RAAF Flight Screening Programme
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey everyone just wanted to chime in to say thanks for all the great advice over the past year. Received a LOO for NEOC 59, hopefully I'll see some of you there!
All the best to you all, study hard!
All the best to you all, study hard!
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have my ASP coming up end of this month. Curious as to what sort of attire people wore; I am guessing a suit or business casual, yet during the full day sessions its a PT attire underneath a flight suit, correct? Which would mean wear the suit/business attire/smart casual en route there, and after hours (dinners etc) when you won't be in the flight suit? Silly question I know, the letter didn't explain in great detail as to what sort of attire is expected that's all.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have my ASP coming up end of this month. Curious as to what sort of attire people wore; I am guessing a suit or business casual, yet during the full day sessions its a PT attire underneath a flight suit, correct? Which would mean wear the suit/business attire/smart casual en route there, and after hours (dinners etc) when you won't be in the flight suit? Silly question I know, the letter didn't explain in great detail as to what sort of attire is expected that's all.
?
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
****, maybe the Army will open up for Pilots again for me now;
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/watch...cid=spartanntp
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/watch...cid=spartanntp
Yeah you only need smart casual for your arrival and for breakfast the day you leave.
Keep in mind that as an early 20s-keen-young-go-getter, your idea of what "smart casual" is, may be somewhat different to the more mature (read "older") people that will be assessing you.
Dress to impress this "older" generation, not necessarily that of your peers.
For guys, I would recommend trousers and a collared shirt (not a polo shirt).
I say this because I've had some feedback from some people involved within the ASP that some of the candidates were dressed like they were going out on Friday night with their mates.
They do notice this stuff, so give yourselves the best chance - certainly what you wear does not reflect your abilities, but it does reflect your attitude to the process, especially in the minds of the "traditional-type" people potentially assessing you.
Disclaimer - I have no fashion sense - my wife tells me so...
Extra Disclaimer - I've told my wife what I wrote here and she reckons I'm an old fashioned loser.
Fashion trumping reading in a few instances then because the joining instructions clearly spell out smart casual as collared shirt and slacks.
Righto - what Tayra said - "Read the Joining Instructions." Good luck!
Old man out.
Old man out.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Sydney
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great info everyone on this forum...thanks for the helpful advice. Am applying for ADFA entry. Can anyone advise on how many ADFA pilot positions are offered? I understand it's a 1-2% chance of acceptance. Thanks in advance!
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some friendly (old man) advice on this. First impressions last.
Keep in mind that as an early 20s-keen-young-go-getter, your idea of what "smart casual" is, may be somewhat different to the more mature (read "older") people that will be assessing you.
Dress to impress this "older" generation, not necessarily that of your peers.
For guys, I would recommend trousers and a collared shirt (not a polo shirt).
I say this because I've had some feedback from some people involved within the ASP that some of the candidates were dressed like they were going out on Friday night with their mates.
They do notice this stuff, so give yourselves the best chance - certainly what you wear does not reflect your abilities, but it does reflect your attitude to the process, especially in the minds of the "traditional-type" people potentially assessing you.
Disclaimer - I have no fashion sense - my wife tells me so...
Extra Disclaimer - I've told my wife what I wrote here and she reckons I'm an old fashioned loser.
Keep in mind that as an early 20s-keen-young-go-getter, your idea of what "smart casual" is, may be somewhat different to the more mature (read "older") people that will be assessing you.
Dress to impress this "older" generation, not necessarily that of your peers.
For guys, I would recommend trousers and a collared shirt (not a polo shirt).
I say this because I've had some feedback from some people involved within the ASP that some of the candidates were dressed like they were going out on Friday night with their mates.
They do notice this stuff, so give yourselves the best chance - certainly what you wear does not reflect your abilities, but it does reflect your attitude to the process, especially in the minds of the "traditional-type" people potentially assessing you.
Disclaimer - I have no fashion sense - my wife tells me so...
Extra Disclaimer - I've told my wife what I wrote here and she reckons I'm an old fashioned loser.
I I have had a quick scroll through the last few months. Some interesting conversations and some interesting points.
A couple of thoughts/points.
ASP like FSP is not a pass or fail course. It is an assessment of potential. Yes if you wish you may argue that Below Required Standard (BRS) is a fail but I will disagree. Everyone has potential. The ADF is not in the business of placing people on a course that they feel have a significant chance of not passing. Not good for the individual nor the company. Hence if you are BRS you have not failed anything. Your potential displayed puts you in the higher risk category for success on this course and as there are people that have MRS why would you place someone that is a high risk candidate in that situation.Anyone that starts giving facts and figures needs to be treated with a wee bit of “consideration”. I know the intent is generally positive in providing information but unless accurate can be detrimental. If I was a newbie and looked at Han’s post on 80% “failure” rate at ASP I certainly would not be instilled with a sense of confidence. The point above in the first para is relative, it’s not a failure. The other point is it’s not 80% BRS. The UK model is a 50% BRS. Ours is no different.Although there is a far bit of jousting that has and is going on in this thread with some negative input there are two things to remember. 1) If you make a statement, give an opinion on an open forum and don’t expect replies that in particular are not to your liking and you have difficulties with this than perhaps you should not post. By all means defend you post but do so in well-mannered way even if the other has not (yes I have not adhered to this but I’m old and grumpy). 2) In the bad old days pilot’s course was a **** sandwich with no bread. In other words it was a negative reinforcement style. “You failed that, do it again and you gone”. Thankfully that style of training/debrief is no longer around. That does not mean you are not critiqued. All it means is that now you get some bread with your sandwich. Why is this relevant? You will need to face up to debrief points and take criticism. If you cannot do that on a forum you may have difficulty doing so on course. And yes this is a different place than being debriefed by a wise all-knowing instructor, here you can argue back but when you defend your post do so in a positive manner (just like Tara).Remember being a kiddie and being told that you can be whatever you want to be? A little more definition on “want” would have been helpful. Want is not wish. Wishing does not make it so. If you want something you work for it. If you want to be in the ADF than go for it, work towards it. If you want to be an ADF pilot than go for it, work for it. It is not going to be given to you as a present.The forum has some good info. However people do get annoyed when someone comes on and starts laying down what it’s all about in a tone that shall we say rubs the wrong way and grates further when not actually 100% correct. So remember it’s not what you say so much as how you say it.
