Seneca college (Bachelor of Applied Technology)

fingersmac · Post by **fingersmac** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:21 pm

DavidClark wrote:in my opinion i think Seneca is the best when it comes to preparing students for the commercial aspect of aviation

I'm starting to think this guy is a troll.

DavidClark · Post by **DavidClark** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:24 pm

--------

hazatude · Post by **hazatude** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:33 pm

you're

DavidClark · Post by **DavidClark** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:41 pm

--------------

mellow_pilot · Post by **mellow_pilot** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:57 pm

DavidClark wrote: the float rouse and cut of the fuel supply

I see english is not one part of the program at Seneca...

av8tor_assrope · Post by **av8tor_assrope** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:02 pm

dc....take it down a notch. you should not be pissing anyone off until at least your 50th post.

p.s. the last seneca student i spoke to, tried to hit me with his purse.

cheers

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:11 pm

" the 150's have a float carburator. So by pushing on the controls abruptly the float rouse and cut of the fuel supply for a split second (or at least minimized flow "

Help me better understand this DC, first how much fuel is there in in the float bowl?

You mean to tell me the engine lost power because you held negative G long enough to cut off the fuel flow in the carb?

This happened leveling off???

Sounds like you need some proper flight training.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:27 am

Cat, you mean that's never happened to you? WTF? Happens to me every time I level off! Now I know why!
Do Seneca grads still show up for interviews wearing those gay leather jackets? Of course, I feel that everybody who gets an education at the expense of the tax payer (you and me) is a raving fag! Or, maybe just pond scum.
Oh, and keep the marks up...wouldn't want one of your classmates to take your place. There'll be enough back stabbing later....

mcrit · Post by **mcrit** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:17 am

Well guys.... we all have to admit that Seneca students excel at cross wind landings.... or is that accell...erate right of the side of the runway?

Have they raised the the solo x-wind limits back above 5kts since your guys made a big puddle of chaff out of those parked a/c?

mellow_pilot · Post by **mellow_pilot** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:21 am

Oh see, now you're all just being mean...

DavidClark · Post by **DavidClark** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:22 pm

----------

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:29 pm

"accidents happen"...yup, you'll last about a week with that attitude. You could use some dual.

DavidClark · Post by **DavidClark** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:30 pm

---------------

DavidClark · Post by **DavidClark** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:35 pm

-----------

TopperHarley · Post by **TopperHarley** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:53 pm

Adam,

You might also want to look into UWO's aviation program. It's not subsidized, but UWO has a good reputation outside of aviation. Several students who left flying are using their degrees working in the business field in better paying jobs.

It's where I went and I loved it.

tdawe · Post by **tdawe** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:04 am

I can't resist wieghing in on the old alma mater. I went through Seneca, albeit before the transition to both the applied degree and the ludicris stance on cross wind limitations.

On the subject of backstabbing, I consider everyone of the 32 people I graduated with to be friends, in my entire time there, including the selection year, I never saw any "backstabbing" or deceitful tactics to harm another students chances. If you ever needed a tutor you could easily find one in your own class or in the years above you. By the end of the selection year everyone in our class had spent so much time together you wanted to see everyone make it through. There may verywell have been douchebags who pulled off some bullsh** to get ahead in previous years or years after mine, there may even have been some in my selection year, but backstabbing was not comon practise. Like I said, I never heard a single specific case of it.

On the subject of having the "best airplanes of any flight school" DavidClark, I can assure you, the subject of being the best is, like the beauty of someone at 2am when the lights come on, entirely in the eye of the beholder. Yes, the brand new (circa 2002) C172S is very nice, (personally I thought the leather smelled aweful in the Toronto summers) and all the aircraft being equipped with highend GPS, moving map, EFIS etc... makes learning all of the different equipment available to you later in life possible while your still a student. This no doubt has advantages, providing exposure so that you dont look totally lost when you first climb into something powered by more then steam dials. Similarly, I'll be the first to agree that racking up cross country time at 170kts beats the 110 of most schools trainers any day. Destinations like Sudbury, North Bay, Buffalo and even Fredricton NB are all possibly in less then a days travel, and more interesting then YKZ-YPQ return.

