Modular Training at Multiple Organisations...

[The_green_penguin]

Hi, I'm sure this query has been raised before, however, the search function was proving next to useless...

Just wondering what the general consesus is (on here and by airline recruiters themselves) to those modular students who have completed different parts of their training at different organisations. I have completed my PPL, just starting out the ATPL theory distance learning with Bristol Ground School whilst hours building. I plan to perhaps do my CPL (and maybe ME) at Shoreham, then do my IR some place else at an ILS based airfield (perhaps Bournemouth?). Then eventually I hope to do the MCC/JOC on a full motion simulator such as at Oxford.

Do airlines prefer people to stay with one organisation throughout the whole training process and would this method stand me in better stead to become a more profiicent pilot overall?

Many thanks for any advice people are able to give.

PS Please, I hope not have opened yet another can of worms which seems so easily to do in this forum.....!!!

[Pilot Positive]

Hello Green Penguin,

Welcome to PPRune and your first few steps into the big wide world of aviation,

Doing your commercial training in more than 2 schools is, IMHO, not advisable as recruiters like to see a continuity of learning which will indicate to them you are not a training risk.

Suggest you check the latter pages of the thread below:

http://www.pprune.org/professional-p...ated-look.html


Good luck

[r1flyguy35]

PP, that maybe the general consensus and may in fact be a deciding factor for most employers, but I did mine at three different locations, Oxford for modular ground studies, Bournemouth for IR & MCC and Wellesbourne (EGBW) for CPL and was hired within 4 months of completing my training

Your money, your choice, do what is best for you

[Pilot Positive]

Its not possible to factor in every individual circumstance and provide a recommendation based on those circumstance so you will need to apply some judgement to your own situation. e.g. you may have very close contacts at an airline which might very well help you to jump the queue and get into the RHS of something nice: if so, where you did your training may be irrelevant.

However, as r1flyguy35 points out, generally its better if you can limit the number of schools you train at.

[TopGunGB]

Not sure about other airlines, but a senior staff member of Flybe told me they like to see the CPL and IR completed at the same school. They aren't concerned where you did your PPL, ground school studies or the MCC.

[pez1]

Concur with the above.
I've been told the same as TopGunGB by various different airline sources, also including Flybe.

[Pilot Positive]

told me they like to see the CPL and IR completed at the same school

That kinda makes sense given that that training forms an essential nub of your job as a pilot.

[fabbe92]

I started with my PPL at the local flying club, some time ago and there is no point of stoping now since I am allmost done. Anyway, many schools require a Night Qualification as well. So should I do the NQ at the flying club or wait and do it at the training organisation, where I intend to do all the rest of my training?

[BillieBob]

Some employers require that all training is done with the same provider, some prefer that it is and others don't care. No employer, so far as I am aware, either prefers or requires that training is completed with a series of different providers. Consequently, and solely in so far as maximising the chances of employment is concerned, there is some advantage and no disadvantage to using as few different training providers as possible.

[Pilot Positive]

Fabbe 92

So should I do the NQ at the flying club or wait and do it at the training organisation

Depends on where you choose to go to do your training and which route you decide to take (see modular v integrated thread: http://www.pprune.org/professional-p...ated-look.html)

If its the integrated route then you will do your night rating with your FTO as part of the overall training package. If Modular, then, for some FTOs a NQ is a mandatory pre-requisite to start the training with them, others might be happy to do it as part of pre-joining training. Check LASORS for minimum experience requirements to start on a modular CPL route.

LASORS: LASORS 2008 | Publications | CAA

If you have the money, then do the NQ, anyway as its time in the air and helps to build a little bit more experience.

[fabbe92]

I am interested in the Modular training at Oxford or Cabair.

And BillieBob, could you give an example of an airline that requires all training done at the same place?

[Pilot Positive]

I'm pretty sure that if you do your training either with OAA or Cabair then they will expect you to have a NQ before starting their flight training programmes.

[alphaadrian]

Fabbe92.

I would serious reconsider MODULAR at Oxford...have heard a few horror stories.

