Growing Evidence That The Upturn Is Upon Us
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: england
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clanger,
Your last paragraph is exactly what I was thinking. Its all about money, if you can spend £££££, you can be a pilot. No qualification required. This is really disappointing. What about people like myself who are educated and have experience in their field, what if they want to be a pilot but dont have resources?
Your last paragraph is exactly what I was thinking. Its all about money, if you can spend £££££, you can be a pilot. No qualification required. This is really disappointing. What about people like myself who are educated and have experience in their field, what if they want to be a pilot but dont have resources?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The Desert but shortly to be HK!)
Age: 49
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree the barriers to entry are very low relative to other professions.... to get the necessary qualifications at least.
Cost is the biggest issue but money can be borrowed (still). The written exams are not really that hard given most candidates can pass fairly easily with a c80-90% average and most of the questions asked are in the public domain anyway. This is not a real barrier anymore like it was say 15-20 years ago. (My old man says it was actually quite tough when he went to Hamble on the old BA scheme back in the dark ages.... no Bristol question bank then!).
The IR is tough but again more people pass than fail having got that far. Getting into medical school/the legal profession/investment banking (back in the day) is far far harder.
The medical side of things (Class 1) takes no inherent skill and loosening of eye sight requirements etc in the last 4-5 years has opened the profession up to a huge number of additional folks who would not otherwise have "qualified" for training.
The airline training industry is set up to suck as much cash out of you as possible and in many cases downright lies about the prospect of being employed. This is different to training for other profession (see medical school entry requirements etc). It encourages oversupply.
I sense this post may irk some folks but it is one of the obvious reasons for the over supply in wanabees. I am not saying they should make it harder to qualify.... it is just a fact of life...... too much oversupply of "qualified" pilots will continue to drive down T&Cs.... it is basic economics.
Cost is the biggest issue but money can be borrowed (still). The written exams are not really that hard given most candidates can pass fairly easily with a c80-90% average and most of the questions asked are in the public domain anyway. This is not a real barrier anymore like it was say 15-20 years ago. (My old man says it was actually quite tough when he went to Hamble on the old BA scheme back in the dark ages.... no Bristol question bank then!).
The IR is tough but again more people pass than fail having got that far. Getting into medical school/the legal profession/investment banking (back in the day) is far far harder.
The medical side of things (Class 1) takes no inherent skill and loosening of eye sight requirements etc in the last 4-5 years has opened the profession up to a huge number of additional folks who would not otherwise have "qualified" for training.
The airline training industry is set up to suck as much cash out of you as possible and in many cases downright lies about the prospect of being employed. This is different to training for other profession (see medical school entry requirements etc). It encourages oversupply.
I sense this post may irk some folks but it is one of the obvious reasons for the over supply in wanabees. I am not saying they should make it harder to qualify.... it is just a fact of life...... too much oversupply of "qualified" pilots will continue to drive down T&Cs.... it is basic economics.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look at the issue from a business perspective, there is absolutely no reason to alter the status quo (flight safety considerations aside). Part of the problem is that aviators have fuelled the dream (illusion?) that flying is glamourous, sexy etc etc. We hide behind big words/acronyms, tell tales of 'daring do' and encourage people to aspire to be like us (complete with a few gold bars). In this respect, we are very similar to the military in encouraging an environment of social hierarchy. The reality is (and has been for some time) that most flying as a job is not glamourous, can be exceedingly boring, plays havoc with any idea of a stable lifestyle and is like many other jobs. We do it for various reasons: to pay bills; because we value those rare few seconds of freedom; we believe that things will get better; it's all we're good at; we are afraid of leaving our comfort zone. When we wake up and realise that our job is no different to any other profession then maybe things will improve. But as long as there are those who are willing to sell the family silver (literally) to get a blue plastic wallet (followed sometime later by a green one) then things will never change, despite the combined wisdom of PPRuNe. 
Of course, the above may just be the result of one too many drams before lunch.
Of course, the above may just be the result of one too many drams before lunch.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why should educational background be a barrier to starting an ATPL?
