Defence recruiting was civilianized some years ago. Speaks for itself.
True. Inefficiences associated with 'civilianising' many defence support services is readily apparent. Recruiting is no different. I'm sure we've all heard numerous 'horror stories'. At the end of the day, there are those who persist with the 'process' and those that don't. Good luck to those that do
17 years of military flying instruction. What's yours?
Impressive and appreciated. The foundation of your opinions are accepted, valued and certainly not challenged. I'm sure there are many prospective aircrew applicants' on this site who can learn much from your experience and position within military aviation. Clearly, I do not have an instructional background. My opinions are based on personal experience, from let's say - the 'receiving end'
The older guys certainly do demonstrate tenacity, and they generally accept criticism in a much more mature fashion then their "Gen Y' counterparts. However in my experience the older guys have difficulty learning at the required rate. Put simply it's really a case of "old dogs - new tricks". Don't get me wrong; I really enjoy flying with the older blokes, but in my experience they do not learn as quickly as the young guys. Additionally they come with baggage which can make their management quite a handful.
Agreed. And I'm in no position to question your years of instructional experience or observations relating to rates of learning amongst all student age demographics. However, from a personal perspective - I know that I am actually learning at a far greater rate - at my current age (41), than say, when I was 25. I don't understand why as this is contrary to most accepted psychological/physiological studies and doesn't conform to the 'bell curve theory'. I know I would not have passed CSE as a 19-24 year old.
A number of my friends' who have undertaken PLT CSE as older age students', have found the CSE no more or less challenging than their younger peers and indeed, have at times - struggled with certain parts of the syllabus - much to the same degree as their younger CSE members. Though, all have adapted to and ultimately, enjoyed the unique training methodology.
They too, have all agreed that their rates of learning do not appear to have deteriorated with age.
I agree too, that there are some older students who bring with them, "baggage" - which is only to be expected if they are married and have a family. To that end, I know of two guys who have DOR'd because of family issues. It's a real shame, but that's life !
Consequently we waste much time, money and effort proving what was common knowledge in "the old days".
Clearly, you're in the best position to form such an opinion and one must accept your assessment of this situation.
It will be interesting to view future recruitment trends of 'older' applicants for all aircrew positions and their success/failure rate statistics whilst on course.
The underlying basis of my comments is based on the opinion that I don't believe 'djwarchild' has the professional expertise or qualifications to give a credible assessment of the training risks associated with the recruitment of older applicants on PLT CSE. This is clearly the domain of OSB and those whose charter it is to make such 'risk assessments' and possible subsequent offers for TRG.
Nor do I believe DFR are prioritising or favouring "kids" out of school or older applicant's, over his application alone. On the surface, it seems he has struck an element of "inefficiency" in the system and that is regrettable. However, there are methods by which one can attempt to remedy the situation. Spitting the dummy and chucking a tantrum on a public forum site are clearly not effective methods of redress ! Just my opinion.