Thread: Modular v Integrated

Originally Posted by Pilotmorbz

what’s the point in getting a sociology degree for example if you’re flying a plane…

For the record. I don't have a sociology degree

Originally Posted by Pilotmorbz

Its common sense that on the whole an integrated training course is better structured and more consistent than a person doing modular type training on their own.

Prior to starting integrated training I did my JAA PPL in San Diego modularly and completed the 45 hour course in 4 weeks. Now if that isn't better structured and more consistent then I don't know what is. All because people are doing the course cheaper by taking the modular route doesn't mean that the school is less organised. If you have the money your training can be as consistent as you want it to be. People can even get their training done quicker than an integrated course if they so please. I can think back to my training and remember there being around a 3 week gap in between having flights!

I still disagree there Ad. You can't generalise and say that modular is better structured and consistent than a course that has been designed to get you through quickly and tightly conforming to the CAA requirements. One of the general benefits of going integrated stem from the fact that they are on the whole more organised and consistent, for example you enroll on the course and the rest is sorted for you- you are told what to do and the whole package fits in tightly. If I was going to redo everything and go modular I wouldn't be all that sure on the different hours requirements and so on, let alone the materials and different million documents out there that I needed to be aware of.

Using your PPL as an example isn't strictly the best example, because your talking about a crash course in a sunny country that only covers probably a 5th of the whole ATPL course. I have not once said that modular schools are disorganised I am simply generalising the different course structures.

Maybe you have had a bad experience along the way but quite honestly I would imagine than if you hadn't had everything put on a plate in front of you with CTC that you would have gone through a little bit more stress trying to organise things yourself.

So in summary I stick by my opinion that an integrated course by nature is more organised, generally more consistent (ie not hopping from school to school or saving up money inbetween flying) and a lot easier for the trainee pilot. You didn't organise the majority of the course yourself did you? You didnt have to research different schools for your training once you started? You didn't have to continually check with LASORS etc to know if you had the right hours and things and OK training had gaps in it but it was a lot less hassle than sorting everything out yourself!

Originally Posted by Pilotmorbz

If I was going to redo everything and go modular I wouldn't be all that sure on the different hours requirements and so on, let alone the materials and different million documents out there that I needed to be aware of.

Did you not see the F170a form for integrated prior to IRT. Now that was the biggest complicated mess I've seen! And to be honest it was us who had to keep an eye on our hours anyway. There was no point at all in my training I was told I needed more hours, I had to do all this myself anyway.

And as I say, I still disagree with the words consistent and organised. You must have had a very smooth course to have this cotton wool wrapped point of view, which is good and wish I had the same experience.

Finally, you don't have to hop in between schools on a modular course e.g. Multiflight in Leeds.

This debate will run and run ad nauseum, nevertheless it was an inspired thread choice for the £500 prize!

Originally Posted by Ads

Did you not see the F170a form for integrated prior to IRT. Now that was the biggest complicated mess I've seen!

Right so with respect to the whole of the training course you narrow complications down to 1 form, I think I’d rather train in a well constructed environment and have 1 messy form to fill in than to personally find out all the different requirements and hours needed to apply for each license as I passed through each phase of training. Surely 1 form at the end of it all is better than lots of different license application forms during training? I remember the modular guys from CTC (despite it basically being an integrated course in an integrated company) had to do a lot more form filling and gain a lot more logbook stickers than the integrated cadets. Once again this is stretching away from the actual topic but nonetheless supports my point that in an integrated course there is more organisation and fluency. And when you perhaps suggest I have had a cotton wool experience, I can personally vouch for the company with regards to hours requirements because within our personal reports after every “stepping stone” lesson we had our hours requirements checked, admittedly sometimes there was confusion thanks to the state of our logbooks (!) but overall there were measures in place to ensure the training requirements were strictly met. I for one had CFI’s come and personally find me to tell me my solo time was short etc. I somehow fear this would have been LESS likely if you were controlling your own training.

But with all the above said, the general gist of it is that as much as people slate integrated and say it’s the easy route for the rich boys and girls, the fact of the matter is that it has that stigma attached because of the nature of the structure- full time and GENERALLY better organised, why else would it be called integrated? It’s an integrated all in one package, not a bit by bit flexible structure. Oh and in the words of the popular publication ‘So you want to be a pilot?’: “Progress to a professional license may be through an integrated full-time attendance course which is to be preferred for continuity...” is a quote which perhaps supports my view.