If you trawl the internet you will find that you can start courses at universities around the world for Law, Medical, Business, Accountancy etc. all without prior qualification. All, however for a cost.
Make the ATPL exams tougher perhaps. Have more stringent testing both at the academic level and the simulator/aircraft level.
Who knows, but, when the companies need pilots the more desperate the company is the lower the standards bar is set. Simple. It's down to economics. When a resource is needed then it is actively pursued, when not, that resource must actively pursue the requirement.
Whilst people are still willing to pay to get that job and are willing to pay for the TR and the line training, the companies will continue to willingly take their money. If no one pays, the companies won't charge. But it will take a generation of Wannabees with big cahoonas to make that jump.
If you trawl the internet you will find that you can start courses at universities around the world for Law, Medical, Business, Accountancy etc. all without prior qualification. All, however for a cost.
Make the ATPL exams tougher perhaps. Have more stringent testing both at the academic level and the simulator/aircraft level.
Who knows, but, when the companies need pilots the more desperate the company is the lower the standards bar is set. Simple. It's down to economics. When a resource is needed then it is actively pursued, when not, that resource must actively pursue the requirement.
Whilst people are still willing to pay to get that job and are willing to pay for the TR and the line training, the companies will continue to willingly take their money. If no one pays, the companies won't charge. But it will take a generation of Wannabees with big cahoonas to make that jump.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: The Desert but shortly to be HK!)
Age: 49
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
betpump wasn't saying educational standards should be a limiting factor.
In fact agree 100% with your post.... but if you limit training to people in their mid-twenties you run the risk they are not gullible enough by that age to think that spending 100k largely funded with debt to join Ryanair is a good idea.... that might be good for the candidate but not necessarily for the airlines accountants or fly schools.... so unfortuntely won't happen.... instead T&C's will continue to erode.
Alos the lefty nampy pampies will crack on about human rights etc etc.
In fact agree 100% with your post.... but if you limit training to people in their mid-twenties you run the risk they are not gullible enough by that age to think that spending 100k largely funded with debt to join Ryanair is a good idea.... that might be good for the candidate but not necessarily for the airlines accountants or fly schools.... so unfortuntely won't happen.... instead T&C's will continue to erode.
Alos the lefty nampy pampies will crack on about human rights etc etc.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Suck on me toe
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I plan on completing my modular training and if necessary I will use Ryanair to get hours and experience in order to achieve my main aims and ambitions which aren't necessarily to earn huge amounts of money. I plan on remaining debt free too. To be comfortable, happy and doing what I want are sufficient for me.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I found that the flying stopped as soon as I moved to airliners.
Airline flying is, at its best, dull and at its worst, terminally dull. But then that's what the passengers expect.
I depends on what you want from a career. If you wish to spend all of your time sitting in the front of a pressurised aluminium tube following a green or magenta line then airlines are for you.
Alternatively go for some BJ flying, instructing, African/Australian bush flying, helicopter flying instead. Have a ball, learn to fly properly and then, when all of the fun stuff is behind you, go for the airlines. You may not be as senior but at least you will be able to look back at a fun career.
Airline flying is, at its best, dull and at its worst, terminally dull. But then that's what the passengers expect.
I depends on what you want from a career. If you wish to spend all of your time sitting in the front of a pressurised aluminium tube following a green or magenta line then airlines are for you.
Alternatively go for some BJ flying, instructing, African/Australian bush flying, helicopter flying instead. Have a ball, learn to fly properly and then, when all of the fun stuff is behind you, go for the airlines. You may not be as senior but at least you will be able to look back at a fun career.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Betpumps, last time out I didn't particularly like something you'd said. this time I applaud you and in particular your comment around being slightly hypocritical. It's very much to your credit that you recognise that it's what got you your break and that it would be disingenuous to criticise anyone else for doing the same.
