It's the same with other Professions (Lawyers, Doctors, Accountants, Engineers etc) - there is an initial body of underpinning knowledge & understanding (UK&U) to be mastered, and then one has to gain sufficient experience to show evidence that you can apply that K&U to real situations. Then there are management elements - people management, task management and financial management to a greater of lesser degree. And then in all the professions there is a need for continuous learning to maintain currency. An finally there are codes of conduct, ethics etc.

I have no problem at all recognising an unfrozen ATPL as a Profession - it would actually be a pretty smart idea to establish an Institute with a Charter and get that set up. But while for some Professions the UK&U is best acquired and demonstrated through university degrees for other professions it isn't necessarily so. To be a doctor or vet (I think) you require the appropriate degrees, but to be a lawyer or accountant you don't - they have professional exams as an option. To be a Professional Engineer you have to show UK&U equivilent to the level of a relevant masters degree supported by a relevant honours degree (for C.Eng - for I.Eng you don't need the masters), but having the actual degrees isn't mandatory if you can show the same level achieved by other means (and indeed that's how the majority of Chartered Engineers did it).

Anyway, the point is this - by all means go for Professional Pilot becoming recognised along side the other professions. I'd support that whole-heartedly. But don't make the mistake of assuming that because it's a Profession the associated basic UK&U must be equivalent to a degree, because it just isn't - neither in depth nor scope of study. Just as it isn't for Chartered Accountants.

Thanks elpipe83 for the clarification. Is what I thought.

So You mean I can be a lawyer during my days off ?

Arguably medicine shouldn't be considered a degree. The joke goes that it's 97 GCSEs taken over 5 years, and that would be about right for the academic part of it. So the genie's already out of the bottle when it comes to vocational qualifications being recognised as degrees...

Really, 90% of what going to university is about, is going to live away from home amongst people with a different background to your own and how to prioritise work and play with nobody looking too closely over your shoulder. Whether an ATPL achieves this, I don't know.

What a really stupid idea! No doubt it had to come from the Iberian peninsula... :hmm:

exactly what GS says!
The technical content and level of difficult is at best to GCSE level, at worst middle school knowledge.

Also agree wholeheartedly with MH152:

I see no reason why passing 14 multi-choice papers and subsequently achieving 1500 hours should entitle pilots to a degree.

There is nothing that involves any preparation at degree level in our profession. PDR1 also sums it up pretty damn well.
There is a level of responsibility for life and equipment, of course. Which should be reflected in the remuneration package. But a degree for an Atpl? What a crock of :oh:

I hold you responsible for me laughing out loud and waking up my girlfriend.

What you said is just so true and so well said :D

The Spanish goverment have been doing this equivalence for at least 15 years, nothing new.

If you read it properly you will see it says they will convalidate the " titulo de piloto". Thats a yellow paper the Spanish authority gives you when you finish your license ( invented by them). That means no joy for those of us who do not have or never held a Spanish license. Thats the answer the COPAC gave me several times between 2002 and now, and they are not willing to help with the convalidation unless you have this paper.

Goodluck

It’s useful to have the recognition the licence deserves. When filling in online forms I can only enter “high school” or “other” in the education field. It puts us at a disadvantage and we don’t get credit for our status in applications.

In the same way that degrees have been dumbed down to the point where one poster's assertion that his ex-sister-in-law gained a 2-1 (whatever that means) with ease, yet being unable to articulate, the ATPL has also been dumbed down to multichoice, easy to pass levels. So, they both have been dumbed down & should be equally recognised.


Actually, sorry to say this, but way back when GCE 'O' levels were quite hard, and 'A' levels were very hard, the UK ATPL was extremely hard because it required passes in at least 9 subjects, all hand-written with pass marks, on average, of 65%. Couple I can think of, like plotting & Met Practical, requited 80% just to pass. Let's say, 9 'A' levels, all at grade A to get you your ATPL writtens. Just to get into Uni (to use modern parlance), you needed just two 'A' levels with decent grades. My E grade pass in Economics and E grade pass in British Constitution failed to get me into Oxford but gained me a place (Law) at Bristol.


The 'old' UK ATPL that we baby-boomers gained after PPL, CPL, Senior Commercial and, consequently, around 1000hrs commercial experience & eight weeks of hell at Sir John Cass College was definitely worth degree status.


Once it is all sorted, can someone tell me where I can pick mine up ? Just to hang on the wall where I, and I alone, can really admire my endeavours. Cheers.

Totally agree - ATPL theory in the last 20 years or so is just a memory test. It's not about how much you understand the subject, but more about learning the feedback parrot fashion. I'm sure type ratings have also been dumbed down over the years too.

