Is modular that much better?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For once, there seems to be some semblance of balance in this discussion. However, whilst I will fully (really, really!) agree with the maxim that each individual must find their own route and go the way that works for them, theres a couple of points that I think are often missed.
Firstly, I get fed up with this "it's £30k cheaper to go modular". No. It's not. It MAY be thirty grand cheaper, but the only figures I've ever seen from Modular students brave enough to ACTUALLY compare and publish the true cost of training like for like, tends to come out between £45 and £50k. Now, don't get me wrong, poke me in the eye with a sharp stick rather than save £15k....this is STILL a considerable saving. But it's WAY too easy to make a sweeping statement that it's that much cheaper.
[I should add, that I suspect it can be done for C.£35k all in, but I don't really care that much that I need to be proved wrong - if you did it for that, good on you. The point is that this is NOT representative, IMHO, of the normal modular cost]
Secondly, and this ties in with my first point, people who go the modular route almost always seem to start from PPL with a fair few hours - this is conveniently forgotten, when it comes to costing. It is ALSO forgotten when it comes to statements such as "....tend to have better hand flying". Does it not stand to reason that someone with 1000 hours will be a better pilot than someone with 200? If this ISN'T the case, why can you only attain command with experience? Thus it is unfair to compare the two IMHO. The fact that a modular student may have >500 hours when they first get a Jet RHS job will make them a better pilot perhaps than someone with less hours, but when the person with less has the same hours will the same ring true? (i.e. compare an integrated student with 500 TT and a modular with 500 TT will the Modular student still have better hand flying?). I personally suspect there will be no more than a Gnats nadger in it. Therefore, this argument boils down to whether carriers should agree to take anyone at 220 hours....which is in turn irrelevant, as the carriers do take 220 hours grads of either method. Could you not even make a cogent argument that an integrated student who has reached 1000 hours, with (say) 750 on type is a better pilot (for that aircraft) than a modular student who has 1000 hours with only 250 on type ?
Finally, one thing that I do feel is consistently missed on this subject is that the argument almost always boils down to the relative cost.
However, let's make some huge assumptions here, accepting everyone is different and that some integrated students will never work in avaiation and some modular will walk into a job the day they finish their MCC.
Assume an average modular cost of £40k and an average integrated cost of £60k (because, let's face it here, OAT always gets a bashing and gets used as the litmus test, but you can go to Cabair or FTE cheaper). It is OFTEN mentioned on here that Mod students take 18 months/2 years of FI work AFTER they finish their studies to get that first Jet RHS ride. If we assume 2 years to complete a modular course of studies, then that's four years in which you will maybe make £30k gross from FI work and have spent £40k
If an Integrated course takes two years to complete and place in a jet job, then averaging £30k p.a. means in that same four years you will have spent £60k and earned £60k, not to mention two years extra seniority.
You can see from this example that if this scenario occured, a four year plan to get to the same place would see you net £10k down through modular and all square integrated. Food for thought, is it not.
The £40k modular route is ONLY a bargain if you can get a job as quickly.
I should finally add, I don't have anything for or against either route, both are a fine way of getting there, just let's stop the bull of comparing apples with blue whales...if you want an answer get the comparison fair, and that means from nothing to RHS...
Now fully expecting to be flamed to hell.
Firstly, I get fed up with this "it's £30k cheaper to go modular". No. It's not. It MAY be thirty grand cheaper, but the only figures I've ever seen from Modular students brave enough to ACTUALLY compare and publish the true cost of training like for like, tends to come out between £45 and £50k. Now, don't get me wrong, poke me in the eye with a sharp stick rather than save £15k....this is STILL a considerable saving. But it's WAY too easy to make a sweeping statement that it's that much cheaper.
[I should add, that I suspect it can be done for C.£35k all in, but I don't really care that much that I need to be proved wrong - if you did it for that, good on you. The point is that this is NOT representative, IMHO, of the normal modular cost]
Secondly, and this ties in with my first point, people who go the modular route almost always seem to start from PPL with a fair few hours - this is conveniently forgotten, when it comes to costing. It is ALSO forgotten when it comes to statements such as "....tend to have better hand flying". Does it not stand to reason that someone with 1000 hours will be a better pilot than someone with 200? If this ISN'T the case, why can you only attain command with experience? Thus it is unfair to compare the two IMHO. The fact that a modular student may have >500 hours when they first get a Jet RHS job will make them a better pilot perhaps than someone with less hours, but when the person with less has the same hours will the same ring true? (i.e. compare an integrated student with 500 TT and a modular with 500 TT will the Modular student still have better hand flying?). I personally suspect there will be no more than a Gnats nadger in it. Therefore, this argument boils down to whether carriers should agree to take anyone at 220 hours....which is in turn irrelevant, as the carriers do take 220 hours grads of either method. Could you not even make a cogent argument that an integrated student who has reached 1000 hours, with (say) 750 on type is a better pilot (for that aircraft) than a modular student who has 1000 hours with only 250 on type ?
Finally, one thing that I do feel is consistently missed on this subject is that the argument almost always boils down to the relative cost.
However, let's make some huge assumptions here, accepting everyone is different and that some integrated students will never work in avaiation and some modular will walk into a job the day they finish their MCC.
