Fair enough fellas. I can cop it on the chin, and I suppose I may have appeared to be having a dig, however I did learn with airline cadets, and if what I was taught is good enough for my ex- RAAF VIP/Roulette/USAF exhange instructor CFI, then its good enough for me, and its obviously good enough for the end-receiver airline (non aussie), who have had four courses go through without complaint, and their native country provides some of the most challenging flying anywhere in the world- as acknowledged by many aussies who craft their trade there.
As far as GA training, I was encouraged by my instructor to accomplish things like first taxiway landings (800m strip) from a gfpt stage. By CPL, aerobatics and formation flying have given way to economic considerations, and what is expected from a prospective employer. I was expected to set a power setting that would take me to the keys from my TOD in a twin, regardless of flightpath and attitude changes... I think any GA employer "in between" would be happy with that, and I think an airline would too.
Every school is different- and admittedly, every teaching culture assumes its methods to be of a higher standard than the next- no body likes being told they do it wrong, hence half of the conversations here are people arguing over their preference- there's no point in crucifying someone for it.
Any pilot with 200hrs should be able to adapt what they do to the conditions present, and Ive been taught that, allthough I may have not stated it initially- Capt Johns- it seems a professional enough attitude to me
Cheers
OH PS...
Divosh, Im only a she on weekends...