My son recently completed this program (https://www.senecacollege.ca/programs/fulltime/APF.html) which is an 8 month (2 semester) course offered by Seneca College in Peterborough. I followed him closely through this program and I was impressed with what they learned and the quality of instruction.

It is open to those with a commercial license already and a post secondary education and is an intensive program that teaches valuable material (SMS, aircraft performance, aircraft systems) as well as simulator training in a King Air and CRJ simulator. The instructors all have relevant industry experience and are first rate.

Seneca is in pretty tight with Jazz, Porter, Sunwings and others and I can see why. They produce an excellent product in their normal four year program as well as this one year program. I consider this "finishing school" for anyone that did not do their various licenses through the military or aviation college - this program provides training that you would not get from flying clubs, etc.

I would urge anyone that is interested to check it out...it could be the best investment in flying training you could ever make.

So your telling someone who already has post secondary AND a CPL to do a 8 month course to learn something you could learn on your own through experience. Jeez you must think people have awefully deep pockets.

ant_321 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 9:54 pm So your telling someone who already has post secondary AND a CPL to do a 8 month course to learn something you could learn on your own through experience. Jeez you must think people have awefully deep pockets.

I don't know how various HR departments look at it, but if it ticks the 'Aviation Diploma" box on an application it could be a real advantage for someone who got their CPL on their own time.

I can guarantee you that what you would learn in this 8 month program you cannot "learn on your own through experience". In fact, as far as the simulator training is concerned (over 100 hours) I hope you never get to experience any of it...stab trim runaway's, engine fire/failure, etc. Sorry, but you cannot learn that stuff in a book or an online course. All of the academics, yes you could but I doubt most would unless they were forced to.

The other aspect of this is that Jazz, Sunwings, Porter, and others hire directly from this program (and the full Seneca program). So, if your desire is to fly with any of these and take a pass on flying for some less than desirable outfits, then an 8 month investment in time and money is well worth it.

That’s all stuff you learn at sim on your initial and recurrent.

L39Guy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:23 am I can guarantee you that what you would learn in this 8 month program you cannot "learn on your own through experience".

I've been flying for 30 years without a Seneca diploma. Is it too late for me to learn these valuable items?

lownslow wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:19 am

ant_321 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 9:54 pm So your telling someone who already has post secondary AND a CPL to do a 8 month course to learn something you could learn on your own through experience. Jeez you must think people have awefully deep pockets.

I don't know how various HR departments look at it, but if it ticks the 'Aviation Diploma" box on an application it could be a real advantage for someone who got their CPL on their own time.

He said it’s open to those with a CPL and post secondary. You would already tick the box with the requirements.

L39Guy wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:23 am I can guarantee you that what you would learn in this 8 month program you cannot "learn on your own through experience". In fact, as far as the simulator training is concerned (over 100 hours) I hope you never get to experience any of it...stab trim runaway's, engine fire/failure, etc. Sorry, but you cannot learn that stuff in a book or an online course. All of the academics, yes you could but I doubt most would unless they were forced to.

The other aspect of this is that Jazz, Sunwings, Porter, and others hire directly from this program (and the full Seneca program). So, if your desire is to fly with any of these and take a pass on flying for some less than desirable outfits, then an 8 month investment in time and money is well worth it.

You would learn all those things in your first initial on any airplane. As someone who flies with Cadets from these fancy colleges on a regular basis, I will say most of the “academics” that are taught in these programs have very little real world applications. The cadets who realize quickly how little they actually know and are humble tend to do ok. Those who think their fancy Seneca degree makes them God’s gift to aviation tend to not do so well.

I can say for certain that Sunwing doesn’t hire cadets from an 8 month program. I’m not sure about other airlines.

I am not against education. I’m currently looking into doing a distance education degree myself. But I don’t see any real benefit to this program. If you have a CPL and post secondary education already go find a job. You will learn more practical/useful knowledge in 8 months of real world flying than you will in years in a training environment.

