Thread: Modular v Integrated

Ok so here it is, you knew it was coming; the big modular versus integrated debate! It’s about time The Pilots Club took part in one of the most discussed topics in the aviation world. What the pros are, what the cons are, what the limitations of each one are, what the airlines think and your individual opinions on both structures of pilot training.
Let’s face it; this is one discussion that will never stop. Pilots of all ages and different levels of experience will always continue to discuss ‘which one is better’ and so on and so forth, putting forward their experiences of both training methods and chipping in with their ideas of which one is better suited to the inexperienced pilot. In this thread I aim to hear all the different views of everyone, no matter how experienced you are, what your opinions are of each course as well as making the topic one of use for those wanting to train professionally. Hopefully a thread on this will kick up plenty of questions and answers that can benefit everyone for future reference.

Feel free to ask about each course if you’re relatively new to the pilot training world and don’t forget- let’s keep it clean and to the point, no stupid digs and cut throat comments! The bare outline of it all is this. Modular training is generally done chunk by chunk usually pay as you go- e.g. gaining your PPL whilst working, then studying for your ATPL exams, then when you have time and can afford it starting hours building towards the CPL and so on. More often than not modular training is done a lot cheaper than integrated style training thanks to the freedom of moving around different flying schools at each stage of training to get the best price and service. Integrated on the other hand is usually done in under 2 years, taking a student from no experience all the way to the frozen ATPL in a kind of crash course, generally benefiting those who want to get it done quickly who can afford to raise the generally larger sum of money needed to pay for the course.

So to start… I personally trained on the integrated route- smashing me through from PPL to ATPL in less than 2 years. Consistent training, somewhat argued to be favourable from the airline recruitment side of things albeit expensive, intense and ultimately coming out of the programme with the same license as those who trained down the generally cheaper modular route. Would I change anything if I could? No, I feel safer with the integrated status on my shoulders despite the long years ahead of debt and the lack of hard evidence for the style of course being favourable by pilot recruitment people.

Modular or integrated, what’s your take?

Originally Posted by Hotdog

Ok so here it is, you knew it was coming; the big modular versus integrated debate! It’s about time The Pilots Club took part in one of the most discussed topics in the aviation world. What the pros are, what the cons are, what the limitations of each one are, what the airlines think and your individual opinions on both structures of pilot training.
Let’s face it; this is one discussion that will never stop. Pilots of all ages and different levels of experience will always continue to discuss ‘which one is better’ and so on and so forth, putting forward their experiences of both training methods and chipping in with their ideas of which one is better suited to the inexperienced pilot. In this thread I aim to hear all the different views of everyone, no matter how experienced you are, what your opinions are of each course as well as making the topic one of use for those wanting to train professionally. Hopefully a thread on this will kick up plenty of questions and answers that can benefit everyone for future reference.

Feel free to ask about each course if you’re relatively new to the pilot training world and don’t forget- let’s keep it clean and to the point, no stupid digs and cut throat comments! The bare outline of it all is this. Modular training is generally done chunk by chunk usually pay as you go- e.g. gaining your PPL whilst working, then studying for your ATPL exams, then when you have time and can afford it starting hours building towards the CPL and so on. More often than not modular training is done a lot cheaper than integrated style training thanks to the freedom of moving around different flying schools at each stage of training to get the best price and service. Integrated on the other hand is usually done in under 2 years, taking a student from no experience all the way to the frozen ATPL in a kind of crash course, generally benefiting those who want to get it done quickly who can afford to raise the generally larger sum of money needed to pay for the course.

So to start… I personally trained on the integrated route- smashing me through from PPL to ATPL in less than 2 years. Consistent training, somewhat argued to be favourable from the airline recruitment side of things albeit expensive, intense and ultimately coming out of the programme with the same license as those who trained down the generally cheaper modular route. Would I change anything if I could? No, I feel safer with the integrated status on my shoulders despite the long years ahead of debt and the lack of hard evidence for the style of course being favourable by pilot recruitment people.

Modular or integrated, what’s your take?

I did the modular route through CTC so it wasn't broken up like traditional modular. But if I was to start from scratch now I would probably take the modular route. Why?

