monk,

Your post offends me. I have 4000 hours and fly a 737 - I completed modular training, after weighing up both the options. I did not 'mince around' during training. I cannot comprehend how CTC/Oxford/FTE et al can charge nearly DOUBLE the price of most schools as they churn out pilots and there still be people to pay it. Most of the course fee would appear to be devoted to marketing in Airliner World with pretty pictures of pilots wearing said discussed Raybans.

During my hour building, I flew different length legs, I flew into different countries and different weathers, and different airfields. From what I know of most integrated schools, you have to have your flightplan 'approved' by some faceless office goon who gives you 'permission' to fly your chosen route assuming it's not too dangerous. You then 'mince around' as you put it, in the middle of Arizona where there are hardly ANY weather issues to contend with and pretend your learning, while you fly to nice paved runways that are over 1000m long. How is that learning? There is nothing better to teach you lessons than watching the low fuel light go on because you f***** up your headwind calculations and had to explain yourself to radar when you screw up their arrivals as you need priority. Mistakes are made and that is how you learn.

Contract agencies should be for short term pilot shortages, not to screw genuine pilots seeking a dream whilst fattening the wallets of management at airlines and the schools. I can't wait for the day when the UK bans this pseudo-employment farce that is FlexiCrew/Brookfield, and I say that as a contractor to an agency.

Horgy

A rather more erudite rebuke than my offering!

Still prefer my last line

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.

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!!!!!! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

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


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!!!!!

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 - I'd be interested to know the source of your views.

That's not been mu experience. The cadets are very well trained.

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.

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.

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... :E

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! :ok:

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. :=

Alycidon, check again.


OM-B 2.69


FCTM-NO-50 p1/8:

From Airbus safety bulletin:

http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/medi..._DEP-SEQ06.pdf

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.

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.

Poose
 

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

Yes yes; what an erudite post Michael.

Send us your money plenty quick :D

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.

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.

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?

:mad:

Architects
 

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%