Oxford Aviation Academy (Merged 2010)
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Scotland
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown with 4 Oxford trained integrated course pilots in the last 12 months, each with less than 1000hrs total experience; all were pleasant company and competent operators both in handling and overall procedure.
Prior to that I flew with 2 Jerez trained integrated course pilots who were of the same competence as those from Oxford.
Prior to that I flew with 2 Jerez trained integrated course pilots who were of the same competence as those from Oxford.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have flown with 4 Oxford trained integrated course pilots in the last 12 months, each with less than 1000hrs total experience; all were pleasant company and competent operators both in handling and overall procedure.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rex
I think your decision to go shopping "on the way home" is of course very sensible but if you felt awkward in your uniform as you suggested - you could always take a change of shirt, tie, put on a pullover or do something to make yourself less conspicuous!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rex,
I also trained at Oxford and share many of your viewpoints.
However I rather suspect the point being made by coldplayer about x winds, is that if it truly WAS gusting 30/35 then it was dog**** airmanship to even attempt a landing, given you were outside of limits. Also you should at the very least have recognised that during solo flying phase you'd (excluding prior experience) have had no more than about 75 hours max and that therefore these conditions were outside your ability to handle safely.
When I was in GYR, Flying was banned if X winds were FORECAST to go above 17 and for solos the duty instructor had to sign you out based on a X wind limit assigned by your instructor, compared to TAF.
As I say, I do agree wiht most of what you have said - but this point is unarguable....if you did get caught in unforseen weather, gusting up to twice your AIRCRAFT demonstrated limit, then I'm fairly certain the school would have wanted you to divert Mobile. Claiming anything otherwise just kinda makes Mad Jocks point.
I also trained at Oxford and share many of your viewpoints.
However I rather suspect the point being made by coldplayer about x winds, is that if it truly WAS gusting 30/35 then it was dog**** airmanship to even attempt a landing, given you were outside of limits. Also you should at the very least have recognised that during solo flying phase you'd (excluding prior experience) have had no more than about 75 hours max and that therefore these conditions were outside your ability to handle safely.
When I was in GYR, Flying was banned if X winds were FORECAST to go above 17 and for solos the duty instructor had to sign you out based on a X wind limit assigned by your instructor, compared to TAF.
As I say, I do agree wiht most of what you have said - but this point is unarguable....if you did get caught in unforseen weather, gusting up to twice your AIRCRAFT demonstrated limit, then I'm fairly certain the school would have wanted you to divert Mobile. Claiming anything otherwise just kinda makes Mad Jocks point.
Oh come on! I felt I could handle the conditions and seeing as we were unauthorised to fly into Mobile solo I didnt consider it (especially not with the dodgy Germans and their lack of position reports). The fact that I am here talking to you now proves I was not incorrect in my judgement.
Whether you felt you could "handle the conditions" or not is irrelevant. If the reported xwinds are above the certified limits for the aircraft (or pilot) you do not land. You hold or divert.
The fact that I am here talking to you now proves I was not incorrect in my judgement.
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you're telling me never in your life have you broken a rule just a little bit??
Cheers
Whirls
You broke a crosswind limit. "Big deal" you say "I got away with it, I could handle the conditions, I didn't want to get into trouble diverting"
My question is this. Would you descend below Decision Height, without the required visual reference? After all, it was forecast above minima when you departed, and if you have to divert the commercial department will be all over your ass. You can handle the conditions, you can get away with it...
Same thought process applied to a different situation, and it doesnt look too clever does it? Remember your HPL? different attitudes?
You've taken a bit of a slating. Not because you went to oxford, but because you have admitted to being a bit reckless, and a bit of a fool. Put it down to the inexperience of youth, learn from it, and move on.
All The Best
TTR
My question is this. Would you descend below Decision Height, without the required visual reference? After all, it was forecast above minima when you departed, and if you have to divert the commercial department will be all over your ass. You can handle the conditions, you can get away with it...
Same thought process applied to a different situation, and it doesnt look too clever does it? Remember your HPL? different attitudes?
You've taken a bit of a slating. Not because you went to oxford, but because you have admitted to being a bit reckless, and a bit of a fool. Put it down to the inexperience of youth, learn from it, and move on.