Mainly seems that they favour integrated guys and the modular students keep getting bumped and treated as "2nd class citizens".

I know 2 of my ex students who were oxford mod guys certainly agreed that this was the case.

That was in 2007 so dont know if things changed since then.

Good luck

[Pilot Positive]

and treated as "2nd class citizens".

Yes there is a tendency at OAA to do exactly that with modular students even to the point where they would prefer to slate their own instruction/program of training than see these guys get jobs over and above integrated guys.

Remember: Like integrated students, you are paying for the quality of training they purport to deliver. NOT A JOB AT THE END. And whilst an optimistic and glossy view of the market, impressively inflated employment figures and a careers department which offers guidance appears to improve your chances of a job at the end - its part of a gentle and subtle sales process.

Sure a small percentage of integrated students will be put forward for jobs (probably a lot less now), but most do not get jobs through their FTOs and it still boils down to you, the individual - the FTO owe you nothing in this area. NO FTO CAN GUARANTEE YOU A JOB - SO NEVER LET THEM MAKE YOU THINK THEY CAN. In a combined FTO the job factor is a grey area and therefore, contentious. I am unaware, since 2001, of OAA ever putting forward a modular student for a job - its actually the opposite.

I know this will open a whole can of worms (there are numerous horror stories and there must be a thread for this one somewhere!!) and I am sure someone will respond in OAA's favour but you need to be aware of the reality of modular programs within an integrated environment - especially when those FTOs are relying so heavily on their ab initio employment rates to sell their highly profitable integrated courses.

If you want more pointers on other UK schools which concentrate purely on modular training and have a good reputation within airline recruitment departments then feel free to PM me and I'd be happy to give you some additional and sincere options.

[fabbe92]

Any ideas on the best GS?

[Pilot Positive]

Fabbe,

you have PM.



PP

[potkettleblack]

Putting aside the valid points made about limiting your chances of getting a job you would be mad to spread your training across a number of providers. Think how many SOPs you will need to learn and then quickly forget, trim and power settings in different aircraft, dealing with a multitude of instructors who all want it done their way, learning new airfields/airways/joining procedures...The list goes on and on. It will cost you loads of extra dosh.

[supramkiv]

I trained modular with a variety of providers and got RHS jet job within 2 months of completing training. The company I worked for had no preference at all for your training route. I would however agree with alot of the above posts that some employers would look for candidates who trained with as few providers as poss.

Best advice I could give is to dont stay with one provider to preserve continuity if you are unhappy with the standard of training. Its better to be well trained with a multitude of organisations, then badly trained with one.

[UAV689]

I personally think the training at one provider for continuity is a load of old hockum.

For 'continuity' I prefer to read time scale, if your flying on a regular basis that in my mind is continuity. How can always flying from one airport, on one fleet, in the same area of the country, same airspace etc make you more proficient?
Yes you will spend a bit of time getting checked out at a new school, establishing your skill level but how can flying a multitude of different a/c at different ends of the country (or overseas) make you worse? that is all good experience.

In my case I have flown over 10 types of powered a/c, solo'ed half of them, and probably the same amount of gliders. I have visited up'teen different airfields, some controlled, some farm strips even landed in a couple of farmers fields whilst gliding. I have done aerobatics (powered and gliding, gliding is the best going down to 900ft agl doing aeros with no engine is ace) formation flying, low level nav's, spinning and basic instrument flying. In my mind all excellent experience and all I have not even started my CPL training yet!

[Pilot Positive]

dont stay with one provider to preserve continuity if you are unhappy with the standard of training.

...when all routes of negotiation are exhausted with that FTO in terms of outlining and addressing what you think might be the issues of sub-standard training.

Again depending on your individual circumstances, generally, when applying for jobs as a first timer one of the interview questions will relate to your training.

Remember: Your aviation experience is minimal so most employers will want to know how you performed within an FTO, what challenges you faced and how you dealt with those challenges. Unless you have previous experience then its possibly the only thing they have to go on.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but as students go into the job market they can never be 100% sure that employers will not ask them about their training. As you will find out: "Prepare for the worst. Hope for the Best"!