Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

This forum has been developed to discuss flight instruction/University and College programs.

Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain

flightsimmer
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:59 pm

Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by flightsimmer »

Hey all, so I've already been accepted to Seneca College's Bachelor of Aviation Technology program.

Unfortunately... I'm having second thoughts about going to it now. I very recently realized that a degree in Aviation is not exactly the best degree to spend four years on, especially if it has no 'fallback' plan. Cost for the degree doesn't seem to be an issue as it has nearly the same cost as any other degree, but my concern is its usefulness. After a bit of research online I learned that many people are not recommending in pursuing a degree in aviation, due to it having no use in any other fields.

I'm wondering if I should instead withdraw from the program and upgrade my grades (I only did well enough to meet conditional acceptance to the program, something I regret) and apply for another program at another institution while attending a local flight school to get started on my PPL.

Or should I just get on with my program?

If I do choose to pull out, with the upgraded marks and hopefully some extra volunteer/work experience I'll have a better chance of getting into Royal Military College for pilot, then take it from there. Due to the difficulty getting in for pilot though, I'll also apply for a general science program in another university as backup and will take flying lessons during my free time.

The only flaw I see in this is wasting a year and the costs of paying for flight licenses + university tuition on top of that. I'm not exactly sure how I'm going to cover that.

Any opinions? Thanks :D
---------- ADS -----------
 
NBGeo
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:15 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by NBGeo »

If you're going to go for a degree other than aviation, I wouldn't recommend one in general science unless you plan on figuring out a major (that's useful) in your first year since a general science degree really wont help you any more as a backup.
---------- ADS -----------
 
love2fly14
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 10:39 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by love2fly14 »

About 90% of the people I know that work on aviation, besides Mechanics do not have a degree. Now that being said, I'm not part of any HR company to know if they favor aviation degrees over experience.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Krimson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Krimson »

If I was you I would stick with the program. If you can't cover tuition + flying on the side, then how will it work? Seneca is partially subsidized, so you'll receive a lot more for your money than a flight school. If you want to get in aviation, I don't get the need for a backup degree like some people say. If you're going to spend 10 years in aviation then think you can just fall back on your 10 year old business degree and compete in the field, you would be kidding yourself. You would have to go back to school and re-learn everything plus what has changed in the last few years, then compete with kids in their 20s fresh out of school.

If you're going to do something, do it right. Go get an aviation degree, you'll learn a lot that will prepare you for your future in your field. Just make sure aviation is for you. It might look nice from the outside, but decide early if it's something you can do for the rest of your life, and if not, cut your losses early and then pursue your science degree and prepare for a different career.
---------- ADS -----------
 
B208
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 700
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 11:00 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by B208 »

I'd pull the pin on Seneca. An aviation degree is really quite useless and garners no respect as an academic accomplishment; nor does it make you a better pilot. If you want a degree as a back up plan go to a real school and do a real program. I’d suggest engineering as a first choice, (the subject matter taught in this program will give you a perfect base for understanding aircraft systems, weather and aerodynamics). The second choice would be business or accounting, (these let you move into management). Third choice would be a science degree, (academic respect and gives you an excellent handle on the technical aspects of flight). Last choice would be an arts/kinesiology degree, (gives you paper, but nothing else).
Once you’ve got the academic path nailed down, you can choose the flight training path. You could do it concurrently with university. The only limiting factor here would be money. The work load with a PPL, CPL is not all that great from an academic standpoint and the act of flying an aircraft is a nice break from book work. You could go to an aviation college after university. Others have done that and it works well. You could go to work after university and use the money from your job to pay for your flight training; This is what I recommend. It keeps the debt levels from getting out of control and establishes you in a second career to fall back on when the lay offs happen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5954
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

B208 wrote: You could go to work after university and use the money from your job to pay for your flight training; This is what I recommend. It keeps the debt levels from getting out of control and establishes you in a second career to fall back on when the lay offs happen.
That is what I did. I never took a loan and was debt free when I started my first flying job. Having another career also gave me options when things got slow in aviation, or in the case of one job, allowed me to leave the abusive and dangerous work environment in the crap Navajo operator I was working for.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gene Hasenfus
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:55 am

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Gene Hasenfus »

