Prospective CXCPP Applicants
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prospective CXCPP Applicants
Hi
I just graduated from an aviation program, and submitted an applications to CXCPP in mid Jan after taking a fam flight. I haven't yet hear from CX, but I would expect to hear from them sometime in March.
Now, are there other prospective applications out there want to start a group to help each other to prepare for CXCPP? IMO, there's no point of applying if one is not prepared for CXCPP. We can have online discussions or better yet, meet up (if near Vancouver).
Remember, we will be competing against CX's hiring standard, not other applicants.
I just graduated from an aviation program, and submitted an applications to CXCPP in mid Jan after taking a fam flight. I haven't yet hear from CX, but I would expect to hear from them sometime in March.
Now, are there other prospective applications out there want to start a group to help each other to prepare for CXCPP? IMO, there's no point of applying if one is not prepared for CXCPP. We can have online discussions or better yet, meet up (if near Vancouver).
Remember, we will be competing against CX's hiring standard, not other applicants.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought if 40 people met their standards, they only choose a set amount still since FTA can't handle too many people. Maybe in the near future they will be able to with the boost of instructors. They might actually change it so that CPL holders can't apply for CPP anymore but only the FTA FI scholarship thing.
There's not much prep required for CxCPP I wouldn't think (sounds weird coming from someone who didn't get in). I went there and it was pretty straight forward, you have more than enough time to study the book they give you and you can't change stuff like your personality before you get there, you won't have enough time.
I went to HK, got a few IQ test booklets from the library, a couple aptitude tests, and that's how I spent my first few days. After that I just studied my CPL notes and textbooks.
If you aren't familiar with job interviews, go apply for some jobs. They can't rate you if you're too nervous to function.
That's why a lot of people with 0 experience get in (or any local). They can walk in without expecting to get through, they can stay calm because they know it didn't just cost them $10,000 to stay in HK for a month in a hotel+airfare+food. They have nothing to lose.
There's not much prep required for CxCPP I wouldn't think (sounds weird coming from someone who didn't get in). I went there and it was pretty straight forward, you have more than enough time to study the book they give you and you can't change stuff like your personality before you get there, you won't have enough time.
I went to HK, got a few IQ test booklets from the library, a couple aptitude tests, and that's how I spent my first few days. After that I just studied my CPL notes and textbooks.
If you aren't familiar with job interviews, go apply for some jobs. They can't rate you if you're too nervous to function.
That's why a lot of people with 0 experience get in (or any local). They can walk in without expecting to get through, they can stay calm because they know it didn't just cost them $10,000 to stay in HK for a month in a hotel+airfare+food. They have nothing to lose.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 22°18'32"N 113°54'52"E
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sorry, but I am afraid I have to disagree with MidgetBoy.
It is a fact that applicants does not compete against each other. CX always have trouble filling a course to its upper limit, due to the lack of suitable applicants.
That is the primary reason why CX no longer requires CPP applicants to have HK permanent residency. They change the requirement to HK resident only (note the deletion of "permanent") because they want to borden the pool of potential applicants, so hopefully more applicants can meet their standard.
That is simply not true. In recent courses:
- 50% of the cadets have PPL or above;
- 75-80% have flight experience before getting into the program;
- 75-80% have lived/were living outside of HK, some had to travel back and forth multiple times from their country of residence to HK for interviews (in fact, I know two who spent over $30,000 alone for airfare to and from HK for interviews).
Everyone I know who got into the program spent months, if not years, preparing for the interviews. The interview process was designed to test multiple aspect of the applicants, and they do not make the decision lightly, regardless if it's a good news or a bad news for you.
Just remember, you can NEVER do too much preparation for the CPP interviews.
It is a fact that applicants does not compete against each other. CX always have trouble filling a course to its upper limit, due to the lack of suitable applicants.
That is the primary reason why CX no longer requires CPP applicants to have HK permanent residency. They change the requirement to HK resident only (note the deletion of "permanent") because they want to borden the pool of potential applicants, so hopefully more applicants can meet their standard.
That's why a lot of people with 0 experience get in (or any local).
