Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

CTC Killing the INDUSTRY!! eJ, Monarch, Thomson and ????

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

CTC Killing the INDUSTRY!! eJ, Monarch, Thomson and ????

Old 4th Apr 2012, 20:58
  #61 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 410
A rather more erudite rebuke than my offering!

Still prefer my last line
BigNumber is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 21:08
  #62 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: on the street
Posts: 37
MrHorgy is quite correct and to ad to his statements the quality of training (especially at the NZ school) in CTC has been hugely sacrificed. CTC built a good reputation and poured lots of money into building a good reputation for years. Now the directors/shareholders (Clarke) want that money back with interest! since 2009 2010 the syllabus and quality was slashed. CTC will make lots of money over the next few years until the industry realises what has happened. There may even be some serious safety concerns.
systematically is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 21:27
  #63 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: chorley
Age: 31
Posts: 48
I can just see how it all begins:::

"Low houred pilot causes Horror around Heathrow!

"today a low houred pilot fresh out of training from CTC caused havoc when he forgot how to land a aircraft. Sources say he saw "clouds" and panicked. "

TONGUE IN CHEEK GUYS! but seriously all it takes is there to be one related incident that hits the press and CTC may start to falter???

Just a theory!!!!!!
michaelmedley is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 21:49
  #64 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The IMF.
Posts: 537
Michael Medley

No. I don't think so.

CTC Cadets, in the absolute VAST majority, are NOT incompetent.

The fact is, they are broadly probably pretty good.

It is the fact that the current CTC schemes, and hence the generally very wealthy cadets therein, are assessed by only 2 main criteria: can you pay over the odds for training, and can you afford to work for not a lot for a good while?

CTC Cadets will NEVER have an accident in a 2 crew operation because they saw, or flew into a cloud.
Narrow Runway is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 22:00
  #65 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: chorley
Age: 31
Posts: 48
Narrow Runway

I was just having a bit of fun as it seemed to be getting a bit out of hand this thread.....my view is at the end of the day...the license is a license.

IF i had the amount of money required to do CTC integrated then i would. Just because i don't have the cash doesn't mean im going to sit here and moan....it means i now have to go Modular and make sure i stand out from the CTC guys/gals. which i will!

Nobody should be on here slamming into the cadets because none of it is their fault, in my eyes they arent doing anything wrong. Good on them!!!!!

As the saying goes....dont hate the player, hate the game!

CTC to blame??? maybe..maybe not......RYR and other lowco T&C's to blame??? YES!!!!!
michaelmedley is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 22:06
  #66 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: on the street
Posts: 37
That's true the cadets are mostly very smart and highly motivated to succeed. But they are not trained very well any-more. Instructors were told to not teach things because it was taking too much time and money. The syllabus was dummed down and cadets are taught on a need to know basis to pass the flight tests. (there was even a data base kept on examiners pet questions and scenarios). Cadets don't know what they are missing out on because they don't see the old syllabus. Instructors were not happy with the standards drop and felt like they were ripping off the cadets.
systematically is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 23:25
  #67 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 33
systematically - I'd be interested to know the source of your views.
jhr187 is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2012, 23:27
  #68 (permalink)  
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 52
Posts: 1,117
But they are not trained very well any-more
That's not been mu experience. The cadets are very well trained.
fmgc is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 01:41
  #69 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: on the street
Posts: 37
The source of my information is from being there when the syllabus was changed and being told to not teach techniques. I have also posted elsewhere with more information on the syllabus. Anybody who was there from 2008-2009 knows about it all.

The cadets were very well trained. The syllabus hours were cut from 230 hrs to 163 to compete with Oxfords training. But costs to the Cadet went up at the same time.
systematically is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 07:44
  #70 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Finsbury Park
Posts: 10
But they are not trained very well any-more
That's not been mu experience. The cadets are very well trained.
That was my opinion too, I was impressed with the standard of the majority of cadets, but I had an interesting debate during the cruise the other day with a SFO with command upgrade hours about which aileron to use during a crosswind takeoff.

Either he was winding me up (quite possible) or he didn't know.

Now, what is the use of a guy who diligently calls out the OM height check on every ILS approach regardless of whether we are in cloud or not and calls out every speed deviation, even if it is only the speed trend vector and not the real airspeed, but doesn't know that you need to put the aileron into wind?

Please let's not have any tosh about avoiding spoiler deployment with neutral control wheel input as I've checked the FCTM and it advises into wind aileron as required.

In fact, I'm not sure I've flown with anyone in the last 3 or 4 years who has used any into wind aileron at all either on takeoff or on landing.

