Attended a Cabair Seminar.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Attended a Cabair Seminar.
Yesterday I attended a fairly slick presentation at Cranfield with a view to Cabair Integrated Course. It almost felt that those whose raised probing questions were treated with suspicion and the staff presenting appeared to be defensive.
One particular area that came up and caused much debate and tension related to Airlines and whether they were prepared to employ newly qualified First Officers of mature age. The seminar lead you to believe this was not unrealistic although in fairness it did not promise but just lead you to believe in the 'possibility'. However, towards the end of the presentation a trainer from an Airline Preparation Company came and spoke, putting a fairly large spanner in the works of what had been said before. He produced his Company survey that had been replied to by 7 Airline Companies (no names mentioned). From this he informed us that 6 out of the 7 would not employ First Officers with low hours above the age of 30. This was obviously probed in the question and answer session after, to which Cabair said the following.
'With smaller Airlines those over the age of 30 and even in their mid-40's newly qualified with low hours would be of interest and may in some ways be more appealing to companies such as Flybe. Their reasoning was at a more mature age you are less likely to use the company as a stepping stone to move onto a long haul operator, etc'. In fairness to Cabair I have heard the same comment from Western Australian Aviation College.
What I find disturbing though is the earlier figure from the survey I mentioned and have question marks as to whether the comments about mature candidates as above can be substantiated. Let's face it, both companies I quote are in the business of taking your money.
Any comments relating to the above age matters would be welcomed, by the way I am 45.
One particular area that came up and caused much debate and tension related to Airlines and whether they were prepared to employ newly qualified First Officers of mature age. The seminar lead you to believe this was not unrealistic although in fairness it did not promise but just lead you to believe in the 'possibility'. However, towards the end of the presentation a trainer from an Airline Preparation Company came and spoke, putting a fairly large spanner in the works of what had been said before. He produced his Company survey that had been replied to by 7 Airline Companies (no names mentioned). From this he informed us that 6 out of the 7 would not employ First Officers with low hours above the age of 30. This was obviously probed in the question and answer session after, to which Cabair said the following.
'With smaller Airlines those over the age of 30 and even in their mid-40's newly qualified with low hours would be of interest and may in some ways be more appealing to companies such as Flybe. Their reasoning was at a more mature age you are less likely to use the company as a stepping stone to move onto a long haul operator, etc'. In fairness to Cabair I have heard the same comment from Western Australian Aviation College.
What I find disturbing though is the earlier figure from the survey I mentioned and have question marks as to whether the comments about mature candidates as above can be substantiated. Let's face it, both companies I quote are in the business of taking your money.
Any comments relating to the above age matters would be welcomed, by the way I am 45.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Im not pilot yet but my mum used to work for BA(not as a pilot)and she said they employ modular graduates with A levels.I think, but this is my own opinion, the intergrated courses they are only setup to get you the minima hours and licence and are only intrested in taking your money.Im only 16 but from all the reaserch i have done you can get more hours with modular and its less expensive,you can do a JOC after graduating.You should have no problems with getting employment with most airlines providing you have the A levels.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Justjoshing,
BA hires pilots two ways, SSP and DEP. SSP is for low hour pilots straight out of flight school and they only hire these from integrated courses, no modular students at all. DEP is a program where BA hire pilots with a Type Rating and 400-500 hours away from other airlines. On DEP, they do take modular trained pilots.
You seriously misunderstand the nature of integrated courses. The reason they include fewer hours is because much of the hour building is done with an instructor aboard and the student logging PICUS. This allows an integrated student to complete the course in less hours (195 is the minimum, but I'm not sure if this includes the MCC). The modular student will get over 250 hours because they are required to have at least 100 hours of solo flight in order to apply for their CPL. Integrated training is denser and more intense. Both integrated and modular training routes lead to the exact ratings, but intergrated students get there in fewer hours because it is a more concentrated way to train. Virtually all airlines who have sponsored training in the past, those who currently have mentoring and tagging schemes with FTE, OAT and Cabair, and all major military flight schools, use integrated training. When airlines spend their own money on training, they seem to do it integrated.
Integrated training courses are more expensive than modular courses and some schools that run them put a lot of hype into marketing them and these are the primary reasons they get bad press, but don't confuse the bad press with the quality. I am willing to bet that many PPruners that writes negative posts about integrated courses and the companies that market them would eat their words and submit applications if airlines started paying for the training again. You can rest assured that if they ever do, they will choose integrated schools to provide it.
