Seneca College Airline Pilot Flight Operations Diploma

[L39Guy]

L39 Guy.

I have read and reread all your posts on this thread. The sense I get is you are really, really promoting this program. And in a very well written way. So well written, in fact, that I can understand why people think you are not as advertised, and have some self interest in this program.

When I read posts such as you wrote, my reaction is to treat them as postamercials.

You do not write like the father of a son who went through the program. Rather more like a promoter defending the program.

If I was asked by a young one about this program, my advice would to be very very cautious. In my experience, Seneca does not have the best reputation, and their graduates are not consistently to the same standard of ability. But that is a very limited and personal opinion.

Be aware when you read glowing posts about a school program.

Trey,

I assume that you have read what I wrote about the CAE/Jazz/Seneca program in this thread: viewtopic.php?p=1095990#p1095990.

Without revealing too much behind my handle (L39 Guy), a previous poster gave away a lot of my background - B787 Captain at AC, a Professional Engineer, etc. I did my flying training through the military many years ago and have been flying professionally for 36 years.

I can assure you that I am no marketing guy and thank you for the compliment about my writing skills; I do a lot of writing but have to work hard on the grammar, etc.

I did have a son go through 1 year Airline Pilot Flight Operations program at Seneca. He did this with a university degree and the multi-IFR, etc. prerequisites with the flying training from a hodge-podge of flying schools, instructors, etc. I thought the ~$12K we spent on the program the best ~12K I have ever spent on flying training. This is why.

First, he did not do an integrated flying training program like one would do in the military, Seneca, Mount Royal, etc. This program pulled together all of the training he did at the various flying schools/instructors and filled in any gaps.

The academics taught in the 1 year program are focused and applicable, unlike something like calculus which is not very useful when an engine is on fire. Subjects like aircraft performance, computer programming (FMS programming), crew resource management, etc. These were all subjects that are directly applicable in day-to-day professional flying.

The flight training, all in simulators, on the Beech King Air and CRJ provided not just an "endorsement" but was also done with excellent training scenarios taught by experienced aviators. In fact, one of his simulator instructors was a coursemate of mine in the Air Force who went on to fly for Emirates before returning to Canada. Pretty tough to beat that kind of experience to teach in an airline-type, multi-crew operation.

I have flown with my son after the Seneca program; he is a different aviator - more professional, SOP, disciplined and technically savvy, the kind of pilot I would want to have beside me in any airline operation. He finished that program a changed aviator.

Since then he has been hired by Jazz as his first professional flying job. I couldn't be happier as he is going to get amazing experience and training with them. And, with the Jazz agreement with Air Canada, he will be at AC in a few years although I hope he spends a few years at Jazz including in the left seat when the time is right.

I have flown with many Seneca graduates during my time at AC and I would have to say that with a few exceptions they have been first class. But you are going to find that in every group of people. The Seneca (or Mount Royal or other) grads that show up thinking they know everything are in for a rude surprise but those that accept that they still have lot to learn are both a pleasure to fly with and easy to fly with as they know their stuff either from their Seneca (or Mount Royal or other) training or from a professional attitude.

I would also go as far as to rate Seneca pretty close to the military in terms of the product they produce for an airline cockpit. Agreed, they don't do some of the fun stuff we did in the military like formation, aerobatics, low-level navigation, etc., however their CRM and flying skills are top drawer. There are those on this forum who pooh-pooh Seneca grads (and Mount Royal grads) as being 250 hour wonders with no business in a Dash 8 or Q400 cockpit; I would like to point out that the military has 250 hour wonders go into fast jet (solo) cockpits, C17's, Aurora's, C130's, Airbus A310. It can be done and done safely with the proper training and supervision from the organization and an aviator with good background training and the right attitude.

WRT the new CAE/Jazz/Seneca program, my comments the other day ago about the cost/benefit and career risk speaks for itself. If one want to flying medivacs or bush or floats then this is not for you; if one wants to wear a tie and fly 705 this program is an excellent ticket into Jazz thence Air Canada. When you do the math of the costs, the post-secondary+endorsements is almost the same as post-secondary+CAE/Jazz with the big difference being the latter is a ticket into Jazz then Air Canada.

Finally, a word about post-secondary education as those of us with it seem to get bad-mouthed and should be ashamed of having achieved it. A post-secondary education does not mean that one is smarter than one without it; I have met plenty of people without a post-secondary education that are pretty brilliant; conversely, I have met some people with a post-secondary education that are pretty dumb.