Do you get to pick your own callsign or do you get assigned one?

Are you kidding me? An 8 month diploma! Ever heard the saying GO BIG OR GO HOME? Either get a 3 or 4 year diploma/degree or don't bother wasting your with this lil post secondary course.. who the heck needs 100 hours in some generic sim? You should atleast come out with a dash type rating after this program

To the OP learn to spell Seneca... especially if you work for them as a recruiter lol.. hard to take your recommendation seriously

jt8d wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:03 pm Are you kidding me? An 8 month diploma! Ever heard the saying GO BIG OR GO HOME? Either get a 3 or 4 year diploma/degree or don't bother wasting your with this lil post secondary course.. who the heck needs 100 hours in some generic sim? You should atleast come out with a dash type rating after this program

To the OP learn to spell Seneca... especially if you work for them as a recruiter lol.. hard to take your recommendation seriously

While I overall agree with you, to be fair this is only offered to people who already have the 4 year degree

I've been flying for 30 years without a Seneca diploma. Is it too late for me to learn these valuable items?

Yeh, I managed to fly commercially for 51 years with no accidents or violations and I had very little formal schooling, maybe I was just lucky?

By the way was it Seneca that used to teach multi engine in a Beech Baron and leave the gear down doing circuits?

One of the biggest scams going out there now, as a broader discussion, is arguably college education. My view, but the costs are skyrocketing, the quality isn't there, and neither is the payback.

What a massive profit oriented business education has become, leaving indebted students in their wake.

And so often it is simply not the way the best learning occurs.

ant_321 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:05 am

lownslow wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:19 am

ant_321 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 9:54 pm So your telling someone who already has post secondary AND a CPL to do a 8 month course to learn something you could learn on your own through experience. Jeez you must think people have awefully deep pockets.

I don't know how various HR departments look at it, but if it ticks the 'Aviation Diploma" box on an application it could be a real advantage for someone who got their CPL on their own time.

He said it’s open to those with a CPL and post secondary. You would already tick the box with the requirements.

Whoops. I fly okay but I guess I don’t read good. Not sure if that’s something Seneca can help me with.

rookiepilot wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 6:32 pm One of the biggest scams going out there now, as a broader discussion, is arguably college education. My view, but the costs are skyrocketing, the quality isn't there, and neither is the payback.

What a massive profit oriented business education has become, leaving indebted students in their wake.

And so often it is simply not the way the best learning occurs.

+1

-signed, a guy with a lot of education.

I am happy for those of you that have flown 51 years or 30 years or whatever without the benefit of a flying college diploma or a higher education. That was then, this is now and times have changed. This is no longer a hands and feet, stick and rudder profession that you entered decades ago. Professional aviators, at the Airline Pilot level (not the Commercial pilot level) require not only those skills but also those of a systems manager and a people (crew) manager. More and more sophisticated aircraft, thanks to technology and the aircraft manufacturers, and more team oriented cockpit skills, thanks to those that failed to use their crew and accidents were the result.

With that in mind, tell me what is wrong with learning:
1. Basic and advanced aircraft system - each and every aircraft course I have done, seven in total, spend weeks learning the unique aircraft systems so clearly this is valuable learning.
2. Aircraft performance - each and every flight requires knowledge of aircraft performance from take-off to touch-down
3. Crew resource management - see above
4. Computer programming - this includes working with an FMS, EFIS, VNAV, etc.
5. 100 hours of simulator time applying the skills learned in the classroom above. This is invaluable training.

It is interesting to note that the airlines in this country seem to desire individuals with this type of training:

Jazz

Preference will be given to candidates with qualifications beyond the basic requirements:

Applicants who possess a Canadian ATPL.
Applicants with two crew multi-engine turbine experience.
Graduates from an Aviation College degree or diploma program.
Applicants with commercial or military flight experience.
Applicants with Flight Management System (FMS) and/or glass cockpit experience.