There are however, downsides to training on this equipment. Yeah the Baron forces you to jam in the pedal when the engine gets pulled at 50ft, (since it does have roughly twice the Hp of a seminole) but it will climb on one engine, all day long. Sadly you may not get that same performance out of a 'Ho coming out of Norther Alberta later on in life, and too many people have died in a similar situation.

Likewise the CRJ sim is no doubt impressive (although I have never seen it) and will surely put students ahead of the curve when the time comes to go regional, but it wont do you a lick of good till then, and thats still AT LEAST 5+ yrs away for the average grad. Until then you have to survive the bush, making that first no-go call, and making that first "I shouldn't have gone" call.

It's understandable that DC, or anyone else going to Seneca, or any school for that matter, wants to believe that their school is the best, because they want to believe that they are recieving the best training that is out there. No one wants to discover down the road that they were either A) ripped off by a puppy mill or B) taught by someone who wasnt ready/skilled/knowledgeable enough to teach. I stand by the education I recieved at Seneca. But I would be a fool to believe that Seneca was the best aviation school in Canada. No school is the best. No instructor is the best. They can't be. Anyone who tells you they know everything there is to know about flying should be ignored, and avoided. No matter where you go, what is paramount is that you never stop learning.

To get back on track, $40Gs is more then program used to cost, (about twice by my memory) but still cheaper then a degree and a licence seperatly. A strong argument is made for getting a degree outside of aviation can be made, and is valid. I don't know if AC ranks degrees, but a nightschool business degree achieved via correspondance while living in Grande Cache will take the average person farther then a degree from Seneca should you discover at age 45 that a bum ticker is keeping you from getting another medical. Then again the starting hourly for Timmy Hos in Grande Cache is more then my hourly right now, but I digress.

Damn thats a lot of writting for me, my fingers are tired.

tDawe

PS: The crosswind limit thing came after I left, and I'll be the first to agree that it's a sad attempt to grasp at safety while doing nothing to acctually manage risk.

LostinRotation · Post by **LostinRotation** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:44 am

DavidClark wrote: and just because there may or may not be airlines looking to hire seneca,saulte and other graduates right after school does not mean everyone should go around bashing us.

No worries there. Even if you won the websters, I think your personality and Ego would stop you at the door.

DavidClark wrote: There are many different routes to get into the airline and just because somebodies route takes them through 10 years of hell doesn't mean everyone else has to go through that route

I'm hitting the airlines...didn't take me 10 years, nor were they hell. I wouldn't trade one shred of my good times and experience for a quick ride to an airline. I met some really great people, made some good money and built up some priceless flight time. If you think your a really good, safe pilot at 250 hrs, your in for a rude awakening. Try flying a Ho in icing with a 40 kt wind, blowing snow and an NDB that looks like Davinci built it. You were talking about " the best aircraft "....Glass cockpit, EFIS, moving map GPS...if you think thats realistic and condusive to the first job you'll have ? You're still going to be the one looking like a deer caught in headlights when you look at the avionics in your 1976 A/C. No ones jealous of you Kid....but if you did go direct to the airlines, you probably missed the best flying of your life. I know I would have.

-=0=LiR=0=-

CommSpaz · Post by **CommSpaz** » Sat Feb 17, 2007 9:49 pm

(Well...just for old times sake ...'Western U, Western U couldn't get into Waterloo!')

HA HA! Here's another:
"Go hard or go to Western!"

Ahhh I miss UW!

ykzrampie · Post by **ykzrampie** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:12 pm

mcrit wrote:Well guys.... we all have to admit that Seneca students excel at cross wind landings.... or is that accell...erate right of the side of the runway?
Have they raised the the solo x-wind limits back above 5kts since your guys made a big puddle of chaff out of those parked a/c?

Hey mcrit, I'm sure you've never made a mistake. I'll tell you what. You've been lucky enough not to find yourself parked in a row of planes because I assure you, when you were training, you had the same limited capabilities as the unfortunate STUDENT pilots on that blustery day. I was there, and those are my friends you are poking fun at. Would you talk this way if they had been hurt?