Assume an average modular cost of £40k and an average integrated cost of £60k (because, let's face it here, OAT always gets a bashing and gets used as the litmus test, but you can go to Cabair or FTE cheaper). It is OFTEN mentioned on here that Mod students take 18 months/2 years of FI work AFTER they finish their studies to get that first Jet RHS ride. If we assume 2 years to complete a modular course of studies, then that's four years in which you will maybe make £30k gross from FI work and have spent £40k
If an Integrated course takes two years to complete and place in a jet job, then averaging £30k p.a. means in that same four years you will have spent £60k and earned £60k, not to mention two years extra seniority.
You can see from this example that if this scenario occured, a four year plan to get to the same place would see you net £10k down through modular and all square integrated. Food for thought, is it not.
The £40k modular route is ONLY a bargain if you can get a job as quickly.
I should finally add, I don't have anything for or against either route, both are a fine way of getting there, just let's stop the bull of comparing apples with blue whales...if you want an answer get the comparison fair, and that means from nothing to RHS...
Now fully expecting to be flamed to hell.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Some where over the rainbow
Age: 37
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
finally, i think someone has a similar way of thinking as me. the reason for me to start this post is to find out which way of training is better and as i said from earlier posts, i wanted to avoid the continious argument regarding cost.
what would people think? 2 pilots with the same amount of exprience but came from integrated and modular respectively, which would be the better pilot. i would say that the one with the better personality and attribute would be.
also, since modular students tend to work while training up for the license, wouldn't an integrated student tend to be more current?
the final note to make is time to the RHS as clanger32 mentioned.
what would people think? 2 pilots with the same amount of exprience but came from integrated and modular respectively, which would be the better pilot. i would say that the one with the better personality and attribute would be.
also, since modular students tend to work while training up for the license, wouldn't an integrated student tend to be more current?
the final note to make is time to the RHS as clanger32 mentioned.
Look. Its so simple a monkey from the Indus could grasp it - yet Wannabes never seem able.
Both routes teach you the same stuff so as to pass the same test.
As an OATS graduate or Integrated student there is not magic moment where you are taken into the chapel and shown the magic fountain.
Trust me - I've taught student to fly for their CPL IR under the modular and the integrated paths and ** major shock alert ** the lessons were the same, only the fees varied..
Now.
In a booming marker of international airline expansion it CAN be worth going Integrated because *** and I have been in the room when this happened *** an airline Head of Flight Ops will just call up and ask for ten guys by a fortnight on Wednesday.
The Head of Flight Ops was in a meeting and it was agreed there, quite out of the blue, that Commercial see a profit in establishing 4 flights a day to Oasis. So an extra aircraft is ordered, in fact two and thus Head of Flight Ops now needs to put 12 Senior FO's on Command courses and recruit 12 new First Officers.
The quickest and easiest way to do this (assuming you are not Virgin who need thousands of hours as a minimum) is to pick up the phone and call OATS Cabair Jerez and speak to the Head of Training.
You say:
"I need 12 guys for the second week of Jan who are OK to take a type rating, give me a list of 24 by next Thursday and we'll interview them all and pick half, cheers, thanks for the Golf weekend last month by the way..".
the HoT says:
"No problem, we have loads of excellent young thrusters and we'll pick the best 24 this afternoon for you to interview and don't worry about the golf weekend, we'll do it again soon and this time we'll go somewhere REALLY exotic..".
HoT then calls the CFI who then gather together his instructors. He then huddles up nd decided who are the best 24 students graduating in late Dec to late Jan. This list is then sent to the Head of Training.
The HoT then takes this list and alters it so that the premium customers who paid most for their training are put forward. After all, we have to protect the revenue stream that pays all the mortgages.
And SO. It is worth going Integrated at a time of airline hiring boom. Because you are in the place where names go on lists who go into airlines. Your premium buys you that POSSIBILITY.
Me. The odds are too long on a £30k bet for my liking. You can do a Modular course for £40k and you'd be lucky not to spend £70k on some of the Oxford courses.
As airline hiring crashes to a halt (as it is doing) the odds only get longer.
But you go on and persuade yourself that you are older or more suited or whatever and go and spend the money.
WWW
Both routes teach you the same stuff so as to pass the same test.
As an OATS graduate or Integrated student there is not magic moment where you are taken into the chapel and shown the magic fountain.
Trust me - I've taught student to fly for their CPL IR under the modular and the integrated paths and ** major shock alert ** the lessons were the same, only the fees varied..
Now.
In a booming marker of international airline expansion it CAN be worth going Integrated because *** and I have been in the room when this happened *** an airline Head of Flight Ops will just call up and ask for ten guys by a fortnight on Wednesday.
The Head of Flight Ops was in a meeting and it was agreed there, quite out of the blue, that Commercial see a profit in establishing 4 flights a day to Oasis. So an extra aircraft is ordered, in fact two and thus Head of Flight Ops now needs to put 12 Senior FO's on Command courses and recruit 12 new First Officers.
The quickest and easiest way to do this (assuming you are not Virgin who need thousands of hours as a minimum) is to pick up the phone and call OATS Cabair Jerez and speak to the Head of Training.
