Frankly, I'm torn between those two options and I'm not sure if there is a "right" answer to that. To me, until the prospects for the airline pilot profession change, it makes no sense to spend six figures at ERAU, for example, even though ERAU is a fine school (not picking on Embry-Riddle, that example just pops to mind). However, if one can find a quality flight school that would cost about the same as a local FBO, and it provides a direct path to a regional airline job, should that path not be recommended?

I realize that we all say that EVERYONE should flight instruct because of the valuable experience it provides, but let's say that a young pilot has 2 options, go to Part 141 "private to regional airline" OR local FBO, flight instruct, then get on with a regional. Which one would you recommend? Is there a right answer?

I also lean towards the direct track Part 141 schools because if you follow my (our) advice to avoid an ERAU type school because it's just too expensive, then the structure that a Part 141 direct track school will provide would probably be even more beneficial because you're not going to get that structure from that name brand aeronautical university you're saving money on by not going to it. Know what I mean? If a young person or a career changer gets an accounting degree at the local university instead of going to ERAU, then gets his ratings at a FBO, flight instructs for a while, then shows up at a regional airline, I would imagine there's going to be some pretty serious culture shock there, even if he has 1,000-1,500 hours of total time. Perhaps the structure of a Part 141 school would be better?

Regardless, if you have an opposing view, click the link on the website and put together some concise sentences and provide the differing opinion. I'll post it on the website, even if it is contrary to the advice I give. I think a young guy or a career changer should read BOTH sides of arguments, and I don't claim to be right all the time.