Get your licences at a flight school and get
flying as soon as you can.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gene says - "Always wear your 'chute!"
NotDirty!
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:04 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by NotDirty! »

Gene Hasenfus wrote:Get your licences at a flight school and get
flying as soon as you can.
+1

... And don't go to one of those crappy engineering schools like Queen's! They don't teach you anything useful!!!
---------- ADS -----------
 
fish4life
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by fish4life »

Do any of the trades interest you? Go to school for a year then start working to get your journeyman ticket and you will be laughing. You can do your licenses on the side and then when you get a job you can be a plumber, electrician etc on the side to help support those first few years of crappy pay.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Krimson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Krimson »

Gene Hasenfus wrote:Get your licences at a flight school and get
flying as soon as you can.
This is a must. The earlier you start flying the better it will be for your career. I know so many people who have started later in life and feel like they missed out because they're behind their friends, other people their age, and sometimes feel too mature for their positions. You don't want to be 30 working on a ramp in middle of nowhere when you're trying to start a family.
An aviation degree is really quite useless and garners no respect as an academic accomplishment; nor does it make you a better pilot. If you want a degree as a back up plan go to a real school and do a real program.
An aviation degree is not really useless. First off, you'll get some extra points on your application because of it. Second, more opportunities exist through cadet programs which are offered at a few colleges, no PPL flight schools. Third, you get access to better professors. People who have been teaching for a long time and you can pull from their wisdom for ground school, not just a low time pilot looking to get hours then move on. Fourth, there is academic accomplishment. You will learn things that you won't in a mom and pop shop. What do you think you're going to do for 4 years? Sit with your thumb up your bum? Look at the pass rates of students per year, they must be doing something hard for students to keep dropping/failing out.

Most of the things you learn will help you later in your career, not at your first job, but I think it will make you a better pilot to have more knowledge about certain things in aviation than someone struggling with a FMS the first time they see it.

Why get a back up degree if becoming a pilot is what you're going to do? It's a waste of time and money which will be useless and outdated 10 years down the road when you hope to use it. Get flying as soon as possible and if you discover it's not for you, then start looking at other careers. Otherwise, do the shitwork when you're young and able to, then progress into your career much faster than people who only stuck a toe in with their useless business degree.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5954
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Krimson wrote:
Most of the things you learn will help you later in your career, not at your first job, but I think it will make you a better pilot to have more knowledge about certain things in aviation than someone struggling with a FMS the first time they see it.

.


I would rather hire someone who has never used an FMS than one who has never landed with more than a 5 kt crosswind.......

If you do go the college route I highly advise that you leave the "I am so awesome because I went to (insert college name here) ". I have seen plenty of college grads who can't walk the talk.........
---------- ADS -----------
 
davecessna
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:52 am

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by davecessna »

NotDirty! wrote:
Gene Hasenfus wrote:Get your licences at a flight school and get
flying as soon as you can.
+1

... And don't go to one of those crappy engineering schools like Queen's! They don't teach you anything useful!!!

Which Canadian school would you recommend for engineering? I'm asking out of curiosity, I went to Concordia in Montreal.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Krimson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Krimson »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:
Krimson wrote:
Most of the things you learn will help you later in your career, not at your first job, but I think it will make you a better pilot to have more knowledge about certain things in aviation than someone struggling with a FMS the first time they see it.

.


I would rather hire someone who has never used an FMS than one who has never landed with more than a 5 kt crosswind.......

If you do go the college route I highly advise that you leave the "I am so awesome because I went to (insert college name here) ". I have seen plenty of college grads who can't walk the talk.........
I would too, but what about hiring someone who can commit to a 4 year program, has turbine sim experience and can land over 20knots from the side? For a BE20 FO position vs someone who's just been taught to CPL standards by a 500 hour pilot?

I personally hate these vs scenarios because nothing is ever black and white like this, and anyone can outperform anyone else. I also don't think there is any college or FTU out there which doesn't let students land with a crosswind over 5 knots. That's just ridiculous to suggest.
---------- ADS -----------
 
falcon50fo
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2013 7:58 am

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by falcon50fo »

I know companies that won't hire graduates with an aviation diploma.

Why???

