scroggs I wouldn't have thought that applied to BA unless their selection is flawed, but I know what OAT mean when they talk about a lack of good students. I've flown with several wannabes who I've been shocked to see go on to further training, because they could not co-operate, or fly the plane, or had taken years and over a hundred hours just to gain a PPL. Many people think the only aptitude they need besides dedication (/obsession) is a large cash sum.
If the quality of fully qualified wannabes is also rather variable that might explain the high percentage of unemployed (unemployable?) fATPL holders, and encourage me to self-sponsor the rest of my training (I'm far from perfect but I'm not a muppet...). But I get the feeling that recruitment isn't meritocratic like that - people get their initial jobs based on contacts or luck and not particularly based on skill or aptitude or how effortlessly they sailed through training - is this correct or am I getting a wrong impression?