All The Best
TTR
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rex,
I'm honestly not trying to have a go at "you", but pointing out that you have to be very careful with what you say. You mention that simply the three letters "OAA" spark fury in people, so why give them ammunition. Opinions like Mad Jock's are formed by people making ill thought out comments that they can seize on.
Yes, I don't think there's a person on this board, or any other, that would say weather forecasting is an exact science and I fully accept that it can turn nasty(ier) than planned in no time at all. But the point is, exactly as Groundloop pointed out, if you're out of limits you stay in the circuit until such time as you can make an approach or you divert to alternate. You're right to say we weren't cleared to land at Mobile solo, but [Not sure if you were there after P Taylor took over as CFI, or whether it was still Tom] I'll bet good money either would have backed you landing away at Mobile rather than making an approach in ~35k x-wind. If you genuinely landed in anything approach 30k X-wind then get over your pride and accept that it was really poor airmanship to have even tried. Put it this way, the instructors wouldn't try landing in that and you certainly weren't better than those guys, even with tons of natural ability, with 75hours under your belt
FWIW, My opinion on this is actually formed from the fact that I had exactly the kind of sudden weather shift you're talking about, just before touch down whilst flying 9844S landing on 21. Basically got hit by C.25k gust direct across the runway at touchdown, causing me to weathercock. I got away with it. I didn't "handle it correctly", I got away with it. And I damn near had to change my trousers. Tower called extreme caution for all in circuit for Windshear on final, so I know it wasn't me. I wasn't exactly liberal with chances anyway - possibly cos I'm an old git, but that taught me exactly how little I knew.
The other point to consider is that you can get away with it 99 times, but you only have to NOT get away with it once. The rules are there so that you have that safety margin that you CAN do it almost all the time.
I too think Mad Jocks Wildly sweeping statement is laughably naieve and I think it shows him(her?) in a terribly bad light (especially considering some of the things I've seen mod students do!) -but you've absolutely fed him here.
edited to say that the original point about OAA students being unable to handle crosswinds - let's face it, you only learn X-wind landings by DOING them. When I was in GYR, there was at least a period where ALL flying was canned if X-wind exceeded (I think it was) 10 knots. WE knew it was lunacy and lobbied for that to be removed (which it was). So you can see why MJ thinks as he does. The fact he's wrong is neither here nor there.
I'm honestly not trying to have a go at "you", but pointing out that you have to be very careful with what you say. You mention that simply the three letters "OAA" spark fury in people, so why give them ammunition. Opinions like Mad Jock's are formed by people making ill thought out comments that they can seize on.
Yes, I don't think there's a person on this board, or any other, that would say weather forecasting is an exact science and I fully accept that it can turn nasty(ier) than planned in no time at all. But the point is, exactly as Groundloop pointed out, if you're out of limits you stay in the circuit until such time as you can make an approach or you divert to alternate. You're right to say we weren't cleared to land at Mobile solo, but [Not sure if you were there after P Taylor took over as CFI, or whether it was still Tom] I'll bet good money either would have backed you landing away at Mobile rather than making an approach in ~35k x-wind. If you genuinely landed in anything approach 30k X-wind then get over your pride and accept that it was really poor airmanship to have even tried. Put it this way, the instructors wouldn't try landing in that and you certainly weren't better than those guys, even with tons of natural ability, with 75hours under your belt
FWIW, My opinion on this is actually formed from the fact that I had exactly the kind of sudden weather shift you're talking about, just before touch down whilst flying 9844S landing on 21. Basically got hit by C.25k gust direct across the runway at touchdown, causing me to weathercock. I got away with it. I didn't "handle it correctly", I got away with it. And I damn near had to change my trousers. Tower called extreme caution for all in circuit for Windshear on final, so I know it wasn't me. I wasn't exactly liberal with chances anyway - possibly cos I'm an old git, but that taught me exactly how little I knew.
The other point to consider is that you can get away with it 99 times, but you only have to NOT get away with it once. The rules are there so that you have that safety margin that you CAN do it almost all the time.