Good luck and good hunting.
A couple of thoughts/points.
ASP like FSP is not a pass or fail course. It is an assessment of potential. Yes if you wish you may argue that Below Required Standard (BRS) is a fail but I will disagree. Everyone has potential. The ADF is not in the business of placing people on a course that they feel have a significant chance of not passing. Not good for the individual nor the company. Hence if you are BRS you have not failed anything. Your potential displayed puts you in the higher risk category for success on this course and as there are people that have MRS why would you place someone that is a high risk candidate in that situation.Anyone that starts giving facts and figures needs to be treated with a wee bit of “consideration”. I know the intent is generally positive in providing information but unless accurate can be detrimental. If I was a newbie and looked at Han’s post on 80% “failure” rate at ASP I certainly would not be instilled with a sense of confidence. The point above in the first para is relative, it’s not a failure. The other point is it’s not 80% BRS. The UK model is a 50% BRS. Ours is no different.Although there is a far bit of jousting that has and is going on in this thread with some negative input there are two things to remember. 1) If you make a statement, give an opinion on an open forum and don’t expect replies that in particular are not to your liking and you have difficulties with this than perhaps you should not post. By all means defend you post but do so in well-mannered way even if the other has not (yes I have not adhered to this but I’m old and grumpy). 2) In the bad old days pilot’s course was a **** sandwich with no bread. In other words it was a negative reinforcement style. “You failed that, do it again and you gone”. Thankfully that style of training/debrief is no longer around. That does not mean you are not critiqued. All it means is that now you get some bread with your sandwich.
Why is this relevant? You will need to face up to debrief points and take criticism. If you cannot do that on a forum you may have difficulty doing so on course. And yes this is a different place than being debriefed by a wise all-knowing instructor, here you can argue back but when you defend your post do so in a positive manner (just like Tara).Remember being a kiddie and being told that you can be whatever you want to be? A little more definition on “want” would have been helpful. Want is not wish. Wishing does not make it so. If you want something you work for it. If you want to be in the ADF than go for it, work towards it. If you want to be an ADF pilot than go for it, work for it. It is not going to be given to you as a present.The forum has some good info. However people do get annoyed when someone comes on and starts laying down what it’s all about in a tone that shall we say rubs the wrong way and grates further when not actually 100% correct. So remember it’s not what you say so much as how you say it. Good luck and good hunting.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: brisbane
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, everything has come around rather quickly for me. I've been lurking here for a while, since before I did my ASP. Now I'm heading off to Canberra in a few days for my OSB. Certainly is a lot of pressure but thanks to everyone for the words of wisdom, can't say I've always agreed with what some of you have to say but It's still nice to check this thread to stay updated.
Final push now - then the painful wait for an offer or the painful wait to try again a year later.
K
Final push now - then the painful wait for an offer or the painful wait to try again a year later.
K
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, everything has come around rather quickly for me. I've been lurking here for a while, since before I did my ASP. Now I'm heading off to Canberra in a few days for my OSB. Certainly is a lot of pressure but thanks to everyone for the words of wisdom, can't say I've always agreed with what some of you have to say but It's still nice to check this thread to stay updated.
Final push now - then the painful wait for an offer or the painful wait to try again a year later.
K
Final push now - then the painful wait for an offer or the painful wait to try again a year later.
K
Hans, precisely the point. You air an opinion anywhere then you invite other opinions which maybe in disagreement with yours. And as it is an opinion it is biased. If your state something that is a fact it is not an opinionFacts and figures from DFR I would take with a huge grain of salt. Your quote that you achieved 76% by working out your score. This obviously did not come from ASP nor DFR.Your quote on “Many officers from East Sale suggested there was an 80% fail rate”. From my previous post you know my thoughts about “fail”. And suggested is not a fact. It is a fact that the RAF system has a 50% “makes the standard” rate. Your 80 % figure is more factual when you look at the 50% that do not display the appropriate potential and then the remaining number that will be looked at means that 80% of the people that do ASP will most likely be not looked at. Not 80% failed.
Happy landings.
Happy landings.
It would be interesting to see how well the screening does, when it gets to numbers of students starting the course compared to the numbers finishing.
50 years ago when I joined the RAAF, there were about 400 applicants for each pilots course. Of those, 40 would be selected to start the course, and of those, around 20 would get their wings.
This is a success rate of 5% from the initial applicants, and 50% for those deemed to be "Meets Required Standard."
Does this more-thorough screening process increase the finishers:starters ratio?
50 years ago when I joined the RAAF, there were about 400 applicants for each pilots course. Of those, 40 would be selected to start the course, and of those, around 20 would get their wings.
This is a success rate of 5% from the initial applicants, and 50% for those deemed to be "Meets Required Standard."
Does this more-thorough screening process increase the finishers:starters ratio?