But what a post-secondary education does is prove that one can learn. Most of the material in post-secondary education one quickly forgets and perhaps never want to see again. Calculus comes to mind. But being a professional aviator is a continual learning experience. Name me another profession or trade does the amount of training we do, particularly at the 705 level. Yes, doctors, lawyers, dentists, engineers, accountants, etc. do professional development, sometimes while on a cruise ship. But how many go back to school for two to three months at a time every few years as we do when we learn a new aircraft? Not many.

So as professional aviators we are in a constant training and learning environment and someone with a post-secondary education has proven that they can learn. That doesn’t mean that someone that doesn’t have a post secondary education can’t, all it means is that one with the degree or diploma can. Sort of like having a instrument rating; if you have one you have proven that you can do it, if you don’t there is a risk that you might not be able to do it.

I suspect that is why AC places and emphasis on a post-secondary education, as well as this CAE/Jazz program as well as all major US carriers that require a college degree.

[trey kule]

Well, thank you for another well written post.

I am not sure where the post secondary issue was raised, but I agree.it does demonstrate something about discipline and learning. I hated calculus much more than an engine failure.

Comparing the military training to a college program is a bit of apples to oranges .
But that is just a personal opinion.

My concern was, is, and will be , that without any real experience in command, it is going to be a future problem when these pilots get command and are dealing with an FO like they were. Right now there is a good experience gradient in the cockpit, which provides both a safe cockpit and a place for an FO to learn.
That experience gradient is going to be drastically reduced in the next decade.

Automation is changing what is means and takes to be a pilot in the 705 world, but until automation gets much better, we need pilots who can deal with an abnormal situation with means other than calling for a checklist.

Come to think of it. The military could save a whole bunch of time if they did all their initial training on the Hornets! Wonder why they don’t. And no selection process on who goes to fighters, transport or helicopters either. I think it is just a random draw for all graduates.
Just saying.....

[digits_]

Genuine question - coming from someone in the Seneca 4 year program:

Why do you guys have such a vendetta against the Seneca/college programs? In every college thread there's always one or more old-timers who shudder at the words "aviation college". Are you pissed that you did not get the same opportunities back in the day ?

The same answer I would give to anyone in any degree program espousing arrogance.

The notion often claimed that something worthwhile was achieved by attaining a degree of any kind, is offensive in the extreme to those who have achieved significant careers, in any field.

I continue to learn from the practioner "old timers" in my field. Myself and my peers mock the academics for their foolishness.

Degree students too often think the only learning is from professors afraid of leaving the classroom, who couldn't survive in the real world.

How many planes would be flying around without academics or people getting degrees? Without an organized way of transferring knowledge, societies would evolve much slower. A lot less people would gain the necessary knowledge if you had to read books by yourselves.

Maybe if we get those "old timers" to write down their knowledge and have them deal with people willing to learn directly, we could make it more efficient. Oh wait, that is basically what college/university is...

You can give it any name you want, but you need to organize something. People don't just get born with knowledge and understanding of advanced aerodynamics.

[C.W.E.]

There are many people who have not received degrees or even high school education due to being born into a situation where the family just did not have the economic means to provide their children with higher education.

Yet a lot of these people did manage to self educate and become very successful in the field of work they wanted to be in.

Fortunately those who want to become pilots have chosen a field where advanced education is not a prerequisite for success.

That is why I am not a brain surgeon.

[trey kule]

I don’t think anyone doubts that advanced education is necessarily the end all, be all.Advanced education does indicate that a person can study, gain knowledge, and has self discipline. University is not about being smart. It is about applying oneself. Smarts alone won’t cut it for very long ( and of course there are exceptions because we cant have a discussion on generalities).

So, two people apply to get on with an airline. One with post secondary education, one without. The HR folks can assume that success in and the post secondary world is indicative a new hire will be able to absorb and practice the material. There are other tests for flying ability decision making etc. It is but one marker.

Now , the person without the advanced education. They are an unknown. Maybe they will succeed, maybe not. Unless the pickings are slim or they really shine in another area, time to take a pass. Fair? Maybe not, and I expect airlines have passed on some potentially great pilots.

Also, after post secondary education, a pilot is older ( which, however politically incorrect it is to say age matters, it generally does). They are not fresh out of high school and saying being a pilot sounds neat. Only downside is cirrhosis of the liver.

