AOPA endorsed PFT...

pavelump

pavelump

Well-Known Member
How nice. This is from the May 2004 issue of AOPA Flight Training Magazine, which by the way is the "special learn to fly" issue. Thanks AOPA.

________________________________
Flight school promotes 'real-world' multi program

St. Louis-based flight school Langa Air, Inc. has partnered with two commercial air charter/cargo operators to offer the First Officer Fast-Track program. The school says the program is structured to allow participants to build "real-world, high-quality multiengine experience." After completing an accelerated introductory training program, first officer candidates can buld flight time in the aircraft of partners Central Air Southwest or Ameriflight. Participants can purchase time at $20 to $30 per hour, can expect to build 60 to 100 hours per month, and will be entitled to preferential hiring by the commercial operators once they archive (sic) minimum flight levels and positions become available, according to the flight school. For more information, see the school's Web site.

__________________________

mad.gif

Dave
 
I don't see how they've endorsed anything with the text of that blurb. All they do is explain the program and direct people to the website. Yeah, it is a disgusting penny-ante industry-killing operator. I wish AOPA wouldn't print it, but I don't think you can say they're "endorsing" it just because they put it in their magazine. My guess would be that this place paid for the listing (it is essentially an advertisement after all).
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how they've endorsed anything with the text of that blurb. All they do is explain the program and direct people to the website. Yeah, it is a disgusting penny-ante industry-killing operator. I wish AOPA wouldn't print it, but I don't think you can say they're "endorsing" it just because they put it in their magazine. My guess would be that this place paid for the listing (it is essentially an advertisement after all).

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. That's just their little industry news section (which I don't even usually read because they tend to be little more than clean reprints of company press releases). It may or may not be paid for, but it's hardly an endorsement. We can dislike the program without shooting the messenger.

And John, aren't we all about the $$$?? I know I am.

MF
 
Was that in the latest issue?

I'll have a look-see and if they indeed are promoting PFT, I'll cnx my subscription. I just have to find it!
 
Yes, it's in May 2004. Maybe "endorsing" is the wrong word, but to the student pilot who is unaware of this sort of "training" it sure looks like AOPA is saying, "Hey look at this cool new thing" and calling it news. And yes, there just happens to be an ad for the school in the back of the magazine.

Dave
 
I'm even more disappointed to see it happening so close to home. Langa is in the St. Louis area, and while I have never flown there as it is about an hour from where I live, I used to get mail from them all the time. They have a flying club type arrangement where you could rent their fleet C172R's for around 59/hr wet. They always seemed like a good flight school. Its sad to see them do this.
 
I learned to fly at Langa! I thought it was a great place but I'm very dissapointed to hear this.
frown.gif


And as such I'm going to write a letter to 'em. I still know (the dude signed me off for my private) the now head flight shcool manager and let him know how dissapointed I am in their decision to screw-over young pilots.

Read this crap:
[ QUOTE ]

The First Officer
Fast-Track Program
Langa Air has partnered with commercial air charter/cargo operators and has
structured a program designed to build real-world, high-quality multi-engine
experience.
The program, “The First Officer Fast-Track”, is an opportunity to drastically reduce
the normal amount of time it takes to become employable in
corporate or commercial flight.
After successfully completing an accelerated introductory training regimen, the
First Officer Candidate will be put on-line as a First Officer and will begin building
their flight time. Langa Air has established several choices of multi-engine aircraft,
including turbine powered.
Considering the type of aircraft and amount of experience to be gained, the
required investment is considerably lower than would be expected.
(Not considering the initial ground training, hourly charges are in the
$20 to $30 / hour range.)
Once initial training is completed and minimum flight levels are reached, the First
Officer Candidate will be entitled to preferential hiring by the commercial operator,
as positions become available.
Financing is available. Ask a representative for details.
langaAir
St. Louis Regional Airport
#4 Eagle Court East Alton, Illinois 62024
800-624-9068 618-258-1005 (fax) 618-258-1007
www.langaair.com


[/ QUOTE ]

Required investment? F8ck that. I don't "expect" to pay $1 for my job. If that means I don't work for awhile then so be it. It's bad enough to get paid $8/hr to fly an aircraft but there aint no way in h#ll I'm going to pay for a job. This really p*sses me off. Langa was a stand up operation but this, IMHO, lowers them to the status of an ATA or Gulfstream and that's just sad.
 
