Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Wannabes Forums > Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies)
Reload this Page >

Modular V Integrated (Merged) - Look here before starting a new thread!

Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies) A forum for those on the steep path to that coveted professional licence. Whether studying for the written exams, training for the flight tests or building experience here's where you can hang out.

Modular V Integrated (Merged) - Look here before starting a new thread!

Old 15th Jul 2012, 09:25
  #381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
Go on then cost it out including living expenses and then add the compound interest you will have payed over 10 years.

I fly with these poor sods that have that much debt.

Just to help out with no capital pay back just compound.

80k at 5% interest and 10 years is 130k

110k is 180k

And 130k is 210k.

Now 5% is a bloody cheap interest rate.

Whats the current rate for an intergrated course? Shall we be nice and say 70k?

Living for 18 months at 1k a month which is pretty low including accom.

So thats 88k so far.

Now add in a type rating say 30k for that and a couple of months accom so another 2k

So we are up at 120k is that unreasonable?

120k at 5% and 10 years is 1300 a month and 150k payed back

the same with 6% is 1332 a month and 160k payed back.

7% is 1380 a month and 166k payed back.

Now before tax thats going to translate into I will just times it by 1.3 to give a rought estimate.

5% 195k
6% 208k
7% 215k

So I ain't to far off am I?

Now modular shall we call it 80k including type rating? which i might add is high but trying to play fair here by putting Intergrated costs low and modular as high.

That at 7% over 10 years would be 920 a month and 110k repayed and 143k before tax and 143 after so 72k saving but in reall life I would expect it to be over 85k if not 100k.

Last edited by mad_jock; 15th Jul 2012 at 10:09.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 10:43
  #382 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
On the other hand, it is extremely hard to discern the quality of training received from many smaller, modular training providers with a large number of flying instructors passing through, resulting in potential for non-standardised and erratic training - not to mention thinking carefully about how to structure hour building to gain and build on the experience.
In my experence its actually the opersite, the smaller mod schools actually proved the better quality pilots. Exeter for example produce extremely good capable pilots and would be on the top of any CV pile that I looked at. Mind you if you look at the list of instructors that work there its not suprising.

But being a good pilot is not what some companys are looking for. They want a known quanity which fits thier training programs. Handling and PIC skills arn't required because they will be sitting next to someone for years who has the PIC skills. And they are trained to work in an automated managed cockpit. They are the ones that like the mentored schemes through the schools.

Do a simple spreadsheet and accumulate the cost of that debt - many would be shocked at what they are getting themselves into. On the basis of that, it might be argued that someone who has cleverly structured their own modular course and carefully built themselves up to the requisite hours to be hired, alongside another career, over the course of a few years, would be the personality who is not only a better judge of risk but more sensible and a better employee.
I payed 35k for my training and had a year as an instructor. This isn't uncommon in the other Captains I work with we all got LHS in 2-3 years and have been working on a Captains wage for the last 7 without paying off any loans in fact most of us have cleared our morgages as well.

A couple of mates in flybe are in a regional base that they want with 4.5k disposable a month. It might not be a fancy jet, it might go tech alot, they might have to put up with flying with MPL's. But they are home most nights and don't have to commute.

Last edited by mad_jock; 15th Jul 2012 at 10:58.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 10:58
  #383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 40
Mad_jock, Which Exeter school are you talking about? I'm asking because I live close by and I've heard some fantastic reviews of the training providers there.

Aviation is really screwing with my head. Don't know where to go. I've also looked at the PATH program up north which looks promising too.

Lakhan is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 11:05
  #384 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
I don't have anything to do with them apart from work and train their product to fly crappy turboprops post license issue

Airways is the one that stands out. But I must admit I haven't heard of anything bad about the others either.

Just looking at the website I see they now do PPL's who are going to become commercial. That to me would seem like a extremely good investment even if it costs a bit more than going to FL to get your PPL.

Get everything done in the same school to keep that box ticked. And I am pretty sure there PPL will be old school with no airline ops . Giving you a good foundation for the rest of your life.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 11:31
  #385 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,263
Let me give you another snapshot of actual figures from a large "integrated" flying school. In this example, around 20 graduates this year alone.

69,000 flying course (bond)
10,000 Foundation course.
500 per month living costs (accom already included) 8000
2000 (discretionary living costs)
2000 (insurances and up front capital item costs)
0 Type rating
0 MCC Jet orientation course. (included with bond costs)
Interest rate for bank borrowing 3% (variable) (227 p/m initially)

Total 91,000.

Refund of previous flying (foundation course) credit -3000 (varies on performance)

Refund of bond during first 7 months of airline placement 8400.

Net total 79,600.