You say:
"I need 12 guys for the second week of Jan who are OK to take a type rating, give me a list of 24 by next Thursday and we'll interview them all and pick half, cheers, thanks for the Golf weekend last month by the way..".
the HoT says:
"No problem, we have loads of excellent young thrusters and we'll pick the best 24 this afternoon for you to interview and don't worry about the golf weekend, we'll do it again soon and this time we'll go somewhere REALLY exotic..".
HoT then calls the CFI who then gather together his instructors. He then huddles up nd decided who are the best 24 students graduating in late Dec to late Jan. This list is then sent to the Head of Training.
The HoT then takes this list and alters it so that the premium customers who paid most for their training are put forward. After all, we have to protect the revenue stream that pays all the mortgages.
And SO. It is worth going Integrated at a time of airline hiring boom. Because you are in the place where names go on lists who go into airlines. Your premium buys you that POSSIBILITY.
Me. The odds are too long on a £30k bet for my liking. You can do a Modular course for £40k and you'd be lucky not to spend £70k on some of the Oxford courses.
As airline hiring crashes to a halt (as it is doing) the odds only get longer.
But you go on and persuade yourself that you are older or more suited or whatever and go and spend the money.
WWW
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FI's
Can i just ask the modular guys who go FI. Are you full time instructors or part time, ie, do you have a 9-5 and instruct as and when. I only ask as the average FI is on a very basic wage. One that in todays climate will have you on a baked beans diet in your Pikey van.....or so i'm led to believe............
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW - Thankyou. An excellently written piece and actually what I was trying to say. The only thing I'd slightly disagree with (and would accept I'm not really in a place to comment one way or the other) is that Once again as always happens in this tedious debate ad nauseum, you've fallen into the trap of comparing what seems to be the minimum you can do modular for, with the max you could spend at Oxford (the most expensive of the integrated courses). So REALLY not comparing like for like, which is both an unfair comparison and misleading to those looking for information.
My overall point is that I'm sure the instruction is the same whatever route one takes and I'm also sure that if you can complete and get a job through modular having spent less than £40k you're laughing, but none of us should ever forget that spending £40k and NOT getting a job is a hell of a site more expensive than spending even £70k and having one....
As always, it's up to the individual to do their own homework, investigate all the possible routes and choose which fits their personal circumstances best. All routes give you the same piece of paper - it's just what you do with it at the end that makes the diff.
My overall point is that I'm sure the instruction is the same whatever route one takes and I'm also sure that if you can complete and get a job through modular having spent less than £40k you're laughing, but none of us should ever forget that spending £40k and NOT getting a job is a hell of a site more expensive than spending even £70k and having one....
As always, it's up to the individual to do their own homework, investigate all the possible routes and choose which fits their personal circumstances best. All routes give you the same piece of paper - it's just what you do with it at the end that makes the diff.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Middle of nowhere
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust WWW
Trust WWW to take 20 odd posts that are all dancing around similar issues and condense them in to one coherent post that hits all the major points!
Marvellous!
B
Marvellous!
B
but none of us should ever forget that spending £40k and NOT getting a job is a hell of a site more expensive than spending even £70k and having one....
I agree. I'd take the £70k course with a job at the end every time.
Some marketing departments posture to suggest that is what they are selling.
I'm pointing this out. What you do is up to you.
WWW
I agree. I'd take the £70k course with a job at the end every time.
Some marketing departments posture to suggest that is what they are selling.
I'm pointing this out. What you do is up to you.
WWW
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
clanger32 wrote:
and also:
You also have fallen into the trap of not comparing like with like - you have fallen into the trap of assuming that integrated go straight into jobs, but modular students don't. You've also assumed that modular students don't earn anything whilst studying - but the abilty to learn whilst earning is one of the big advantages of that route.
Apart from the potential difference in cost, the major difference between the two (briefly touched on by both pilotho and bri1980) is learning/teaching style.
Modular students - especially those doing distance learning - require more self discipline for the studying. The courses are less regimented, the pace of learning (whilst within set boundaries) is dictated by the student, you are studying alone and not in a group (except when on residential courses), and maintaining motivation can be very hard. A big plus is you have more flexibility in the timing of when you take the courses, and it is easier to fit it around a full time job.
Integrated study is more disciplined, the timings of the course are set as is how you work through the material. You are learning in a group environment with more instant feedback, and motivation can be easier to maintain. But you are fixed into the course structure and timetable of that institution and it is impossible to maintain a full time job whilst studying (although part time may be possible).
So whilst looking at the cost is important (after all its a big financial commitment), you also need to think very hard about the style of teaching/learning that suits you. Which is why you should never choose a course simply on cost - always look at how the courses operate as there can be big differences between institutions offering the same type of course (i.e. integrated or modular) which may affect your decision.
But whichever path you choose to take - good luck! And don;t let the naysayers here tell you you chose the wrong path - as long as you are sure you chose the right one for you.
Assume an average modular cost of £40k and an average integrated cost of £60k (because, let's face it here, OAT always gets a bashing and gets used as the litmus test, but you can go to Cabair or FTE cheaper). It is OFTEN mentioned on here that Mod students take 18 months/2 years of FI work AFTER they finish their studies to get that first Jet RHS ride. If we assume 2 years to complete a modular course of studies, then that's four years in which you will maybe make £30k gross from FI work and have spent £40k
If an Integrated course takes two years to complete and place in a jet job, then averaging £30k p.a. means in that same four years you will have spent £60k and earned £60k, not to mention two years extra seniority.
