ATPLH - relevant?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: US
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATPLH - relevant?
Just wondered how much of the syllabus from the ATPL you have actually found useful and relevant to the 'real' world? As far as I can see the syllabus generally certainly is'nt there for practical application.
Met - relevant.
PoF - useful.
What do you think - just an elitist way of keeping down the numbers?
Met - relevant.
PoF - useful.
What do you think - just an elitist way of keeping down the numbers?
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
Depends on which school's ATPL (H) course you are studying but yes, a lot of it is irrelevant. The course I did was completely fixed wing oriented apart from PoF. I do not need to know how many crowbars are required on boards if you have 300 passengers. 
Cheers
Whirls
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,383
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmm ...
.... how much of the syllabus from the ATPL you have actually found useful and relevant to the 'real' world? ....
Well I've found near everything I learnt over the years to be relevant AND useful ..... at sometime or other ....
As a professional pilot I'd have to say the knowledge requirement (of the ATPLH) to be accurate ... and while you may not use all of the syllabus knowledge all of the time eventually when you do use it you will be most satisfied.
I have noticed over the years it is often beginners who object to the seemingly rediculous subject matters to be studied .... there is 'method in the madness' but it is not till you are exercising the privileges of your hard earned license that you will recognise the benefits of your learning.
Never lose track of the fact that you and your passengers wellbeing can depend on your professional knowledge being the best it can be.
.... how much of the syllabus from the ATPL you have actually found useful and relevant to the 'real' world? ....
Well I've found near everything I learnt over the years to be relevant AND useful ..... at sometime or other ....
As a professional pilot I'd have to say the knowledge requirement (of the ATPLH) to be accurate ... and while you may not use all of the syllabus knowledge all of the time eventually when you do use it you will be most satisfied.
I have noticed over the years it is often beginners who object to the seemingly rediculous subject matters to be studied .... there is 'method in the madness' but it is not till you are exercising the privileges of your hard earned license that you will recognise the benefits of your learning.
Never lose track of the fact that you and your passengers wellbeing can depend on your professional knowledge being the best it can be.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: US
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm just speaking as someone midway through the ATPL process.
The met and PoF seem definately relevant, even if not now, but some of the subjects (eg HP) seem to be there to pad out things. Dont get me wrong - I take in the subject but I don't think doing the exam will improve my ability regarding stress, CM etc....but I can't really say until I am putting it into professional practice.
Interesting to hear all your experiences and views.
The met and PoF seem definately relevant, even if not now, but some of the subjects (eg HP) seem to be there to pad out things. Dont get me wrong - I take in the subject but I don't think doing the exam will improve my ability regarding stress, CM etc....but I can't really say until I am putting it into professional practice.
Interesting to hear all your experiences and views.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would say that certainly the JAA ATPL theory syllabus straddles the border between 'education' and 'training'.
I do not believe that having an element of education is necessarily a bad thing - it can give a broad basis of knowledge upon which further training can be built more easily. The theory portion of the licensing process is the most obvious place to integrate this.
For me, the crux of the matter is whether the education/training balance is correct, and to an extent what the topics of education are.
I do not believe that having an element of education is necessarily a bad thing - it can give a broad basis of knowledge upon which further training can be built more easily. The theory portion of the licensing process is the most obvious place to integrate this.
For me, the crux of the matter is whether the education/training balance is correct, and to an extent what the topics of education are.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,149
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
People forget that the point of training is to give you enough knowledge to be able to make sound decisions.
I have no problems with the JAA syllabus, but the real disgrace is the question system.
Phil
I have no problems with the JAA syllabus, but the real disgrace is the question system.
Phil
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Planet Google
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is quite simple.
The ATPL study course will give you a good, solid educational background because of the standards required to achieve the licence.
Do not be dismissive of what can be percieved to be irrelevant and out moded information. Once learned, the knowledge is stored ready to be pulled to the front when needed.
Reality: No ATPL (H) = No constructive career beyond the CPL (H) unless you want to and are happy to stick with single engine, instructional or charter type jobs. There is nothing wrong with this career path and many excellent pilots are more than happy to be in this area, but if you want to progress to the next level .....................