- 50% of the cadets have PPL or above;
- 75-80% have flight experience before getting into the program;
- 75-80% have lived/were living outside of HK, some had to travel back and forth multiple times from their country of residence to HK for interviews (in fact, I know two who spent over $30,000 alone for airfare to and from HK for interviews).
Everyone I know who got into the program spent months, if not years, preparing for the interviews. The interview process was designed to test multiple aspect of the applicants, and they do not make the decision lightly, regardless if it's a good news or a bad news for you.
Just remember, you can NEVER do too much preparation for the CPP interviews.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Singapore
Age: 42
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am siding with sgsslok on this one.
The job knowledge book is pretty much the bare minimum. In fact, if I am right, there were a few questions in the test that were meant to test your "general" knowledge in airline transport without any relevant info provided in the book. No surprise, there are always a handful of individual answered the said questions wrong and claimed "it wasn't mentioned in the book, how would I know the answer?"
The idea of getting a few IQ books like midgetboy did was a good one. If you want a rough idea of CX's IQ test, go to the cadet website of Qantas, they have a small sampler platter there.
From past experience, they do tend to be a bit more thorough with applicants with aviation background. Below is a sampler of what you could be asked (or grilled
):
-history of CX ie founders and founding date
-a quick overview of fleet development over the years
-current fleet type and size and primary role of each type of aircraft ie long-haul vs medium haul, high density vs medium density
-major incidents with CX, pre-jet and jet era
-future order
-identification of aircraft and their power plants outside the window if your room faces the apron
-tell them aircraft that you most recently flown
-identification of one or more aircraft model. What features leads you to your answer
-major events in the past or current year
-route structure of CX and KA. ie. 1st destination, destinations served, continents not served, total number of cx pax destination, freighter-only stations, total station served by CX metal or codeshare
-your response in a randomly picked normal or emergency scenario
-how will you deal with an awkward situation with a cpt and you as an SO
-oneworld alliance
-possible reasons of CX's choice of aircraft and engines
-something special about CX's fleet
-feature of a certain type of aircraft in CX, past or present, ie engine, wings, landing gear (777 is an interesting one), brakes etc.
-major differences between airbus and boeing cockpit
-tell them about yourself or let them grill you about what you have written
-"sell" yourself to them, kinda like in America's Next Top Model
As you can see, the list is long and yet not exhaustive....... so the advice will be prepare as much as you can. You will be surprised, the interviewer is very adapt at differentiating a bad candidate from a candidate having a few bad mins during the whole process.
Good luck and hope to see you in ADL
The job knowledge book is pretty much the bare minimum. In fact, if I am right, there were a few questions in the test that were meant to test your "general" knowledge in airline transport without any relevant info provided in the book. No surprise, there are always a handful of individual answered the said questions wrong and claimed "it wasn't mentioned in the book, how would I know the answer?"
The idea of getting a few IQ books like midgetboy did was a good one. If you want a rough idea of CX's IQ test, go to the cadet website of Qantas, they have a small sampler platter there.
From past experience, they do tend to be a bit more thorough with applicants with aviation background. Below is a sampler of what you could be asked (or grilled
):-history of CX ie founders and founding date
-a quick overview of fleet development over the years
-current fleet type and size and primary role of each type of aircraft ie long-haul vs medium haul, high density vs medium density
-major incidents with CX, pre-jet and jet era
-future order
-identification of aircraft and their power plants outside the window if your room faces the apron
-tell them aircraft that you most recently flown
-identification of one or more aircraft model. What features leads you to your answer
-major events in the past or current year
-route structure of CX and KA. ie. 1st destination, destinations served, continents not served, total number of cx pax destination, freighter-only stations, total station served by CX metal or codeshare
-your response in a randomly picked normal or emergency scenario
-how will you deal with an awkward situation with a cpt and you as an SO
-oneworld alliance
-possible reasons of CX's choice of aircraft and engines
-something special about CX's fleet
-feature of a certain type of aircraft in CX, past or present, ie engine, wings, landing gear (777 is an interesting one), brakes etc.
-major differences between airbus and boeing cockpit
-tell them about yourself or let them grill you about what you have written
-"sell" yourself to them, kinda like in America's Next Top Model
As you can see, the list is long and yet not exhaustive....... so the advice will be prepare as much as you can. You will be surprised, the interviewer is very adapt at differentiating a bad candidate from a candidate having a few bad mins during the whole process.