I too think Mad Jocks Wildly sweeping statement is laughably naieve and I think it shows him(her?) in a terribly bad light (especially considering some of the things I've seen mod students do!) -but you've absolutely fed him here.
edited to say that the original point about OAA students being unable to handle crosswinds - let's face it, you only learn X-wind landings by DOING them. When I was in GYR, there was at least a period where ALL flying was canned if X-wind exceeded (I think it was) 10 knots. WE knew it was lunacy and lobbied for that to be removed (which it was). So you can see why MJ thinks as he does. The fact he's wrong is neither here nor there.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And also, just out of interest how many accidents do you think happen where the crew have stated "ooh, these conditions are a bit ****, they're well out of my comfort zone. Still, let's carry on". My point about airmanship isn't that you got away with it, it's that with a Xwind approaching or exceeding twice max demonstrated you shouldn't even have tried. Your default position should have been "go elsewhere" not "Give it a whirl".
No-one ever thinks it's above their capability level until such time as lady luck leaves the room and - if you're lucky - you're left picking bits of twig out of your air intakes and maybe looking at a collapsed gear strut. If you're unlucky, you find yourself on a cloud somewhere looking down at a smoking hole thinking "....But I COULD handle it....."
No-one ever thinks it's above their capability level until such time as lady luck leaves the room and - if you're lucky - you're left picking bits of twig out of your air intakes and maybe looking at a collapsed gear strut. If you're unlucky, you find yourself on a cloud somewhere looking down at a smoking hole thinking "....But I COULD handle it....."
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: at the whim of people I've never met
Age: 46
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rather goes to prove the point of Mad Jock et al.
Textbook example of pressonitis and inflated opinion of ones own limitations let alone that of the aircraft.
Forget 'authorisation' to land solo at Mobile, landing that far outside the limits was a terrible decision. There are numerous airfields around the valley close by. Bravado has no place in aviation be that solo SEP or commercial Jet Transport.
Textbook example of pressonitis and inflated opinion of ones own limitations let alone that of the aircraft.
Forget 'authorisation' to land solo at Mobile, landing that far outside the limits was a terrible decision. There are numerous airfields around the valley close by. Bravado has no place in aviation be that solo SEP or commercial Jet Transport.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dry bar
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hollingworthp said:
Bit like candidates pressing on with progress tests when there are dust storms and Cb's all over the valley, eh hp.
The discussion about landing in gusting crosswinds (the Piper published figure of 17kts is a maximum demonstrated figure (by a manufacturers test pilot) not a limitation, although you might use it as a guide) is interesting when you consider that the extremely high incidence of landing incidents and accidents at Goodyear might suggest that student pilots there demonstrated particularly poor crosswind technique -indeed, the crosswind limitation of 10kts that clanger32
was introduced in an urgent attempt to reduce the number of runway excursions by solo students. The sheer arrogance of the statements made here by some of the posters purporting to be former OAA students only serves to testify why integrated training and OAA itself has the somewhat stuck-up reputation that it does; if you feel that a crosswind limit determined by your instructor only applies to takeoff or is 'lunacy' proves the point - you were a student and should not have been in a position to make the call for yourself. How would a blatant disregard for SOP's be treated in your current operation? No tea, no biscuits with the fleet manager at best I'd like to think - unless of course you 'got away with it this time'. There was another runway runoff only as recently as this week I understand so clearly it's still happening.
Curious - didn't the last CFI at 'TK drive a golf?
Textbook example of pressonitis and inflated opinion of ones own limitations let alone that of the aircraft.
The discussion about landing in gusting crosswinds (the Piper published figure of 17kts is a maximum demonstrated figure (by a manufacturers test pilot) not a limitation, although you might use it as a guide) is interesting when you consider that the extremely high incidence of landing incidents and accidents at Goodyear might suggest that student pilots there demonstrated particularly poor crosswind technique -indeed, the crosswind limitation of 10kts that clanger32
lobbied for that to be removed (which it was)
Curious - didn't the last CFI at 'TK drive a golf?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: at the whim of people I've never met
Age: 46
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bit like candidates pressing on with progress tests when there are dust storms and Cb's all over the valley, eh hp.
