With seemingly more and more UK airlines using CTC as their source of new recruits it is only going to get harder and harder to change airlines. When they all use CTC you will effectively be stuck in the airline you first get into because all the other airlines will only want a new batch of 21yr old CTC cadets. Slightly ironic that a CTC student ends up stuck in a job thats not what they want but are prevented from moving by CTC cadets. Sadly those with big cheque books have screwed this industry.:mad:

Monarch580

I have no problem with people aspiring to become pilots, I just feel its unfair for their ambition to come at the expense of every professional currently in the industry.

You obviously disagree, I hope you never find yourself unemployed and unable to find work because all the jobs have been taken by cheep students.

Only on Pprune would you find pilots bemoaning the introduction of a competitive recruitment scheme based upon ability where the airline is paying for it.:rolleyes:

Tourist, VA are not paying for this. The cadet stumps up £109k. Both VA and the cadet will get a tax advantage by pretending the £109k is a bond, but be under no illusion, it is the cadet who is paying for his/her training.

Artie

Is that a fact or speculation?

I was under the impression that VA were paying (slightly offset by a pay reduction for a few years, but not by any means covering the cost )

Tourist,
Is that a fact or speculation?

If you had to pay £109k up front, and have this returned in lieu of part of your salary over 9 years, would you think that you or VA had paid?

Tourist
 

You make a good point, there is place in all airlines for a scheme that you outline.

But I suppose the big question is.... does every airlines scheme have to be run by the same FTO

Taking all things into consideration regarding the "advantages" of using company "a" and we have heard a whole host of reasons trotted out over the years as a suitable rationale, "one stop training" "structured training program" "better product than your average pilot" etc etc meanwhile back on the line the every day joes have seen with their own eyes these guys are split into the same proportions of skygod/average/numpty as those from other training routes

For me something doesnt stack up to why one company can secure such an incredible market share.

I have to say from my own standpoint Superpilot is on the money with the post above. The important points the restriction of opportunities for experienced pilots, the lowering of ts and cs for all by the flooding of the lower echelons of the recruitment pyramid with the product from company "a"

All that said, I also believe there is a place for cadets in every airline, albiet in the right percentage compared to other recruitment streams. It may be true that Virgin actually have this percentage correct, and the negativity on this thread is fuelled by the over use of company " a" elsewhere in the industry.

Maybe a company "a" thread would be better to allow this one to get back on track

1. CTC course costs; £109k.

2. Cadet pays £109k “bond” to Virgin Atlantic.

3. Virgin Atlantic pays course cost of £109k to CTC.

4. Virgin “return bond” to cadet over a 9 year period. Virgin Atlantic simultaneously reduces cadet’s salary by a “coincidentally similar” amount to the bond.

Who paid for the course?

Disclaimer… back of fag packet calculations

Virgin’s cost reductions;
VAT reclaim; up to £21,800
Corporation tax reduction; £22,890
NIC reduction over 9 years; £15,152
VA’s reduced tax liabilities over bond period; up to £59,842

Cadet’s liabilities and savings;
Cadet’s NIC & income tax saving over bond period; up to 56,680
Loss of earnings over 9 years; £109k
Cost of interest on loan (estimated); £21,800
Net cost to cadet £74,120

Don’t try and make VA sound benevolent.

Artie, neither fact or speculation, merely the impression I was given.

If it is the case that the cadet ends up paying the full cost then yes, the deal is nothing like as good.
The only good bit left is the selection on merit, plus I suppose the job at the end.

Never tried to make out they are benevolent, but any deal that gets a pilot a free(or greatly reduced training costs) license plus gets the airline pilots selected by ability should be applauded.

Three Lions

I have not time for CTC either. Vastly overpriced but that is a different argument.

Tourist. You must believe everything then that the Daily Mail writes in its wonderful prose.

I find it ludicrous and my fellow aviators who have wracked up the mileage will agree with me; that VS is feeling utterly benevolent to brand new shiny just been born aviators and willing to give them 109k licence free of charge. However ctc and VS have thrashed out their deal, those guys and gals who get taken on will be paying for their licence in some shape or form. And it WILL cost more (to the cadet not VS) than recruiting a Non Typed guy or gal from the street.