You can see from this example that if this scenario occured, a four year plan to get to the same place would see you net £10k down through modular and all square integrated. Food for thought, is it not.
The £40k modular route is ONLY a bargain if you can get a job as quickly.
If an Integrated course takes two years to complete and place in a jet job, then averaging £30k p.a. means in that same four years you will have spent £60k and earned £60k, not to mention two years extra seniority.
You can see from this example that if this scenario occured, a four year plan to get to the same place would see you net £10k down through modular and all square integrated. Food for thought, is it not.
The £40k modular route is ONLY a bargain if you can get a job as quickly.
The only thing I'd slightly disagree with (and would accept I'm not really in a place to comment one way or the other) is that Once again as always happens in this tedious debate ad nauseum, you've fallen into the trap of comparing what seems to be the minimum you can do modular for, with the max you could spend at Oxford (the most expensive of the integrated courses). So REALLY not comparing like for like, which is both an unfair comparison and misleading to those looking for information.
Apart from the potential difference in cost, the major difference between the two (briefly touched on by both pilotho and bri1980) is learning/teaching style.
Modular students - especially those doing distance learning - require more self discipline for the studying. The courses are less regimented, the pace of learning (whilst within set boundaries) is dictated by the student, you are studying alone and not in a group (except when on residential courses), and maintaining motivation can be very hard. A big plus is you have more flexibility in the timing of when you take the courses, and it is easier to fit it around a full time job.
Integrated study is more disciplined, the timings of the course are set as is how you work through the material. You are learning in a group environment with more instant feedback, and motivation can be easier to maintain. But you are fixed into the course structure and timetable of that institution and it is impossible to maintain a full time job whilst studying (although part time may be possible).
So whilst looking at the cost is important (after all its a big financial commitment), you also need to think very hard about the style of teaching/learning that suits you. Which is why you should never choose a course simply on cost - always look at how the courses operate as there can be big differences between institutions offering the same type of course (i.e. integrated or modular) which may affect your decision.
But whichever path you choose to take - good luck! And don;t let the naysayers here tell you you chose the wrong path - as long as you are sure you chose the right one for you.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In the clouds above
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be aware that Chief Pilots get a stiffy about integrated courses.
I went modular and it suited my circumstances, pocket and outlook. With hindsight I think I would have definetly tried for CTC but no point in looking back.
I still don't think I would have went to Cabair, Oxford or Jerez though. In my humble opinion, the £30k extra you spend would be better spent buying a share in a twin for £20k and using up £10k on flying expenses such as fuel and boosting your hours out, then sell your share, afterwards its the minefield of buying a type rating or not. Possibly pick up a bit of work relating to the flying to subsidise it such as photography, parachutes, etc. but count that as a bonus.
There is also the option to be a FI, in real terms its hours in the logbook which aren't usually questioned, in my eyes I have to question how valuable flying CFR in a traffic pattern in a 152 is to a future airlines career. No doubt I'll get grief over that statement.
Cue abuse!
I went modular and it suited my circumstances, pocket and outlook. With hindsight I think I would have definetly tried for CTC but no point in looking back.
I still don't think I would have went to Cabair, Oxford or Jerez though. In my humble opinion, the £30k extra you spend would be better spent buying a share in a twin for £20k and using up £10k on flying expenses such as fuel and boosting your hours out, then sell your share, afterwards its the minefield of buying a type rating or not. Possibly pick up a bit of work relating to the flying to subsidise it such as photography, parachutes, etc. but count that as a bonus.
There is also the option to be a FI, in real terms its hours in the logbook which aren't usually questioned, in my eyes I have to question how valuable flying CFR in a traffic pattern in a 152 is to a future airlines career. No doubt I'll get grief over that statement.
Cue abuse!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hill Street Blues
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really wishing to dip my toe in here.... I promise not to get too heated..
To compare like for like...really
Oxford APP First Officer Program @ 3/11/2007 NB this seems to be the ONLY integrated course on their website.
68 Weeks approx
Cost £61800.00.
Included, Insurance, Accommodation in the USA, return Flights, Nav Equipment and Headset.
Not included,
Accommodation at Oxford say 50 weeks at £130 Pw as per oxfords website (20 weeks in the US)
Cost £6500
Food and general costs.
14 Ground school exams @ £62 each £868
All CAA Skill Tests
PPL £173.00
CPL MEP £712.00
I/R £712.00
Night rating £78.00
License issue
PPL £164.00
Night rating £78.00
CPL £216.00
I/R £108.00
R/T £65.00
Medical inital £310.00
Revalidation £125 at my AME
So lets say with exam fees and medical this would be:
Total Cost £71831.00
Assuming that you pass everything first time and minimum hours.
Modular via Multifilght, their Ab-Initio ATPL Course @ 3/11/2007
Cost £29950.00
Included, Faa medical and books and study guides,
FAA certification fees, all groundschool fees, FAA Groundschool test,
In the UK, all Ground school materials, Two, two week brush up school.