Cadets are probably expected to pick this skill up on the line, but I can't see the evidence yet.
Alycidon is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 15:30
  #71 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 151
Michael Medley

Your views on CTC/OAA may very well change when you've actually made considerable sacrifices or indeed find yourself looking for employment, only to find that the majority of operators that recruited all of your contacts only a few years back are now defaulting to CTC for all of their low houred pilots.

As for "moaning on forums" and "standing out from the crowd", I'm only pointing out the current reality, as regards to CTC etc.

The truth isn't pleasant at the minute for Modular students.

Stand out from the crowd? How does several years working in a Flight Test environment on a CS-25 aircraft suit you? Or perhaps a degree in Mechanical Engineering and leadership/management experience gleaned from Sandhurst and a stint in the Army...

I'm sorry, Michael - but there comes a point in this game where the eventual bottom line is whether or not you have access to cash for a Type Rating and can live off peanuts for your first year or so.

Now before someone advises me to network, I already have a broad range of contacts in some great operators - who unfortuneatly now turn to CTC for their new, low houred blokes and are powerless to help...
I'm going to continue networking and chasing the dream - but see my point?

Anyway... good luck!
Poose is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 15:41
  #72 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 489
Originally Posted by Michael Medley
Nobody should be on here slamming into the cadets because none of it is their fault, in my eyes they arent doing anything wrong. Good on them!!!!!
How do you work this out? It is as much their fault as it is CTC themselves. We (well, not me) all bang on about supply and demand as to why this industry is in a state, well it's the same argument for the CTC sausage machine. The only reason CTC are alive and well with this scheme is because the cadets are feeding it, the supply to CTC is there for them to operate their business model. If cadets don't sign up for it, then it won't exist, simple as that. As someone else wrote on here last year, it's the reason why they charge you 3 x the price for flowers during Valentines day.....why.....Because us muppets are prepared to pay it. Don't over complicate it, and certainly don't exonerate the cadets of all blame.
Coffin Corner is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 17:06
  #73 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: U.K.
Posts: 529
Alycidon, check again.

OM-B 2.69

For crosswind takeoffs, routine use of into-wind aileron is not recommended. In strong crosswind conditions, small amounts of lateral control may be used to maintain wings level, but the pilot should avoid using excessive amounts. This causes excessive spoiler deployment, which increases the aircraft tendency to turn into wind.

FCTM-NO-50 p1/8:

For crosswind takeoffs, routine use of into wind aileron is not necessary. In strong crosswind conditions, small lateral stick input may be used to maintain wings level, if deemed necessary due to into wind wing reaction, but avoid using large deflections, which increase the aircraft tendency to turn into the wind (due to high weight on wheels on the spoiler extended side), reduces lift and increases drag. Spoiler deflection becomes significant with more than a third sidestick deflection.
From Airbus safety bulletin:


In the case of crosswind, the flight crew should minimize lateral inputs on ground and during rotation, in order to avoid spoilers extension. If the spoilers are extended on one wing, there is a reduction in lift combined with an increase of drag, and therefore, a reduction in tail clearance and an increased risk of tailstrike.
I could go on listing them but they ALL recommend, outside of STRONG crosswind conditions, not to use into wind aileron. As the SFO has a crosswind limitation which would not fall into the category of strong crosswind (below 25kts) he or she is correct the he or she would not use any in to wind aileron on a crosswind take off.

In fact, I'm not sure I've flown with anyone in the last 3 or 4 years who has used any into wind aileron at all either on takeoff or on landing.
That's because they are following the procedure and this demonstrates the great training, high standards and quality of information we are provided with.

If you don't mind I'll rely on airbus and easyJets recommendations rather than an incorrect anonymity on PPRuNe. As always be extremely careful about what you believe on PPRuNe. And I mean no offence by that.

Poose do the CTC ATP scheme then - if you cant beat them join them.

Last edited by BlackandBrown; 5th Apr 2012 at 17:22.
BlackandBrown is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 19:22
  #74 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: chorley
Age: 31
Posts: 48

I suppose every situation is different......

If the only option is to pay for a type rating then our hands are tied for the moment until it becomes a choice. Just another fee that's going to cripple me/us/you for even longer.

Im not yet into the big bad world of job seeking so i really do not want to say what's right or wrong if im honest so i shall steer clear of that one until im in THAT situation.

I will try and make myself (as the rest are) as available as possible as i am fortunate that i don't yet have commitments that force me to stay in EU.

i shall state that i do not knock CTC cadets or ANYONE training as we are all going to be sat in the same boat at the end of the day regardless of contacts/partners ect........ its a dog eat dog business.

If you cant beat them.....Join them

Kind Regards
michaelmedley is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 19:27
  #75 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 410
Yes yes; what an erudite post Michael.