[ QUOTE ]
first officer candidates can build flight time in the aircraft of partners Central Air Southwest or Ameriflight.

[/ QUOTE ]

PFT for these outfits is not "Pay For Training" like Gulfstream Airlines, it is more "Pay For Time". Both these operators are part 135 single pilot . The PFT'ers sit in an otherwise empty seat and play with the flight controls, and somehow (still not clear to me) log the time as SIC. While I am in no way endorsing these programs, the participants are not occupying a required seat and taking away a job from a qualified pilot, like Gulfstream for example. I say if these people want to log questionable flight time, let them. They are only hurting themselves.
 
[ QUOTE ]
PFT for these outfits is not "Pay For Training" like Gulfstream Airlines, it is more "Pay For Time". Both these operators are part 135 single pilot . The PFT'ers sit in an otherwise empty seat and play with the flight controls, and somehow (still not clear to me) log the time as SIC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, here's my perspective.

If in fact it's a single-pilot operation and the right seat pilot, not needed certification-wise but still able to log SIC, might as well consider it an internship, or just bite the bullet and pay the kid in the right seat so at least he's a 'professional aviator' and learn the craft rather than logging 'ballast' time.

I'd like to know the perspective of the PIC of an operation like this. Is it more of a hassle having a low time/low experience pilot in the right seat? Is it like bringing your kid brother to work? Are they a welcomed presence in the cockpit or is it more like "Great, now I've not only got to work, I'm expected to play jovial CFI too".

Inquiring minds and all that.
 
Ok folks here's what I'm considering sending. Any opinions?

[ QUOTE ]
Mr.–––,

I write you today because, as a former student and now customer, I'm very upset and disappointed in Langa Air.

I learned to fly at Langa Air and my name is ––––. Mr. –––– may remember me as he finished my private pilot training when my first CFI, ––––, left the school back in August of 2001.

In any event, I'm writing you this morning to express my utter astonishment and anger over your newest offering, the "First Officer Fast Track" program.

This is Pay For Training (PFT) – or more correctly termed "Pay For a Job" (PFJ) – and it's just plain wrong!

As a new, commercial pilot looking for his first flying job it disheartens me to know that operations like this undermine my ability to not just find work but to find work that pays enough to live on. When something threatens my livelihood (or potential livelihood) I get very angry. To learn that threat is being propagated by the school that taught me to fly, and the school I held close to my heart and with such respect, I get even angrier.

You say in your program information flyer that, "the required investment is considerably lower than would be expected." Actually, sir, the "expected" investment for any self-respecting, would-be first officer is for the company that hires them to not only pay for the training but to pay them for being an employee! This "fast track" program is exploitation at it's worst and I'm appalled that Langa Air would have anything to do with it.

Offering a "right-seat" job to someone paying for the "privilege" of riding in that seat not only hurts the person paying for the seat but the pilot that would have otherwise been employed to fill that "right seat' had there not been someone willing to pay to do his or her work!

If you claim that the right-seat would be empty, anyway, because the companies are single-pilot, 135-operators the question then becomes how does the "Fast Track first officer" log legal, non-questionable time? Further, do these "first officers" have to comply with a company created schedule? Do they help load/un-load cargo? Do they perform any kind of "work" other than the flying "duties" they are PAYING for? If the "first officer" is expected to do any of the aforementioned activities the "first officer" is paying for a job. A job that should be held by a paid employee – not an exploited "intern."

Would you expect someone to walk into Wal-Mart and pay Wal-Mart to work there? I think not. So, then, why exactly would you expect someone to do it for a flying job!?

Ask yourselves this question: if a pilot came to you looking for a right-seat job in your charter operation with a logbook full of this "right seat time" would you hire them? I doubt it.

I've always held Langa Air in high regard as a stand-up operation. I finished my private pilot certificate in 35.1 hours and the school never tried to hold me back or "milk" me for more money. Unfortunately, these actions are fairly common in the flight training world and I've always held Langa in the highest of regards for not participating in such scams.

However, now with the announcement of this PFT/PFJ "program" I must, unfortunately, change my view of Langa. Your business now, in my opinion, is not much better than the now defunct ATA, or the much-hated Gulfstream Academy or any of the other PFT/PFJ scams running across the country.

