CX cadet pilot programme interview in november
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: YVR
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is kind of a previous topic but for the interview we all kind of know it's suit and tie...but how about the colour of the shirt and tie??? ive heard the traditional white or blue shirt...with somewhat matching tie....but i was thinking about a green shirt and tie....a cathay green too....think that would work???
also anyone else going to the interview from YVR??
also anyone else going to the interview from YVR??
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 22°18'32"N 113°54'52"E
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
holdmetight-
Thank you! Your post was spot on as well.
Your info about housing allowance is not true, however. Local captains get HK$24k a month for housing. It's true that no other local pilots other than captains get housing allowance. That's why some ex-cadets FOs have jumped ship to Oasis because Oasis gives housing to everyone.
Then again, because of that, CX no longer puts cadets onto the 747s.
Thank you! Your post was spot on as well.
Your info about housing allowance is not true, however. Local captains get HK$24k a month for housing. It's true that no other local pilots other than captains get housing allowance. That's why some ex-cadets FOs have jumped ship to Oasis because Oasis gives housing to everyone.
Then again, because of that, CX no longer puts cadets onto the 747s.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cathay will take you if they need you, provided you meet the minimum requirements
That whole spiel about CX not taking DESO below 3000TT is false. They look at your overall picture, ie what a/c you were operating, the nature of operations, your status as a resident in HK, personality. Cathay state the minimum requirement is 1000TT for a DESO position and that is what they go by. There have been plenty of new pilots with the minimum requirement who have been offered a place. The amount of experience is not based on how many hours you have but rather the amount of sectors you flown. If you've racked up thousands of hours doing long haul, I'm afraid you haven't flown much. In my opinion the entire concept of a second officer (the way cathay implement it) is a waste of company resources. There is no reason a cadet cannot go from finishing flight training to operating from the right hand seat of a big jet. It's being done everywhere else. Another thing that cathay will be looking at, as I mentioned earlier, is the type of flying you have done. Anyone can shoot an ILS. How many non-precision approaches does cathay do? probably none. Perhaps once or twice in the sim. It is these things cathay would look at rather than the amount of hours above 1000TT that you have logged.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
karam:
i do agree with you that CX's SO position is a total waste of resources. enough said about that!
but i don't really agree with your statement that plenty of new pilots are being offered jobs with the minimum requirements. while i do not have any ballpark figures in hand, taking a look at another thread in the fragrant harbour wannabe forum is a good reference in itself. while it's true that 3000+ hours are not compulsory, this is the norm. most of the guys who applied for jobs (and bothered to tell other ppruners about it) have more than 3000 hours, some a little less, and only one who was employed with a mere 1100 hours. unless you are totally confident that you can be that one person, i believe that CPP will always be a quicker way to a CX cockpit than saving time for direct entry.
another thing worth mentioning is that most of the direct-entry pilots come from LCCs or small flying organizations. they may have been charter pilots, flight instructors, military pilots or captains of turboprops in small airlines. it's not often that they (can) employ other pilots from long-haul major airlines, so basically everyone who can get an interview with cathay will already have a reasonable amount of technical ability (and experience) when it comes to flying. not to mention one of the hurdles an applicant must pass before being offered a job is a sim assessment on a B742 simulator!
what i'm trying to say is that while quality and number of sectors flown is important, TT is equally or possibly more important. since everyone has done a good amount of hands-on flying when applying, the more TT means the more sectors, and the more experience and tech aptitude. most applicants are pilots from LCCs and small airlines, and how often do these airlines use cruise pilots? never!
therefore, while building TT takes a lot of time and effort, the CPP will provide a direct path to the majors and save a lot of time that would otherwise have been used in logging hours.
i do agree with you that CX's SO position is a total waste of resources. enough said about that!