Good luck and hope to see you in ADL
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Trent, those things you've stated were pretty obvious stuff to know before hand, if you didn't know most of those you shouldn't be going to begin with.
And sgsslok, what currency are you using for '$30,000'. That would mean that your friend flew back and forth like 20 times.
Even if they flew there for initial, flew back for one day and then came back for first interview, then flew home, then flew back to pick up the JKI book, then flew home, and then flew back for the 2nd job interview, that doesn't cost $30,000 let alone $10,000 since you're cutting back on the hotel costs.
And most people do have previous experience, lots of it just isn't told to Cx. A lot of people go up enough times to grab their solo first and then when they get to flight grading, they suck real hard at the start and improve really fast. It shows Cx that they learn really fast. As I co-own a flight school, I have seen 3 of 7 students who have applied for Cx get in, 1 of which said he had 3 hours when he actually had 20, the other 2 had extra bonuses...
Anyways, regarding those little questions posted, I think I recall something about the 777. I was naming an aircraft and I think it was supposed to be a 777, but because it was a cheap one, it had huge disproportionate wheels and it only had 4 on each little stub so I got that question wrong. =.=
About destinations, just know the # of destinations, they don't fly to South America, and where abouts they fly in Africa.
And sgsslok, what currency are you using for '$30,000'. That would mean that your friend flew back and forth like 20 times.
Even if they flew there for initial, flew back for one day and then came back for first interview, then flew home, then flew back to pick up the JKI book, then flew home, and then flew back for the 2nd job interview, that doesn't cost $30,000 let alone $10,000 since you're cutting back on the hotel costs.
And most people do have previous experience, lots of it just isn't told to Cx. A lot of people go up enough times to grab their solo first and then when they get to flight grading, they suck real hard at the start and improve really fast. It shows Cx that they learn really fast. As I co-own a flight school, I have seen 3 of 7 students who have applied for Cx get in, 1 of which said he had 3 hours when he actually had 20, the other 2 had extra bonuses...
Anyways, regarding those little questions posted, I think I recall something about the 777. I was naming an aircraft and I think it was supposed to be a 777, but because it was a cheap one, it had huge disproportionate wheels and it only had 4 on each little stub so I got that question wrong. =.=
About destinations, just know the # of destinations, they don't fly to South America, and where abouts they fly in Africa.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Besides information about CX. I am reading several books that can increase my aviation and CRM knowledge.
One is Redefining Airmanship by Tony Kern. I learn some good stuff about CRM and human factors. Other things that I am doing to prepare is to learn more about decision-making and communications, which will play a big part for CPP interviews and real flying.
As for flying experience, it's important to try flying (if available), before one apply for CPP. My view is that you never know if you really like it until you try it. That's I went to the fam-flight. I will probably fly for a few more hours, just to get use to the cockpit environment.
One is Redefining Airmanship by Tony Kern. I learn some good stuff about CRM and human factors. Other things that I am doing to prepare is to learn more about decision-making and communications, which will play a big part for CPP interviews and real flying.
As for flying experience, it's important to try flying (if available), before one apply for CPP. My view is that you never know if you really like it until you try it. That's I went to the fam-flight. I will probably fly for a few more hours, just to get use to the cockpit environment.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MB, good on you for having all those stuff as being pretty obvious. 
But such may not be the case with everyone. So it is still a good idea to do a bit of research.
I think sgsslok is quoting that figure in HK$. Also, never once did sgsslok mention about that said applicant not needing to stay in a hotel. Let's assume an average of $850 expenditure per day for your hotel, food, and transport and you are required to stay say an average of 2 nights each time you come to HK for the interview. So for a total of say 6 trips, that will come to apprx HK$10200. Now assume that the each round-trip ticket, including all YR & tax, to be about HK$6000. The airfare will then come to about HK$36000. So an upfront expense of about HK$30000 isn't that unbelievable. To continue with this example, we are already talking about HK$46200 which comes to about US$5470. Now if an applicant is working and has to miss work, the figure will likely continue to creep up.
