I think some people here have a misunderstanding on what equivalent means. What it definitely not refers to is perceived difficulty.

I hold a german diploma in a natural science, this degree is equivalent to a MSc in the British or US System as it encompasses roughly the same requirements, workload, curriculum and examination standards. For that reason its not equivalent to a Phd nor to a BSc, honors or not even though depending on which exact courses you compare, the difficulty may vary greatly. (a BSc at Uni A can be way harder to achieve than a MSc at Uni B)

The biggest difference between a university degree and other forms of training or apprenticeships is that a university degrees primary purpose is not to prepare you for a job but to qualify youfor academic research in your chosen field by scientific standards. That doesn't make it better or worse, it's simply a completely different approach requiring a very different skill set and things to be taught.

Therefore an ATPL can never be equivalent to a degree, aerospace engineering or something else, independent of how much experience you have or how difficult you perceive it to be. The goal is totally different (flying safe and economical in a commercial environment compared to academic research) and it therefore requires a completely different approach to training. To give an example, it would be completely unreasonable and unnecessary to teach ATPL students the Navier-Stokes equation and the level of math required to understand it as it would be to teach an aerospace engineer meteorology. Or for the ATPL student to conduct a wind tunnel experiment and for the engineer to be able to fly proficiently in instrument conditions. For the respectively other however these are essential parts of their training.

So people stop trying to gain respect for your / our profession by trying to make it into something it definitely isn't just because you perceive it as something difficult. I agree wholeheartedly with PDR on this.

I have a B.Eng degree in engineering, an EASA ATPL and various other licences from around the world, and am finishing up an MSc.

I don’t think an ATPL theory exams are particularly difficult, cognitively; more a case of volume of material to learn. I do feel that anyone who has had to be a subject matter expert, i.e. conduct a training needs analysis for their company, has experienced similar tasks as those of of a degree purely due to the amount of regulatory research, etc..

Intellectual snobbery has a different meaning. A good reading about the subject :
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/17505343.cms

While the Spanish government attempts to elevate the status of pilots with education comparisons, the Spanish pilot union SEPLA appears to have lowered the status of some member pilots.

By contradicitng its prior position and submititng to a collective agreement with Norwegian Air Resources, SEPLA has effectivley accepted its members are rented service industry employees and not airline employees. SEPLA members flying for Norwegian have no union representation to the airline (their real employer).

So much for your "status" as a pilot in Spain, whether university educated or fantasy equivalent.

Bondi, I have to admire your ability to turn any subject into an anti Norwegian rant.

I might have to sit this out now because I am beginning to agree with everyone ! PARKBREMSE ; Very well said indeed.

A and C, the word "rant" is not applicable to my post. The vocabulary used in your opinion must emanate from an ATPL education equivalent.

The higher educated will see the irony of the Spanish establishment attempting to raise the status of a particular group of workers, while SEPLA, purporting to represent the best interests of that same group, accept agreements lowering the workers status.

LANDFLAP : Me too. Ok, ok, but will you degree bods allow us to put letters after our names too ? You know, I fancy, GORDOMAC ( UK ATPL/IR/Perf A , B767) the last group being current aircraft. Ah, not current on anything now, so, maybe RETD to replace currency. C'mon PDR, give us something !

Happy to. I've been looking at what it is that would make a profession into a Profession, and it comes down to a number of things which professional pilots do have, but two things which they don't. The two things are:

1. An Institute of some sort which defines and administers Professional status. It would take a week or two to set this up, and needn't be expensive. There are lots of examples to use as models, be they the Engineering Institutes (IET, IMechE, RAeS et al), the Chartered accountant instute (ACMA etc), the solicitor's instute (the Law Society), the Barristers institute (the Bar*), the barristas institute (Costa) (:E), the medical institutes (RCS, RCN et al) etc etc. In fact now I think about it the RAeS is already an accredited institute for Professional Engineers, so you might be able to persuade it to take on a similar role for Professional Pilots.

2. A self-regulatory function in its institute so that the Institute becomes responsible for assurance of maintaining and policing Professional Standards. I don't think this currently exists - this assurance is done externally rather than by self regulation. But you could fix that easily enough.

So if those two aspects were addressed you could establish yourselves as a Profession and have the legally protected exclusive right to "post nominals" (lettuce after your name) as I have the right to add "C.Eng" and anyone who does it without hav9ing the charter would be committing an offence.

As to what those post nominals would be, well that's entirely up to you and your Institute. You could have "CP" (chartered pilot), but if it was up to me I'd choose "Professional Pilot Regulated Under New Exposition", so that Joe Blogs could, on achieving Professional status, sign himself as:

Joe Blogs PPRUNE**

PDR - the professional bodies are Institutions, not Institutes. The Women's Institute is a wonderful thing, but does not confer any form of professional status on participants. Whereas I consider myself thoroughly institutionalised.