Yes, there is a lot in the ATPL syllabus which does not seem relevant to the job of a helicopter pilot, but at the end of the day you need to complete the exams to get the licence.
I am with Phil, the data base is not the way things should be done, but unfortunately the old system of "chalk and talk" has gone. So be it.
Holding an ATPL (H) IR with two crew, twin engine, varied experience (offshore, VIP, SAR, Air Ambulance, etc) plus 2500 or more hours will help to open the doors. Of course there is then the argument about how is the low time CPL to gain such experience?
Having a CPL (H) and less hours should be considered as a stepping stone, but unless there is a co-pilots slot available with the major players such as Bristow, CHC and Bond and you can beat the other multiple applicants for any available slot, the long term prospects of life as a CPL are slim. So keep knocking on doors, visit potential employers so they see you face, do the exams, build the hours, etc etc.........
It is true about being in the right place at the right time.
Thats life, It is competitive and requires a certain ammount of dedication and self belief to achieve ones desires.
Where I am we regularly recieve CV's from experienced military and civil pilots with 2000 - 3000 hours experience but we cannot look at them because they only have a CPL and we require an ATPL and IR. There is nothing personal in this, but for insurance and client requirements we need pilots with the ATPL and IR.
So instead of moaning about the relevance of the licence, there needs to be a realisation that the ATPL is what the industry demands and if someone wants a job it is what they need.
Sorry for being blunt, but there it is!
AMCP
The ATPL study course will give you a good, solid educational background because of the standards required to achieve the licence.
Do not be dismissive of what can be percieved to be irrelevant and out moded information. Once learned, the knowledge is stored ready to be pulled to the front when needed.
Reality: No ATPL (H) = No constructive career beyond the CPL (H) unless you want to and are happy to stick with single engine, instructional or charter type jobs. There is nothing wrong with this career path and many excellent pilots are more than happy to be in this area, but if you want to progress to the next level .....................
Yes, there is a lot in the ATPL syllabus which does not seem relevant to the job of a helicopter pilot, but at the end of the day you need to complete the exams to get the licence.
I am with Phil, the data base is not the way things should be done, but unfortunately the old system of "chalk and talk" has gone. So be it.
Holding an ATPL (H) IR with two crew, twin engine, varied experience (offshore, VIP, SAR, Air Ambulance, etc) plus 2500 or more hours will help to open the doors. Of course there is then the argument about how is the low time CPL to gain such experience?
Having a CPL (H) and less hours should be considered as a stepping stone, but unless there is a co-pilots slot available with the major players such as Bristow, CHC and Bond and you can beat the other multiple applicants for any available slot, the long term prospects of life as a CPL are slim. So keep knocking on doors, visit potential employers so they see you face, do the exams, build the hours, etc etc.........
It is true about being in the right place at the right time.
Thats life, It is competitive and requires a certain ammount of dedication and self belief to achieve ones desires.
Where I am we regularly recieve CV's from experienced military and civil pilots with 2000 - 3000 hours experience but we cannot look at them because they only have a CPL and we require an ATPL and IR. There is nothing personal in this, but for insurance and client requirements we need pilots with the ATPL and IR.
So instead of moaning about the relevance of the licence, there needs to be a realisation that the ATPL is what the industry demands and if someone wants a job it is what they need.
Sorry for being blunt, but there it is!
AMCP
Last edited by amostcivilpilot; 20th Mar 2010 at 18:08.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in a skip
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reality: No ATPL (H) = No constructive career beyond the CPL (H) unless you want to and are happy to stick with single engine, instructional or charter type jobs. There is nothing wrong with this career path and many excellent pilots are more than happy to be in this area, but if you want to progress to the next level .....................
The reality is that with a CPL(H), you can do everything that a holder of an ATPL(H) can do, with the exception of being in command of a multi-crew helicopter. Oh, and feeling smug and condescending. You can also, contrary to your belief, fly multi-engined helicopters.
'Where I am we regularly recieve CV's from experienced military and civil pilots with 2000 - 3000 hours experience but we cannot look at them because they only have a CPL and we require an ATPL and IR. There is nothing personal in this, but for insurance and client requirements we need pilots with the ATPL and IR.'
ATPL and IR?