Novicepilot,
The survey is well known. It is the GAPAN/EPST survey and you can find it at www.gapan.org. It is about 4 years old, so hardly what I would call current. They sent it to 10 airlines and three did not even bother sending it back. They do not reveal which airlines they sent it to. There are over 30 airlines in the UK, so 7 is hardly representative enough sample to conclude those over 30 should not bother.
BA hires pilots two ways, SSP and DEP. SSP is for low hour pilots straight out of flight school and they only hire these from integrated courses, no modular students at all. DEP is a program where BA hire pilots with a Type Rating and 400-500 hours away from other airlines. On DEP, they do take modular trained pilots.
You seriously misunderstand the nature of integrated courses. The reason they include fewer hours is because much of the hour building is done with an instructor aboard and the student logging PICUS. This allows an integrated student to complete the course in less hours (195 is the minimum, but I'm not sure if this includes the MCC). The modular student will get over 250 hours because they are required to have at least 100 hours of solo flight in order to apply for their CPL. Integrated training is denser and more intense. Both integrated and modular training routes lead to the exact ratings, but intergrated students get there in fewer hours because it is a more concentrated way to train. Virtually all airlines who have sponsored training in the past, those who currently have mentoring and tagging schemes with FTE, OAT and Cabair, and all major military flight schools, use integrated training. When airlines spend their own money on training, they seem to do it integrated.
Integrated training courses are more expensive than modular courses and some schools that run them put a lot of hype into marketing them and these are the primary reasons they get bad press, but don't confuse the bad press with the quality. I am willing to bet that many PPruners that writes negative posts about integrated courses and the companies that market them would eat their words and submit applications if airlines started paying for the training again. You can rest assured that if they ever do, they will choose integrated schools to provide it.
Novicepilot,
The survey is well known. It is the GAPAN/EPST survey and you can find it at www.gapan.org. It is about 4 years old, so hardly what I would call current. They sent it to 10 airlines and three did not even bother sending it back. They do not reveal which airlines they sent it to. There are over 30 airlines in the UK, so 7 is hardly representative enough sample to conclude those over 30 should not bother.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that if you do above and beyond the bog standard fATPL post training you'll make yourself more marketable. I wish it wasn't the case but at the very least it increases the likelihood that you'd get noticed and thus improve your overall chances. Irrespective of everything else at the end of the day it's just a 'chance' and no way a guarantee nor affirmation of any kind.
Last edited by boogie-nicey; 19th Jun 2007 at 11:23.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just spoken Oxford.
Spoke to a careers advisor at the above - very helpful, but very realistic. He was of the opinion that anyone over the age of 32 ish would struggle to ever move into a job with the Airlines with low hours, although he didn't say never.
Suppose the advice - "if you can do the integrated and are prepared that you may get nothing at the end, without feeling angry of ripped off" is quite sound. I like the truth even if it is unpalatable. So, now I need to balance this with the other advice that 'Flybe may prefer you as you are more mature'. Probably know instinctively who is portraying the situation more ethically.
Maybe I will now look at a career as a flying instructor, and if I can get the airline break its a bonus. Think I will now need to post a thread along the lines of - how much would I earn doing this?
Suppose the advice - "if you can do the integrated and are prepared that you may get nothing at the end, without feeling angry of ripped off" is quite sound. I like the truth even if it is unpalatable. So, now I need to balance this with the other advice that 'Flybe may prefer you as you are more mature'. Probably know instinctively who is portraying the situation more ethically.
Maybe I will now look at a career as a flying instructor, and if I can get the airline break its a bonus. Think I will now need to post a thread along the lines of - how much would I earn doing this?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: northampton
Age: 55
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too have been to cabair, been through the selection process and have been offered a place. I am now 38 and really do want to fly, and quite frankly turbo prop, jet, passenger, frieght, instructing any thing goes really. The down side is I will need to be renumerated in whatever may be available. Not a huge amount I hasten to add. After a bit of fact finding and reading some replies, its still 50-50 as to whether there is work available for the low hours, newly qualified mature person. I have no issue spending the amount of money required to do an integrated course providing there may some shred of work. What I won't have is an abundance of cash afterwards for more courses. I would just like to keep the roof over my head(the fast car can wait 
). Is there is can anybody who can offer a few pointers? Is there any particluar reason as to why the airlines play their cards so close?
Thanks
). Is there is can anybody who can offer a few pointers? Is there any particluar reason as to why the airlines play their cards so close?Thanks
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allegedly, they play the cards close because older wannabees learn slower and are more likely to fail type or line training and even if they pass, will take extra sim sessions on the TR. Airlines that make you pay for the above would perhaps be more receptive. From what I have been told by a few schools, students around 40 take a lot of extra time getting through an fATPL course as well and a £10,000 cost overrun is not unusual.