Send us your money plenty quick
BigNumber is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 20:15
  #76 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Cloud Base
Posts: 3
Just to be clear, CTC does not block modular guys (& gals) in fact recently EZY and others have cleared out the AQC CTC hold pool and they are all going through their line training etc. most are modular with varied experience as FI's, meat bombers, tug pilots and the like in all age ranges and second careers etc.
CTC do not BLOCK modular/ self improver but are the only conduit to certain airlines.
I will say again that the full time crews have let this situation occur and continue to allow it to get worse.
For example objections around Merlin almost entirely are related to the seniors whinging that they are not getting RPI related increases, not anything about random rosters for the newbies or the over reliance on Flexi crew.
Cloud9.5 is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 23:14
  #77 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 54
Ctc only way (unless you are very experienced on type) into ezy and many other uk airlines is the truth for the past 4 years. Monarch prefer cadets and rarely take on experienced non rated crews. Oxford / are similar to ctc but seem to have slightly higher standards though costs are extremely high.

GB£ 120k was not inflated it was info from cadets 4 years ago. Just look at the ctc arl deal with ba and you will see actual costs are far more than 84k initial outlay.

Cloud 9.5 mentions folk from other backgrounds but states these are ctc hold pool. Also they had to pay for TR with ctc and more through flexi crew scheme. Ezy did look at high hour on type pilots late last year due to over reliance on cadets of late.

Truth is many ctc cadets were abused on 6 month contracts on min wages then laid off and told not to apply elsewhere in case ctc wanted them to work again.

One cadet managed to escape to aer lingus at the time. Good on them.

All ctc cadets were given the answers to the a320 type rating papers unofficially after death by CBT. They were given more sim sessions for Lst than the trss guys. None were allowed to borrow fcom or take paper tigers home for revision usage. Some that failed LST were given further training and re tests.

The reason Tcx send their cadets to flybe is due to the lack of airmanship and experience cadets have. Being keen, bright and loaded is not enough.

How many Flybe captains have joined ezy over past 4 years? That route has been blocked by these airline/school deals.

Thankfully qatar do not use this system.

Most cadets are poorly trained in minimum hours by so called approved schools. This is not the cadets fault. The schools have sold an image to the wannabees and then not delivered what used to be a fairly sound package.

Most do not understand that adding power at a stall does not aid recovery. It is a minimum height loss technique that only works if the AoA is reduced simultaneously and on its own power on will actually worsen the stall.

Most of the recent graduates have flown mutual "solos" instead of having to think for themselves during the light aircraft flying phase and this is being reduced further under Mpl.

Finally the term woefully undertrained is now in black and white in CHIRP reports instead of hearsay and PPRuNe.

Last edited by greenedgejet; 5th Apr 2012 at 23:43.
greenedgejet is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 23:33
  #78 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 54
Why should poose do the ctc ATP scheme if already qualified? Are you suggesting modular is so 2nd class citizen that someone has to do an integrated course as described above just to get a foot in the door of a loco job?

greenedgejet is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2012, 23:57
  #79 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Europa
Posts: 612

I have relatives in this profession. There are no huge upfront fees or pay to work in a design office deals in the uk. The training is in 3 parts.

Part 1 is standard university degree which is nowhere near the cost of an integrated ATP course.

Part 2 is very similar to engineering with chartered status requirements.

Part 3 is a final exam for professional status (equivalent to unfreezing an atpl).

After part 1 you start earning a salary similar to an Fo joining a turbo prop airline.

From info4study website 2009:

Q. How much will I earn?

A. There is no national salary scale for architects but for guidance, typical earnings after Part 1 graduation (before final qualification and Registration as an Architect - see below) are around £15,000 to £17,500. The average salary for a qualified architect with three years experience is approximately £33,000. Architects who are self-employed or partners have an income that is dependent on the fees earned by the practice (that are charged as a percentage of the cost of the buildings that the practice designs eg 20%
angelorange is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2012, 01:52
  #80 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 160
Interesting. Fair enough. The figures are not what I thought they were.

The fact remains though that an architect makes an investment (albeit it a smaller one) for the purpose of gaining employment. Reasonably around 30,000 for a degree these days. He/she is then paid a terrible salary of just 15-17,000. I understand this can last for around 3 years, before they gain final qualification. 3 years after that (so almost 10 years after they started their training degree) their average salary is just 33,000.

If you ask me, that is as bad a deal as it gets. The average salary of an integrated student 10 years after commencement of training is considerably more. Many are even loco captains.

The fact still remains that many other professions (architects included) make a financial investment in order to pursue their chosen career.
Full Left Rudder is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.