It is all to easy to say, look at me. But exceptions are not the rule. People sometimes forget that.

I can recall spending three days taking a COMPASS test, knowledge tests,medicals, and a nice chat with the company psychologist. Never could figure why they passed on some pilots I thought were pretty good types..Everyone has their biases.

[C-GGGQ]

See everyone says "post secondary proves you can learn" yes....so does ppl cpl mifr etc. They all had ground work etc. This person obviously learned their licenses ratings and prior ppc's so I'm somewhat dubious at that claim. The fact that you are at AC AT etc with a few thousand hours experience shows you can learn.

[digits_]

See everyone says "post secondary proves you can learn" yes....so does ppl cpl mifr etc. They all had ground work etc. This person obviously learned their licenses ratings and prior ppc's so I'm somewhat dubious at that claim. The fact that you are at AC AT etc with a few thousand hours experience shows you can learn.

The study requirement to pass a ground school course or even a typerating course is negligible compared to the study requirements to pass a college or university degree.

You can argue the merit of a degree, but it is a much better indicator to judge someone's capacity to study/learn than passing an ATPL ground school.

[rookiepilot]

I would say look at the overall quality of the learning these days. As a pure filtering device, companies often use a degree.

Post secondary in my field anyway, proves absolutely nothing about the ability to productively apply what one has learned, too often rote and memory learning, in a disciplined fashion.

If top level MBA's were the be all and end all in my field, every top graduate would trounce the S&P 500 every year. They don't. 98% of active managers fail by that standard, because they didn't learn critical thinking skills in school.

I can't see aviation being THAT different. So a top school can turn out first class FO's that can operate very well by rote.

And what happens when the sh-t hits the fan, something not in the book? Maybe I'm wrong?.

I do not believe most post secondary education teaches the independence, critical thinking, problem solving, and risk management skills that many advanced fields require. Mentoring is required.

There is a reason, ie, new doctors are made interns, and not given supervisory level responsibility.


This isn't a zero sum argument. Those considering must also weigh the burden of a six figure student debt at the end of their education. Costs have exploded and quality has degraded.

[C.W.E.]

I realise it is to late to make any difference now, but I have a question.

Had I gone beyond grade school would I have been a better pilot?

[TT1900]

I realise it is to late to make any difference now, but I have a question.

Had I gone beyond grade school would I have been a better pilot?

Define 'better'. It's possible your career would have taken a different path. While a degree has little to do with stick and rudder flying it certainly doesn't hurt and opens several possibilities closed to those without. Find me a recent graduate of any of the large test-pilot schools that lacks a degree and I'll show you the unicorn I keep in my backyard.

[L39Guy]

I realise it is to late to make any difference now, but I have a question.

Had I gone beyond grade school would I have been a better pilot?

There is no way of determining that without knowing you, knowing your career arc and your desired career arc. Unfair question and academic now anyways.

Reading between the lines in your previous posts I would guess that you have been in this industry 40+ years now. Lots has changed since you first started. Hands and feet skills are still required (we saw that in spades with Lion Air accident and its final report and the Ethopian accident too but that's another thread). In the airline industry in the 70's there was no such thing as FMS's, CRM, ADS-B, CPDLC, etc., etc. That doesn't mean that someone without post secondary can't learn about this, as they clearly do, but flying aircraft is far more complex than the stick and rudder days of the B737-200, B727, DC8, DC9, etc.

But most importantly, it is the employer that is demanding post-secondary education in the hiring matrix. I'm not going to go to all of the websites and post links but AC, Jazz, WJ, Encore, Porter, Transat, Sunwings, Pacific Coastal, CMA, etc all note a post-secondary requirement as a desired qualification just like a commercial, multi-IFR, etc. They all have lots of experience hiring and training pilots and clearly their experience must be that those with post secondary are easier to train, all other things being equal.

As I have noted earlier, if flying for a 705 operation is not your career objective, then a post-secondary education may not be key hiring requirement with those operators; if, however, one's flying objective is with one of the 705 operators noted above, then a post-secondary education is but one of the hiring determinants.

It's a competitive employment environment even if the "pilot shortage" has come to fruition. There is no shortage per se but there may be a shortage of qualified or "ideal" hiring candidates. At AC, with 70% of new hires coming from Jazz/SR that leaves on 30% coming from "off the other street". In the next year that means 240 of the 800 hires will not be Jazz/SR. I have heard that there are 2000 applicants meeting the minimum requirements for those 240 positions. After this hiring spurt due to FTD and domestic growth, things will slow down to 200 per year of which 60 will be non-Jazz/SR.