Well I have an aviation degree, so could have got a job in the industry making connections while saving and flying at the weekends. This would be a much cheaper way of doing it. Don't be fooled that integrated schools provide superior training, because this isnt't true. The majority of instructors have jus come out of training themselves and have minimal experience.

Also, looking back, would have prefered to have done all my training in the UK. Because to be honest, I wouldn't have a clue how to fly visually in the UK airspace now. I guess people have had this problem training at modular schools in USA. (However, my NZ experience was one of the best experiences in my life).

My advice. Go to university. Save money. Train modular.

Go to university and save money I hear you say? Yes there are student loans but these are paid off at a very small percentage once you do start earning over a certain threshold. But you come out with a degree that can lead to a good back-up career and if you train modular you can save up to £20-30k.

The choice is yours...

As a mere PPL holder I can only comment as an observer here but my only concern with modular is there seems to be no selection process like you get with the integrated courses (ok I didn't realise that CTC did modular). The number of student pilots or PPL's I have seen over the years that were "going to go all the way to the airlines" when you only had to look at them to know they weren't but were going to waste a lot of money trying and were often failing exams at PPL level has always reminded me of all the "actors" waiting tables in LA with no concept of reality. Of course, in the good times there were all the stories of builders, bus drivers and janitors training in their spare time and getting their dream job and for most, modular is the only way they can go for financial reasons but I know if I had a son (or daughter) wanting to be an airline pilot which way I would want him to go and if the 3 big schools wouldn't let him in he'd have to nip it in the bud sharpish

That's the quality of integrated schools. The selection process and how they drive you through the course, albeit to a lower standard these days.

If you are to go modular you really need to know it is what you want to do and that you have the aptitude. Spending thousands of pounds on something you know deep down is not for you is pointless.

On the other hand, people will lose confidence and all enthusiasm to fly from people with negative attitudes (eg. the majority of members on another aviation forum). Also, people may lose confidence after failing a PPL for example. Why continue to follow my dream of becoming an airline pilot when I can't pass a PPL? Well don't! I have a uncle who is a BA 747 captain who failed his PPL first time and now he is earning £100k+

PilotPaul, regarding the modular selection process, it is possible.

GAPAN hold an aptitude test:

Aptitude Tests - GAPAN

I would advise any potential professional pilot to go on one of these test days, in the grand scheme of things, £175 out of the many thousands of pounds it costs in training is well worth it.

It's not a 'selection' process as such but will give a good idea if the candidate has what it takes to complete the course of training aptitude wise.

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.

The only real true selection processes are in the military and the sponsorship/cadet schemes.

Originally Posted by Ads

Well I have an aviation degree, so could have got a job in the industry making connections while saving and flying at the weekends… My advice. Go to university. Save money. Train modular… come out with a degree that can lead to a good back-up career and if you train modular you can save up to £20-30k.

As much as this is a good plan I will of course put forward my opinion purely because I feel differently about it having not gone to university myself. I would have loved to have gone to university not only for the degree but for the life experience (/ binge drinking!) as well, however, for me like 90% of most pilots money is generally the biggest issue behind it all. My old flying instructor once said to me “every penny spent on university is a penny that could have been spent on flying hours, and ultimately when it boils down to it, hours and experience look better than qualifications”. For me this sealed the decision not to go to university and just finish A-levels instead, despite having my heart set on both university and flying! So I see your point but I disagree on the part about saving money. Yes you can get government loans with very small interest paid back over a very long time but ultimately £14-20k of university debt (possibly more possibly less) could have been £14’000 spent on flying. Ok overall its sensible that if you want to do both university and flying then modular pay as you go might be a better option than spending even more on an integrated course.

Alongside this when you say you can save up to 20-30k, well you’re not exactly saving anything because you’re still spending it i.e. money you won’t get back, your merely making a comparison. Steering back towards the modular integrated debate though…

Originally Posted by Ads

Don't be fooled that integrated schools provide superior training, because this isn't true.

I agree on this part, especially the bit about many instructors being relatively inexperienced themselves, however generally integrated courses I feel (again my opinion having not gone modular myself) integrated training will be better structured in terms of aided lectured learning, consistency in flying and better organised flying schedules to stick to as opposed to doing it all on your own.

