Originally Posted by
LanceHudson
I'm not sure this an entirely fair response. As I said, I fully trust the academies. If they were no good you would not be having the likes of BA/Virgin/easy taking their cadets. That's for sure. That being said, instructor retention is an issue these days (I was told by a representative at an L3 open day, so straight from the horses mouth) with many being straight out of flight training themselves. I never said I am experienced, but there is something to be said about spending 27 out of my 30 hours next to instructors on the complete opposite of the spectrum in terms of experience!
I apologise if my previous post was poorly worded and/or sounded like I have no respect for academies and their instructors. That is not the case and I am very much looking forward to starting my training with them and becoming the best aviator I can be. I cannot wait to be back in control of an aircraft, I have missed it dearly the past few years.
My response was slightly (very) tongue in cheek. I've had the pleasure of flying with people from the armed forces, academies and everything in between, I think where this thread falls short is people are generalising far too much, at
both ends of the spectrum...
The ex military guys I've flown have been a mixed bag, some were great people and good pilots, others I wouldn't want to share a bag of crisps with, let alone a flight deck... just because someone has flown something fast and pointy doesn't necessarily mean they have the 'right stuff' in a commercial environment.... there are many transferrable skills that certainly hold merit, but conversely there are occasionally traits preferred by the military that make for a tough day out too. You can quite easily swop the words 'ex military' for 'academy students' without any real difference to my experience of the above. I have flown with cadets who were an absolute joy, and some who believed they were 'the chosen' with similar results to the above. I couldn't say who was better however, as to be quite honest I've met geniuses and idiots aplenty regardless of what 'group' they came from.
As for the aptitude tests, that only holds water so far, in the end they prove very little, but are just a hoop to whittle the numbers down... again I've flown with graduates from numerous schemes with various 'stages' of selection, and found it hard to believe in some instances that they could have been 'chosen' for anything. At the end of the day it boils down to the individual and their motivation, not the training organisations... the only caveat being that the industry at the moment has certainly made it possible due to BOMAD (bank of mum and dad) that anyone can turn up, regardless of ability, motivation OR personality and become a pilot... and herein lies the problem, they are making money, and even if a candidate is failing, that is a good thing as they will need to spend extra to get to the required standard, which equals profit for the organisation.
Want proof? CTC used to have a 3% pass rate at selection... which equaled max 3 people a month onto their ab initio course. what is it they take nowadays? 30-40 people? Either there has been a vast increase in applications or the bar has been lowered?