WWW, yeah, but earlier in the thread you believed that 27 or 28 was more reasonable... and personally I'm on the wrong side at just 26 and a few weeks... which -- going back to my original simple point that I don't really think needed to be challenged so much -- is not so old that people have necessarily completed their education. That is why it is a questionable cut-off, and, since it is arbitrary, it's also questionable for it to be strictly applied down to the last day.
scroggs, yes I know there are other routes and we can all get there by one means or another. I don't want to keep going around in circles re strict cadet age limits, but, I would say multiple arbitrary criteria being used to give a score to initial applications, is a fair system, because that method gives an applicant's other virtues a chance to shine.
I obviously accept that employers can use whatever criteria they want to bring 800 people with grade 'C' A-levels down to the most favoured 24, but you can't be seriously asserting, as this isn't Cuba or Iraq, that those of us marginally outwith some initial arbitrary criteria have to unquestionably accept their strict imposition, or that those in charge aren't able to subtly or 'arbitrarily' adjust or relax them. I'll sure be keeping an eye out for any whining in future from the defenders of these tough regimes regarding their mandatory retirement ages or anything else!
Re: the Hercules -- well, was just telling it as I heard it! Maybe the seats didn't need actually modified, a likely exaggeration, but the thrust of the matter was that someone was too tall to even apply, but because he wanted specifically to fly transport aircraft, which had room for larger pilots, and was such a good egg otherwise, that they waived some arbitrary height restrictions in force at the time. I think he studied law at uni and went on to fly for Britannia if that helps you think of who it could be... I don't know a name...