Including airbus type rating and 500 hours of airbus flying time (on around 2000 p/m (nett) back to the individual.) Employment contract dovetailed at end of 7 month placement period of around 38K rising to 50K about 9 months later (with 1000 hours on type).

These are accurate figures for this example and I have over 20 such examples this year alone.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 11:43
  #386 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
We are not discussing the mentored schemes Bealzebub.

This is purely about the hit that self financed students are taking by going intergrated.

Let me give you another snapshot of actual figures from a large "integrated" flying school. In this example, around 20 graduates this year alone.

69,000 flying course (bond)
10,000 Foundation course.
500 per month living costs (accom already included) 8000
2000 (discretionary living costs)
2000 (insurances and up front capital item costs)
0 Type rating
0 MCC Jet orientation course. (included with bond costs)
Interest rate for bank borrowing 3% (variable) (227 p/m initially)

Total 91,000.

Refund of previous flying (foundation course) credit -3000 (varies on performance)

Refund of bond during first 7 months of airline placement 8400.

Net total 79,600.
Your figures just show the stupidity of doing intergrated unless its through a mentored company scheme.

I fully agree if you can get on one of these schemes go for it.

But all you are doing self financing is subsidising the few airlines who prefer that product.

Far from showing how good intergrated is it just shows you how stupid you would need to be to self finance.

Last edited by mad_jock; 15th Jul 2012 at 11:47.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 11:47
  #387 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,263
But all you are doing self financing is subsidising the few airlines who prefer that product.
Of course. Because until you have paid it, you are not that product.

By the way it is still integrated and not intergrated.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 11:49
  #388 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
So paying over 200k to be an unemployable product just so a few airlines can get what they want.

Outstanding life choice, paying 110k so someone else can get a job. These cadets you like really must be thick as .
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 13:56
  #389 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,263
200k?
Where did you pluck that number from?

To become an A320 F/O at the figures I have shown would hardly group those cadets in to the category you so politely describe. Even if it did, they can all write a paragraph without spelling every other word incorrectly.

These forums are about people making choices. it seems reasonable they should be given balanced information.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 14:07
  #390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
If you see the loan workings. You can see that self financing over 10 years of loan.

And no the cadets are the sensible ones and to be honest should be the only ones doing such courses.

The thick as products are the self financing taking such huge debt load without any tenious link to a job afterwards.

And yes the forums are for making choices which is why constant harping back to how good the company schemes are for that those that get them really isn't helping self financing students see the implications of what they are signing up to.

Yes if you get on a comany mentored/sponsored scheme intergrated is fine and dandy and crack on.

If you are self financed you are subsidising airlines training schemes which you haven't got a hope in working for. While at the same time I might add cutting off access to many others.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2012, 19:52
  #391 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Stansted
Age: 31
Posts: 3
All very valid points Mad Jock but I guess one individual's dream is another person's nightmare. Flying interests all of us for many reasons, we all share a passion for the sky etc etc but after a while is that enough? Some people take the rose tinted specs off and look at the profession more realistically. All the examples of success you've cited here don't really inspire me. Like many of my peers I looked at flying as a decent career proposition and I felt that paying for a quality training product would be the best way of getting where I wanted quickly. Obviously I paid more and obviously not everyone can afford that, that's not the debate. I'm arguing the corner for those that could afford it, coughed up, worked hard and achieved what they wanted without a mentorship. I resent being branded a naive fool and I think you need to be a little less blinkered with your views. It really doesn't paint the modular fraternity you so passionately represent in the best light.

Last edited by Jetlad; 16th Jul 2012 at 19:31.
Jetlad is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2012, 13:11
  #392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 1
Mad Jock, I am not concerned about your personal training background, I am sure people could not care less.

Firstly, surely you must have better things to do than post on here, as a man coming on with nearly 7000 posts claiming to be some sort of successful sage rings alarm bells, to be honest I have massive doubts with regards to your flying background, of which the details you present are ambiguous at best. Surely a man who claims to be as experienced as yourself has better things to do than come on here and aggressively attempt to poison a trainee into a particularly path.

As you stated "The thick as products are the self financing taking such huge debt load without any tenious link to a job afterwards." This proves my point here, you speak in aggressive tones continuously. The irony here is that the majority of this products which you refer are doing substantially better than yourself and are not flying around in "some crappy manual turboprop" with no prospects.

I am going to do you a favour and offer you career advice, tailored specifically. From your posts it is apparent that even after 6800 odd of them, you are still unable to coherently cobble together a sentence, your writing, particularly your spelling is abysmal and quite frankly my 5 year old son could do a better job. Really, what must any potential new employer think when you apply for a job? No wonder you are so bitter about your current position. As everybody else seems to be also pointing out your maths is more mathemagic than mathematic, I would advise you to seek some help in improving these essential skills.