You have to have an IR in order to obtain an ATPL. Although this wasn't always the case, it has been for quite a while.
'So instead of moaning about the relevance of the licence, there needs to be a realisation that the ATPL is what the industry demands and if someone wants a job it is what they need.'
But you need the job in order to obtain the ATPL! Or do you mean that you need the ATPL theory and CPL IR? Often, erroneously, referred to as a 'frozen ATPL'.
So, the industry demands ex offshore pilots only? Because that's where the majority of ATPL holders are.
In the words of Victor Meldrew, I don't believe it!
I totally agree with The Beater on this, but :-
Why would you need to 'open doors' if you had that sort of experience? Surely you'd be in a job somewhere if you did? Or maybe not???
Mind you, saying that, I know a few people
with thousands of hours, ATPL's IR's, and there just aren't jobs for them and they are presently looking. 
The market isn't good for helicopter pilots right now, even the experienced ones.
Holding an ATPL (H) IR with two crew, twin engine, varied experience (offshore, VIP, SAR, Air Ambulance, etc) plus 2500 or more hours will help to open the doors. Of course there is then the argument about how is the low time CPL to gain such experience?
Why would you need to 'open doors' if you had that sort of experience? Surely you'd be in a job somewhere if you did? Or maybe not???
Mind you, saying that, I know a few people
with thousands of hours, ATPL's IR's, and there just aren't jobs for them and they are presently looking. The market isn't good for helicopter pilots right now, even the experienced ones.
The Veloceraptor of Lounge Lizards
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: From here the view is lovely
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly someone somewhere has told the pax that the ATPL is the license for their plots to have. I often listen in to our ops staff telling customers that yes pilot X has ATPL/IR and yes the aircraft is maintained to the hilt. And strangely the insurers do like pilots holding ATPLs as it shows a higher level of experience and theoretical knowledge and so our premiums are cheaper. When we are trawling the C.Vs as we are at the moment what we look for is how much corporate/charter experience followed by the qualifications
But, don't knock ATPL theory. Helicopters operate worldwide, an ATPL candidate may think that much of the theory is a waste of space, one day that candidate may find themselves in a part of the world where assistance is hard to find relying on knowledge gleaned from the ATPL theory syllabus, I know I have.
But, don't knock ATPL theory. Helicopters operate worldwide, an ATPL candidate may think that much of the theory is a waste of space, one day that candidate may find themselves in a part of the world where assistance is hard to find relying on knowledge gleaned from the ATPL theory syllabus, I know I have.
I disagree that holding an ATPL shows a higher level of experience. It might mean you've hit the minimums to hold it, but that's it. There are guys out there with CPL's, thousands of hours of experience in all different types.roles and does that make them any less of pilot as they dont hold an ATPL? What if you only ever fly single crew with no way of getting multicrew time?
It's all rubbish if you ask me. I don't have an ATPL! I fly multicrew, have an IR, fly in a multicrew aircraft, have over 2.5k hours. Does that mean I really shouldn't be there? Mind you, some of the guys who I fly with may well ask that very question!
It's all rubbish if you ask me. I don't have an ATPL! I fly multicrew, have an IR, fly in a multicrew aircraft, have over 2.5k hours. Does that mean I really shouldn't be there? Mind you, some of the guys who I fly with may well ask that very question!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Antigua, West Indies
Age: 55
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hold a CPL(H) and IR. I did CPL theory and IR theory and my qualifications -- according to the CAA -- amount to a fATPL. That from the horse's mouth.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: uk
Age: 48
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UM...lifting
.... .- .... .- --..-- / --. --- --- -.. / --- -. . .-.-.- / .- / ..-. . .-- / .--. . --- .--. .-.. . / .-- .. .-.. .-.. / .... .- ...- . / - --- / -... .-. ..- ... .... / ..- .--. / --- -. / - .... . / --- .-.. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / .--- ..- ... - / - --- / --. . - / - .... .- - / --- -. . / .- -. -.. / .- ... / ..-. --- .-. / - .... . / --- -. . ... / .-- .... --- / -. . ...- . .-. / -.. .. -.. / .. -. / .---- ... - / .--. .-.. .- -.-. . ..--.. / .- .... / .-- . .-.. .-.. --..-- / .-- . / .... .- ...- . / - --- / .-.. . .- .-. -. / - --- / -.... / .-- .--. -- / .-- .- -.-- / -... .- -.-. -.- / .-- .... . -. .-.-.- / ... - .. .-.. .-.. / --. .- ...- . / -- . / .- / -.-. .... ..- -.-. -.- .-.. .