Not included,
Flights to and from the USA from Manchester to Orlando,
Virgin Atlantic £380.00
Accomodation in the USA say $30 per night 9 weeks, $1890 or £905.00 @ 3/11/2007
Headset DC 10-13 bought in USA $315.00 or £151.00
Nav equipment say £20.00
Crp-5 £75.00
UK Land and approach fees say £2000.00
Hire of Aircraft for test 4 hours @ £246 ph, £984.00
170A Test Fee 2 hours @ £130ph, £260.00.
Groundshool accommodation say £700
Food and general costs.
14 Ground school exams @ £62 each £868
All CAA Skill Tests
PPL £173.00
CPL MEP £712.00
I/R £712.00
License issue
PPL £164.00
Night rating £78.00
CPL £216.00
I/R £108.00
R/T £65.00
Medical initial £310.00
Revalidation £125 at my AME
MCC £1500.00, if done at Multiflight
JOC say £1200
So a similar cost comparison would be....
Total cost £41656.00
Assuming that you commute from home to Leeds
Now this too is based on first time passes and minimum hours, time to complete at your own speed, took me just over a year.
So to compare both you would have a saving of £30175.00
Enough to get a Type Rating and Hours on a Jet or that rather nice new car you always wanted....
So the £30175 question is this.....is intergrated really worth the extra £30175.00.Are you guaranteed in writing that you will be offered a job with the likes of BA after finishing.... Also BA DO charge you for the Type Rating even if you are ex Oxford, source BAPLA EOC a few weeks ago.
To compare like for like...really
Oxford APP First Officer Program @ 3/11/2007 NB this seems to be the ONLY integrated course on their website.
68 Weeks approx
Cost £61800.00.
Included, Insurance, Accommodation in the USA, return Flights, Nav Equipment and Headset.
Not included,
Accommodation at Oxford say 50 weeks at £130 Pw as per oxfords website (20 weeks in the US)
Cost £6500
Food and general costs.
14 Ground school exams @ £62 each £868
All CAA Skill Tests
PPL £173.00
CPL MEP £712.00
I/R £712.00
Night rating £78.00
License issue
PPL £164.00
Night rating £78.00
CPL £216.00
I/R £108.00
R/T £65.00
Medical inital £310.00
Revalidation £125 at my AME
So lets say with exam fees and medical this would be:
Total Cost £71831.00
Assuming that you pass everything first time and minimum hours.
Modular via Multifilght, their Ab-Initio ATPL Course @ 3/11/2007
Cost £29950.00
Included, Faa medical and books and study guides,
FAA certification fees, all groundschool fees, FAA Groundschool test,
In the UK, all Ground school materials, Two, two week brush up school.
Not included,
Flights to and from the USA from Manchester to Orlando,
Virgin Atlantic £380.00
Accomodation in the USA say $30 per night 9 weeks, $1890 or £905.00 @ 3/11/2007
Headset DC 10-13 bought in USA $315.00 or £151.00
Nav equipment say £20.00
Crp-5 £75.00
UK Land and approach fees say £2000.00
Hire of Aircraft for test 4 hours @ £246 ph, £984.00
170A Test Fee 2 hours @ £130ph, £260.00.
Groundshool accommodation say £700
Food and general costs.
14 Ground school exams @ £62 each £868
All CAA Skill Tests
PPL £173.00
CPL MEP £712.00
I/R £712.00
License issue
PPL £164.00
Night rating £78.00
CPL £216.00
I/R £108.00
R/T £65.00
Medical initial £310.00
Revalidation £125 at my AME
MCC £1500.00, if done at Multiflight
JOC say £1200
So a similar cost comparison would be....
Total cost £41656.00
Assuming that you commute from home to Leeds
Now this too is based on first time passes and minimum hours, time to complete at your own speed, took me just over a year.
So to compare both you would have a saving of £30175.00
Enough to get a Type Rating and Hours on a Jet or that rather nice new car you always wanted....
So the £30175 question is this.....is intergrated really worth the extra £30175.00.Are you guaranteed in writing that you will be offered a job with the likes of BA after finishing.... Also BA DO charge you for the Type Rating even if you are ex Oxford, source BAPLA EOC a few weeks ago.
Last edited by Frank Furillo; 3rd Nov 2007 at 15:55.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Polymer Records
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess things have changed at Oxford since I went through? I paid 60.5K and that was it all included. All flight/ground exam fees paid, all accomodation in the states, medical renewed, licence issue, the lot. In fact, seeing as I had a few flight/sim hours spare, I actually got a small refund at the end.
Also, if you are going to compare like for like, why build into your comparison modular students commuting from home (with no commuting costs) and Oxford students paying 130 per week living costs?
Most modular students I met, depite more optimistic initial budgeting, usually admitted to spending approx 50k. Now that's still a substantial saving, but its not 30k and it certainly won't pay for a type rating.
So what return on investment did I get for paying a 10k premium to go integrated? All 15 of my classmates and I were in the RHS of a jet within three months of finishing training. I think it a reasonable statement to say that modular students on average take a few months extra to get their break than integrated students do (no, its not fair or right, but who ever said things were going to be fair). As I clear, on average, just over 3K per month I would say getting a job a few months earlier than I would have done via the modular route means I'm probably quids in on the deal.
In answer to to the original question - is modular any better I'd say no. But I wouldn't say integrated is any better either, its just a different version of the same thing. The price differential is overstated and as soon as you're type rated and employed no one neither remotely cares nor can tell any difference.