If I was you I would accept that I have done better than expected, lay off here, relax and enjoy a peaceful existence.
reverandsmith is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2012, 13:57
  #393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
Maths is fine thanks, well enough to get through a BEng.

Yes I am crap at spelling and have been since graduating from remedial English aged 13.

For any that want to check the maths and compound interest please check

Fool.co.uk: Stock Investing Advice | Stock Research

For an online loan calcuator. Run a load of numbers see how the figures will really stab you in the wallet for years to come.

And have a bloody good think.

To be honest the marority arn't doing better especially over the last 4 years because basically they are unemployed and I ain't what ever heap I fly. Which BTW we are getting more and more desperate to buy a dead type rating on just for hours.

Mind you a one post wonder.

So reverand stick to god bothering and leave the professional advice out.

Or is it a standard thing in religion over the centurys that you want to makes sure the masses don't get to learn the truth?
mad_jock is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2012, 15:01
  #394 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Here and there
Age: 38
Posts: 19
I once worked at a school that provided both Integrated and Modular. I worked in "sales", and we pushed the integrated program quite a bit... the reason being that the integrated course was less flying hours but had a higher pricetag since it was supposedly "better training." More expensive but less flying hours... think about that for a minute. The school made a larger profit on integrated students.

Were the integrated students better pilots? No, they received the same instructors, same aircraft, and roughly the same syllabus and used the same examiners and were tested to the same standards...but they were treated a little differently since they paid more.
FokkerGirl is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2012, 17:19
  #395 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,823
To be fair Fokkergirl they were are taught in the classroom full time which adds to the cost of the course. I don't disagree it would still have been a larger profit. But a full time course is more expensive in resources in teaching rooms etc and staff.

For some this is the only way they could pass the theory exams so would be a valid reason for choosing that option.
mad_jock is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2012, 17:47
  #396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Here and there
Age: 38
Posts: 19
At the time, we also offered modular students full time ATPL theory at considerable cost (in fact I thought that it was so expensive, I was surprised whenever modular students bought the course), but there was no secret in the sales office that integrated generated more profit.
FokkerGirl is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2012, 06:38
  #397 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manchester
Posts: 15
But.....

I think what is being missed here is that the market is still on it's arse and from experience, when you finish modular training (as I did) with minimum hours, even buying a type rating won't get you into a job easily.
So, don't forget to bolt on some more hour building and maybe even a one or two LPC renewals before you land a job..

I'd still never go down the integrated route even though it was a roller coaster of a ride before I finally found a job..
ftimesf is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2012, 10:14
  #398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 215
If you dont mind me asking ftimesf, why do you say you would never go integrated? Is that finance related, or a conscious decision of choice?
Libertine Winno is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2012, 18:25
  #399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Belfast
Posts: 14
Like most people, I can't really afford a huge loan for the integrated course. I'm currently doing my PPL. My aim has always been to go modular. Would anyone be able to put up a full cons/pros list for anyone like myself who are in the process of choosing? Also, realistically, what are the chances of an unsecured loan for integrated versus modular? Are both unlikely?
ggargan is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2012, 14:00
  #400 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central London
Age: 37
Posts: 310
I've been looking into this in detail over the last year or so, and my take on it is as follows.

The appeal of the modular route (which is what I'm doing) is that you can work full time throughout the course, and pay for your training as you go. Even if you need to borrow money for the expensive CPL/MEIR stage at the end of the course, the cost would be around 25k which you could conceivably borrow on an unsecured basis if (and only if) you're in well paid employment and have a good credit rating.

An integrated course would be worth doing if you can get onto a tagged scheme with an airline. However, with the exception of the BA FPP scheme (currently closed), you would be required to fund the cost of the course up front from your own resources (or borrowings). A loan of this magnitude (80kish + housing and living costs for 18 months) would be required to be secured on a property with substantial equity in it and - sensibly enough - would certainly not be available on an unsecured basis these days.

Doing an integrated course, even on a tagged scheme, is a bit of a risk in the event that your potential employer folds (or simply decides it doesn't need to take you on) - but would probably be a risk worth taking (or it would be for me). Doing it without any prospect of a job at the end of it seems like madness in the current market.

The other thing to consider, if you're already earning, is the loss of earnings for the duration of the integrated course which might be very substantial - not to mention the lack of a 'back up' plan if you've burned your bridges with your existing career by giving up work to pursue flying training.

Keep in mind as well that, whether modular or integrated, you're highly likely going to have to fund your own type rating at the end of training - which could be 10k to 30k depending on operator/aircraft.

As a result of the above, my conclusion is that a. if you aren't on an airline scheme, and/or b. have a well paid existing job, modular becomes the only sensible option.

Last edited by taxistaxing; 1st Aug 2012 at 14:07. Reason: typo
taxistaxing is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.