All of the other carriers will be hiring too but not in those numbers but presumably those 2000 applicants that meet the minimum AC requirements (which include post-secondary) will also be seeking the jobs at WJ, Encore, etc. It will be a while before those 2000 individuals are absorbed by AC and the others and in the interim the pipeline will produce more qualified applicants coming out of the military, overseas, etc.

Will the industry ever get to the point where post-secondary won't be a requirement? Not likely, according to my assessment.

Whether you agree or disagree with the post-secondary requirement, it's a fact-of-life in this industry (and other industries that heretofore never required advanced education either). My advice for a young person entering this industry desiring to fly in the 705 world is to pursue a post-secondary education in something they are interested in to not only check that box but also for self fulfillment and an educational back-up should the aviation career not pan out for whatever reason (medical issues, etc).

[twa22]

I realise it is to late to make any difference now, but I have a question.

Had I gone beyond grade school would I have been a better pilot?

In the airline industry in the 70's there was no such thing as FMS's, CRM, ADS-B, CPDLC, etc., etc. That doesn't mean that someone without post secondary can't learn about this, as they clearly do, but flying aircraft is far more complex than the stick and rudder days of the B737-200, B727, DC8, DC9, etc.

But most importantly, it is the employer that is demanding post-secondary education in the hiring matrix.

They all have lots of experience hiring and training pilots and clearly their experience must be that those with post secondary are easier to train, all other things being equal.

I was going to quote your other post regarding degrees and that they show you have the ability to learn.

They don't, at least for the most part they don't. The amount of people that have degrees, and can't differentiate left from right is outright scary... I have gotten to the point where I trust almost no one who is "qualified", because frankly, they are full of shit and don't have a clue what they're talking about.

You don't have to understand what you're "learning", you just simply need to regurgitate the material and be able to pass some exams and voila, you have a degree.

Don't get me wrong, the concept of a degree and the material taught is obviously meant to be useful, and if one actually likes what they are "learning", they will put a conscious effort in understanding what they "learned" to put the useful material into practice... but these days that doesn't seem to be the case, in my opinion

For what it's worth I have a degree, but in terms of material learned, it's of no real added value in the practical, working world. On the other hand, I have self taught myself many different things, and a lot my friends would consider me the most handy person they know... however, the fact that I don't have a "professional" designation, certification, or "degree" relating to fixing things (things like plumbing), means I cannot be trusted to work or fix something... and you know what's really sad about all of that? I have actually fixed things when the "professional" with a designation couldn't. It was only then that people realized "oh wait, this guy seems to know a thing or two". This point isn't meant to boast about myself, it is to try and prove a point on this whole twisted view of "degree" or "designation", which many employers fail to see, in my opinion of course

[digits_]

For what it's worth I have a degree, but in terms of material learned, it's of no real added value in the practical, working world. On the other hand, I have self taught myself many different things, and a lot my friends would consider me the most handy person they know... however, the fact that I don't have a "professional" designation, certification, or "degree" relating to fixing things (things like plumbing), means I cannot be trusted to work or fix something... and you know what's really sad about all of that? I have actually fixed things when the "professional" with a designation couldn't. It was only then that people realized "oh wait, this guy seems to know a thing or two". This point isn't meant to boast about myself, it is to try and prove a point on this whole twisted view of "degree" or "designation", which many employers fail to see, in my opinion of course

How would you propose companies determine in a half hour interview if you have the ability to learn, without using a degree as a frame of reference?

[C.W.E.]

How would you propose companies determine in a half hour interview if you have the ability to learn, without using a degree as a frame of reference?

How come I have flown for some of the worlds biggest companies and was never asked about my education background???

Not even once.

[rookiepilot]

My problem isn't with a university degree per se. It's with the exploding costs of one, the degrading quality (in my view) and the massive debt burden it places young folks under at the beginning of their working lives. It's become too often a giant scam, and a stupid requirement.

I can tell in 10 minutes in any interview, who I'm dealing with and if they can learn. Degree or no degree. But I'm not an HR drone.

Debt is a horrible thing to get out from under, especially these days.

The smartest thing I DID NOT do was get a degree, because if I had, there is no way I could have started my business.