Porter

QUALIFICATIONS:

* Airline Transport Pilot License (Transport Canada) or Integrated Airline Transport Pilot License
* Minimum 1,000 hours total time
* Aviation College or University Degree is an asset
* Pilots that do not meet the minimum requirements may be considered based on experience and other factors

Encore

Desirable Assets:

Ability to work within a dynamic team
Strong interpersonal and communication skills
Adaptable and flexible to change
Professional and committed to upholding WestJet values
Scheduled airline and/or military flight experience
Glass cockpit and/or FMS experience
Post-secondary education
Internal WestJet and/or WestJet Encore referral

Pacific Coastal

Please note: As pilot applications far exceed job vacancies, preference will be given to candidates with qualifications beyond the minimum requirements, including but not limited to:

Graduate of a recognized degree program
Aviation College degree or diploma
Flight experience in addition to the minimum
Commercial or military flight experience
Jet and/or turbo-prop multi-crew experience

I was mistaken in my earlier post regarding Sunwings. They have not hired from the 1 year "finishing" school but they have hired directly out of Seneca's four year program.

I don't do pilot hiring but I do hiring in my engineering practice. However, if I was a pilot recruiter and I had two candidates in front of me, one with the training that a aviation college like Seneca provides and one that does not, I know which one I would hire, hands down. The aviation college candidate would present more learned skills that are directly applicable to what I want and need as an employer plus I would know that there is less risk of that individual not passing the training as they have already demonstrated that they can perform to a level of an airline pilot.

My advice to any person on this forum looking to compliment their flying skills and become a better aviator and a more desirable employee to any of these and other air carriers, is to give this serious thought. If 8 months of school (and, yes, more money) gives you the skills and qualifications to get hired by one of these excellent air carriers straight out of school and if airline flying is your end goal this is an excellent path.

Le sigh... As far as actual "learning" is concerned, there is no benefit to these degree and diploma programs. You're the same idiot you were going in to it as you were coming out. Yes, you prove to someone that you have the ability to stick it out in a program and pass but don't make the mistake of thinking you're actually a better "airline" candidate because of it... All they are is a cash grab and unfortunately the airlines assign an extra check mark next to your name when you apply.

Plus, the majority of kids in these programs have mommy and daddy paying for all their shit, haven't worked an honest day in their life and really aren't that great of leaders let alone know how to manage people.

My advice. Go to the cheapest school you can find, get your first job and once you're established do a degree online or if you're lucky at a local university if it works with your schedule.

I have a 4 year aviation degree, so I'm not just pessimistically jealous.

That was then, this is now and times have changed. This is no longer a hands and feet, stick and rudder profession that you entered decades ago.

Have they changed the flight controls on airplanes recently and you don't need to know how to hand fly one?

Sure seems to be less emphasis on hands and feet skills these days... now Jazz has 1000TT system operators that don't know how to land a plane in marginal wind conditions hehe.. i say again.. 100 hours in a sim and no type rating out of it is a money grab! Might as well go out there and get a flight instructor rating with that cash... (since you'd already have a degree anyway). So basically if you take this course, the main benefit is you can check off the FMS experience box... yayyee! Original poster seems to be under the impression that jazz is openly taking 250TT pilots... last i checked, you had to be crème de la crop from the class... so don't bank on Jazz being your first employer as a pilot! I guess Seneca sold you a different story about their post-post-secondary course haha... FMS is easily learned in an initial course with good trainers! Kids these days are pretty tech savvy... if you have the degree to qualify you for this silly program.. then you already have a leg up on most on the CV pile... there's no point in this program at all unless your mommy and daddy are paying for it.

In my experience in my own extremely demanding industry, success in a school environment in no way proves any high degree of competence in actual industry application.

I would personally argue the opposite: Post secondary today too often doesn't teach critical thought, creativity, problem solving, out of the box thinking, independence.....but dependent rote learning.

Maybe (this aviation degree) is different?

