Peter wrote:
especially as Modular can be done for well under half the money
I can see why the airlines may have a (possibly misplaced) preference for integrated over modular from a training point of view, but why would they prefer cadets who have spent more money than others?
Airborne_Again wrote:
why would they prefer cadet
In a nutshell:
So they can shape them wannabes according to their own presets, from the very beginning. This includes technical and social performance, access to the records to facilitate pre-screening, as well as a direct integration in the lower scales of wages on pre-contracts (and not directly with the airline of choice).
A modular candidate has most probably acquired bad habits, might have done his training over a long period of time (as I did…), and being probably older will aspire to higher wages.
why would they prefer cadets who have spent more money than others?
They don’t; it works the other way round.
By preferring Integrated they are selecting for the cadets who spent the most money. Or the ones whose [grand]parents spent the most money.
I would also argue they are selecting for the cadets with the lowest IQ 
because those with a higher IQ will prefer the Modular (i.e. DIY CPL/IR) route because it saves them enough money to buy, ahem, a beech hut on Shoreham Beach.
I have occassionally dived into “professional pilot training” forums and found they are dominated by FTO owners, under nicknames, slagging off the modular route. So it all feeds on itself.
access to the records to facilitate pre-screening
Logbook forgery is obviously harder in an FTO.
being probably older will aspire to higher wages.
I reckon a lot of them go into the bizjet scene rather than the Easyjet RHS, although I know a woman who did the latter at around 40.
The average FTO output would be completely incapable of survival in the bizjet world. They don’t even know how to fly to Le Touquet. I’ve seen them there (going in a DA42) but only with an FI.
Dan wrote:
So they can shape them wannabes according to their own presets, from the very beginning. This includes technical and social performance, access to the records to facilitate pre-screening, as well as a direct integration in the lower scales of wages on pre-contracts (and not directly with the airline of choice).
A modular candidate has most probably acquired bad habits, might have done his training over a long period of time (as I did…), and being probably older will aspire to higher wages.
Yes. As I wrote, I see that.
I don’t know how much difference it really makes to employability. Integrated will tend to get a head start with employment because a lot of the FTOs have (or at least have had in the past) links with certain airlines, ie. CTC and Easy, Oxford and Ryanair etc. That doesn’t stop someone from a modular training background getting employed by airlines as well, normally. One posssibly contrary example I can think of from years ago was Flybe used to specify a preference for either integrated applicants or modular applicants who had completed all post PPL traning at one FTO.
At the end of the day, whilst airlines employ a lot of ‘cadets’, they also employ a substantial number of experienced applicants, and at this stage it is just about irrelevant what way you did your training. Certainly for my employer (in the UK), at any one time we have a number of cadets, who have come from a mix of integrated and modular, and a number of new-to-us pilots with previous experience, and I would estimate that the majority of them have modular backgrounds.
modular applicants who had completed all post PPL traning at one FTO.
That is hard for the DIY route, due to the usual stuff like most FTOs not allowing own aircraft, having to live in a hotel, etc. At my base, there was a window during which I could have met that requirement but it lasted only about 1-2 years, over past 20 years.
The real post-PPL work is the IR. The European CPL is just some easy boring dual VFR flying.
The big difference between modular and fATPL is:
-You study theoritical ATPL in classroom study, with 2 to 6 hours lesson per day with classrom/computer/ ATPL instructor (that goes for a year at least, and ~10k)
-You have 40hours of IRME instead of 20 for modular (along with sim), which goes for a lot of $$, knowing that an hour or DA42 with FI is ~600euro. (that goes for 12000 additional, not counting for those whi miss one’s flight lesson’s objective)
-usually now, you have also AEPS MCC or at least a MCC done either in-house or subcontracted, with a fair margin in between. I have not idea of how much it gets, but a MCC can go as low as 3000 euro for 20h sim + 25h classroom course.
Of course it doesn’t fill the gap from 40k to 100k, but I assume the 40k is underestimated, I would place it to 60k. fATPL have a minimum hours of 150 at the end of training, whereas modular must have 200 before the CPL test, so you need to fly 50h more in a club, mostly PIC time (so 10k more for modular). And you have to pay a distance course for fATPL (3 to 5 k).
Being in a modular course along with fATPL, I can say there is a difference of qualification, the fATPL being much easier with IR training and conformance to SOP in general. But the real hidden route is that a fATPL candidate that can pay 100K+ can also pay an ryanair APS MCC that will directly goes to associated screening that will lead you to a cheque of 40k for their TR. When you finishes this APS MCC, the same FI will send you to ryanair, there is little incertitude on the result unless you are not made for aviation. A great part of the whole fATPL class will go this way.
I don’t like it but it is the way now.But there are good and bad schools. Mine (Cannes Aviation) is asking a kick off deposit that is not enormous, and after flights are starting, they only require the account to be positive. We had bad ones also in France, that went bankrupt after its manager burnt all the money (airways college in 2021).
Just saw a post on FB:
EasyJet in Europe [he means the EU region] are recruiting modular fATPL holders, even if their ratings have lapsed. They also allow 5 exam retakes.
I assume the 40k is underestimated
Could be, but also there are multiple routes if you have time and not much money e.g. doing an IR in the US, flying 50hrs “under IFR”, and then doing the ICAO IR to CB IR conversion route.
Also not all countries charge what the UK CAA charges for the written exams.
And having previous flying experience, unlogged, makes a dramatic difference to how long all this stuff takes to do.
To add:
they have [not] yet relaxed the rule in the UK, but it might be a sign of things to come. Only last month EasyJet cancelled 45 flights one day and 55 the next, out of Gatwick. They cited extreme heat, but every other airline managed. It was of course, so they didn’t have to pay compensation. The real reason was lack of flight crew.
Bastards, as I always suspected, having lost out on a good few hundred quid in 2019.
Peter wrote:
EasyJet in Europe [he means the EU region] are recruiting modular fATPL holders, even if their ratings have lapsed. They also allow 5 exam retakes.
If you can get a link, because all easyjet signs of openings are very rapidly closed and for sure only opened to 1000h on type…
edit “- A minimum of 1,500 hours on aircraft above 10 Tonnes MTOW (by easyJet induction date).”
I doubt that sort of thing would ever be published anywhere (by Easyjet) but I asked the bloke who posted it on FB for a source.
EDIT:
