I think many of you are being very dismissive of the education provided by the big aeronautical universities. Everybody loves to hate ERAU, UND, etc., because they "know a guy" who graduated from that school who was "a really bad pilot," "sheltered," or wasn't a "critical thinker" so they paint with that broad brush.
Using that logic, I could say, "Hey, why go to college anyway? All you learn to do is party and drink beer!" I could also bash Part 61 training and say that all a Part 61 guy has to do is go to a local Mom&Pop, memorize the questions for the written and take the practical with the "well known" local DPE who isn't looking to disrupt his gravy train exam fees and pretty much gives the same "well known/documented" ride to each guy he tests. No one wants to go to a DPE who fails "too many guys," right? Yeah, that Part 61 pilot learns a lot going that route, too.....right?
I went through a big aeronautical university and got that aeronautical degree. It was a very technical degree. I DID learn a thing or two about aviation. The guy that taught our turbines class was a former engineer from Pratt&Whitney. We dissected turbine engines. The guy that taught out aircraft systems class was an A&P, IA, and had been in the airline business for decades. When I press the hydraulic pump button, I understand how the switch works, how an electrical relay works to turn the pump on, why a relay is used, and how a variable displacement engine driven hydraulic pump works. I know that because the instructor had one sitting on the table in front of the class, cut in half so we could see how it worked, and explained it all. The guy that taught our flight engineer course had a Master's Degree, had been an airline pilot for decades, and had been an instructor at his airline for years. And he was a really nice guy because he always told us what question 1 would be on each systems exam: draw the system being tested out, from memory. I took classes in CRM, aviation safety, aviation law, aerodynamics, aircraft performance, global navigation, etc. The flight courses I took were structured courses, and the expectation before every flight was that you studied and arrived prepared. Does a guy who goes through a Part 61 program get that kind of aeronautical education? Is that education worth anything?
I guess you could argue, who cares? I press the button, the hydraulic pump goes on. I press it again, it goes off. Who cares that it is a Vickers variable displacement piston pump controlled by a button on the overhead panel through a 24V DC relay? Well, I think one could argue that after having taken 4 years of classes that go into that sort of detail is worth "something." Back that education up with a structured Part 141 flight curriculum and I can see how they might lower the requirements for the ATP a little bit. Although I don't agree they should