RE: educational requirements - I'm not exactly endowed with the greatest academic achievements myself and there are several inconsistencies that I'd argue vehmentley which make academia no more than a side show. However, what I was referring to is a base level of education - the standard "5 GCSEs or O levels grade C or above". You could mitigate the effect on people who were less priviliged with a simple "or equivalent", where clearly an open university degree or similar more than fills the requirement.
Age is also a good method of limiting the numbers for my mind. Let's face it, I would suspect that more of the SLF public would be slightly ill at ease with a 19 year old up front, than those that would be fine with it.
Another method would be to formalise some kind of standard pre-professional training aptitude test. Clearly some people are better than others at these, but the overall idea is that to preserve Ts & Cs you need to reduce the numbers who CAN do it. Of course, this will never fly, because it does reduce the options for the airlines and FTOs themselves.
Wobble - I hate to say it, but I think you're in for a let down if you expect the newly qualified pilots to stop paying for the ratings. It's the selfish instinct again - there will ALWAYS be one person who can and will pay to get ahead and as long as that option exists for them they'll take it. And whilst that one person can take the option, others have no choice but to match them, or fall away back into the pack of also rans. Personally, I rather suspect the only way to stop these schemes would be for the TRIs and TREs to simply refuse to train people who were self paying. After all, there is no better placed person to know the damage it's doing and if there's no-one to train them, then you can't sell the position...
RE: educational requirements - I'm not exactly endowed with the greatest academic achievements myself and there are several inconsistencies that I'd argue vehmentley which make academia no more than a side show. However, what I was referring to is a base level of education - the standard "5 GCSEs or O levels grade C or above". You could mitigate the effect on people who were less priviliged with a simple "or equivalent", where clearly an open university degree or similar more than fills the requirement.
Age is also a good method of limiting the numbers for my mind. Let's face it, I would suspect that more of the SLF public would be slightly ill at ease with a 19 year old up front, than those that would be fine with it.
Another method would be to formalise some kind of standard pre-professional training aptitude test. Clearly some people are better than others at these, but the overall idea is that to preserve Ts & Cs you need to reduce the numbers who CAN do it. Of course, this will never fly, because it does reduce the options for the airlines and FTOs themselves.
Wobble - I hate to say it, but I think you're in for a let down if you expect the newly qualified pilots to stop paying for the ratings. It's the selfish instinct again - there will ALWAYS be one person who can and will pay to get ahead and as long as that option exists for them they'll take it. And whilst that one person can take the option, others have no choice but to match them, or fall away back into the pack of also rans. Personally, I rather suspect the only way to stop these schemes would be for the TRIs and TREs to simply refuse to train people who were self paying. After all, there is no better placed person to know the damage it's doing and if there's no-one to train them, then you can't sell the position...
Wobble2plank,
Am sure many wanabees would follow your advice, but;
FI - little or no jobs currently available
BJ - yes, if you have 1000+ hrs (see above)
Bush flying - many have ties to the UK and just can't go globe trotting
Helicopters - well yes, if you want go rotary but not alot of use for fixed wing
Under the old "self-improver" route, there was a natural progression of PPL-BCPL-FI-MEIR-air taxi-turbo prop and on and up... This helped those who couldn't go down the military or sponsored route.
With the advent of mod/integrated courses, anyone with cash can instantly be 'right hand seat' qualified in a few months and there are simply too many. Hence reduced T's & C's for all. It's supply and demand and the situation is unlikely to change, even when there is an upturn.
Am sure many wanabees would follow your advice, but;
FI - little or no jobs currently available
BJ - yes, if you have 1000+ hrs (see above)
Bush flying - many have ties to the UK and just can't go globe trotting
Helicopters - well yes, if you want go rotary but not alot of use for fixed wing
Under the old "self-improver" route, there was a natural progression of PPL-BCPL-FI-MEIR-air taxi-turbo prop and on and up... This helped those who couldn't go down the military or sponsored route.
With the advent of mod/integrated courses, anyone with cash can instantly be 'right hand seat' qualified in a few months and there are simply too many. Hence reduced T's & C's for all. It's supply and demand and the situation is unlikely to change, even when there is an upturn.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parson,
Thanks for that, no-one was ever going to take it seriously on a 'Wannabee' a jumbo jet pilot forum anyway.