The fact that they hit other planes has everything to do with the layout at YKZ. It's a tight place if something goes wrong. You don't have to stray too far off the runway to end up in a row of parked million $ planes. How many times do pilots leave the runway only to end up harmlessly, or at least less publicly, in the grass? Happens all the time especially in training. These were newly minted PPL pilots with barely 50 hours under their belts. That crosswind/windshear that day would have been a challenge for even the most seasoned pilot.

What Seneca did as a result was lower the crosswind limits. This I never agreed with. I doesn't fix the problem. It just assures that grads end up piling into planes on someone else's dime. I still think (and they may be doing this now) that there should be a couple hours devoted to crosswinds. I mean real crosswinds. Use the wrong runway crosswinds. Now that would be better training.

Anyways, end of my rant for the night. I just wanted to expose the other side of the coin and to remind some to think before they speak.

ykzrampie · Post by **ykzrampie** » Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:13 pm

CommSpaz wrote:
(Well...just for old times sake ...'Western U, Western U couldn't get into Waterloo!')
HA HA! Here's another:
"Go hard or go to Western!"

Ahhh I miss UW!

Waterloo chics shave their backs...

mcrit · Post by **mcrit** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:53 pm

The fact that they hit other planes has everything to do with the layout at YKZ

I don't suppose that the fact that the LICENSED pilots went off the runway would be any sort of a contributing factor?
We've all made mistakes, (even me), and we all get made fun of for it, thats just part of aviation, get used to it.

Pugster · Post by **Pugster** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:29 pm

ykzrampie wrote: The fact that they hit other planes has everything to do with the layout at YKZ. It's a tight place if something goes wrong. You don't have to stray too far off the runway to end up in a row of parked million $ planes. How many times do pilots leave the runway only to end up harmlessly, or at least less publicly, in the grass? Happens all the time especially in training. These were newly minted PPL pilots with barely 50 hours under their belts. That crosswind/windshear that day would have been a challenge for even the most seasoned pilot.

Oh boy. I've gotta jump in on this one.

First off, it was not the layout of the airport that caused this accident, it was leaving the runway that did. It may have contributed to the resulting damage, true, but suggesting that it was a cause is like suggesting that a telephone pole causes a drunk to crash into it. Semantics - but important ones when assessing risk.

I also assure you that cruising into the rhubarb does not happen as frequently as you suggest - I never had it occur during my 3 years instructing, nor in the years since (not just me but also any of my co-workers, or friends). What I do agree with you on is that reducing the allowed crosswind is not the solution. These students should have been taught to start processing options - not just attempting to land in conditions that obviously exceeded their abilities. Does nobody teach to look for other possible airports when conditions pop up like this? It's pretty rare you can't find one with more favorable winds - especially if there was windshear being reported! The real failure here was in the lack of the pilots to accurately assess the risk of the situation they were getting themselves into - and not looking for safer options.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:46 pm

" What I do agree with you on is that reducing the allowed crosswind is not the solution. "

Incredible, simply incredible.

When a school has an accident because someone can't land in a X/ wind the answer is lower the X/ wind they can fly in.

Yup, that's the answer.

When they are interviewing for the next CFI or who ever makes these mindboggling decisions do they hire only those who can't figure out how to correct for a x/wind?

happily.retired · Post by **happily.retired** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:57 pm

Everyone I spoke to who had attended the school said that they were really good at destroying their students' love of flight. They'll make you a very efficient pilot but a bit of a robot and that's if you make it through. If you don't you'll very likey find yourself bitter, disheartened and questioning your abilities as a pilot.

Also the money you save going there might just cost you alot of money on later ratings. I've never had a harder time teaching anyone than their students, both the grads and the washouts. They don't learn decision making or probem solving or how to deal with less than perfect situations.

Take note of how many people on this site have issues with each school. They are the same people you will be handing your resume to in a few years and most of us look at resumes from schools X, Y and Z and say thanks but no thanks. What school name do you want at the top of you resume?

Pugster · Post by **Pugster** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 5:19 pm

Cat Driver wrote: When they are interviewing for the next CFI or who ever makes these mindboggling decisions do they hire only those who can't figure out how to correct for a x/wind?

Well, I assume they only hire their grads. ZING!