CAE vs Alteon (Boeing Training)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Europe/Usa
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAE vs Alteon (Boeing Training)
Just came across this article about Alteon renaming its self as Boeing Training:
Boeing's Alteon Changing Name to Boeing Training & Flight Services - Press Releases - CNBC.com
How do these guys compare with CAE? or is this like Mac vs PC
Boeing's Alteon Changing Name to Boeing Training & Flight Services - Press Releases - CNBC.com
How do these guys compare with CAE? or is this like Mac vs PC
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WARNING: Personal Opinion
Since you ask, may I offer you this comment?
CAE are simulator manufacturers that decided to get into the training business because they recognized a potentially lucrative market with pilot training. As a result of this potential market the list of saavy simulator manufacturers increased and therefore increased competition for CAE, which only drove the price of full flight simulators down. That meant smaller profits for CAE who were forced by the market to reduce the price of their level D simulators from around 15 million to around 8 million. That meant 'cheapening down' their product. A few years ago, a training company in Dallas on the verge of disappearing offered an "out of the box" solution for CAE who bought them up. You might know that organization as Simuflight. Well, it's now CAE Simuflight.
I'm not sure why CAE doesn't want to dispense with the name Simuflight and call it simply CAE Flight Training but maybe that will happen in the years ahead.
Why not get rid of the name Simuflight if the company was on the verge of Chapter 11? Not knowing the real answer, to me chapter 11 suggests possibly a poor business model, poor management, poor financials which in combination, may spell or indicate customer disatisfaction at some level.
As we've seen in the airline business when Delta bought Northwest, Northwest disappeared with the merger. It's commonplace in the 'industry'.
The braintrust in Montreal isn't geared to those kinds of 'name' decisions (CAE is an engineering/manufacturing company and not a flight training delivery company) as Simuflight seems to run with a free rein and both seem content with the idea that the folks in Dallas know training best (which leads to an entirely new discussion). I think it's safe to say they certainly know pilot training better than CAE.
That may work for CAE but it may not work for others. Such are the fickle minds in aviation. We'll have to see how CAE's market predictions worked out versus economic reality and a downturn in pilot training.
Boeing is an aircraft manufacturer and as such one would think (expect) they'd know their aircraft product to a higher degree than a company based primarily on the use of "contract" instructors. This would likely separate them from other third party vendors in the training delivery market. Their focus is on training Boeing pilots the Boeing way.
My experience with contract instructors is that they train you their way and not necessarily the Boeing way. I think you'll find Airbus Training take a similar approach to Boeing. They know their aircraft better than a Heinz 57 training organization which (I think) CAE Simuflight is for market reasons. (That comment is NOT a slight BTW) Compare the list of types offered by both and I think you'll find Boeing specialize in Boeing while CAE has no speciality. They offer everything which in my view makes a big difference. A review of TBC shows them getting into the training business, then getting out of or selling off their training business then buying it back. Which is where we are today.
In the final analysis, which is better?
Training with either one is a safe bet. Until YOU take YOUR training with one or the other, we won't know.
Willie
Since you ask, may I offer you this comment?
CAE are simulator manufacturers that decided to get into the training business because they recognized a potentially lucrative market with pilot training. As a result of this potential market the list of saavy simulator manufacturers increased and therefore increased competition for CAE, which only drove the price of full flight simulators down. That meant smaller profits for CAE who were forced by the market to reduce the price of their level D simulators from around 15 million to around 8 million. That meant 'cheapening down' their product. A few years ago, a training company in Dallas on the verge of disappearing offered an "out of the box" solution for CAE who bought them up. You might know that organization as Simuflight. Well, it's now CAE Simuflight.
I'm not sure why CAE doesn't want to dispense with the name Simuflight and call it simply CAE Flight Training but maybe that will happen in the years ahead.
Why not get rid of the name Simuflight if the company was on the verge of Chapter 11? Not knowing the real answer, to me chapter 11 suggests possibly a poor business model, poor management, poor financials which in combination, may spell or indicate customer disatisfaction at some level.
As we've seen in the airline business when Delta bought Northwest, Northwest disappeared with the merger. It's commonplace in the 'industry'.
The braintrust in Montreal isn't geared to those kinds of 'name' decisions (CAE is an engineering/manufacturing company and not a flight training delivery company) as Simuflight seems to run with a free rein and both seem content with the idea that the folks in Dallas know training best (which leads to an entirely new discussion). I think it's safe to say they certainly know pilot training better than CAE.
That may work for CAE but it may not work for others. Such are the fickle minds in aviation. We'll have to see how CAE's market predictions worked out versus economic reality and a downturn in pilot training.
Boeing is an aircraft manufacturer and as such one would think (expect) they'd know their aircraft product to a higher degree than a company based primarily on the use of "contract" instructors. This would likely separate them from other third party vendors in the training delivery market. Their focus is on training Boeing pilots the Boeing way.
My experience with contract instructors is that they train you their way and not necessarily the Boeing way. I think you'll find Airbus Training take a similar approach to Boeing. They know their aircraft better than a Heinz 57 training organization which (I think) CAE Simuflight is for market reasons. (That comment is NOT a slight BTW) Compare the list of types offered by both and I think you'll find Boeing specialize in Boeing while CAE has no speciality. They offer everything which in my view makes a big difference. A review of TBC shows them getting into the training business, then getting out of or selling off their training business then buying it back. Which is where we are today.
In the final analysis, which is better?
Training with either one is a safe bet. Until YOU take YOUR training with one or the other, we won't know.
Willie
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alteon was originally the Boeing Training Department until they were spun off with a different name several years ago. Looks like they're just going back to the original name...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My experience with contract instructors is that they train you their way and not necessarily the Boeing way.
Under the Boeing franchise the student will be guaranteed a tightly controlled regime of training within the Boeing approved syllabus and no more. Instructor experience on type means nothing with very little outlet for initiative based on personal flying experience. It is all about litigation protection. Personal hand-outs that could prove helpful to some students are not permitted unless it is Boeing approved material. The student receives an inflexible "package".
While some pilots are comfortable with that, others prefer a less robotic approach to training.
Within sensible guide-lines, students would generally opt for an instructor not afraid of using his initiative based upon his own flying experience when conducting simulator training. With contract instructors at some establishments, the syllabus of training is usually flexible enough to allow for additional training sequences at the discretion of the instructor.
Given the choice, most students prefer to be trained by an instructor who can teach safe and efficient flying both on automatics and using basic skills of raw data hand flying. Not ham-strung by the party line. Most pilots would agree they should be equally capable using both disciplines rather than purely automatics skills. The Boeing way accents full use of all automatics - sometimes to the detriment of pure flying skills. Loss of Control replacing CFIT as the leading cause of accidents, would suggest the Boeing way of training need reviewing.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Europe/Usa
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like CAE is really struggling with the downturn if they are removing the free coffee facilities from their training centers! The cost of a type rating would probably cover the annual cost!