but i don't really agree with your statement that plenty of new pilots are being offered jobs with the minimum requirements. while i do not have any ballpark figures in hand, taking a look at another thread in the fragrant harbour wannabe forum is a good reference in itself. while it's true that 3000+ hours are not compulsory, this is the norm. most of the guys who applied for jobs (and bothered to tell other ppruners about it) have more than 3000 hours, some a little less, and only one who was employed with a mere 1100 hours. unless you are totally confident that you can be that one person, i believe that CPP will always be a quicker way to a CX cockpit than saving time for direct entry.
another thing worth mentioning is that most of the direct-entry pilots come from LCCs or small flying organizations. they may have been charter pilots, flight instructors, military pilots or captains of turboprops in small airlines. it's not often that they (can) employ other pilots from long-haul major airlines, so basically everyone who can get an interview with cathay will already have a reasonable amount of technical ability (and experience) when it comes to flying. not to mention one of the hurdles an applicant must pass before being offered a job is a sim assessment on a B742 simulator!
what i'm trying to say is that while quality and number of sectors flown is important, TT is equally or possibly more important. since everyone has done a good amount of hands-on flying when applying, the more TT means the more sectors, and the more experience and tech aptitude. most applicants are pilots from LCCs and small airlines, and how often do these airlines use cruise pilots? never!
therefore, while building TT takes a lot of time and effort, the CPP will provide a direct path to the majors and save a lot of time that would otherwise have been used in logging hours.
Last edited by holdmetight; 13th Nov 2007 at 12:06.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Holdmetight:
I can't really remember what the woman (is that woman?) said. In fact, her question was not really meaningful. So you can ignore it.
By the way, are you a hku student? You will apply for cpp this year?
I can't really remember what the woman (is that woman?) said. In fact, her question was not really meaningful. So you can ignore it.
By the way, are you a hku student? You will apply for cpp this year?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you use your CPL spend 10 months volunteering to fly medivac in canada or uk or something, you'll build 800+ hours + 200 (for CPL) that you already have, it's enough.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 22°18'32"N 113°54'52"E
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't necessarily agree that SO is a waste of resource. In fact, it's the other way around.
In CX, FOs get complete type-ratings. If every new hire (direct entry or cadet) is a first officer, a lot more training resources will need to be allocated to keep everyone current.
Moreover, when it comes to long-haul and ultra-long-hauls, having 3 or 4 crews who are all CNs and FOs will definitely increase the operating cost due to higher salaries they get.
That's why SO exists in CX. With the amounts of LHs and ULHs they fly, having SOs allow CX to save $$ on recurrent training and pilot salaries.
In CX, FOs get complete type-ratings. If every new hire (direct entry or cadet) is a first officer, a lot more training resources will need to be allocated to keep everyone current.
Moreover, when it comes to long-haul and ultra-long-hauls, having 3 or 4 crews who are all CNs and FOs will definitely increase the operating cost due to higher salaries they get.
That's why SO exists in CX. With the amounts of LHs and ULHs they fly, having SOs allow CX to save $$ on recurrent training and pilot salaries.
Last edited by sgsslok; 14th Nov 2007 at 02:33.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
good point, sgsslok. i must admit i had ever considered things from that perspective!
however, i believe there are more (better) ways that S/O's role in CX can be improved. S/Os come from various backgrounds but one thing is for sure - they have been trained to fly and are proficient at what they do. many will have logged several thousand hours before joining the company... why not make use of the experience they have gained during all those hours? i do not believe that making them sit in the cockpit during cruise and watch the autopilot is a task that you specifically need someone of a specific rank to do. cruise pilot function can be done by F/O, S/O or even CN. if S/O are also allowed to participate in landings and takeoffs, it will cost more in terms of resources to keep their type rating current. true. but then it would also save in terms of manpower... the S/O could step in and do the job of a normal F/O, so potentially there's a budget saver in that you can employ less F/Os.
it's kind of like an Airbus CCQ thing. if you have pilots who can fulfill two roles at the same time (flying as a relief pilot or flying as a copilot), then potentially the company saves money in human resource, because the company doesn't need to employ one pilot each to fulfill these roles. just like companies with extensive Airbus fleets can save up on pilot expenditure because their pilots can MFF.
