) About to embark on one.
In either case they have a reason to want to believe that integrated is the way to go but there is no evidence to support such a claim. At the moment lots of people are recruiting and you will find that the stumbling block to getting your first job is the age old problem of a lack of experience, which neither a modular or integrated course can claim to help you with. At the end of the day you end up with the same blue book. It's what you do then, and the contacts you have made during training, thats affects your employment prospects.
Good Luck
You have as a good a chance of getting an airline job having gone modular as you do of getting one off the back of an integrated course. This sort of question comes around every five minutes and we always get the same range of answers.
People who say you are much more likely getting that first job having gone integrated (there are some on this thread!) are either
a) On an integrated course, or
b) About to embark on one.
In either case they have a reason to want to believe that integrated is the way to go but there is no evidence to support such a claim. At the moment lots of people are recruiting and you will find that the stumbling block to getting your first job is the age old problem of a lack of experience, which neither a modular or integrated course can claim to help you with. At the end of the day you end up with the same blue book. It's what you do then, and the contacts you have made during training, thats affects your employment prospects.
Good Luck
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Cyberdog.....
As one of those poor simple hillbilly cousins who flys jets for a living...I can tell you modular or intergrated makes no difference if your an idiot.
The tone of your question suggests you believe that if you train via the modular route..you will struggle to get a job, simply not true
Your first job will ALWAYS be a struggle, accept it, get used to it, and get on with getting it!!
Bitmoreright is correct in their assertions..and has put them in a far more eloquent way.
X3k5...you are incorrect.....CTC a modular training organisation, nuff said
As one of those poor simple hillbilly cousins who flys jets for a living...I can tell you modular or intergrated makes no difference if your an idiot.
The tone of your question suggests you believe that if you train via the modular route..you will struggle to get a job, simply not true
Your first job will ALWAYS be a struggle, accept it, get used to it, and get on with getting it!!Bitmoreright is correct in their assertions..and has put them in a far more eloquent way.
X3k5...you are incorrect.....CTC a modular training organisation, nuff said
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Age: 41
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add to what everyone else has said i believe it makes no difference whether you train modular or integreated for the majority of airlines. One airline that i know does is BA who will only take integrated giving an excuse of "integrated training is similar to there type rating and line training"!!!!!! Although the chance of getting your first job with BA is comparable to winning the lottery.
Rob
Rob
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Not "nuff said" at all. CTC is as good as integrated if you do know about it
Its a full time structured modular which also costs just as much as Integrated
Its a full time structured modular which also costs just as much as Integrated
oh dear....have you read what you've typed?Its as good as intergrated?...so that must mean its modular
By the way modular IS structured by definition...how else could the training be put into modules?
X3, judging by your previous posts you are quite likely incredibly nieve, or more likely you have little or no experience of this industry, either way your advice is as meaningless as it is inaccurate...mayby you should go back to practicing your PAN calls in a PA-28
One thing is for certain..you have coughed up £60k or so for an intergrated course...and now your trying to convince yourself that its going to get you a job.
Last edited by haughtney1; 24th Jun 2006 at 22:11.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your chance to get a job after ANY basic training is close of 0%.
after your training, you will need a MCC and a type rating ONLY to apply.
then IF you are selected, you will be requested to pay for a second type rating.
it is not worth to start an aviation training if no employment guaranty BEFORE training.
IF you are not hired after 3-6 months, you minimise your chance to find a job
Paying for a type rating is NOT the solution as many airlines train their own pilots.
apply BEFORE forking your own money in this megascam runed by schools
.
forking 150'000$ or more in a training with a return of 5-15$/hour as a fi, or traffic watch pilot is probably the stupidest investment...
after your training, you will need a MCC and a type rating ONLY to apply.
then IF you are selected, you will be requested to pay for a second type rating.
it is not worth to start an aviation training if no employment guaranty BEFORE training.
IF you are not hired after 3-6 months, you minimise your chance to find a job
Paying for a type rating is NOT the solution as many airlines train their own pilots.
apply BEFORE forking your own money in this megascam runed by schools
.forking 150'000$ or more in a training with a return of 5-15$/hour as a fi, or traffic watch pilot is probably the stupidest investment...
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320 I think you are good value round here and your posts balance out the rose tinted spectacles view but come on mate.........
You now need a minimum of two type-ratings to get a job? Thats reaching the extremities of bulls
it, even for you!
Originally Posted by A320rider
your chance to get a job after ANY basic training is close of 0%.
after your training, you will need a MCC and a type rating ONLY to apply.
then IF you are selected, you will be requested to pay for a second type rating.
after your training, you will need a MCC and a type rating ONLY to apply.
then IF you are selected, you will be requested to pay for a second type rating.
it, even for you!
BitMore
I think the dig he was having was at those who will go off and pay for their own type rating with no time on type etc.
Should they be lucky enough to go on and find a jet job even on the A/C they are rated on. Most airlines worth their salt will make the candidate complete the full type rating again with their sop's etc
2 type ratings
I think the dig he was having was at those who will go off and pay for their own type rating with no time on type etc.
Should they be lucky enough to go on and find a jet job even on the A/C they are rated on. Most airlines worth their salt will make the candidate complete the full type rating again with their sop's etc
2 type ratings