Just the musings of someone who wonders what drives people to fly big, boring aircraft from the age of 21 to the, now, age of 65.
Sadly, as you say, there are too many of 'em.
Thanks for that, no-one was ever going to take it seriously on a 'Wannabee' a jumbo jet pilot forum anyway.
Just the musings of someone who wonders what drives people to fly big, boring aircraft from the age of 21 to the, now, age of 65.
Sadly, as you say, there are too many of 'em.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ???????
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't really see how the age limit suggestion makes any sense, in America you need to be 23 to hold an ATP and many similar problems exist with the training system and the over supply of low houred pilots. I have two friends who fly for a legancy carrier, they are 25 and 27. One of the main things they said to me when I started my ATPL's last year at 22 is that I was starting at the optimum age because I would probably land my first professional job between the ages of 25 and 27, I was told this was a good thing because the Airlines would still view me as young, but at the same time I would not face the hang ups of lack of maturity or lack of life experience. Both these guys trained when they were younger and they rekon that it was a mistake because they simply did not get jobs as they were not viewed as mature enough during interview, they only go there first jobs at 24 and 26 respectivley.
The Credit crunch should get rid of this pay for everything problem, it will take a while yet, maybe another year, but I doubt most people will be able to get a loan to pay for the type rating and associated line training shortly. Remember the Banks only really had a mass panic in November and many of the loans being used now to fund this nonsense were probably approved prior to this, wait until next year things will have changed!
The Credit crunch should get rid of this pay for everything problem, it will take a while yet, maybe another year, but I doubt most people will be able to get a loan to pay for the type rating and associated line training shortly. Remember the Banks only really had a mass panic in November and many of the loans being used now to fund this nonsense were probably approved prior to this, wait until next year things will have changed!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Just a bit lower than the point where the falling angel meets the rising ape
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You apply for your BJ via a reputable BJ provider
You are assessed to see if you are suitable for a BJ
If you are deemed suitable for a BJ you may get one, but if you do, you will pay through the nose for it, and there'll be no guarantee that 6 months down the line you won't feel sticky, itchy and unwell.
Sorry.
JR
p.s. "bush flying"... Strictly postgraduate!
You are assessed to see if you are suitable for a BJ
If you are deemed suitable for a BJ you may get one, but if you do, you will pay through the nose for it, and there'll be no guarantee that 6 months down the line you won't feel sticky, itchy and unwell.
Sorry.
JR
p.s. "bush flying"... Strictly postgraduate!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently MOL wanted to offer BJ flying but the German translator couldn't think up the word for it!
Guaranteed it would be expensive!
The trick with bush flying is not to tell the airfield operator about other bush fields you've operated to before. Apparently they may rescind approach rights again in the event of a go-around.
Enjoy.
Guaranteed it would be expensive!
The trick with bush flying is not to tell the airfield operator about other bush fields you've operated to before. Apparently they may rescind approach rights again in the event of a go-around.
Enjoy.
Wobble2plank - I took your comments seriously. And it's a pity that the 'old' traditional way of progressing has gone (I missed it by a few months) which I'm sure produced more rounded pilots.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, Caveat up front, that I don't know. Also I don't really have an opinion...I have nothing more than my basic (well, minimum required to get professional licences) training and fully recognise that this qualifies me as probably no more than "not a total beginner any more".
But, I have to ask, as a discussion point, DOES the old route provide more rounded pilots? really? everyone I know who has stepped into a jet sim having previously flown nothing more complex than a light twin has found that it is a totally different world. Therefore, whilst I'll accept there is no substitute for experience and further that you do more "hands on" flying in a light a/c, I don't know that it necessarily makes a jot of difference. Or perhaps I should express it more as "does it make a jot of difference".