The diploma holders are made to believe they are special by their instructors who have the bare min hours themselves and neither student nor instructor feel they have to do grunt work to earn their keep. :prayer:

Except from interview:
Recent graduate, "I'm not working weekends or evenings. Also, if you make me work more than 12 hours in a day, my CFI says I have to turn you into Transport. Oh, and I can only fly with a glass cockpit."

As I was recently told my a 30,000hr major airline pilot, "Tell the flight schools to stick to flight training and leave the CRM, FMS, and sim to the big guys. The kids don't need to know that stuff until they know how to really fly." If you can't fly with more than a 5 knot crosswind, a cloud in the sky or recover from a full stall (instructors at the local aviation program are too scared to do one) than rethink the aviation diploma path and get real career and do the flying on the side.
---------- ADS -----------
 
zulutime
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by zulutime »

falcon50fo wrote:I know companies that won't hire graduates with an aviation diploma.

Why???

The diploma holders are made to believe they are special by their instructors who have the bare min hours themselves and neither student nor instructor feel they have to do grunt work to earn their keep. :prayer:

Except from interview:
Recent graduate, "I'm not working weekends or evenings. Also, if you make me work more than 12 hours in a day, my CFI says I have to turn you into Transport. Oh, and I can only fly with a glass cockpit."

As I was recently told my a 30,000hr major airline pilot, "Tell the flight schools to stick to flight training and leave the CRM, FMS, and sim to the big guys. The kids don't need to know that stuff until they know how to really fly." If you can't fly with more than a 5 knot crosswind, a cloud in the sky or recover from a full stall (instructors at the local aviation program are too scared to do one) than rethink the aviation diploma path and get real career and do the flying on the side.
Care to share the names of those companies who don't recognize an aviation degree? I know many graduates from different aviation programs and none of them have the attitude you speak of. I would suggest that such an attitude is not created by any college atmosphere or instructor but is inherent in the individual's personality prior to even going to college. Like your 30,000 hr airline pilot, there are many opinions out there. My experieince has been that the students who graduate from these colleges are well trained. Doesn't mean they know it all. Doesn't mean they are better than anyone else. Simply well trained for the number of hours they have in their log book. I don't think an aviation college is a bad place to start your aviation career. You seem to suggest it is. That's too bad since I'm sure we can all agree there is not only one "right" path in this industry.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5954
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Krimson wrote:
. I also don't think there is any college or FTU out there which doesn't let students land with a crosswind over 5 knots. That's just ridiculous to suggest.
Seneca college will not dispatch a student solo if the crosswind is more than 5 kts.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Cat Driver »

Seneca is the only training facility that I ever heard of that trains students to leave the gear down in a twin engine airplane doing circuits.

That has has to be the most stupid thing I ever heard of in flight training.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Krimson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Krimson »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:
Krimson wrote:
. I also don't think there is any college or FTU out there which doesn't let students land with a crosswind over 5 knots. That's just ridiculous to suggest.
Seneca college will not dispatch a student solo if the crosswind is more than 5 kts.
I know for a fact that is not true.
Seneca is the only training facility that I ever heard of that trains students to leave the gear down in a twin engine airplane doing circuits.
I believe the reasoning is a cooling issue with the motor running every 3 minutes for an hour.
I know companies that won't hire graduates with an aviation diploma.
That is possibly one of the stupidest things I have heard. Probably a place that likes to abuse their staff. I can't imagine anyone who would want to actively reduce the number of potential candidates because they went through additional classes to better themselves. If the owner can't judge each person based on their personality instead of "ya'll got one of 'em fancy certificates?", then I think it's safe to say no one is missing out.

I've worked for a company who hires only graduates of aviation degree programs. However, he has also hired people without degrees...based on the person!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5954
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Cat Driver wrote:Seneca is the only training facility that I ever heard of that trains students to leave the gear down in a twin engine airplane doing circuits.

That has has to be the most stupid thing I ever heard of in flight training.
+1
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Cat Driver »

I believe the reasoning is a cooling issue with the motor running every 3 minutes for an hour.
If an airplane has a landing gear motor time restriction for cooling then change your circuit times and touch and go frequency.

Not retracting the gear in a Beech Baron is just plain stupid and is teaching an unorthodox proceedure.

I wouldn't hire anyone that was taught an unorthodox proceedure like that.