In my industry, anyway....there is an accurate saying: Those who can, do. Those who can't...are academics.

C.W.E, please read my post carefully:

"This is no longer a hands and feet, stick and rudder profession that you entered decades ago. Professional aviators, at the Airline Pilot level (not the Commercial pilot level) require not only those skills but also those of a systems manager and a people (crew) manager. More and more sophisticated aircraft, thanks to technology and the aircraft manufacturers, and more team oriented cockpit skills, thanks to those that failed to use their crew and accidents were the result."

Rookiepilot:

I won't bother to debate the virtues of higher education although it is people with higher education that advances our society in engineering, sciences, medicine, etc. If there is any industry that has benefited from highly educated people it is aviation where we fly amazingly sophisticated and safe aircraft but that's a debate for another day.

But I will say this, as you can see from the desirable qualities sought by the airlines I quoted earlier, they clearly value a post secondary education, be it an aviation diploma or degree or other forms of education. I think that damn good proof that they value the education and skills, some directly applicable and some not, that one gains in these programs.

Spoken like a true shill. Your posts read like commercials for Seneca.

I am happy for those of you that have flown 51 years or 30 years or whatever without the benefit of a flying college diploma or a higher education. That was then, this is now and times have changed. This is no longer a hands and feet, stick and rudder profession that you entered decades ago.

Times have not changed as much as you suggest, the aircraft are still certified to standards very similar to those of decades ago, and a competent (hands and feet) pilot, with relaxed, experience build confidence is still the most important safety feature of an aircraft. Sure, there are much more advanced electronic navigation and display systems, which do require learning - that learned is best done by building on the learning skills of a solid knowledge of basic systems. When I first flew G1000, the only thing which was not intuitive was the "ball", which is the only display whose format was not retained from the old steam gauge format. Yes, I fly with reference to "the ball".

With that in mind, tell me what is wrong with learning:
1. Basic and advanced aircraft system - each and every aircraft course I have done, seven in total, spend weeks learning the unique aircraft systems so clearly this is valuable learning.
2. Aircraft performance - each and every flight requires knowledge of aircraft performance from take-off to touch-down
3. Crew resource management - see above
4. Computer programming - this includes working with an FMS, EFIS, VNAV, etc.
5. 100 hours of simulator time applying the skills learned in the classroom above. This is invaluable training.

1. Great, weeks spent learning about systems. Useful, if you can afford that training time on types you hope to fly one day. That said, it is a design requirement that the systems of an aircraft are described in the flight manual, (2x.1581 (c)). A flight manual will certainly be provided to you for aircraft you may fly - read and understand it. Generically, there are lots of publications describing systems. You don't need to take a college course to learn them if you're motivated.

2. Performance, yes, you must learn it, again, well presented in the flight manual, section 5, and many easily available publications. A classroom knowledge of performance is nice, but it will not replace the hands and feet skills to fly the aircraft so it achieves the performance. Many time I have flown with book smart pilots, who did not have the skill to get the performance out of the plane safely.

3. CRM - First, treat people as you would like them to treat you. Second, build the experience in yourself, by yourself, by which you make really good decisions in flight. As you do this, treat the people you meet as you would like to be treated. Follow your employer's policies, and work as a willing team member. Then, when you are in command of a crew, you will have the naturally gained experience to execute good CRM.

4. FMS, EFIS, VNAV "working" is not computer training - the people who built those systems have computer training. What you're talking about is learning to operate those systems. They ALL have operator's manuals for that. Don't let a college charge you a fortune to allow you to read flight manual supplements easily available to you. Going back to my first comment, with lots of flying the plane steam gauge experience, and a good knowledge of where I was going, and how I would like to get there, and the ability to fly it hands and feet, I have been able to read and learn those systems as needed to operate the plane safely.

