Aviation student numbers to be capped
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Too far away from the cockpit...
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-dwnunderblunderer, you seem like a genuine, hard working fella but most of this is directed at you (and it's not a personal attack. 
)-
I can't agree more with those saying that potential career pilot applicants should be screened better before they can commence training. But just remember:
Universities have been screening potential students for years. The screening process is similar (although not to the same extent) as an airline interview.
So before anyone starts blaming uni students for the excess of CPL pilots, remember that aviation (flying) students have at least passed some type of selection process, unlike G.A. which has no such process.
Not saying there's anything wrong with doing your training through a G.A. school, but stop putting allthe blame on uni students. Many of those who would have previously done their training through G.A. now take the uni option as it is prefered (I bet that will get a retort) by most airlines. I don't think that is a bad thing.
Good on all you guys who have paid for their training while working, it does show great commitment. Just remember uni students still have to pay a high proportion of their costs and the degree is still hard work. We don't have it easy and most of us have just as much drive as you but we have opted to do the degree first. The hard yards are still to come.
The argument about suplemented education is an easy one. If you have the aptitude to be accepted into a course, then the government is willing to ASSIST you. It has been that way in other professions for a long, long time.
Ultimately the operators decide who gets the jobs and they do so depending on the job at hand. It would seem that airlines can and are becoming more selective so we all have to work a little harder. You'll never get a job based purely on how many aeronautical / law / aviation degrees you have, just like you wont get it purely on the fact that you had to pay for your own training.
That was a pretty ordinary and rushed explanation of my point
but hopefully you can see what I'm trying to say.
Ultimately it's a dynamic industy which doesn't make training easy, but why get so angry at people who been offered the opportunity to get into a uni course? And how can you say they are 'fluff' courses if the airlines prefer them?!
RAAF pilots are given very high quality training subject to selection criteria. Why not bag them because you don't have the same opportunity?
)-I can't agree more with those saying that potential career pilot applicants should be screened better before they can commence training. But just remember:
Universities have been screening potential students for years. The screening process is similar (although not to the same extent) as an airline interview.
So before anyone starts blaming uni students for the excess of CPL pilots, remember that aviation (flying) students have at least passed some type of selection process, unlike G.A. which has no such process.
Not saying there's anything wrong with doing your training through a G.A. school, but stop putting allthe blame on uni students. Many of those who would have previously done their training through G.A. now take the uni option as it is prefered (I bet that will get a retort) by most airlines. I don't think that is a bad thing.
Good on all you guys who have paid for their training while working, it does show great commitment. Just remember uni students still have to pay a high proportion of their costs and the degree is still hard work. We don't have it easy and most of us have just as much drive as you but we have opted to do the degree first. The hard yards are still to come.
The argument about suplemented education is an easy one. If you have the aptitude to be accepted into a course, then the government is willing to ASSIST you. It has been that way in other professions for a long, long time.
Ultimately the operators decide who gets the jobs and they do so depending on the job at hand. It would seem that airlines can and are becoming more selective so we all have to work a little harder. You'll never get a job based purely on how many aeronautical / law / aviation degrees you have, just like you wont get it purely on the fact that you had to pay for your own training.
That was a pretty ordinary and rushed explanation of my point
but hopefully you can see what I'm trying to say.Ultimately it's a dynamic industy which doesn't make training easy, but why get so angry at people who been offered the opportunity to get into a uni course? And how can you say they are 'fluff' courses if the airlines prefer them?!
RAAF pilots are given very high quality training subject to selection criteria. Why not bag them because you don't have the same opportunity?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pacific Wings Snippet.
Was browsing the latest edition of PW the other day and noticed a little tidbit about the capped student numbers for student loans.
According to this little news peice, most fulltime aviation students are on multi-year courses and are in fact considered the equivalent of 3.42 Fulltime students therefore reducing the actual number of student pilots from 775 to 230-ish.
Work that out
S2K
According to this little news peice, most fulltime aviation students are on multi-year courses and are in fact considered the equivalent of 3.42 Fulltime students therefore reducing the actual number of student pilots from 775 to 230-ish.
Work that out
S2K
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
7 Posts
I have posted a thread, about yet another Irene article
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=109192
If any of you feel strongly enough to give the media more info on a more Pilot perspective please Call NZPA 04 4726223 and ask for Ruth, make reference to the pilot shortage article and spill your guts about this rubbish as long as you are prepared to be quoted.
When I asked them why they always publish articles like this from -ONE- perspective, the answer came they never have pilots to talk to. errrrr, and got the impression is was too much to ask for them to actively find some. SO CALL THEM !!!!