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Planet Google
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all 
If I have rufled some feathers by my previous post then I would like to say sorry, it was certainly not my intention to do so
Beater
I am not remotely smug or condesending.
I also spent my first few thousand hours as a CPL, flying multi engine helicopters, single pilot and two crew.
If I had my way I would actively recruit suitable low time CPL's, give them an IR and a rating on a multi crew helicopter, give them a varied flying roster with both single and multi engine flying and be delighted to see their career progress. I was lucky enough to be given the chance and I would like to (and hope) to be able to give somthing back.
However, where I now operate we can only look at pilots who have a mutitude of experience, both single pilot and two crew, who hold an ATPL, who have a rounded background which would at least include, VIP, offshore, mountain, filming, reasonably high night and IR time and low level flying experience both in single and multi engine helicopters.
As I pointed out in my earlier post:
This is a simple fact. Our requirement is employer, client and insurance driven.
When I refer to the "next step", I am implying that the individual must make the decision for themselves about where their carrer path takes them.
If you are happy and able to operate as a CPL, then don't bother with the ATPL. However, if you look for another job within the industry and the company you wish to work for states that they require an ATPL then you will need to have one.
IS the ATPL relevant.
Yes.
Why? Because the industry (as a whole) has areas that require individuals to hold the licence before they can be selected.
helimutt
I fully agree. As I said above, I flew as a CPL and did the same for many years, but then moved into a different area which required the ATPL.
As you pointed out, the market is not good for anyone at the moment. However, there are jobs available. But does the face, your face, personality and profile fit the job? Not allways, so having the employers required experience is still only one step in the right direction in an exceptionally competitive market.
AMCP
If I have rufled some feathers by my previous post then I would like to say sorry, it was certainly not my intention to do so
Beater
The reality is that with a CPL(H), you can do everything that a holder of an ATPL(H) can do, with the exception of being in command of a multi-crew helicopter. Oh, and feeling smug and condescending. You can also, contrary to your belief, fly multi-engined helicopters
I also spent my first few thousand hours as a CPL, flying multi engine helicopters, single pilot and two crew.
If I had my way I would actively recruit suitable low time CPL's, give them an IR and a rating on a multi crew helicopter, give them a varied flying roster with both single and multi engine flying and be delighted to see their career progress. I was lucky enough to be given the chance and I would like to (and hope) to be able to give somthing back.
However, where I now operate we can only look at pilots who have a mutitude of experience, both single pilot and two crew, who hold an ATPL, who have a rounded background which would at least include, VIP, offshore, mountain, filming, reasonably high night and IR time and low level flying experience both in single and multi engine helicopters.
As I pointed out in my earlier post:
.....but we cannot look at them because they only have a CPL and we require an ATPL and IR. There is nothing personal in this, but for insurance and client requirements we need pilots with the ATPL and IR.
When I refer to the "next step", I am implying that the individual must make the decision for themselves about where their carrer path takes them.
If you are happy and able to operate as a CPL, then don't bother with the ATPL. However, if you look for another job within the industry and the company you wish to work for states that they require an ATPL then you will need to have one.
IS the ATPL relevant.
Yes.
Why? Because the industry (as a whole) has areas that require individuals to hold the licence before they can be selected.
helimutt
I disagree that holding an ATPL shows a higher level of experience. It might mean you've hit the minimums to hold it, but that's it. There are guys out there with CPL's, thousands of hours of experience in all different types.roles and does that make them any less of pilot as they dont hold an ATPL? What if you only ever fly single crew with no way of getting multicrew time?
It's all rubbish if you ask me. I don't have an ATPL! I fly multicrew, have an IR, fly in a multicrew aircraft, have over 2.5k hours. Does that mean I really shouldn't be there? Mind you, some of the guys who I fly with may well ask that very question!