Sure its nice to bring in youngsters into aviation. But whats the problem with taking on the people from the likes of Eastern, Flybe, Regional and others. The problem is the cost, the money and what the accountants are agreeing. It isn't about being nice and touchy feely with the bearded one.

The thread is diverting away from the theme a bit. But this just goes to show how pprune and the industry are swimming around in the basin with a lot of floating debris. :mad::mad::mad:

Good post JB. With this new approach by VS to fill the RHS will we see them drop the weight requirement for any future DEP recruitment. You can't argue the need to have flown a bus or Boeing with a certain minimum weight limit if you have 12 or so CTC cadets a year on the A330. But of course it's their train set!!!! I for one would love to have a shot at VS. what's the feeling within the Virgin pilot community about this? Trainers are going to have a more testing time on the line.

Let's hope no one takes it out on the new cadets who eventually get the job. It's not their fault, it's a few bean counters at VA. If I'd been offered that opportunity when I started my career I would have jumped at it - who wouldn't!

Don't get me wrong thought, I'm not exactly in agreement with it. I've been sitting with around 4-5k hours all Boeing rated, over 100 tonnes waiting for VA to start recruiment for that category. I was expecting it after the Airbus recruitment but didn't allow for Military > 100 tonnes that was created to help a few of the ex Tri-Star guys out! Still, at least BA have now done so!

Personally I'm fairly sanguine about it. I don't see the hold pool drying up, recruitment stopping forever or western civilisation collapsing over the decision to recruit 10 or so cadets who won't actually hit the line for another 2 or 3 years hence. In the meantime you have a predominantly middle to late-middle aged demographic with the 65yrs old retirement bubble looming in a few years. All things being equal then, we're going to see increased retirements, reduced times to command and an ongoing need to recruit experienced pilots into the company. A trickle of cadets will serve to smooth out the demographic somewhat in the future but won't cause the rending asunder of the space/time continuum that some of the posters on here are speculating it will.

You can guarantee that there are all manner of tax breaks, incentives and deals are being achieved by both CTC and VAA. As VAA puts in place many initiatives to bring the company back into profit it certainly isn't going to start benevolently lobbing money at prospective aviators. Whilst I personally dislike the MPL concept I think the VAA scheme offers more over others. VAA being who they are will make the trainees feel part of the company from the outset (an intangible aspect I'll agree but important one nonetheless) through things like supernumerary flights, cadet liaison line pilots and immersion in VAA SOPs etc from an early stage.

As for the cost, well it is what it is. As stated, VAA aren't going to throw £1M at 10 unknowns in the hope of getting some pilots a few years down the line. So the cost is borne by the trainees. Personally I would've like to have seen VAA at least assist in securing the finance - some sort of link up with Virgin Money would've looked good (rather than the dubious looking Banquõs Del Récessiōn featured on the CTC site).
However, If a financial giant like BA want £84k for their Future Pilot Scheme you can't be surprised that VAA expect similar funding requirements.

Notwithstanding the general failings of the Zero to Hero MPL course, there isn't a shortage of pilots out there and Virgin isn't reliant on these cadets getting through to support the business. The desire to achieve, do well and pass the course must therefore driven by the students themselves, safe in the knowledge that if they don't put the effort in they fail and they personally are out of pocket to the tune of £LOTS. It's not like joining the Air Force, getting halfway through training before deciding you don't really like flying and then dropping out with no financial penalty. Any airline that doesn't own it's own training school needs to protect itself from the vagaries and potential financial losses of sponsoring ab initio pilot training.

When these cadets fall out of the machine at the far end they become long haul Line FOs. I have absolutely no idea what the pay scheme will be. However it works out, the new pilot will be on a decent wage (commensurate with experience), flying long haul around the world, on track to a long haul command with a great company at a relatively young age.

Yes you can drill down into the figures and work out quite how CTC and VAA are saving on NI costs or tax breaks or whatever. Airlines are businesses not charities and they would be mugs not to be using the system to minimise costs/maximise costs wherever they can. Your current employer is probably/definitely doing it to you right now.

