PTC Waterford (What's the deal ?)

[mtanz0]

Just to clarify, I know we all have our suspicions about the credability of PTC, and they do seem to have somewhat too slick an operation, straight out of the sim into the room to discuss finance. The question is, does anyone actually know of people that were turned away from the PTC on the grounds that their pilapt / sim results were too bad ? Or is the assessment really just an opportunity to get 300 euro off you and also designed to give you the impression that you'll be a terrific pilot someday.Cheers.

[corsair]

Bluntly yes, but to be fair to PTC. Most PilApt tests are the same. One RTO bluntly admitted to me that they only provided them because the competitor did and people kept asking for them.

Even the PilApts that have some meaning are less to do with the student and more to do with ensuring that they maximise their pass rates and scores in order to ensure they continue to market themselves as 'quality' schools.

Simple as that.

[mtanz0]

So you should at least be able to take some comfort in the fact that they're prepared to accept you, you have a reasonably good chance of succeeding, and it doesn't all just boil down to getting their hands on ur cash ?

[corsair]

That would apply to the 'famous' integrated schools mostly. But like I said it's for their peace of mind and reputation not yours. Qantas, on their cadetship web page are careful to point out that failing their aptitude tests doesn't mean you will never be a pilot or never work for Qantas one day. Typical straight talking Aussies telling it like it is. Tests prove nothing.

Others simply do it for marketing purposes. Their tests are considerably less complicated and are designed to be passed easily. They're not intended to screen out potential failures. I would imagine the debrief for these type of test would be along the lines of: 'Well done, you passed. However there are a few issues which can easily be resolved during training. Now sign here and will you be paying by cheque or credit card?'.

It's much easier to sell an expensive course to young and impressionable potential students and their parents, who quite likely will be funding the whole exercise if you can tell them that they 'passed' a test and have been 'accepted' by the 'college' or 'academy'. This is an attempt to give flying schools the aura of a university college or that the selection process is a bit like an Air Force (or Air Corps in our case). The reality is that the qualifications need to start training as a pilot are an ability to speak and write English and enough money to pay for it.

[Adios]

Corsair,

I think your view of aptitude testing is somewhat distorted. There are integrated schools that have no shortage of wannabees queueing up for a seat. It would be foolish for them to sell seats to people who are likely to fail when they can be weeded out with aptitude testing, as once an integrated course starts, the FTO can't resell a seat if someone fails. It's smarter to find the strongest candidates to sell the seats to when a school has so many wanting in that they must choose who to take. If wannabees discover the FTO suddenly lowered the pass marks in a recession, then maybe what you claim is applicable.

I agree with your view that FTO's use aptitude testing to protect their own interests, but that in itself does not make testing evil or cynical, as in many cases it's in the wannabes best interest too. Every one who's been through flight training, be it modular or integrated, has witnessed students that had no business spending good money pursuing this career (perhaps you are an exception to that statement). You seem to make that argument yourself when you claim FTOs are using testing as a gimmick and taking anyone who waves a cheque at them, when indeed they should not. If your claim that all it takes to succeed is "an ability to speak and write English and enough money to pay for it" is true, then I don't see the point of dissing aptitude testing. The FTOs could simply bin it and take every applicant. Is your argument simply that rejecting a few who meet your criteria somehow helps them twist the arms of the others?

My main point is that I think it is a distortion to say every FTO with aptitude testing is doing it for marketing reasons or to make it seem that they are like an elite university. I've seen that line of argument before on this forum from someone that worked at an FTO and was involved in such a discussion when they decided to introduce testing and I think you are just parroting his argument. Even if it was the reason at that school at that time, it doesn't necessarily hold true at that FTO today, as they might have learned that the testing actually helped improve their reputation and/or results or at least their bottom line.

The fact that almost every airline uses some sort of screening and testing process shoots dozens of holes in your argument that it's all a cynical marketing technique. I think the claim it is a marketing gimmick is the odd exception rather than the rule.

Now that is off my chest, I would advise any wannabe who fails an assessment not to give up based on one FTO's advice (anyone who discourages so easily might not be right for a line of work where assessment and criticism is continuous until retirement). Likewise, if you were extremely worried you would fail and passed easily, then maybe you should take it with a pinch of salt and give GAPAN's testing a go in case your FTO is the odd one out.