Also, if you are going to compare like for like, why build into your comparison modular students commuting from home (with no commuting costs) and Oxford students paying 130 per week living costs?
Most modular students I met, depite more optimistic initial budgeting, usually admitted to spending approx 50k. Now that's still a substantial saving, but its not 30k and it certainly won't pay for a type rating.
So what return on investment did I get for paying a 10k premium to go integrated? All 15 of my classmates and I were in the RHS of a jet within three months of finishing training. I think it a reasonable statement to say that modular students on average take a few months extra to get their break than integrated students do (no, its not fair or right, but who ever said things were going to be fair). As I clear, on average, just over 3K per month I would say getting a job a few months earlier than I would have done via the modular route means I'm probably quids in on the deal.
In answer to to the original question - is modular any better I'd say no. But I wouldn't say integrated is any better either, its just a different version of the same thing. The price differential is overstated and as soon as you're type rated and employed no one neither remotely cares nor can tell any difference.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Some where over the rainbow
Age: 37
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still haven't found the answer to my question. I have learnt very well that if I go modular, then I would be able to buy a new car etc etc.
What I wanted to ask was, which pilot would be better, bearing in mind that they have same amount of exprience.
Pilot A : Integrated
Pilot B : Modular
If you was the chief pilot wishing to recuit for that right hand seat, would you prefer the modular student because he managed to get that book despite the distractions or the integrated guy who just happened to be able to afford the training.
What I wanted to ask was, which pilot would be better, bearing in mind that they have same amount of exprience.
Pilot A : Integrated
Pilot B : Modular
If you was the chief pilot wishing to recuit for that right hand seat, would you prefer the modular student because he managed to get that book despite the distractions or the integrated guy who just happened to be able to afford the training.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EvilKitty,
I can see where you're coming from, but I promise you, I hadn't overlooked that aspect. The ability to "earn while you learn" is a great example of a major plus point of the mod route. However, the fact that you're earning whilst you train has little effect on the cost of training. For example, I worked bloody hard in my existing career to save the necessary funds for my training before starting, so it's not a consideration for me as I had no need to earn. Likewise, if you're prepared to put your kidneys as security and borrow the whole lot, again, it's of little consequence. I would assume however and this based only on my own knowledge of the intensity of the workload, that by working rather than full time modular, you would extend the time scale to complete (please note the "assume" in that statement)
Secondly, I have to pull up on the point about more disciplined. Says who? Can you name me one person ever who has completed both routes? Of course not...therefore all one can ever say is how disciplined you have to be on your own chosen route. I do not believe for one second that you need to be "MORE" disciplined on a mod route...the discipline required is different, that's all. For example, if you don't understand subsonic incompressible airflow on a Mod course, you just take a couple more days looking at it before moving on, you can't do that on the integrated route...so the discipline, in that regard at least, is greater (to ensure you understand it up front).
Frank - Absolutely right, I do agree with what you say. One thing I'm REALLY keen to get across is that I do not fall into EITHER camp. Both routes have distinct pros and distinct cons. For what it's worth however, I can't help but notice that you include £6500 worth of living cost for Oxford, but then add "....if you live at home and commute in" for your Mod breakdown... Now I know that's splitting hairs slightly given the magnitude of the cost difference, but it is demonstrative of the common problem...on this topic people ALWAYS compare the MOST expensive integrated course with all the bells and whistles to the cheapest mod course they can find with other bits missed off...
So then we get back to the other main point - time to employment. To be fair, I know a couple of mod pilots who walked into jobs pretty much instantly. I also know (of) an integrated guy who took two years before he found his first job. I'm sure there are plenty of other stories of people who went integrated and never worked in aviation also. But I also know a guy who sold his house, uprooted his family and spent £40k+ modular (doing as cheaply as he could) and, having just renewed his IR for the second time has been told by his wife that they can't afford to renew again if he doesn't find a job. In that circumstance, £40k suddenly looks BLOODY expensive.
Either way the general consensus seems to be that it takes longER to get that first job from the mod route. So yes, Multiflight might be £30175 (or £23675 if you include like-for-like accomodation...
) cheaper than the most expensive integrated course, but what I was trying to demonstrate earlier is that that £23k is only worth ANYTHING if you land a job more quickly than a comparitive integrated student. This is NOT to say "integrated guarantees you a job" or anything like that....but I would refer you to WWW post above he clearly gives an example where that's EXACTLY what happens with some integrated students. The WHOLE point of integrated is to ease your route to the RHS - whether that works for a given individual or not.
If you add up the comparitive cost per career, getting into a jet job even a year earlier compared to a year of aviation photography, para dropping, FI work etc and then to a RHS I suspect that £23k difference will disappear VERY quickly with better salary, one years seniority etc...
Promise I'm not trying to be argumentative, just objective. Bottom line is you pays your money, you takes your choice.