As for ongoing recruitment, the Virgin Training Standards Manager has already outlined Virgin's needs in an earlier post. The longstanding recruitment requirements of 3000hrs etc etc won't change. Those requirements work and produce the candidates that the company want. Yes some might perceive it as "unfair"; lots of things in life are "unfair" including Airline recruitment which is based on 30% qualifications/suitability and 70% luck and right place/right time. I thought it was very unfair when Virgin didn't interview when I first applied. I was then very lucky when they did a year later. Not much changed in the intervening time other my amount of luck.

Whether or not those currently in the hold pool get offered a job I can't say. I spent a long time in the VAA hold pool before I was offered a job and I really hope those that are currently "swimming" get offered a course in a due time. If they do or don't will have absolutely and categorically nothing to do with cadets and everything to do with 787 training needs, Airbus vacancies, route changes, 747 drawdown/base moves and planning needs for the 744 replacement (777/A350/???).

On balance I think this is a half decent scheme and one that offers superb opportunities to a few budding young aviators. Yes it's expensive which is self-selecting in itself; I would've liked to have seen more indirect financial support from VAA to enable the widest spectrum of people to apply. Yes it'll be a burden on the trainers in the future but not, I believe, an intolerable one. And no, no-one will "take it out" on them when they reach the line (whatever "it" is). That's not really how we do things.

Interesting times and good luck to those applying - see you downroute in a few years' time.

Great post stopstart, nice to see a balanced view for once :ok: Does anyone on the inside know any more about CTC's claims of Virgin backed loans for a select few candidates? Their website says,

"It may also be possible for Virgin Atlantic to act as bank loan guarantors for a small number of successful candidates if required. Therefore, this programme offers an opportunity for everyone, including the most exceptional candidates with potentially limited financial resource."

This is a very vague statement. It seems to suggest Virgin would guarantee your loan if you didn't have access to funding, but only if you were 'exceptional'. Is this more exceptional than what is required to pass selection? It' an odd position for the airline to be getting into if they start saying "you're not good enough for us to act as a guarantor but we'll still hire you if you can pay".

Other than that, I'd be intirgued to know what Virgin's plans for the A330 are. I understand they're leased, but is the long-term plan to keep them? Are the primarily going to be doing East-coast US whilst the 787s do the longer flights?

StopStart and anyone else that may be interested; starting salary for new cadets is £26k (+bond repayment).

Twenty Six?!

thowmas - like I said, I have no idea what the salary will be. £26k isn't great however add the £14.5k flight pay to that + the £15.5k bond repayment + £6kpa allowances makes a not insignificant amount.
Interested (in inverted commas) to know where you got that figure from though....

Stopstart- Thank you for that post. Might I just enquire a bit further as to what you believe the 'general failings' of the MPL are as opposed to the zero to hero CPL/IR route? Merely curios.

I didn't express a preference for a 200hr CPL/IR either. I have a leaning towards pilots gaining a broad experience of flying before being unleashed on a commercial aircraft packed full of punters. I think the FAA have it right with their 1500hr rule. Just my own, irrelevant opinion.

I'd be interested to hear how cadets and experienced DEPs will be placed on the seniority list. If you have 4-5000 hours guys with heavy jet time that joined Virgin the day after one of the cadets, is the cadet going to get a LHS move before the experienced pilot? Prioritising date of joining over that much experience would be madness!

Do you really think hours are going to be an issue when time to command is about 15-20 years?

£26k flying 825 hours instead of the 750 hours. Straight onto LH widebody.
Kid-ets should consider themselves very very lucky.

However, I said it 4 pages ago - Watch out for your T&C's.
There is now a divide in the workforce (hours & entry pay) management/bean counters will start to turn the screws!

The question is : will one of these guys find himself flying over the ITZ, get an unreliable airspeed through a frozen pitot and decide to pull up to an attitude of 18 degrees nose up while saying "I don't know what is happening". If they do (lets hope they don't) whose fault is it?

http://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-...ould-read.html

Is that the question? What if the FO has 3000hrs and does the same?
:hmm:

Hopefully said FO might do the same while flying by himself in a C172 scaring himself witless in the process and thereby avoiding a repeat with 300 people behind. How is a Virgin FO with an MPL followed by 2 landings per month ever going to get any hands on experience. He might become a brilliant "systems manager" but not a pilot and being a pilot, like it or not, is still an essential part of our job.

