No you are not right I think that is a typical "civilian, chip on shoulder remark!"
During my training they were looking for flying ability foremost - my course started with 16 - all of whom had been through the UAS system so were assessed as able to fly - but 8 of those got chopped as not making the grade once the ability to operate, rather than just fly, an a/c became of greater importance. So nobody was an also ran as you quaintly put it. The assessment for allocation to future roles was then made on 2 accounts - ability to fly and ability to operate as a captain as soon as one reached a Squadron. Those who had good captaincy skills went to single seat FJ and helicopters as at that time all RAF helicopters were single pilot. Good captaincy skills were essential as even as a first tourist one could be working alone and away from supervision be asked to do all sorts of tasks by the Army!! I arrived on my 1st Squadron as a Captain with approx 290hrs.
RAF selection and training was tough and you only got through on ability so your childish "also ran" comment perhaps reflects on you rather than contributing to the debate.
It was a question, not a remark, and you give a different answer from the one I got from Al-bert (who implied that my suggestion was correct with a few exceptions) so perhaps it is you who has the chip?
Whether or not I have a chip really doesn't matter since I already have a job with Bristow, Bristow already has won the SAR contract, defined it training programmes etc etc. The question of chips is rather more significant for those who may be seeking employment with the UK's soon-to-be only SAR provider.
I am not in the "SAR division" so probably of no consequence to me personally, but I still have a slight dread of a large influx of SAR gods with superiority complexes who will exhaust themselves saying "we should do it like This - as we did in the military" and pouting and sulking when they don't get their way, rather than just getting on with the job as defined in Bristow's SAR ops manual. Hopefully I am quite wrong, but it is the tone of some contributers on this thread that makes me think otherwise!