Either way, my overall point, which I think both Frank and Kitty would agree with is that everyone needs to assess the routes for themselves and choose which route is the best for them. Unfortunately flight training is not something where "one size fits all"
I can see where you're coming from, but I promise you, I hadn't overlooked that aspect. The ability to "earn while you learn" is a great example of a major plus point of the mod route. However, the fact that you're earning whilst you train has little effect on the cost of training. For example, I worked bloody hard in my existing career to save the necessary funds for my training before starting, so it's not a consideration for me as I had no need to earn. Likewise, if you're prepared to put your kidneys as security and borrow the whole lot, again, it's of little consequence. I would assume however and this based only on my own knowledge of the intensity of the workload, that by working rather than full time modular, you would extend the time scale to complete (please note the "assume" in that statement)
Secondly, I have to pull up on the point about more disciplined. Says who? Can you name me one person ever who has completed both routes? Of course not...therefore all one can ever say is how disciplined you have to be on your own chosen route. I do not believe for one second that you need to be "MORE" disciplined on a mod route...the discipline required is different, that's all. For example, if you don't understand subsonic incompressible airflow on a Mod course, you just take a couple more days looking at it before moving on, you can't do that on the integrated route...so the discipline, in that regard at least, is greater (to ensure you understand it up front).
Frank - Absolutely right, I do agree with what you say. One thing I'm REALLY keen to get across is that I do not fall into EITHER camp. Both routes have distinct pros and distinct cons. For what it's worth however, I can't help but notice that you include £6500 worth of living cost for Oxford, but then add "....if you live at home and commute in" for your Mod breakdown... Now I know that's splitting hairs slightly given the magnitude of the cost difference, but it is demonstrative of the common problem...on this topic people ALWAYS compare the MOST expensive integrated course with all the bells and whistles to the cheapest mod course they can find with other bits missed off...
So then we get back to the other main point - time to employment. To be fair, I know a couple of mod pilots who walked into jobs pretty much instantly. I also know (of) an integrated guy who took two years before he found his first job. I'm sure there are plenty of other stories of people who went integrated and never worked in aviation also. But I also know a guy who sold his house, uprooted his family and spent £40k+ modular (doing as cheaply as he could) and, having just renewed his IR for the second time has been told by his wife that they can't afford to renew again if he doesn't find a job. In that circumstance, £40k suddenly looks BLOODY expensive.
Either way the general consensus seems to be that it takes longER to get that first job from the mod route. So yes, Multiflight might be £30175 (or £23675 if you include like-for-like accomodation...
) cheaper than the most expensive integrated course, but what I was trying to demonstrate earlier is that that £23k is only worth ANYTHING if you land a job more quickly than a comparitive integrated student. This is NOT to say "integrated guarantees you a job" or anything like that....but I would refer you to WWW post above he clearly gives an example where that's EXACTLY what happens with some integrated students. The WHOLE point of integrated is to ease your route to the RHS - whether that works for a given individual or not. If you add up the comparitive cost per career, getting into a jet job even a year earlier compared to a year of aviation photography, para dropping, FI work etc and then to a RHS I suspect that £23k difference will disappear VERY quickly with better salary, one years seniority etc...
Promise I'm not trying to be argumentative, just objective. Bottom line is you pays your money, you takes your choice.
Either way, my overall point, which I think both Frank and Kitty would agree with is that everyone needs to assess the routes for themselves and choose which route is the best for them. Unfortunately flight training is not something where "one size fits all"
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: XXX
Age: 38
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriously I am very suprised that many guys on this forum still asking "who is the best ? modular or integrated ?"
Did you not understand that it depends of YOU ? only you.
Some people take modular route or integrated but are bad.
It is simple if you have got money that integrated if not modular...
But after the course (modular or integrated) you will be in the same boat like a thousands other CPL/IR/MCC.
I am taking the modulare route at the moment and i don't regret it. It is cheaper for the same licence.
Because I know a lot of friends (modular route) they found a job.
Did you not understand that it depends of YOU ? only you.
Some people take modular route or integrated but are bad.
It is simple if you have got money that integrated if not modular...
But after the course (modular or integrated) you will be in the same boat like a thousands other CPL/IR/MCC.
I am taking the modulare route at the moment and i don't regret it. It is cheaper for the same licence.
Because I know a lot of friends (modular route) they found a job.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PilotHo,
to TRY and answer your Q. .. there IS no right answer!
The problem is several airlines won't touch you with low hours if you're modular...BA won't and Flybe have just announced they'll only hire integrated students for two. However there are several hundred that WILL. Like for like (i.e. 0 hours to completing the course) I suspect you'd be a better hands flier through modular.
So, depends on you. Integrated I suspect you will find easiER to find a job, IF YOU PERFORM WELL, Mod will be cheaper and may serve you every bit as well. Modular, you will need to be very disciplined and hardnosed, prepared to take a fair amount of rejection, integrated, you will need to conform to an expected norm, you won't get time to understand anything you didn't quite get first time round, cos you'll have moved on.
Bottom line, a LOT of airlines like the integrated method, and rely on it for their low hours recruitment. Likewise a heck of a lot rely on Mod and happily take the right kind of people from that route.
There IS no right or wrong answer on this one (IMHO), despite what some people would have you believe. you need to assess and make up your own mind which route, with all the pros and cons that go with either route, which suits you best.
to TRY and answer your Q. .. there IS no right answer!
The problem is several airlines won't touch you with low hours if you're modular...BA won't and Flybe have just announced they'll only hire integrated students for two. However there are several hundred that WILL. Like for like (i.e. 0 hours to completing the course) I suspect you'd be a better hands flier through modular.