This is an age-old debate that rears its head every year or so - my guess is, generally by those who don't have a degree, but want to claim the ATPL is somehow just as worthy. It's not!

It's generally the other way around, people who got a degree but never made it as professional pilots or never went too far in their career.

Aerial Bus Driver, 1st Class?

What status? Look I really hate to break it to you, but there is almost nothing in an ATPL learning path that even begins to meet the requirements for an accredited degree in the UK. OK, so there's a lot of stuff to cram - taxi drivers suffer the same (Ealing Broadway to Mornington Crescent when the yellow ball is on the blue diagonal and residential one-way streets are wild), but degrees aren't about cramming information (not beyond 1st year,a t any rate). Manual skills are learned on a full-time craft apprenticeship taking many years, but they don't claim these are degree-level either.

A BA/BSc graduate should be able to assimilate information and experimental/research results, review them and draw conclusions, with some commentary on methods. A Honours Grad should be able to define objectives and conduct the reseach as well, and identify methods to scale sources of error. A Masters Grad should be able to do that plus design the experimental/research methods with a rigorous and quantitative assessment of error sources (scope and scale), plus reflective critque on the defined objectives, methods and data sources. A PhD grad should be able to postulate a "new" piece of knowledge (a principle, theory or conjecture) and then identify methods by which this might be tested, and against what criteria (plus all the other stuff).

An ATPL doesn't even get to the "basic degree level" in this - it's a totally different kind of learning. Sure, an ATPL+TR could expect a high probability of successfully flying and landing a jet in adverse weather with some systems malfunctions*, but that's a manual skill not a something involing higher education. Yes, they can understand, recall and use reams of data (generated by someone else) on airspace categories, air regulations and the systems architecture of their current aeroplane, but that's what taxi-drivers do when they learn "the knowledge".

It's a Profession, but it's not a degree. Get used to it!

* But not today, apparently - because I waited for well over two hours in the terminal before they felt they could manage the weather this morning... :E

PDR1 are You an active Airline or professional pilot ?

:D PDR1, could not have put it any better myself!
Whilst I agree there should be some form or recognition for the profession and skill required, a degree is WAY over the top.
Volume of information required to be remembered does not equal degree. Never mind the "academic" content of it!

In terms of recognition, I stand by my assertion of remuneration vs. academic title. The skill and level of responsibility borne by the pilot should be reflected in salary.

As others have said.. this argument rears its ugly head every now and again, but really.. if people want a degree, "pay" your dues and and get one like every other graduate? Plenty of people I've come across at work, who have gone and got degrees in a number of disciplines, all while flying a jet for a living.

That is the evidence You have no clue what You are talking about.
Source : myself, TRI/TRE and in training management of an European major.

Damn - can I have another go at it? I'm not used to people agreeing with me1

Absolutely. I do not wish to challenge in any way the salary or status of a professional pilot. I just challenge this silly idea that it is equivalent to a degree, 'cos it ain't.

Look, when I went to Uni I had all the usual aspirations - fame, fortune, hot babes and fast cars. But I chose engineering as a career so fame, fortune and hot babes were immediately off the menu and I was just left with the fast cars and the lettuce after my name. Had I chosen "professional pilot" then I would have had access to the fame, fortune and hot babes, and probably still had the fast cars, but I would never have got the lettuce. If you want the lettuce after your name you do have to do the work and achieve the degree, not just bitch about it later.

It's either that or share out the cash and give use 2nd dibs on some of the totty.

I was right then.

How many degrees do you have, sonic?

I'm not too sure about any of those... I ain't seen no fame, fortune or fast cars (though I have noticed the occasional Porscha, Lambo, Aston etc in the crew car park!)... hot babes..hmm, better look over me shoulder before I type anything, the wife could be hovering around!

But I do agree about having to put the work in for a degree!
I will re-iterate: ticking boxes to pass 14 Atpl subjects does NOT in any way shape or form equate to any work required at degree level. Equally, having achieved 10,000 or 30,000 hours flying a 300T jet around the globe does not entitle one to a degree! What academic achievement have we exactly attained to be able to say we should be awarded a degree?

Despite what others are trying to say, this is a job that requires no particularly high academic standards! Sure there is an element of aptitude, hand-eye coordination, decision-making, teamwork.
However, as someone else has said previously, most Atpl candidates achieve 90%+ pass marks on all subjects. That really says it all about the academic level of knowledge required to pass the Atpls...
The exact same goes for a Type Rating. It's just an awfully massive amount of technical info and procedures. I know because I've done 3.
But for heaven's sake it's not degree level learning!