Then that is only my personal opinion.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
fish4life
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by fish4life »

That's a good habit to get into if you want gear up landings later on in your career, no wonder some companies won't hire them.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Krimson
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Krimson »

fish4life wrote:That's a good habit to get into if you want gear up landings later on in your career, no wonder some companies won't hire them.
Must be the same as flying a 172 eh? Leave the gear down for every circuit...must cause gear up landings later on in everybody's career who has ever flown a fixed gear. :roll:



Lot's of people claiming they wouldn't hire people on some arbitrary point. How about judging every candidate on their personal qualifications? But that must sound too reasonable... With a degree or not, if a place wouldn't hire me based on where I got my licence, I would not want to work there anyway. I'll leave that position for someone who doesn't mind putting up with the owner's fragile mind and the associated bs that would come with that personality.
---------- ADS -----------
 
B208
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 700
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 11:00 pm

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by B208 »

An aviation degree is not really useless. First off, you'll get some extra points on your application because of it. Second, more opportunities exist through cadet programs which are offered at a few colleges, no PPL flight schools.
I will cede these points to you....
Third, you get access to better professors. People who have been teaching for a long time and you can pull from their wisdom for ground school, not just a low time pilot looking to get hours then move on.
......this point I will not. The vast majority of instructors at the Ontario schools, (Confed in TBay being the one exception), never got to far from the training system. A few went out and drove King Airs for a few years, but then came back to flight training. Confederation was the one notable exception, they had a lot of bush guys on staff; mind you, the Confed program is still a two year college diploma, vice a four year degree. I will take this chance to amplify my position. I think a two year college diploma is an appropriate path for flight training. Making it a four year degree is not; it simply does not present enough intellectual challenge to earn a degree.

Fourth, there is academic accomplishment. You will learn things that you won't in a mom and pop shop. What do you think you're going to do for 4 years? Sit with your thumb up your bum? Look at the pass rates of students per year, they must be doing something hard for students to keep dropping/failing out.
I won't give you this point either. Everything is relative. Compared to a traditional academic program, an aviation degree is not difficult. The mental gymnastics required to complete a B.Eng or B.Sc. are much uglier than anything required to produce a CPL. I started first year with 300 other people in my program. Four years latter thirty of us got our degree, and that was without any artificial funnelling via quotas. Four years doing physics and economics 101 does not a scholar make.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gene Hasenfus
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 9:55 am

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by Gene Hasenfus »

Getting a four year degree to fly a highly automated
aircraft straight and level is bizarre. It would make
more sense to get a degree in welding, or operating
a crane, or perhaps a bulldozer.

It's important to understand the difference between
a line pilot (e.g. Asiana 214, AF447, Colgan 3407) that
really doesn't have to be even competent in the basic
operation of an aircraft, and an experimental test pilot,
who would have graduated from ETPS, USNTPS, USAF
TPS etc.
At 02:10:05 UTC the autopilot disengaged and the airplane transitioned from normal law to alternate law 2. The engines' auto-thrust systems disengaged three seconds later. Without the auto-pilot, the aircraft started to roll to the right due to turbulence, and the pilot reacted by deflecting his side-stick to the left. One consequence of the change to alternate law was an increase in the aircraft's sensitivity to roll, and the pilot's input over-corrected for the initial upset. During the next thirty seconds, the aircraft rolled alternately left and right as the pilot adjusted to the altered handling characteristics of his aircraft. At the same time he made an abrupt nose-up input on the side-stick, an action that was unnecessary and excessive under the circumstances. The aircraft's stall warning sounded briefly twice due to the angle of attack tolerance being exceeded, and the aircraft's recorded airspeed dropped sharply from 274 knots to 52 knots. The aircraft's angle of attack increased, and the aircraft started to climb. By the time the pilot had control of the aircraft's roll, it was climbing at nearly 7,000 ft/min (for comparison, typical normal rate of climb for modern airliners is only 2,000–3,000 ft/min at sea level, and much smaller at high altitude).