I have met professional women, but nothing that a large dose of penicillin couldn't fix...

But you're right, of course. That'll teach me to check what my autocomplete is actually autocompleting with.

Interesting discussion. I agree that the ATPL theory is barely worth comparing to A levels. That being said, the job itself of piloting a commercial airliner does require significant levels of technical expertise, experience, human skills and higher cognitive function.

Especially when troubleshooting and problem solving in the air in a hostile and often time constrained environment.

Let’s just say this: What is the probability that the average airline operator could not pass an average university course? I would say zero.

Remember, 90% of courses at university nowadays should not be there in the first place. But if we look at University as what it, in my opinion, should be (SCIENCE) then there should be no comparison.

Would love to fly where you fly now, Dr Faust. New adquisitions in my present job would make you change that statement in a heart beat. They can't even follow when I explain them NM/minutes to station and v/s to use to descend!

You don't seem to have much of an idea about what you are saying.

SEPLA are defending pilots in low-cost airlines within Spain, well, because it is the reality there. Ryanair is number 1 in national flights.

They are there to improve pilots conditions. The new Norwegian Collective Labour Agreement is a massive improvement compared to the old conditions. What should SEPLA have done?

As for the ATPL, there are many degrees out there that you get by paying a bit of money and go to university not paying much attention. Apart from some engineerings, law, medicine and a few others, reaching a full ATPL in aviation is a lot harder than getting a degree in teaching.

Oh really.

On 4 March, 2015, Dagbladet news reported comments by SEPLA President, Javier Martinez de Velasco;

“Pilots must be employed by an airline and cannot be hired from an external crew company”

“The bosses and the office workers, and even the ground staff can be hired out, but not the pilots”

Article link:
https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/nor...leger/60704442

As previously stated; by signing a collective agreement with Norwegian Air Resources, SEPLA has accepted its members flying for Norwegian are rented service industry employees and not airline employees. Furthermore, with no union representation to the airline – their real employer.

Before responding, be aware I have a Certificate of Secondary Education, CSE, Grade 5 in woodwork and a less formal Spanish university degree/ATPL.

Really? Please name them.

PDR what is quite puzzling in all this discussion is not the fact that the ATPL should or should not be compared to a degree but the fact that You are constantly on these pages bitchin about how much of a über genius You need to be to achieve any kind of studies past high school except of course the ones required to be a professional pilot, which of course you are not. You define yourself as a chartered engineer and you spend half of your day on a professional pilot's forum in the terms and conditions section leading your crusade against any sort of equivalence between pilots studies and any academic title. In my opinion your attitude shows that you have a big load of resentment towards our profession otherwise you would have dropped the question long time back after proving your point. If ATPLs holder do get an academic equivalence to a degree nobody will steal your job or decrease your working conditions as nobody will be awarded an engineering degree or any other degree for free. The equivalence would only be meant for other usages that other users have already explained to you.

I'm merely trying to correct what appears to be a significant misaprehension in certain quarters about wnat is required to achieve a degree. There seem to be many who think that a degree can be obtained without any work, or by just mugging-up on facts and regurgitating them in an exam. Neither of these are true, as most of your colleagues seem to recognise but some are still struggling with. Nor do I suggest that obtaining an ATPL can be done without effort or by just regurgitating learned facts.

I don't claim to be an "uber genius" - you made that up. Nor do I claim that people with degrees are somehow "better" than people without. I have made that very clear on several occasions. All I am saying is that there is no way to somehow equate the two - they are completely different things.

Elsewhere in this place someone asked the question"Why do people live near airports & then complain?". I think there is a similar question "Why do people choose not to take a degree and then complain when people don't accept they should be regarded as having one?".

But you do get this weels "Playing the man rather than the ball" award. That is usually taken to indicate that he you can't discuss the subject in a grown-up manner and are just spitting dummies. If that's the way you want to present yourself it is your democratic right to do so.

PDR the ball has already been played for a while and You still do not get it. We got Your point, thank You very much, that has been told a while back to You. Now, it is a professional pilot forum and we are dealing with our profession related matters be it a degree or anything else so it would be sensible from You to understand this point.
Then I wrote in my previous post "You defined yourself as a chartered engineer" and I get a PM from You with your full name and employee number because I might not believe You... I have absolutely no reason not to believe You but you behaviour is childish to say the least. I think You are way out of line and my point on Your resentment towards the profession and the category seems to be valid then according to your behaviour. Anyway if the mods let you here for me you're mostly welcome.

Anyway now to move away from all these drifts... Thanks to all the posters that have clarified the positions of the Spanish towards the ATPL-degree discussion which definitely makes sense.