Also maybe you are unclear on the definition of 'purporting' - maybe you should check it out when the hangover clears.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Polymer Records
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another thread started by a budding young aviator discending into childish bickering about "my course was better than your course". A fine example to show the lad, who has shown us all how sensible one can be aged 14 by asking professionals in the industry he aspires to enter for help. And look how you repay him!
To the OP; as to whether OAA or indeed any school gives you better job prospects is a matter of some debate. When the question is asked you usually get a lot of heated responses, mainly from people trying to justify the descisions they took themselves. The matter has never been proven one way or the other - the argument rolls on.
From my own experiences of passing through flight training, (5 or 6 years ago), both the size of the "integrated premium", and the improved job prospects it provides was largely exagerated by both sides of the divide to suit their own argument. Indeed, I remember the day I joined my airline; we were all down the bar and an integrated student said that he wished he'd gone modular and saved money as there was an even mix of integrated / modular students sitting in the bar, starting the same job as him. The modular student next to him laughed and said that in the end he'd spent nearly as much it costs to do an integrated so would probably have preferred to go down the integrated route after all.
The above story displays well the type of person airlines are after.
As has been said above, keep a good ear out as to what suits you best at the time you want to start training. At the moment the cadet scheme with Thomas Cook and Flybe are by far the best options, if you can get in. No doubt in a few years time it will all be different.
Best of luck
To the OP; as to whether OAA or indeed any school gives you better job prospects is a matter of some debate. When the question is asked you usually get a lot of heated responses, mainly from people trying to justify the descisions they took themselves. The matter has never been proven one way or the other - the argument rolls on.
From my own experiences of passing through flight training, (5 or 6 years ago), both the size of the "integrated premium", and the improved job prospects it provides was largely exagerated by both sides of the divide to suit their own argument. Indeed, I remember the day I joined my airline; we were all down the bar and an integrated student said that he wished he'd gone modular and saved money as there was an even mix of integrated / modular students sitting in the bar, starting the same job as him. The modular student next to him laughed and said that in the end he'd spent nearly as much it costs to do an integrated so would probably have preferred to go down the integrated route after all.
The above story displays well the type of person airlines are after.
As has been said above, keep a good ear out as to what suits you best at the time you want to start training. At the moment the cadet scheme with Thomas Cook and Flybe are by far the best options, if you can get in. No doubt in a few years time it will all be different.
Best of luck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Phil - I checked. My intention had been to suggest that posters on this thread claiming to have landed in 30kt + crosswinds whilst OAA students might not have been OAA students. I know of a number of irresponsible antics that students thought they 'got away with' such as formation flying and landing at unauthorized airports to pick up girlfriends and classmates whilst on solo cross-country exercises but you don't read about them here - I put landing in crosswinds outside of your endorsed limit in the same bracket and I am surprised that a post-flight discussion with the Sergeant Major did not occur. You still have that somewhat supercilious air - immediately interpreting what was intended to be a joke as some sort of an attack then dismissing my observations as the ramblings of someone who had just got home from the pub - as I was eight hours behind the U.K. I was in fact simply biding my time before the commencement of Happy Hour which, I notice....has now started - Cheers! 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't recall RexBanner saying he landed with a 30 knot or more crosswind. I doubt it would be possible to pull that off without it getting reported to the FTO, if not by the tower, then by the crash crew that scrapes the wreckage off the sand on the leeward side of the runway! He does seem to claim that he might have exceeded the 17 knot crosswind limit, but his main point was that the forecast weather often changed and there were gusts in the 30-35 knot range. It's not ideal, but when you have to get down, you might have to have a few gos until you get it down between gusts.
I'm not sure why he takes it so personal that someone claims Oxford grads don't get enough crosswind landing experience though. It seems like a few years in on pprune he'd know better the futility of going after the windup merchants with large chips on their shoulders!
I'm not sure why he takes it so personal that someone claims Oxford grads don't get enough crosswind landing experience though. It seems like a few years in on pprune he'd know better the futility of going after the windup merchants with large chips on their shoulders!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adios,
On re-reading, you are perhaps correct that there isn't a specific statement of "It was gusting 35k AND I landed in it", but the following quote implies strongly that whatever landing was made was well outside of limits. I for one am yet to see a "....300/05g35" TAF....