You have to remember that I am not debating and saying things for the sake of it because I am being paid by a company to do so or because I have trained on an integrated course myself, because I admit that during training no matter who you go with there will always be hiccups and imperfections, flaws and troubles encountered, and that not everyone will have the same training experiences. BUT generally on the whole (and please someone else comment here) that by name and nature, modular courses are more likely to be less consistent and provide less guidance in terms of “here’s your course outline plan and this is how you’re going to do it” than a set integrated training pattern. Why else would they name the structures in the way they do? I am not saying modular is a bad structure or that integrated is perfect, but if a random person asked you the difference between integrated and modular the general answer would be that you have more control over your modular training and you have choice to do it as and when you like, bit by bit. That reply in itself supports what I am trying to say!

Oh and Mcgoo, typing in Modular V Integrated with the key word of pilot into google brings up this thread as the 8th most popular return, perhaps it was a good choice of topic! And like you say it is never ending but somewhat interesting for those who have barely heard of the different courses.

You could argue then that the modular guys under no supervision and having to find out the rules and requirements for themselves rather than be spoon fed under an integrated package have a greater knowledge base then??

Originally Posted by Pilotmorbz

Right so with respect to the whole of the training course you narrow complications down to 1 form,

I could go into much more detail but I know who reads these things.

Originally Posted by Pilotmorbz

I remember the modular guys from CTC (despite it basically being an integrated course in an integrated company) had to do a lot more form filling and gain a lot more logbook stickers than the integrated cadets.

This is seriously not the case at all. Yes we had more stickers but that was it! Ask any of the Bournemouth instructors.

You keep speaking about organisation and fluency but this is your opinion. One not shared by a number of cadets I know.

People taking up integrated training now need to think seriously about what they are doing. Why spend £60k (even more with living expenses) when you can pay the same and fund your own type rating straight after your training?

Originally Posted by Mcgoo

You could argue then that the modular guys under no supervision and having to find out the rules and requirements for themselves rather than be spoon fed under an integrated package have a greater knowledge base then??

I'm going to make my own ideal training course called intermodulated. It's the way forward.

Originally Posted by Mcgoo

You could argue then that the modular guys under no supervision and having to find out the rules and requirements for themselves rather than be spoon fed under an integrated package have a greater knowledge base then??

You could if we were arguing that the integrated course spits out 'better quality' or more 'knowledgeable' pilots but nobody has made that statement yet!

And Ad, perhaps you might like to start a CTC thread or a flying school review page because a lot of the statements you are putting forward are totally specific to your training course and not summarising the whole purpose of the topic and the generalisation of integrated and modular. You seem to be referring to your experience on more of an 'intermodular' course. Have you got many examples of friends who fully trained down the modular route on their own back as opposed to down the route of the specific flying school you seem to dislike

Interesting point raised on the type rating bit there though. It does seem like a huge benefit of going modular that you are more likely to be able to afford a type rating at the end of it all, likewise an instructors rating. I would have liked to have been able to afford an instructors rating but I'm not too bothered that I can't because just working at my local flying club not so long back there seems to be an excess of instructors floating around like there are qualified airline pilots! All of these decisions really do depend on the same common variables- how much you can afford, the state of the economy and how quickly you want the license!

Hmm. Not too sure what you are getting at to be honest. But coming from an aviation degree, yes I know a lot of people who have done modular and integrated. And believe it or not everyone who has gone through CTC has the same complaints, whereas not heard so many complaints from FTE. People who have taken the modular route have not regretted it one bit. If anything they are more experienced and have a better overall knowledge than myself and many other integrated cadets I know.

Sorry to steer slightly off subject, but back to the selection process

Good tip on Gapan Mcgoo. Not enough people know about GAPAN, particularly newbies.

Originally Posted by Mcgoo

Having said that i'm always a little sceptical of the integrated schools 'selection' process as they are hardly likely to have many fail as they would be throwing away thousands of pounds of revenue.

I have to disagree with you here though. It would be pretty short sighted to let people through who weren't up to it. No-one is going to re-mortgage their home and pay £70k on a course that doesn't have a near perfect pass rate. Equally it is in their interest to have a good record of placing graduates with airlines. Their reputation is the only thing keeping them in business - they obviously can't compete on price.