At 02:11:10 UTC, the aircraft had climbed to its maximum altitude of around 38,000 feet. There, its angle of attack was 16 degrees, and the engine thrust levers were in the fully forward Takeoff/Go-around detent(TOGA), and at 02:11:15 UTC the pitch attitude was slightly over 16 degrees and falling, but the angle of attack rapidly increased towards 30 degrees. A second consequence of the reconfiguration into alternate law was that "stall protection" no longer operated. Whereas in normal law, the airplane's flight management computers would have acted to prevent such a high angle of attack, in alternate law this did not happen. (Indeed, the switch into alternate law occurred precisely because the computers, denied reliable speed data, were no longer able to provide such protection – nor many of the other functions expected of normal law). The wings lost lift and the aircraft stalled.

At 02:11:40 UTC, the captain re-entered the cockpit. The angle of attack had then reached 40 degrees, and the aircraft had descended to 35,000 feet with the engines running at almost 100% N1 (the rotational speed of the front intake fan, which delivers most of a turbofan engine's thrust). The stall warnings stopped, as all airspeed indications were now considered invalid by the aircraft's computer due to the high angle of attack. In other words, the aircraft was oriented nose-up but descending steeply. Roughly 20 seconds later, at 02:12 UTC, the pilot decreased the aircraft's pitch slightly, air speed indications became valid and the stall warning sounded again and sounded intermittently for the remaining duration of the flight, but stopped when the pilot increased the aircraft's nose-up pitch. From there until the end of the flight, the angle of attack never dropped below 35 degrees. From the time the aircraft stalled until it impacted with the ocean, the engines were primarily developing either 100% N1 or TOGA thrust, though they were briefly spooled down to about 50% N1 on two occasions. The engines always responded to commands and were developing in excess of 100% N1 when the flight ended.

The flight data recordings stopped at 02:14:28 UTC, or 3 hours 45 minutes after takeoff. At that point, the aircraft's ground speed was 107 knots, and it was descending at 10,912 feet per minute (108 knots of vertical speed). Its pitch was 16.2 degrees (nose up), with a roll angle of 5.3 degrees left. During its descent, the aircraft had turned more than 180 degrees to the right to a compass heading of 270 degrees. The aircraft remained stalled during its entire 3 minute 30 second descent from 38,000 feet before it hit the ocean surface at a speed of 152 knots (280 km/h), comprising vertical and horizontal components of 108 and 107 knots respectively. The aircraft broke up on impact; everyone on board died
You can learn a hell of a lot more about flying
an airplane from reading that, than going to
university for four years.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Gene says - "Always wear your 'chute!"
JBI
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1238
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:21 am
Location: YYC / LGA

Re: Should I withdraw from Seneca's Aviation degree program?

Post by JBI »

Flightsimmer,

As you can tell from the above responses, every person is different and has a different opinion on whether the college route / aviation degree is a good way to go.

The most important question is what are your career goals?

Regardless of the opinions on whether AvCanadians think you'll get good training or not, a degree or diploma from a college such as Seneca (also Sault, Confed, UWO etc.) are highly respected at the airline level. I understand that Seneca has a direct entry program with Jazz. Again, the pros and cons of this program have been debated endlessly on this board (caveat: know your audience), but if you want to fly in an airline environment, that's a pretty darn quick way to get you there.

Note though, if you do not get in any direct entry programs, doing a 4 year degree does not mean you'll get to the airlines any quicker. The operators who run small airlines do not care if you have a piece of paper that says you completed 4 years of courses - they want to know if you can load the aircraft safely, get the pax and cargo to the destination and make them money.

That being said, having a back-up plan is a very good idea. Due to a number of issues, I left flying for a while and had to go back to school. I was lucky in that I was still in my early/mid 20s, so could take on some student debt and go back to school. Plus I really enjoyed school. But that would have been pretty hard to do if I had to make the change 10 -15 years later with a family and a mortgage.

I don't think there's a right answer - just a right answer for you.

In addition to determining the type of flying you want to do, ask yourself:
  • Do you like school? If you don't like courses/exams/ learning new ideas - a degree will be pretty challenging.

    Does it matter to you whether you live in a city or the country/small town?

    How are your finances? The Ontario schools that are subsidized are also available for student loans.

    What sort of jobs would you want to do as a back-up plan? This varies by person - Trades, business, teaching or running your own business are all options that have very different paths.
No matter what route you choose, I do agree with many of the posters - make sure you don't bring a 'holier than thou' attitude with you out of school. That will pretty much ruin your chances of moving up in the industry.

Cheers,
James
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Flight Training”