military vs civilian apptitude test.

[fabbe92]

Hello! I´ve been searching the forum for some time but I haven´t found anything that answered my question, really.

I know that not many people have what it takes to become a fighter pilot but how hard are the apptitude tests compared to the ones you take to enter a flight school or during an interview with an airline?

cheers!

[NDW]

Well from what I have experienced, Military Aircrew aptitude tests are hard, but they are bound to be, they are designed to filter out the less able.

In regards to the Civvy Airlines, I'm afraid I can't answer that for you, but I have recently applied for NATS ATCO, and looking at the Aptitude tests for that, it looks B***** difficult.

A flight school? Aptitude Tests? I've never heard about that? Unless you mean a Sponsorship flight school?

I currently work for a Flying School, and there are no aptitude tests.

I know that not many people have what it takes to become a fighter pilot but how hard are the apptitude

Well spelling for one is deffinately an aptitude test.

In either career that you opt for, best of luck. :ok:

[fabbe92]

Thank you for the info!

Considering that english is not my native language, I think I spell quite well:)

[Lafyar Cokov]

deffinately

Oh dear - glass houses...............

[NDW]

Ahhhhhhhhh, I shall keep my mouth shut from now on :ok:.

I blame it on the keyboard :ugh:.

Fabbe92, I was only kidding, I even made a ruddy mistake myself.

Best of luck with your career choice.

[El_Presidente]

It's been 15 years, so I'm sure some has changed, but if I recall:

Hand eye coordination; time/distance calculations; pattern recognition...

But more, you then have the team exercises and individual aptitude tests which look at leadership skills, team working ability, problem solving, communication skills etc...

I think there was also some form of test in the bar at the OASC accommodation involving beer, a dodgy juke box with nothing but Elton John and Radiohead on it, and a crooked pool table with shrinking pockets...

:E

[Piltdown Man]

In 1989, a quick arm, leg and eye count was performed. If the number came to about six you were in. For the next two years, no tests were done because no one was hiring. A few years later, you could expect a sim. check, a bit of Lego building, a nice chat with a pilot and grilling from someone in Human Remains. When the bean counters looked at screwing as much as they could from everyone, they changed the tests for prospective pilots. So now Civvy aptitude tests generally consist of getting your cheque book out and signing on the dotted line. If the signature is accepted by your bank and it doesn't bounce, you're in.

PM

[bingofuel]

Military Aircrew aptitude tests are hard, but they are bound to be, they are designed to filter out the less able.

Lets just put this into the correct perspective. By less able I hope you agree it means less able to cope with the rather specific requirements to train someone to be a military pilot.
The military look for a very distinct product. Not fitting into that category does not, by any means, suggest that a person who does not pass OASC selection is not fully able to excel in another field, even civilian aviation, it just means they are not what the military are looking for.

[NDW]

Bingofuel;

Lets just put this into the correct perspective. By less able I hope you agree it means less able to cope with the rather specific requirements to train someone to be a military pilot.
The military look for a very distinct product. Not fitting into that category does not, by any means, suggest that a person who does not pass OASC selection is not fully able to excel in another field, even civilian aviation, it just means they are not what the military are looking for.

Exactly what I meant, I apologise for the 'Less able' comment, as you stated above, not as able to cope with the requirements in aptitude testing.

[bingofuel]

Thanks, I was just concerned that people reading this thread who may have been unsuccessful at OASC do not now think they are lesser people.

They most certainly are not.