What PDR1 said about successfully obtaining an ATPL and a TR is essentially true! We take an awful amount of information, and very basic for that matter, and apply it to our job. Again, airmanship, a "non-eventful" div to St Johns or Nizhnevartovsk, a successful landing in crosswind with gusts to 45kt, or a well-handled engine fire are NOT something you can go and claim a degree for!

You want a degree, go to Uni like everyone else who wanted a degree did before you. Simples really.

You did forget the part of the ATPL process which elevates the candidate to godhood.

:)

If the 14 ATPL exams are not considered to be at degree level, and thus should not entitle the holder to a degree. How about aligning the exams with experience and brining it on line with the Qualification framework http://https://www.gov.uk/what-diffe...ication-levels.

For instance, say you join the pilot profession with the minimum of qualifications, or base line qualifications (ATPL's). Accrue experiance over many years, doing in house development course's along the way that compliment your continued growth (sim, LPC, type ratings, upgrades). At a certain level you can step onto the framework with a vocational qualification that is equivalent to a degree, or will allow you to claim points towards years of study towards a degree.

This has been implemented successfully within the military for many years, it has allowed people a very good spring board to future careers, legitimizing their years of experience.

BS in Aviation Management, mandatory for my position.

BS would appear appropriate.

Not in my experience, but in either case, it's a bit pathetic.

PDR1 is an example.

Sonic, old fruit - there are plenty of your ATPL colleagues who have agreed with me, so it clearly isn't a matter of me "not knowing what I'm talking about". You're just making a public fool of yourself.

No need to comment further I believe.

See above.


There is just a little bit more than that. Whenever You have 5 spare minutes have a look at the Manual of Evidence Based Training.

If they are active professional pilots I respect their opinion as they know what the story is.

I did an engineering degree before becoming a pilot.

In no way can the cognitive effort of them compare... Flight school felt like going back to elementary school

Fair enough, I would be curious to see Your reaction if Your employer brings this up at the next pay review.

History lesson
 

Many years ago the ATPL underwent a process to align it with other vocational qualifications. Many people claimed tax relief on training undertaken. The Government then disallowed that and it stopped and so did the vocational framework. We are now talking in the UK about vocational qualifications AGAIN. Its a cycle.

Brings what up?

This comment from eduelp

Why would he (the employer)?

I suppose when it matters, I would rather someone who is a damn good pilot up at the pointy end than a member of MENSA or a First from Oxbridge.

When a relative of mine was training at a well known Spanish flight school, there were several graduates, one even with a degree in aeronautical engineering, who struggled with the sheer volume of learning and, despite being used to studying, found the course no easier than the non graduates.

Interestingly, my daughters English degree could easily have been ‘compressed’ into a one year course, rather than the three years it took. She only had lectures a handful of times a week so she was able to hold down a part time job as well (and still came away with a First) She was at a top class university but they were pretty spoon fed over what to study and how and when their essays were due. Whereas at flight school, my nephew worked 9 - 5 every day in class, then 3 - 4 hours studying in the evening. In contrast to my daughter, if he didn’t understand anything or felt he needed help, it was up to him to seek out the tutor or do his own research.

Finally, I wonder if any flight students would think about suing because they didn’t get a job at the end of the course?

Graduate loses bid to sue Oxford over 2:1 degree - BBC News

No argument from me - as I have repeatedly said I support the idea that steering aluminium rates as a Profession, right up there with Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers and Accountants. Just don't try calling it a degree because (as you so plainly put it) you don't need that level of education to fly a plane.

Ooh, looky here - the kid can use google to find one single case that was never going anywhere!

What about these fifty? Or these?

Looks to be quite common actually...

Fair point and mea culpa; I didn’t check my facts. :ugh: It’s just that sheer arrogance of that particular graduate really stuck in my craw when I saw the BBC report.

Mine too. My immediate reaction was that a man more deserving of a sound horsewhipping has yet to walk this earth - if you know where he lives I'll send the gamekeeper round.

I guess my fundamental point is that if you want ATPL to be respected as a Profession (which it certainly could/should be) then seek respect for what it IS rather than trying to portray it as the one thing it isn't.

That's all

ATPL frozen is not the full ATPL
 

This is linking with the full ATPL not just for the Frozen one...You need pass the Subjects...true but after that: 1500TT 500 multicrew + PIC and Night...after...again a simulator to have that. As you see that Degree is just for Comercial Pilots working in a multicrew and with enough experience as PIC.

I couldn’t agree more.

Which is why US airlines require a Degree to get hired. Getting an ATPL in any other country is an academic challenge, which fills the same square that US airlines need by requiring a degree. Namely, that you have the intellect and knowledge required to operate a complex machine in a complex environment.