You could ask that question of every MPL cadet or 200hr CPL/IR pilot currently flogging around Europe in one RYRs 738s or EZYs 319s. I can think of a few "stall" related incidents (Air France 447, Turkish at AMS, Thomson at Bournemouth, Asiana at SFO) - all of them involved a loss of speed & system awareness/SA and none of them involved "cadets". In fact, pretty much everyone involved had thousands of hours. Draw from that what you will.

It is true the "cadets" will have fewer actual flying hours than everyone else when they hit the line but you manage this through training and supervision - especially on an operation where actual hands-on is, on the whole, limited to final stages of flight. It's not insurmountable; recruit good people and train them well.

Probably, but . . .

I'm not so sure.

SH is completely different to LH. None of us are really current (rather than legal), most of us are kn@ckered and we fall back on experience and motor memory. They have very little to fall back on. The fact that this :mad: has been going on for a while in SH with no problems is not evidence that it's a good idea. Sometimes problems take a very long time to lead to a smoking hole. In fact, if the rest of the air transport system is any good, it should take a long time. Aerospace has had plenty of examples of "good ideas" not looking quite so clever many years later.

No doubt I'll be flying with this lot in a few years and will just have to make the best of it. In that respect it's no different to many other questionable aspects of the job. My opinion is irrelevant, I just fly the line as well as I can.

I'm sure we'll have plenty of applicants, especially in the current jobs market. All I'd say is be careful what you wish for. I wouldn't wish a 40+ year career of pure LH on my worst enemy, and that's in the current industry. To be blunt, I'm not convinced that the type of person who signs up for that life plan is the kind of person who should actually be a pilot. Have a good think about what's coming next. Four plus decades is a long time.

But I do agree with StopStart. It's not the end of the world.

Am I right in thinking, as used to be the case with MPL, that the licence is tied to the airline that you're doing the training with.

So, in a purely hypothetical situation, what happens to the chosen 10 if a) virgin go belly up (lets really hope not) or b) Delta buy out the VS stake?

I'd give an arm to fly.. I'm no youngster (35) and have seen enough of the world and the industry to want to get involved, but the sheer scale of that sort of investment with no guarantee of seeing it back would terrify me - even without a 2 year old and a mortgage, especially if your licence is rendered useless because you no longer have a partner airline..

(it might have all changed since I was involved with it, so if thats the case.. disregard!)

You mean "when".

The MPL is already transferrable, several Flybe q400 guys have gone on to fly other Aircraft with other airlines..... In which case the MPL is a joke already.

The goal posts have moved and will continue to move, much to the determent of all others with good experience waiting for the chance to move on :ugh:

You haven't seen enough of the industry if you still want to get involved, certainly under your own investment.

Smokie
 

Whilst I'm no fan of the MPL scheme, I don't believe it has become a joke because some guys have been able to transfer types/companies.

It's purpose isn't to hold you hostage to one type/AOC; it is merely a change in training philosophy, one that encompasses more multi-crew operations rather than light aircraft flying, as it's deemed more relevant.

Again, I'm not it's biggest fan, but I am under no illusion - it is the future, and I actually agree with it, in concept.

I fly a B777 after flying nothing larger than small twins and turboprops. I can assure you that such GA flying, whilst fun and a good experience, is sod all use when it comes to handling a 350 ton jet, ETOPS, HF, polar ops, etc.

sigh.
 

To: No-one in particular..

Sure it's probably the wrong place, and it's probably been answered somewhere in the depths of prune, but there seems to be a large number of crews that are so disillusioned with their careers/lives that they go out of their way to stop people getting into the aviation industry and paint it in the worst possible light.

Most of the posts I read are so dead-set against newbies getting into flying that, given 20-25 years, we'd have barely any pilots whatsoever!

From the outside I'm sure it looks rosier, it always does. But from the point of view of a desk pusher, with a go-nowhere job, many careers look rosy. Especially having spent formative years in the industry, and now, through redundancy, sadly away from it.