Something of interest also, in the latest Flyer mag, Air NZ only expects 61 pilots in the next -5- yrs, yes, I repeat, the next FIVE yrs, to reach 60 (i.e retire).....
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=109192
If any of you feel strongly enough to give the media more info on a more Pilot perspective please Call NZPA 04 4726223 and ask for Ruth, make reference to the pilot shortage article and spill your guts about this rubbish as long as you are prepared to be quoted.
When I asked them why they always publish articles like this from -ONE- perspective, the answer came they never have pilots to talk to. errrrr, and got the impression is was too much to ask for them to actively find some. SO CALL THEM !!!!
Something of interest also, in the latest Flyer mag, Air NZ only expects 61 pilots in the next -5- yrs, yes, I repeat, the next FIVE yrs, to reach 60 (i.e retire).....
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Anywhere I lay my hat...
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dwnunderblunderer
You got it right about the polytechs getting the money.
Quite a few other posts have also mentioned this. But it's not just the polytechs, some F/Schools are also guilty.
DOK001
I think (possibly) you've slipped a cog. DUB wasn't (or didn't seem to be) talking about Uni students. More like those that get conned into the aviation career without any sort of pre-selection process.
What has caused this, is the huge loans given out at a whims notice, for those that really aren't interested in the job, just the perceived $$$$.
Similar amounts are given to Doctors, Lawyers, but the assoc. schools at the Unis pre-screen their students.
Unlike the poly-techs.......
Unfortunately, this can reflect badly on those that are really keen on the professional aviation lifestlye. (if there is such a thing left?)
I suppose, if potential students want loans, then the major balance should be paid upon suc. completion of set objectives. Like, PPL. CPL. IR. ATPL Subjects.
And some sort of screening. And I know that could open up a can-of-worms....
You got it right about the polytechs getting the money.
Quite a few other posts have also mentioned this. But it's not just the polytechs, some F/Schools are also guilty.
DOK001
I think (possibly) you've slipped a cog. DUB wasn't (or didn't seem to be) talking about Uni students. More like those that get conned into the aviation career without any sort of pre-selection process.
What has caused this, is the huge loans given out at a whims notice, for those that really aren't interested in the job, just the perceived $$$$.
Similar amounts are given to Doctors, Lawyers, but the assoc. schools at the Unis pre-screen their students.
Unlike the poly-techs.......
Unfortunately, this can reflect badly on those that are really keen on the professional aviation lifestlye. (if there is such a thing left?)
I suppose, if potential students want loans, then the major balance should be paid upon suc. completion of set objectives. Like, PPL. CPL. IR. ATPL Subjects.
And some sort of screening. And I know that could open up a can-of-worms....
I like the idea of capping the number of students receiving a Government assisted loan for flight training.
The hard part will be creating a fair allocation of the funding. Hopefully the Government doesn't look to MAF for assistance in this area.
Also, let's hope they don't stop at Aviation, a slow down on the SLS needs to put in place.
But we shall have to wait for MP's who have daughters/sons who are struggling in other professions before those reviews occur.
Futhermore I have never had an interview where I was questioned on my finance's nor would I answer such a question. Nor would I ask such a question of a prospective employee. To consider one for employment based on how one funded their training is absurd and I am disappointed to see that such practise is in place. Surely the interviewer could be more constructive in their questioning.
Appropriate questions regarding the individuals development and experience to date would be of more interest and value.
To make a direct comparison between the funding of one's training and their attributes is pathetic and misguided.
The hard part will be creating a fair allocation of the funding. Hopefully the Government doesn't look to MAF for assistance in this area.
Also, let's hope they don't stop at Aviation, a slow down on the SLS needs to put in place.
But we shall have to wait for MP's who have daughters/sons who are struggling in other professions before those reviews occur.
Futhermore I have never had an interview where I was questioned on my finance's nor would I answer such a question. Nor would I ask such a question of a prospective employee. To consider one for employment based on how one funded their training is absurd and I am disappointed to see that such practise is in place. Surely the interviewer could be more constructive in their questioning.
Appropriate questions regarding the individuals development and experience to date would be of more interest and value.
To make a direct comparison between the funding of one's training and their attributes is pathetic and misguided.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Too far away from the cockpit...
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plas Teek,
Well said my friend I had rambled a little with that posting but you said what I would have liked to have said. The problem certainly isn't limited to universities.
Unfortunately I think it'll be a while before the problem is addressed effectively......
Well said my friend
I had rambled a little with that posting but you said what I would have liked to have said. The problem certainly isn't limited to universities.Unfortunately I think it'll be a while before the problem is addressed effectively......