5. Some simulator time is good, and I have lots. I have never flown any dual simulator, only ever solo left seat sim time: ATC 610, ATC 810, Twin Otter, Dash 7, and DC-8-63 (oh, and some things that Microsoft made, if you call them simulators). It was fun and educational, as no one has offered me left seat in a Dash 7 nor DC-8. But, sim time is very different from hand flying time, even in a light single.

When you fly something very modest, and poorly equipped, and build experience in many environments, and situations, your skills will be built immensely - particularly in decision making. This is very sadly missed in the college environment - they make the decisions for you. Yeah, yeah, I know that they tell you that they teach you decision making but do they let you do it? Not really - they hold the keys. Example: A few weeks back, my diligence told me that some upcoming flying I had would be best served with a quick checkout with an instructor, just an objective overview of my skills, and a letter for the insurance, as I was new to them. So I arrange an hour in a 172. The wind was something like 15G20 45 degrees or so off the runway heading. The instructor and I discussed this, and my comfort level (very comfortable). It was otherwise a fine day for flying. While I flew upper airwork, and three very nice circuits at Peterborough - all of Seneca's 172's sat idle on the apron. Apparently Seneca had decided that there was too much crosswind for training - at all, not even dual! If a student had used their own decision making to determine that the crosswind exceed their personal limits, okay. If an instructor felt that they could not teach in those conditions, pity that instructor. But, was the instructor making that decision? Or Seneca? It's not only at Seneca, I've flown into other training places, where the fleet was parked due to wind, and I was happy to fly in and out. Back, all those decades ago, wind was never regulated as a fly/don't fly that day as I trained, it was a discussion with the instructor before the flight - decision making training!

If you want a job flying planes - fly planes! Take classroom training as required to learn the ground skills, but fly planes, as PIC, and solo, as much as you can - whatever airplane you can find! As you fly, you will encounter situations where you have a question, or recognize the need for more cockpit technology - then, you'll be ready to learn it, and absorb the knowledge. In the mean time, if you're sitting in an expensive classroom, with limited piloting experience, and an instructor is pouring information into your head about systems, a lot of that information is overflowing, and not being absorbed - because there were no questions in your head, to which that was the answer!

Napoleon So Low wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2019 10:50 pm Spoken like a true shill. Your posts read like commercials for Seneca.

One of the things I really don't like on these forums is the name calling. Rather juvenile.

And no, I am not a shill for Seneca or any of the other flying colleges. I happen to fly with a lot of first rate pilots who happen to come from some very good training organizations (the military, Seneca, Mount Royal, etc). 99% of them are top drawer, the remaining 1% wankers but you'll get that in any group of individuals.

What has always impressed me is the knowledge and professionalism of these pilots - this is not to detract from others that don't come from any one of these formal, flying training schools but my experience has been that virtually to the man (and woman), you are dealing with a highly competent aviator. Like any skill, competence comes from learning the basics early and properly then applying then thereafter. That is what the military or an integrated training organization like Seneca, Mount Royal provides. For those that do not do an integrated training program but instead get their flying training piecemeal, a private certificate here, the multi-engine there, etc they do not get an integrated training and that is what the 1 year Seneca program provides, a mechanism to fill in the gaps that a piecemeal training program does include.

But please, don't take my word for it as I am just a line pilot in a major airline. Ask the employers or better yet go to their websites to see what they are looking for as I have done and you will notice that they seek pilots with military or aviation college credentials. For those that lust over working in the US; if you want a major airline job you need an education, normally a full college degree so Canada is not unique in demanding post secondary training.

The keen reader might notice that I am speaking (or writing) past the naysayers and I do that intentionally. My target audience are those that are looking for some free advice if they are trying to decide how to go about checking the boxes to get an airline gig. The hiring desires of the airlines are all on their websites and most of them include the aviation college degree or diploma. For those without one but believe they should get one to become more marketable to an airline but already have a commercial pilot license and a post secondary education, the 8 month Seneca program ticks that box, in addition to providing valuable training.

You are here to provide free advice, and you have ten posts. Admirable altruism.