AH64
Careful mate, I’ve still got to squeeze my head into a C152. Carry on like that & I’ll need a C130!!
Cubby
No – flying isn’t brain surgery, and a low score in these tests doesn’t mean you’ll never fly an airliner. However, airlines would generally look to recruit people who show the best potential for soaking up training quickly (and therefore cheaply). That is what these tests are supposed to gauge, giving them an indication of an applicant’s potential.
But – and it’s a big but – there’s many, many ways to skin a cat. What will jump out from your CV more than anything else is hours. Chances are you won’t need to pass too many aptitude tests to instruct, and if you and me went for a FO position with GO, I had 300 hrs TT and a gold star from GAPAN, and you had 1000+ hours behind you as an instructor, who would be the more attractive candidate?
I suspect a lot of people look at aptitude tests (particularly for sponsorships) as something that can kill your career before it gets started. Aptitude tests are merely a tool in the recruitment process, nothing more, nothing less. Yes they are important, but they’re not the be all & end all.
Superted
Yep, I’ve had those jumpseat rides as well, when 99% of the flight was on autopilot, and I thought “I could push those switches.” I’ve even had an F100 FO tell me that he couldn’t land light aircraft properly because they were too twitchy compared to his Fokker . . . I think what you’re getting trained (and then paid) for upfront is those days when the super-dooper electrics don’t work properly, or the ILS is out, or the crosswind is right on the limit, etc etc.
They may be big docile beasties when everything is going well, but it always looks easy when someone knows what they’re doing. At 9 miles a minute (or 3 miles a minute on approach) I suspect most airliners would bite you extremely quickly if they got away from you.