But such may not be the case with everyone. So it is still a good idea to do a bit of research.I think sgsslok is quoting that figure in HK$. Also, never once did sgsslok mention about that said applicant not needing to stay in a hotel. Let's assume an average of $850 expenditure per day for your hotel, food, and transport and you are required to stay say an average of 2 nights each time you come to HK for the interview. So for a total of say 6 trips, that will come to apprx HK$10200. Now assume that the each round-trip ticket, including all YR & tax, to be about HK$6000. The airfare will then come to about HK$36000. So an upfront expense of about HK$30000 isn't that unbelievable. To continue with this example, we are already talking about HK$46200 which comes to about US$5470. Now if an applicant is working and has to miss work, the figure will likely continue to creep up.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was there for just under 1 month, but the hotel was paid for a month. I stayed at Citygate in Tung Chung. Though the cost was through the roof on their cheaper seasons where I ended up paying $22000 HKD for the month and I got boosted from 9th floor to 19th floor, I would say it's well worth it. You don't have to worry much about transit, it's extremely close to the airport, and you can get a view of Cx City for motivation. On top of that cost, round trip from Vancouver to HK on Cx was I think $1900 CND which works out to about $15,000 HKD. And on top of that you have to pay for food.
I just got a basic outline on the company by reading the Discovery Magazine, checking out their website and read Wiki.. xD
Just be honest with them, "what aircraft do you want to fly the most?"
"An F14 Tomcat because they look SWEET!, I wanted to build up my hours in the military before I came here but my eyesight wasn't good enough for them, so I skipped that part and I'm here for the cadet program."
I just got a basic outline on the company by reading the Discovery Magazine, checking out their website and read Wiki.. xD
Just be honest with them, "what aircraft do you want to fly the most?"
"An F14 Tomcat because they look SWEET!, I wanted to build up my hours in the military before I came here but my eyesight wasn't good enough for them, so I skipped that part and I'm here for the cadet program."
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 22°18'32"N 113°54'52"E
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was talking about HKD. At least you were lucky that you could stay in HK for a month for the interviews. The two people I was referring to had work/school commitments back where they lived and they had to fly back and forth from Hong Kong to Canada/Australia for every stage of the interview as well as flight grading. That's about 4 or 5 intercontinental roundtrip tickets. You do the math.
I highly doubt that CX will use a technically inaccurate model to ask you to identify the aircraft type. If my guess & my memory serves me right, the model you were referring to was a 1:200 model with CX livery, which should be a A330.
Also, regarding flight experience, having experience/license doesn't mean automatic qualification for CPP. Multiple applicants with PPL and/or CPL have not made it through the interviews/flight grading. In fact, with flight experience, CX will expect more from the applicant since he/she should know more.
Once again, preparation is key. The more, the better. CPP is a very rare opportunity, and please don't let it slip by because of lack of preparation.
I think it was supposed to be a 777, but because it was a cheap one, it had huge disproportionate wheels and it only had 4 on each little stub so I got that question wrong. =.=
Also, regarding flight experience, having experience/license doesn't mean automatic qualification for CPP. Multiple applicants with PPL and/or CPL have not made it through the interviews/flight grading. In fact, with flight experience, CX will expect more from the applicant since he/she should know more.
Once again, preparation is key. The more, the better. CPP is a very rare opportunity, and please don't let it slip by because of lack of preparation.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Singapore
Age: 42
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote :Yeah, that means I still spent more than they did, if you said they spent $6000 USD, I spent $9000 USD.
Not quite from what I gather.
But the main thing is: you still did not make it in.
Not quite from what I gather.But the main thing is: you still did not make it in.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you cannot tell the difference between a 777 or a 330 with a plane model on the desk you really should start reading up again, there must be at least a dozen OBVIOUS differences between the two jets without having to even look at the gears, dont look at the specifics look at the obvious differences.. they're everywhere!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
was it a model of a CX plane? if it was... give it a hard thought and im sure you can immediately deduce that its either a 744 or a 777.... CX has one of the most simple and easy to recognize fleets in the world, along with SQ they only have heavies.... imagine having to recognize every plane that AA/UA have.. the RJs that would suck...
and yes im sure 99.99% of people on pprune know that a 330 is not a boeing.. if not they're on the wrong website
and yes im sure 99.99% of people on pprune know that a 330 is not a boeing.. if not they're on the wrong website
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote MB : Well Trent, those things you've stated were pretty obvious stuff to know before hand......
