Trying to compare a military instructor with an airline LTC is madness.
Military pilots are usually pretty good, the selection procedure ensures that, but what makes the real difference is the training that they are then put through. The quality and expense of military pilot training ensures a great "product". Thrown the same resources at civvies and you'd also get great results much of the time. Mil pilots were all civilians at some point.
This incident sounds like a total mess.
However good RYR's training and checking system is, I would be far happier to have the same system, but with more experienced people in the front seats, or at least people with a bit more experience than just an integrated course from Oxford and then a type rating.
I've trained many people in the past who went onto to RYR and the mix is enormous. We always did our job and moved them through, but many only just scraped it. I wouldn't have employed them myself though.
All airlines have a mix of good and bad people, that's just how it is and it's a testament to RYR's SOP's that there haven't been more incidents or any major accidents.
However, when the recruitment procedure does seem to focus on inexperience and the ability to pay, over and above the quality of cadet, then you are storing up problems for the future.
It's not rocket science to see this. I wonder how far this thing can be pushed before it breaks down and someone gets hurt?
Modern airliners are much more reliable and easier to fly than they ever have been, but they aren't immune from problems. Experimenting on how low you can push the pilot quality bar is at total odds to how I see a safe operation being run.
You should be pushing for the best you can get, not who's easiest to manipulate or the cheapest. Why employ a 250 hr cadet over an experienced SFO if it isn't to do with cost? It is absolutely naff all to do with the 250hr pilot being better, that is one thing that is certain.
I was a 250hr cadert once and I know how rubbish I was then (some might say that nothings changed...!)
Safety and cheapness ARE mutually exclusive.