I.e. someone who goes traditional route may attain [say] 1500 hours...however, none of this is in operating jets, which is a totally, totally different ball game than anything <7500kg. Someone that goes straight from an FTO to the RHS of a 737 or 320 and has built 1500 hours won't probably have anything like the competence in a light a/c but will be significantly more competent in their own a/c. Is one therefore "better" than the other, given the huge gap in required skills between the two?
discuss...
But, I have to ask, as a discussion point, DOES the old route provide more rounded pilots? really? everyone I know who has stepped into a jet sim having previously flown nothing more complex than a light twin has found that it is a totally different world. Therefore, whilst I'll accept there is no substitute for experience and further that you do more "hands on" flying in a light a/c, I don't know that it necessarily makes a jot of difference. Or perhaps I should express it more as "does it make a jot of difference".
I.e. someone who goes traditional route may attain [say] 1500 hours...however, none of this is in operating jets, which is a totally, totally different ball game than anything <7500kg. Someone that goes straight from an FTO to the RHS of a 737 or 320 and has built 1500 hours won't probably have anything like the competence in a light a/c but will be significantly more competent in their own a/c. Is one therefore "better" than the other, given the huge gap in required skills between the two?
discuss...
I suppose the fact that this thread has crept so far from the original topic is evidence that the upturn is not upon us 
As for Clanger32's question, I would have thought handling skills developed in smaller aircraft would be of benefit in a jet. After all, a 737 is still an aeroplane and when all else fails, in an emergency, a pilot who automatically reverts to 'flying it like a Cessna' will probably come through ok.
But that doesn't mean that someone with 1500 hrs on light twins will have the aptitude for flying a modern glass cockpit jet.
As for Clanger32's question, I would have thought handling skills developed in smaller aircraft would be of benefit in a jet. After all, a 737 is still an aeroplane and when all else fails, in an emergency, a pilot who automatically reverts to 'flying it like a Cessna' will probably come through ok.
But that doesn't mean that someone with 1500 hrs on light twins will have the aptitude for flying a modern glass cockpit jet.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was just think MikeHotel, this thread has crept very, very far from both it's original purpose and the one it came to represent! However, still an interesting debate (although, agreed, possibly not correctly placed on this thread)
I would have to take issue though, with the concept of being ok if "you flew it like a cessna". From my very limited experience of the 737 sim, it is an entirely different beast, significantly more slippery than an SEP and less than half as forgiving....I'd actually go so far as to say even trying to fly it like a cessna would be a recipe for disaster! (but then, I bow to those with more knowledge than I!)
I would have to take issue though, with the concept of being ok if "you flew it like a cessna". From my very limited experience of the 737 sim, it is an entirely different beast, significantly more slippery than an SEP and less than half as forgiving....I'd actually go so far as to say even trying to fly it like a cessna would be a recipe for disaster! (but then, I bow to those with more knowledge than I!)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Planet no. 3
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about this article from the Financial Times to get back on topic:
Downturn bottomed out, Trichet signals
"Jean-Claude Trichet signalled on Monday that the global downturn had bottomed out with some large economies already able to put the recession behind them and look forward to renewed growth.
The European Central Bank president’s comments on Monday in Basel, Switzerland, had added weight because he was speaking on behalf of the world’s leading central bankers, not just for the eurozone."
Downturn bottomed out, Trichet signals
"Jean-Claude Trichet signalled on Monday that the global downturn had bottomed out with some large economies already able to put the recession behind them and look forward to renewed growth.
The European Central Bank president’s comments on Monday in Basel, Switzerland, had added weight because he was speaking on behalf of the world’s leading central bankers, not just for the eurozone."
Sorry - the bond market says no.
By printing money and dropping interest rates to the underlay they've bought a little bit of time and averted the immediate failure of the worlds banking system and a Depression.
However, the stench from all that newly printed money will soon become overpowering.
This is a long way from over.
WWW
By printing money and dropping interest rates to the underlay they've bought a little bit of time and averted the immediate failure of the worlds banking system and a Depression.
However, the stench from all that newly printed money will soon become overpowering.
This is a long way from over.
WWW