Originally Posted by Ads

Also, looking back, would have preferred to have done all my training in the UK… I wouldn't have a clue how to fly visually in the UK airspace now.

Bit off topic but for the sake of potentially saving a tonne of money flying abroad (a whole new thread opportunity here!) a few hours with an instructor in the UK would certainly fix this, especially being an ATPL holder

Originally Posted by Mcgoo

I would advise any potential professional pilot to go on one of these test days… It's not a 'selection' process as such but will give a good idea if the candidate has what it takes to complete the course of training aptitude wise… 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.

Very interesting statement. I have heard of the GAPAN selection but I somehow feel its a little waste of money. As you say it’s a good indicator and it’s not biased in any way unlike a lot of the flying school’s selection processes, however, the fact of the matter is that if you can pass a flying school’s selection process you can become a pilot anyway, i.e. you have the aptitude. Flying I feel is more about determination (and a wedge full of cash) than perfect hand eye coordination and rapid math skills. I think if you’re going to splash out the money on an aptitude test then why not just go to the real thing, i.e. a flying school’s like CTC’s or Oxfords because as much as they want to take your cash from you their selection processes will be good enough to give you a decent idea. This said at CTC a lot of the guys who failed to get on the “sponsored” wings course still bought their way into the training and passed almost just as well as those that passed the selection!

Some interesting points raised, however steering back to the integrated versus modular topic… From an airline’s point of view, 2 people with same qualifications, same age, same experiences, however one has modular training background (PPL at one club, ATPL self study with another school, CPL at a cheaper school and Instrument rating at another flying club up the road) and another has integrated training (condensed rapid training, slightly less hours, consistently part of one flying school). Who are they more likely to pick? Now I know this is a stupid scenario and you might answer with “the one with the massive tits” but it all boils down to the ultimate goal- actually bagging a place flying with an airline. We all know the competition is ridiculously tough so perhaps something so controversial as training course structure might play a big part in even getting an interview? Why do airlines even bother asking “Integrated or Modular” on the application forms if it doesn’t matter?

…..

I do admit that if I went straight to CTC from school then I would have a job now and possibly nearing captaincy for certain airlines. However, I have no regrets about going to university. My degree included a plethora of different modules giving, not only essential aviation knowledge, but also an insight into many other areas. Employers and airlines will recognise such achievement, especially when selection is extremely competitive.

Originally Posted by Hotdog

Yes you can get government loans with very small interest paid back over a very long time but ultimately £14-20k of university debt (possibly more possibly less) could have been £14’000 spent on flying.

I wish I could have spent my student loan on flying but it's only allowed to be used for tuition costs
But like Hotdog said university may be for another thread.

Still ultimately if you go to university and go down the modular route you will be saving £20-30k (yes, the average university debt is currently £10k but still a saving.)

Originally Posted by Hotdog

consistency in flying and better organised flying schedules

Yes I agree, this is how it should be but realistically it is not.

Originally Posted by Hotdog

when it boils down to it, hours and experience look better than qualifications

You are more likely to achieve more hours and experience on a modular course. So I feel you may have contradicted yourself there. Especially when CTC's and FTE's integrated courses are now a bare minimum of 150 hours.

I think I am glad I went through CTC. Mainly because of their excellent airline placement record and they don't throw you out the other end with no help like other FTO's. But there's always that thought niggling inside that I could have done this much cheaper and the £30k I saved be used for Ryanair type-rating.

Originally Posted by Ads

So I feel you may have contradicted yourself there.

And again!

Originally Posted by Hotdog

Very interesting statement. I have heard of the GAPAN selection but I somehow feel its a little waste of money. As you say it’s a good indicator and it’s not biased in any way unlike a lot of the flying school’s selection processes, however, the fact of the matter is that if you can pass a flying school’s selection process you can become a pilot anyway,

Unbiased opinion or a selection process from a business that potentially will take £70k+ off you, choice is yours!

And I will add, too much is made of the Integrated/Modular debate, it's impossible to generalise for everybody, everyone has different finances, circumstances and requirements.

For example, do you shell out £70k + for an integrated course and hope for a job straight away?, do you get a degree first?, do you go modular and save enough to pay for a TR?

There are many options so pick whats right for YOU rather than anything else!