if pilots are not fully utilized to their utmost abilities, a waste of resources will still occur.
my very humble two cents
however, i believe there are more (better) ways that S/O's role in CX can be improved. S/Os come from various backgrounds but one thing is for sure - they have been trained to fly and are proficient at what they do. many will have logged several thousand hours before joining the company... why not make use of the experience they have gained during all those hours? i do not believe that making them sit in the cockpit during cruise and watch the autopilot is a task that you specifically need someone of a specific rank to do. cruise pilot function can be done by F/O, S/O or even CN. if S/O are also allowed to participate in landings and takeoffs, it will cost more in terms of resources to keep their type rating current. true. but then it would also save in terms of manpower... the S/O could step in and do the job of a normal F/O, so potentially there's a budget saver in that you can employ less F/Os.
it's kind of like an Airbus CCQ thing. if you have pilots who can fulfill two roles at the same time (flying as a relief pilot or flying as a copilot), then potentially the company saves money in human resource, because the company doesn't need to employ one pilot each to fulfill these roles. just like companies with extensive Airbus fleets can save up on pilot expenditure because their pilots can MFF.
if pilots are not fully utilized to their utmost abilities, a waste of resources will still occur.
my very humble two cents
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 37
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rejection!??
Hey all....first post here!.....
been reading the forum for abit, and just got a question or two regarding the CX cadet interviews. If you applied for the cadet program, but fail to meet their requirements. Would they at least tell you that you didn't cut it? or you simply hang in the darkness(3-4 months until you realize that they don't want you?
Thanks!
been reading the forum for abit, and just got a question or two regarding the CX cadet interviews. If you applied for the cadet program, but fail to meet their requirements. Would they at least tell you that you didn't cut it? or you simply hang in the darkness(3-4 months until you realize that they don't want you?
Thanks!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 42
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
adamk: as for me, they sent me a rejection letter within one week when i was not shortlisted in 2006.
likewise it took them one week to inform me the interview schedule in 2007.
it really depends on the workload of HR at that point of application
as for wait how long to know if you are shortlisted, in CX Singapore FAQ - two months wait if no letter pls consider ur application failed.
>>> How do I know if my application is successful or not?
Cadet Pilot applicants who do not hear from us within eight weeks may consider their application unsuccessful.
First and Second Officer applicants are encouraged to send Update Forms outlining any changes in your contact details and/or flying hours. We will acknowledge receipt of all correspondence sent to the Flight Crew Recruitment Section.
Cheer...
likewise it took them one week to inform me the interview schedule in 2007.
it really depends on the workload of HR at that point of application
as for wait how long to know if you are shortlisted, in CX Singapore FAQ - two months wait if no letter pls consider ur application failed.
>>> How do I know if my application is successful or not?
Cadet Pilot applicants who do not hear from us within eight weeks may consider their application unsuccessful.
First and Second Officer applicants are encouraged to send Update Forms outlining any changes in your contact details and/or flying hours. We will acknowledge receipt of all correspondence sent to the Flight Crew Recruitment Section.
Cheer...
Last edited by benedictz; 14th Nov 2007 at 08:11.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Adamk, if you applied for the cadet program for the November interviewing schedule too, there is no point in waiting those last 2 weeks. The interviewing starts in 2 weeks from now and they should have contacted you in early October.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 37
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all the replies! I got curious at the end and decided to fire off a email to the cadet recruitment HR. Got an email back today advising that i am shortlisted.....
lol.. say what!??....
Adam
lol.. say what!??....
Adam
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard training a cadet and having them work as an SO for two years pays off already for the training and room/board in Adelaide since they don't have to hire a F/O to sit there instead.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well according to the other forum threads, they're changing the CPP to 3-4 hirings next year with 13 cadets each time. But I know this year, the summer hiring had about 25 cadets. So they're going to end up with the same cadets in the end.