PFT/PFJ exploits young pilots. It's bad enough that the industry pays such low wages in the beginning levels of the career but with the proliferation of "programs" like these it won't be long before simply finding a job that pays anything – as opposed to the pilot paying for a "job" – is even possible!

I used to, very enthusiastically, refer anyone looking to learn to fly in the St. Louis area to visit Langa. I would tell people of my experience – earning my certificate at the bare minimum and not being held-back by the school – and tell them that Langa was a very nice place to learn to fly. However, as long as Langa offers this "Fast Track" program I will not refer one, single person to even get gas at Langa much less learn to fly there. I will instead send them to Premier, or Schaeffer's or over to KSUS or any of the other local airports or FBOs.

Your participation in PFT/PFJ is extremely unnerving and I as long as the "Fast Track" program stands I will be ashamed to have had any connection with the school. I fly our family aircraft back to St. Louis about once a year and I've always made it a point to use Langa as my destination. However, now, as long as Langa offers this "program" I will NOT use the FBO when I return to St. Louis. I will go to MidAmerica, Premier or any of the other FBOs.

PFT/PFJ hurts the piloting profession. There is no other way to state it. And, with your participation in PFT, Langa Air is now responsible for helping to undermine the profession. The profession Langa claims, on its very own Web site, to help people reach.

In closing I will offer this advice: If you wish to maintain a good reputation – and if you're in the flying business you know it's a very, very small world – I would strongly suggest you seriously reconsider your participation in this scheme and withdraw forthwith before your reputation is tarnished.

Sincerely,

Me


[/ QUOTE ]

(edit: This is the final version ... and it's been sent. I'll post a reply if I get one.)
 
Now that I am a CFI and I am working around about 70hrs a week to log about 25, I really wonder about this "CFI Quickstart Program". I undestand all operations need to train their own future CFI's but the notion of becoming a CFI in after the 30th week is amazing. There are many operations like this out there. My rant is that CFIing is really really challenging. If you are looking to be a good CFI and actually TEACH someone something, you need to experience aviation, not cram for it.

I am at work about seven days a week now. Today is my first day off in six weeks. I can't tell you all how much I learn everyday on the job, it is amazing. I am so green at this yet I worked my tail off for 18 months to be prepared. It appears to me, and no offense to those veteran CFI's at Lauga, I would hate to be a student there have a student teaching me how to fly.

What do they say? "The blind leading the blind"
 
Good letter, Pilot602.

Programs like that are the "casting couch" of professional aviation. Come on in, take off your shirt and I'll see if there's a role for you in my next b-film.

Ophir hit the nail on the head as well. Being a CFI is tremendously challenging.
 
Yeah I'll probably burn a few bridges but damnit we all need to start doing it if we want to save this profession! Besides, if this is the kind of company I have a "bridge" with I don't need it.
smirk.gif


It just really ticks me off that the school I learned to fly at is now in a position to screw me in terms of finding my first job. Maybe not directly but if enough of these things pop up it will be a direct attack on new commercial pilots and our (potential) livelihoods – if you can call poverty wages a livelihood to begin with. And that p*sses me off to no end.

Bah.
 
You won't burn bridges 602, that is called integrity. If they hate you for it, they know you are right. If they listen to you, you've helped everone in avaition, especially the would-be students who will be taking out that Key Loan.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't having advertisers in your magazine considered an ad hoc endorsement of the product?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah I'll probably burn a few bridges but damnit we all need to start doing it if we want to save this profession! Besides, if this is the kind of company I have a "bridge" with I don't need it.
smirk.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

The 'race to the bottom' has been in full effect for years.

If you look at the future, if we're not careful, it's going to be like "American Idol".

Thousands of people clawing at one another, selling themselves out for the chance for that small number of decent jobs.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't having advertisers in your magazine considered an ad hoc endorsement of the product?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, primarily why I'm always careful, nervous and very selective about whose ads I run on my website. Just takes one bad apple and I'd be no better than Flying Magazine.
 
It's been sent. Final version has been posted (edited into previous post).

Now, where's my flamethrower ...
smirk.gif
crazy.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't having advertisers in your magazine considered an ad hoc endorsement of the product?

[/ QUOTE ]

If CNN runs an ad from President Bush and another ad from Senator Kerry, does it mean CNN is endorsing both candidates? No. It's called making money. That's what the media does.

MF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top