AC should be thinking of the effects of their policies. Who is to say that extra massive debt load doesn't have a factor in pilots taking extra overtime, fly overtired, and you end up with an SFO situation?

Prove me wrong.

[L39Guy]

For what it's worth I have a degree, but in terms of material learned, it's of no real added value in the practical, working world. On the other hand, I have self taught myself many different things, and a lot my friends would consider me the most handy person they know... however, the fact that I don't have a "professional" designation, certification, or "degree" relating to fixing things (things like plumbing), means I cannot be trusted to work or fix something... and you know what's really sad about all of that? I have actually fixed things when the "professional" with a designation couldn't. It was only then that people realized "oh wait, this guy seems to know a thing or two". This point isn't meant to boast about myself, it is to try and prove a point on this whole twisted view of "degree" or "designation", which many employers fail to see, in my opinion of course

Has it occurred to you that perhaps the reason why you are so good at these self taught things is that you learned to think in a post-secondary education and don't realize it?

I disagree with your claim that post-secondary is a matter of regurgitating what you read in a textbook; some of it is perhaps but a lot of it is applied, i.e. physics, chemistry, mathematics, engineering subjects, law course (apply legal principles). Even arts course such as history asks you to interpret events not just a repeat of what you may read in a textbook.

But is there not value in learning by rote too? SOP's, checklists, aircraft limitations, etc. are all rote learning. Seems to me that that is pretty applicable in the aviation business.

[L39Guy]

How would you propose companies determine in a half hour interview if you have the ability to learn, without using a degree as a frame of reference?

How come I have flown for some of the worlds biggest companies and was never asked about my education background???

Not even once.

What stage of your career did you apply for these flying positions? Were you a 250 hour wonder or had accumulated thousands of hours by then? Were you already type endorsed?

What would your advice be to a young person starting out in this business that is interested in 705 type flying in the face of all of the air carriers seeking a post secondary education? Would you counsel them to not get it and risk not getting hired?

[C.W.E.]

What stage of your career did you apply for these flying positions? Were you a 250 hour wonder or had accumulated thousands of hours by then? Were you already type endorsed?

I started my flying career in the mid fifties and my first flying job was as a flight instructor for about a year or two.

Then I took an aerial applicators flying course and went into Ag. flying for 13 years.

Next I did fire suppression flying for 15 years.

In between these jobs I flew bush flying and general charter flying with a couple of years flying for a scheduled airline which convinced me that type of flying was not for me because it was so repetitive.

So I started my own business and from there just did contract flying which was all by referral from previous clients.

My most interesting flying job was flying for Miramax movies in California, and it was also the best paying.

I finally retired after fifty one years of flying for a living.

What would your advice be to a young person starting out in this business that is interested in 705 type flying in the face of all of the air carriers seeking a post secondary education? Would you counsel them to not get it and risk not getting hired?

Carefully research the cost of qualifying compared to the wages you can expect to make.

[rookiepilot]

What would your advice be to a young person starting out in this business that is interested in 705 type flying in the face of all of the air carriers seeking a post secondary education? Would you counsel them to not get it and risk not getting hired?

Carefully research the cost of qualifying compared to the wages you can expect to make.

Outstanding advice.

L39 you are assuming by the time someone starts a degree program today there will be jobs waiting, to pay off the resulting education debt.

In a few years I happen to see the world in a very different place.

Then again I do not have a degree.

[ant_321]

How would you propose companies determine in a half hour interview if you have the ability to learn, without using a degree as a frame of reference?

How come I have flown for some of the worlds biggest companies and was never asked about my education background???

Not even once.

What stage of your career did you apply for these flying positions? Were you a 250 hour wonder or had accumulated thousands of hours by then? Were you already type endorsed?

What would your advice be to a young person starting out in this business that is interested in 705 type flying in the face of all of the air carriers seeking a post secondary education? Would you counsel them to not get it and risk not getting hired?

I won’t argue about the merits of a post secondary education. I do think the 18 month Seneca program you promote is a crock of shit but that’s another matter. I will say that the only airline in Canada that puts any significant weight on post secondary is AC and only then only if you’re coming from off the street. I went to a small flight school and everyone I went to school with and my students have had no problem succeeding in the airline world. All of us work for Sunwing, Westjet, Jazz, encore, Transat or Air Canada. Nobody has any post secondary. With the way things are going now I could even argue that you would be better off getting your training done ASAP and getting a job before the music stops. A degree will do you no good when nobody is hiring.