It's also worth noting that MY contribution here was effectively trying to say "don't feed the troll" - which IMHO Rex did beautifully.
Final point - but reversebucket - you seem to imply (and perhaps I too misread your post) that it was me alone that lobbied for removal of the X wind solo limitation. A) It certainly wasn't - it was all students (just to clear that up!) and B) I'm not quite sure what you'd have OAA do then? Have a ridiculously low X wind limit (on reflection, think it may have been 5kts!) so that no student ever gets to learn or practice X winds, or remove that limit and have a limit imposed by the instructor that reflects the students ability? I for one certainly think that X wind technique was not taught at all well in Oxford, but you DO only learn it by doing it.
On re-reading, you are perhaps correct that there isn't a specific statement of "It was gusting 35k AND I landed in it", but the following quote implies strongly that whatever landing was made was well outside of limits. I for one am yet to see a "....300/05g35" TAF....
And I'll have you know that there were plenty of times it was gusting 30 knots straight across the runway at Goodyear when we arrived back from solo's and we didnt wither away and die, we dealt with it, and absolutely fine in my case and plenty of others
Final point - but reversebucket - you seem to imply (and perhaps I too misread your post) that it was me alone that lobbied for removal of the X wind solo limitation. A) It certainly wasn't - it was all students (just to clear that up!) and B) I'm not quite sure what you'd have OAA do then? Have a ridiculously low X wind limit (on reflection, think it may have been 5kts!) so that no student ever gets to learn or practice X winds, or remove that limit and have a limit imposed by the instructor that reflects the students ability? I for one certainly think that X wind technique was not taught at all well in Oxford, but you DO only learn it by doing it.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having sampled the delights of KGYR from APR-AUG I would say that there were very few days when there was a noticeable x-wind factor compared to GA flying I have done in the UK.
I also doubt that anyone could land a PA28 or PA34 in a x-wind of 35kts. It might have been gusting but not 35kts, if it were varying that much I would expect you to be off the side of the rwy in seconds.
I also doubt that anyone could land a PA28 or PA34 in a x-wind of 35kts. It might have been gusting but not 35kts, if it were varying that much I would expect you to be off the side of the rwy in seconds.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: LONDON
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry guys but we've seemed to have gone a little off topic. The original question was:
Is Oxford Aviation Academy worth the cost?
To do the integrated ATPL(A) APP F/O Training is £66,000 and I know it's cheaper to go down the Modular Route but does going to Oxford Aviation Academy mean better job prospects?
The answer to the questions are: £66,000 is a lot of money and there are other cheaper options available to obtain your Frozen ATPL as previously mentioned in this thread. OAA is well known to the airlines, as is FTE, CTC, etc and speaking as a member of the recruitment team for a UK carrier, rightly or wrongly, an application from a cadet who qualified from OAA or any other full time course provider does place you above modular students.
OAA, FTE, CTC, etc have a level of ability to put you forward to an airline, however be aware that they will only do so if you are their "cream of the crop". At the end of the day the training organisations are running a business and every student they recommend will be one that has proven to be a reliable high achiever so as to greatly limit their risk of any failures once the cadet is with an airline.
As others have said keep watching the industry, keep studying hard and keep your options open.
Hope this helps.
Is Oxford Aviation Academy worth the cost?
To do the integrated ATPL(A) APP F/O Training is £66,000 and I know it's cheaper to go down the Modular Route but does going to Oxford Aviation Academy mean better job prospects?
The answer to the questions are: £66,000 is a lot of money and there are other cheaper options available to obtain your Frozen ATPL as previously mentioned in this thread. OAA is well known to the airlines, as is FTE, CTC, etc and speaking as a member of the recruitment team for a UK carrier, rightly or wrongly, an application from a cadet who qualified from OAA or any other full time course provider does place you above modular students.
OAA, FTE, CTC, etc have a level of ability to put you forward to an airline, however be aware that they will only do so if you are their "cream of the crop". At the end of the day the training organisations are running a business and every student they recommend will be one that has proven to be a reliable high achiever so as to greatly limit their risk of any failures once the cadet is with an airline.
As others have said keep watching the industry, keep studying hard and keep your options open.
Hope this helps.