Quote timyue : there must be at least a dozen OBVIOUS differences between the two jets without having to even look at the gears
Let see the number of differences:
1. Wing tip vs no wing tip
2. Trent 700 vx Trent 800
3. Shape of the nose
4. Shape of the fin
5. Shape of tail cone
6. Location of APU exhaust
7. Number of doors
8. Size of overwing door
9. Shape of window on doors
10. Cockpit window shape
11. Shape of pylons
12. Geometry of their wings......
Also, if they used a 1:200 model, the type of aircraft is usually printed on the fuselage anyway......
Quote timyue : there must be at least a dozen OBVIOUS differences between the two jets without having to even look at the gears Let see the number of differences:
1. Wing tip vs no wing tip
2. Trent 700 vx Trent 800
3. Shape of the nose
4. Shape of the fin
5. Shape of tail cone
6. Location of APU exhaust
7. Number of doors
8. Size of overwing door
9. Shape of window on doors
10. Cockpit window shape
11. Shape of pylons
12. Geometry of their wings......
Also, if they used a 1:200 model, the type of aircraft is usually printed on the fuselage anyway......
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: VHHH
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to offer a word of advice to prospective colleagues:
Concentrate on the big picture stuff. Having an argument on who spent more money or whether one have correctly identified an aircraft type are hardly going to help you in your endeavours.
In case you had not already thought of this yourselves, there will be occasions in the future where you will detect a dismissive or condescending attitude from your expatriate colleagues due to nothing else but your background as being an ex-cadet. Appearing petty and immature will not command equal professional respect.
Concentrate on the big picture stuff. Having an argument on who spent more money or whether one have correctly identified an aircraft type are hardly going to help you in your endeavours.
In case you had not already thought of this yourselves, there will be occasions in the future where you will detect a dismissive or condescending attitude from your expatriate colleagues due to nothing else but your background as being an ex-cadet. Appearing petty and immature will not command equal professional respect.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North America
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's what I thought, I was like, I enjoy flying enough to want this to be my career but at the same time I won't fill up my brain with knowledge that doesn't affect me. I don't know specific power an engine can produce or specifics on each aircraft besides the one I will be flying at the time, I know a few people who do that and they appear to be fanboys who just want to be in the air but will never be able to get through the years of training.
Cx asked me about their fleet, I told them the aircraft they had but not the specific # of each. I knew enough to be able to answer the question, "if you had a choice, which one would you fly." Though they never asked me that.
Cx asked me about their fleet, I told them the aircraft they had but not the specific # of each. I knew enough to be able to answer the question, "if you had a choice, which one would you fly." Though they never asked me that.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: VHHH
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taking an interest in all areas of aviation never does any pilot any harm to say the least. And being knowledgeable from naming aircraft types to other technical details is one of many ways to show that you are genuine in your aspirations.
If you can afford the time and have the capacity then by all means find out as much as possible. But if during an interview you are exposed to be a little weak in any particular area, don't be too disheartened. It is not reasonable for the interviewers to expect too much from you.
However, I am not encouraging knowing just what you think is the minimum required to operate your expected aircraft type. There are numerous obvious hazards to this attitude and it will definitely raise an eye brow in an interview.
There are lots of 'fanboys' who are trusted to possess the judgement and knowledge outside of the manuals to command an airliner with passengers onboard. Many of them might even be the very person who has the final say in whether an applicant is accepted! I wouldn't be so dismissive of a passion for all things in aviation.
If you can afford the time and have the capacity then by all means find out as much as possible. But if during an interview you are exposed to be a little weak in any particular area, don't be too disheartened. It is not reasonable for the interviewers to expect too much from you.
However, I am not encouraging knowing just what you think is the minimum required to operate your expected aircraft type. There are numerous obvious hazards to this attitude and it will definitely raise an eye brow in an interview.
There are lots of 'fanboys' who are trusted to possess the judgement and knowledge outside of the manuals to command an airliner with passengers onboard. Many of them might even be the very person who has the final say in whether an applicant is accepted! I wouldn't be so dismissive of a passion for all things in aviation.