So, depends on you. Integrated I suspect you will find easiER to find a job, IF YOU PERFORM WELL, Mod will be cheaper and may serve you every bit as well. Modular, you will need to be very disciplined and hardnosed, prepared to take a fair amount of rejection, integrated, you will need to conform to an expected norm, you won't get time to understand anything you didn't quite get first time round, cos you'll have moved on.
Bottom line, a LOT of airlines like the integrated method, and rely on it for their low hours recruitment. Likewise a heck of a lot rely on Mod and happily take the right kind of people from that route.
There IS no right or wrong answer on this one (IMHO), despite what some people would have you believe. you need to assess and make up your own mind which route, with all the pros and cons that go with either route, which suits you best.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately just that. They've just announced that they will be only taking grads from FTE, Cabair, OAT and I think it was Atlantic from now on. http://www.oxfordaviation.net/news.htm and http://ask.oxfordaviation.net/viewtopic.php?t=4087 give about as much as I know, save for the bit that was mentioned that they will no longer take Mod (allthough having just dug a bit up on the Flybe website here: http://www.flybe.com/vacancies/pilots_sponsorship.htm it seems there is a slight loophole there...)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Glasgow
Age: 44
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clanger - not quite so.
They will continue to employ from their training partners by:
a) Participation in one of their schemes (partial sponsorship Cabair/Oxford or MAPS at FTE)
b) By the recommendation process for
1) non sceme integrated students - from FTE, Oxford and Cabair
2) One stop modular students - from Atlantic Flight Training or Aeros
They will also recruit others via their website (opening November 12th) who satisfy the published criteria and are not necessarily from a training partner.
Obviously it would be an advantage to have a recommendation from one of the training partners.
They will continue to employ from their training partners by:
a) Participation in one of their schemes (partial sponsorship Cabair/Oxford or MAPS at FTE)
b) By the recommendation process for
1) non sceme integrated students - from FTE, Oxford and Cabair
2) One stop modular students - from Atlantic Flight Training or Aeros
They will also recruit others via their website (opening November 12th) who satisfy the published criteria and are not necessarily from a training partner.
Obviously it would be an advantage to have a recommendation from one of the training partners.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair, I don't know the full situation, only what I have been told. I know a couple of guys at OAT and according to them, Flybe did a "roadshow" type tour there where Captain Ian Cheese apparently very distinctly said "we will no longer take Modular students" (which I will admit seemed odd, as the other key message seemed to be "we're choking for pilots"). Unfortunately, I wasn't there, so can't verify the authenticity of the statement or that it hasn't been corrupted in translation. However, the details on the OAT web page seems to be that details will be announced today, so I would expect to see further clarity in the next couple of days.
Either way it does seem that they are cutting down on the number of entry methods with them.
Either way it does seem that they are cutting down on the number of entry methods with them.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: galway ireland
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a monopoly??
Also from OAT website
[/quote]
GCAT Flight Academy today announced that it has entered into an agreement to acquire Oxford Aviation Training (OAT) from parent company BBA Aviation plc for a total consideration of $63 million (£32 million). The deal is backed by GCAT Flight Academy's majority shareholder, STAR Capital Partners.
Specialist European investment fund Star Capital Partners have over £1 billion of equity under management and made their first investment in the flight training industry in February 2007 through the acquisition of a majority stake in General Electric Commercial Aviation Training (GECAT) and the entire share capital of SAS Flight Academy from SAS AB. The new group was named GCAT Flight Academy and overnight became the largest flight training organisation in Europe and the third largest in the world
So to be precise OAT is really part of GECAT and both are owned by an investment fund. Now I am not an expert in this but my understanding of investment funds was that they are there to make a profit?!
As for Treesavers
Perhaps that answers that
Secondly is the fact that such a large group is formed not a cause for concern for smaller FTO's??? In other industries this would provoke a huge discussion regarding a monopoly situation. Why not here??
My search shows minimal comment so far
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...academy&page=2
The question is not just is integrated better than modular but are all integrated courses considered equal???
[/quote]
GCAT Flight Academy today announced that it has entered into an agreement to acquire Oxford Aviation Training (OAT) from parent company BBA Aviation plc for a total consideration of $63 million (£32 million). The deal is backed by GCAT Flight Academy's majority shareholder, STAR Capital Partners.
Specialist European investment fund Star Capital Partners have over £1 billion of equity under management and made their first investment in the flight training industry in February 2007 through the acquisition of a majority stake in General Electric Commercial Aviation Training (GECAT) and the entire share capital of SAS Flight Academy from SAS AB. The new group was named GCAT Flight Academy and overnight became the largest flight training organisation in Europe and the third largest in the world
So to be precise OAT is really part of GECAT and both are owned by an investment fund. Now I am not an expert in this but my understanding of investment funds was that they are there to make a profit?!
As for Treesavers
I would like to ask OAT students where they think the additional 30k goes?
Secondly is the fact that such a large group is formed not a cause for concern for smaller FTO's??? In other industries this would provoke a huge discussion regarding a monopoly situation. Why not here??
My search shows minimal comment so far
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...academy&page=2
The question is not just is integrated better than modular but are all integrated courses considered equal???
Last edited by kpd; 4th Nov 2007 at 13:06. Reason: Quotes