If it's that bad, how come so many of you are still doing it - I'm sure some of those skills you've learnt would be useful somewhere else. and on the plus side, it'd allow some of those people that you are always decrying about wanting to get into the industry to actually get the jobs they so dearly wish for.

It really is a question - I'm interested to learn why you're all so demotivated. I guess you could ask the same question to Nurses, Firemen, Teachers - another group of people who must know what the job is like, long hours, pension fund holes, shi**y management, goalpost moving etc, before they get into it and yet still find the requirement to moan about it constantly.

Sorry. it just frustrates me. I'm sure there must be a huge number of people who absolutely love their flying careers - it's just for some reason they don't post here. My old man used to love his job as an FE, albeit finished through retirement - mind you, he did quite often say it wasn't the industry it once was.. mind you - is any?

And for the record, I definitely don't agree with being charged £109k for a licence. lets go back to the old way of the airline paying for it and being bonded to them for 7-10 years whilst the bond is paid back on a reduced salary...... Surely a win-win situation - unless the airline goes bust, in which case it's just a win situation.

Perhaps you sigh because you don't like what you hear. I love the nuts and bolts of the job (minus a few things) but do not like the industry much. I used to love the idea of the "industry" and thought I knew what that meant as I knew I'd like the job. Worked my way up, all enthusiastic. Put stacks in and owe no one nothing so I do not feel I should move aside. I got myself here under my own sweat and saving money. I've been in 20 years now amd whilst I recommend the job as its enjoyable, I cant repsonsibly recommend the "industry" to anyone who is asked to lay down investment to do it. It would be irresponsible.

Part of being an airline pilot is not dwelling on the status quo but having foresight to envisage what is going to happen. It doesn't look to good for a long term option at the current rate. If it were free to get in that would be ok. In 10-15 Years time it'll be akin to earning 25-30k currently with temp contracts, zero extra benefits and a very bad lifestyle. For an investment of over a hundred thousand pounds that's a poor return for a future. .

As for being transferable skills wise. Airline experience at my age is as useful in another career as selling veggy dishes to cannibals, unless you want to get in CRM instructing, sim training. It's is an enjoyable job day to day, but it is changing. If you're gonna do it you're gonna do it. Good luck if you do. At least try the better options first like the BA FPP.

Sorry for the ongoing thread drift.

It's not "fact" it's your opinion. Depending on exactly what is done in those light aeroplanes, I may or may not agree with you.

Firstly, as far as I know, that applies to SH not direct to LH. Secondly, a properly formulated safety assessment does not merely consist of an examination of accident statistics. Otherwise, I'd suggest that we can make lots of other money saving changes. How about removal of pop out RATs? When was one last relied on as sole electrical or hydraulic pressure source? Why stop with the RAT, just get rid of triplex hydraulic systems entirely. I'm sure we could get rid of at least one of the A320/330/340's pesky flight control computers. Delete an HF radio on LR types? We all know that if you lose comms half way accross the pond or going down through Africa you'll live. Why teach stall recoveries? A good transport pilot doesn't get into that position, and bad ones screw it up when they need it, so what's the point? Why carry final reserve fuel? It's almost never used and if it wasn't there people would just declare an emergency and land earlier. Obviously I could go on and on - and yes, I am being facetious. But I hope I've made my point. These are meant to be two pilot aircraft not one and a half.

Back to thread. Regardless of joining scheme or licence, think very carefully before signing up to a forty plus year career of pure long haul. By all means go LH later, if you so wish.

Can anybody in the know describe how/if fleet transfers work at Virgin? Obviously as an MPL your first few years are tied to the A330, but after that is there the opportunity to transfer? IIRC the A330s are leased and, with the 787 deliveries and expected order for more to replace the 747, could cadets end up stuck on a shrinking A330 fleet as VS gradually become 787 only?

Re-assuring to hear :ok:

Manutd1999

Why is that reassuring to hear? What, a 777 or 787 over an airbus? I can't help but notice you're at the aspiratinal stage going from your posts. At your stage wouldn't you be glad to be given a turbine kite to fly given many are kicking around on pprune unemployed?