70 Mustang

:D Sir, if it was possible to give out awards here, that would deserve it

sonicbum

I return to why? What you're proposing is learning for the sake of it. Education for its own sake is a perfectly worthy aim, but it adds nothing to the day to day operation of an aircraft.

As the holder of a degree from a top university, I can 100% vouch for an ATPL having no equivalence to rigorous academic study. There is simply no comparison. That's not to say that one qualification is better or more worthy than the other; they serve completely different purposes.

As to your second point: I was chatting to a mate who was a journo for The Telegraph and The Sun among others. Airline pilot is considered by the media in the UK not to be a profession equivalent to medicine or law, but rather a skilled trade equivalent to plumbing. It is a vocation rather than an academic discipline.

RE, academic or not ....who cares ?

If I wanted a degree I’d have been to university . There was nothing of interest. I wanted to be a pilot and nothing fitted the bill....I had a vague interest in space, but I was average at maths and physics.

The thing with the ATPL exams is the volume ( there’s nothing particularly difficult ) and the fact there is a large clump of them, combined with ( in my case ) part time study as well as a job. I was overjoyed to get first time passes. Flying is not academic , it’s about mental agility .

I don’t need BA or BSc after my name . In actual fact 2/3 of my peers that did degrees never used them for that purpose they were intended .

I think there is a big misunderstanding about what is an ATPL.

Some say FO’s cannot read charts, understand Radio Nav or recognise clouds(!). Well you might be surprised to know that your FO does NOT hold an ATPL

He/she holds a CPL/IR and a frozen ATPL, or whatever they call it today.

It is going to take him some years to accumulate the remaining hours (1500) bearing in mind co pilot time is halfed.

Only then, when he has done perhaps 2-2500 hours total flying (on the job training) will he earn the coveted ATPL.

Any comparison with a degree should be done at that stage.

Oh and, maybe, by then he can recognise a CB!

Your CPL holder has probably peaked academically, in terms of knowing about lots of "stuff", at the point they have taken their exams..and these exams are not pitched at degree level.

They'll move on to becoming a more experienced pilot by the time they reach 2500 hours but I'd hazard a guess whilst their hand/eye skills may have got better and they'll have a grasp of the specific knowledge needed for day today line operation their knowledge across the whole range of ATPL subjects will have decayed.

2500 hours of flying doesn't make you better at reading a sigmet chart or understanding why on a particular day the trop. over Siberia is below 20,000 feet than the CPL candidate going into their met exam..if they've gone to an organisation that used computerised performance data I'd hazard a guess the 2500 hour pilot may well have forgotten some of the little performance gems and wrinkles that they needed to be aware of when walking into the exam hall.

Nothing wrong with any of that, they should be better equipped to do the job after 2500 hours, but that is what makes (IMHO) the ATPL a vocational qualification, not a degree.

It isn't halfed, and up to 100 hours in the simulator can be counted towards the requirements to take an ATPL skills test, so it can be done with 1400 hours of actual flying time.

I was talking about the UK licence ....

Right, as far as I know, you guys are still part of EASA and not everybody on here is from the UK.

Yup....can't wait to travel again... places to see, things to do, friends to meet....the air travel industry is important and i respect those who work in it - from pilots (how do you land such a big plane?!) to baggage handlers (thanks for reuniting us) and everyone else ...blue skies soon I pray...

We need more of you ... !!