My opinion is if a recruiter had two guys with similar hours and experience and one had a degree, the one with the degree would progress for no other reason than they would be sifting through lots of C.V's and it looks better at a glance.

A modular guy may be able to do the FI course and having less loan repayments would be able to live on the salary whereas an integrated guy maybe couldn't manage the loan repayments and shell out for the FI course and live on the salary.

I think maybe it's the wrong time to be training integrated, 2006/2007 when it was booming, it was the way forward but now in the economy we live in, unless it's tied to a cadet scheme, modular is the way forward.

This profession (I use the term loosely as it has gone downhill) is all about timing and ideally having a crystal ball! lol

Good discussion, I am sure this debate will continue forever...

Here is just my £3.78 worth;

I followed the CTC Integrated path. Regrets? no. Different course given the current climate? yes. The reason the CTC Integrated route appealed to me was because of the fantastic opportunities and contacts they could give you on completion of training. Now the only real opportunity is with EasyJet through the "Flex-crew" contract - another debate to save for later. At the end of the day the markets today are totally different from 2 years ago when I started training and are different to what they will be in 2 years time.

The big selling points for an Integrated course, at the moment, have gone in my opinion. Add to that the heafty price tag I dont think I could justify it in my mind. If I was given the option I would go modular and not burden myself with the debt. Then there is the other factor that you need to keep that drive to ensure that you complete the modular course.

Lets just hope the recession we just saw is not the first bounce of a dead horse and that the recovery is beginning...

Firstly Mcgoo- you've misunderstood me with the aptitude bit! What I was trying to explain is this. I agree 100% that company aptitude tests are probably fixed and they probably let in one or two cabbages from time to time because its money in their pocket at the end of the day. However, I was trying to suggest that instead of doing the GAPAN aptitude test and spending £100+ and then potentially changing your mind or deciding to go to a major flying school (modular or integrated) and paying for their selection / aptitude process as well, that you might as well just go to a flying school selection process and only pay out once instead of twice. This will still give you a really decent idea of whether you are capable or not, because yes they want your money but at the same time they are unlikely to put you through if you have really bad aptitude, and lets face it- having whitnessed it for myself plenty of guys who failed the wings aptitude test are now pilots, many of which had first time CPL/IR pass rates. Does that clarify things? I was suggesting a method of saving money if people were interested in testing their aptitude prior to commencing any form of pilot training...

I have to agree with the multiple comments above about the state of the economy with regards to the decision of training course you take. I trained during the recession in a crash course and ultimately now have a 6 month wait before I start flying, so economy should have an impact on choice. And again as it has already been said- everyone has different circumstances and there is no right or wrong course to take because it all boils down to how much people can afford, what their day to day working pattern is, family commitments and so on. However the real interest in the never ending integrated / modular discussion lies in what the airlines think. I am yet to find some hard evidence on preferences, despite hearing rumours such as BA only taking on integrated pilots and some other airlines saying the same. On the other hand as highlighted this week, an airline (not mentioning which one) is hiring newly qualified pilots and are requesting minimum of 300 hours which may cause a problem for some integrated trainees based on the absolute minimum amount of 150 hours needed.

Oh and with regards to university debts and flying costs- again slight misinterpretation as I know that student loans can’t be used for flying (!), but what I was ultimately saying is that the debt you’re in from university is physically a debt, i.e. you are going to have to pay 10 grand back, whether it takes 2 years or 20 years. Therefore if you could have got a loan from a high street bank of that value then it could have been used for flying hours. I wasn’t talking about the source of the money but more the point of actually having that debt similarly to having flying debts but seeing that it hasn’t been spent on flying. I like the idea that a degree helps make your CV stand out a bit more but I could always argue that when the recruiter is looking through the pile their eyes are probably more drawn to the numbers on it and the total flying hours, oh and like someone said it’s a new topic in itself but what’s the point in getting a sociology degree for example if you’re flying a plane…

Originally Posted by Ads

Yes I agree, this is how it should be but realistically it is not.

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, so I totally disagree with you when you say they are not. If you thought that the course you've been on was disorganised and inconsistent for an integrated company and they are said to be one of the best then I dred to think what the rest are like and just how more consistent and organised you would have made it if you went on a modular route on your own =P