It's all rubbish if you ask me. I don't have an ATPL! I fly multicrew, have an IR, fly in a multicrew aircraft, have over 2.5k hours. Does that mean I really shouldn't be there? Mind you, some of the guys who I fly with may well ask that very question!
Why would you need to 'open doors' if you had that sort of experience? Surely you'd be in a job somewhere if you did? Or maybe not???
AMCP
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Antigua, West Indies
Age: 55
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aren't all CPL+IR pilots with enough PIC, multi-engine multi-crew time (etc etc) automatically ATPL holders? Lasors G3.3 refers:
In other words, as the knowledge requirements are satisfied, once all the practical requirements are met, the holder gets a free upgrade to ATPL.
That is how it was portrayed to me by the CAA, anyway.
The holder of a JAR-FCL CPL(H) and IR(H) satisfies the knowledge requirements for the issue of an ATPL(H).
That is how it was portrayed to me by the CAA, anyway.
.. ..-. / .-- . .----. .-. . / --. --- .. -. --. / - --- / .... .- ...- . / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . / .-- .. .-.. .-.. -.-- / .-- .- ...- .. -. --. ---...
.... - - .--. ---... -..-. -..-. -- --- .-. ... . -.-. --- -.. . .-.-.- ... -.-. .--. .... .. .-.. .-.. .. .--. ... .-.-.- -.-. --- -- -..-. .--- - .-. .- -. ... .-.. .- - --- .-. .-.-.- .... - -- .-..
.. - .----. ... / - .... . / .-- .- -.-- / .- .... . .- -..
.... - - .--. ---... -..-. -..-. -- --- .-. ... . -.-. --- -.. . .-.-.- ... -.-. .--. .... .. .-.. .-.. .. .--. ... .-.-.- -.-. --- -- -..-. .--- - .-. .- -. ... .-.. .- - --- .-. .-.-.- .... - -- .-..
.. - .----. ... / - .... . / .-- .- -.-- / .- .... . .- -..
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in a skip
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To clarify.
In order to obtain an ATPL, amongst the other requirements is that of obtaining the multi-crew hours. This is not satisfied by simply having two crew in the aircraft; it has to be either in an aircraft certified as multi-crew, or in an otherwise single-pilot aircraft that is flown as a two crew operation in a manner that is acceptable to the authority. Realistically, most pilots will achieve this by working for one of the offshore operators. In any case, you need to obtain that elusive job flying as a co-pilot in a multi-crew operation somewhere, somehow, with a CPL.
Given that that job is likely to be relatively well paid, at least compared with most work onshore, just how many pilots are going to leave to then attempt to find work flying a jetranger or similar, on an ad-hoc basis being paid for their flight time only?
The reality is that the pilots holding ATPLs under the old system, based, in some cases with little more experience than instructing in an R22, say, are having them exchanged for CPLs on renewal.
The future trend is likely to be that the licence you hold is the one that is appropriate for the type of work you're doing.
Multi-crew Captain - ATPL
Everyone else (amost) - CPL
And as for that fATPL nonsense...
What does your licence say?
What colour is it?
Tell the CAA to send you a cream one and see what they say.
In order to obtain an ATPL, amongst the other requirements is that of obtaining the multi-crew hours. This is not satisfied by simply having two crew in the aircraft; it has to be either in an aircraft certified as multi-crew, or in an otherwise single-pilot aircraft that is flown as a two crew operation in a manner that is acceptable to the authority. Realistically, most pilots will achieve this by working for one of the offshore operators. In any case, you need to obtain that elusive job flying as a co-pilot in a multi-crew operation somewhere, somehow, with a CPL.
Given that that job is likely to be relatively well paid, at least compared with most work onshore, just how many pilots are going to leave to then attempt to find work flying a jetranger or similar, on an ad-hoc basis being paid for their flight time only?
The reality is that the pilots holding ATPLs under the old system, based, in some cases with little more experience than instructing in an R22, say, are having them exchanged for CPLs on renewal.
The future trend is likely to be that the licence you hold is the one that is appropriate for the type of work you're doing.
Multi-crew Captain - ATPL
Everyone else (amost) - CPL
And as for that fATPL nonsense...
What does your licence say?
What colour is it?
Tell the CAA to send you a cream one and see what they say.