Just a question out of interest on that OneFifty - how is the decision on the relevance of academic qualifications actually made?

I only ask because I went through a long time ago, but had a postgrad MSc in Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences under my belt along with my undergrad degree by the time I applied. A guy I currently work with went through at the same time with 5 years of undergrad and postgrad aero engineering to his name. At the time, we were told we were allowed to apply for enhanced seniority because of our extra qualifications, but in both cases we were initially turned down on the grounds that our qualifications weren't relevant.

We both got the seniority after a bit of a bunfight, but it did rather beg the question as to who makes the decisions, what are the criteria for being relevant or do they just give the papers to the cleaner and get her to flip a coin?

Melchett01

Unfortunately, I can't answer that question for you. I do know it has a lot to do with course content but as far as how the decision is made, I do not know.

RAF Selection process
 

Hello just a quick question. Im 16 years old and extremely keen to join the RAF as a pilot. I would be greatly appreciative of anyone who can offer me advice or guidance on how to prepare for the interview (should i know history of the RAF and in how much depth) and also i was wondering is it looked upon better if you have been to uni already or just left from having done A-Levels.

Thank you :ok:

Otters, if you read the very recent posts on this thread then you will see that university may be a best option.

Note the temporary stop on pilot recruitment. By the time that is over, you as an 18 year old would be in competition with a 2-year backlog of aspirants. Wait 5 years and things may be more stable.

Uni option
 

Pontius,
Thanks for the help! Well yes looking at it now maybe university is the best option. What I worry about is what to do as my life has literally been a lead up to the moment I apply to the RAF. Yourself being older than the current intake of pilots in the RAF, would you suggest any courses? All I want to do is be in one of the beastly typhoons!!!!! Thanks

P.s Merry Xmas

Obviously the science subjects such as Physics, Maths etc. would help but you should do a course that suits yourself, as long as that subject is a decent subject and not the 'History of David Beckham' or some other Mickey Mouse course.

Nothing worse than going to University and studying a course you don't like, I done it myself and it was dreadful but I did complete it.

Otter
 

These two statements do not seem to indicate a burning desire to join the RAF, merely an attraction to

:uhoh:

Filter to OASC Timeframe
 

Hi OneFifty and others,

I have completed my filter interview and been recommended to OASC (about a month ago).

I am going for Pilot and I am aware that even if successful at OASC my IOT date would not be until 2012.

Approximately how long should I expect to wait to be hear from OASC please?

I have also passed all my aptitude tests in advance as part of a UAS.

Thanks

At the risk of raining on your parade, have you had it confirmed that your pass as part of the UAS is valid and meets the scores required for regular selection?

Only asking as they first introduced the aptitude tests on UASs when I was on Sqn in the mid 90s. We were all shipped of to OASC to have a go and give them some data to help standardise their scores. Back then, you needed a score of 90 to pass for pilot on the UAS, but 110 to pass for selection to regular service as pilot.

Given the reduction in numbers required, the scores needed may change. You might want to check that the scores you got are good for both regular service and UAS flying.

Thanks for explaining that. I am certain they are valid however, they were only done a few months ago and many others on squadron have done the same and then just done the remaining 3 days of OASC in the future.

I got 147 and you need 112 for Pilot and it was the current test, sat with others doing the full OASC. All other tests were very much in the green too.

Thanks though

TheOttersNest, if this was truly a lifelong ambition of yours, you'd have been a member of the Air Training Corps for nearly 3 yrs now.

The First Class syllabus of which involves learning about the History of the RAF and would be engrained upon your mind.

As it is evidently not the case, it is only natural to question your statements.

Otter,

I wasn't going to say anything, but frankly, your last post simply serves to highlight your total unsuitability for Commissioned Service in the RAF. Your attitude stinks, and even if you did manage to somehow blag your way past OASC, you would be found out very very quickly once at IOT and in all likelihood be re-coursed at best or chopped at worst for attitude. Whilst OASC and IOT has very definite standards, which are objectively graded against, be under no illusion that every flight commander asks the same question come graduation time: would I want to go and have a beer with this guy? Do not underestimate how much part that very unofficial thought process plays in the final decisions. If you have struggled but are seen to be a decent guy, it could be the one thing tips the decision in your favour. If you have struggled but are seen to be a bit of an arse, well all I can say is I wouldn't want to spend over a year at IOT.

We are an organisation that has a very serious role to play in the defence of the United Kingdom and the pursuit of HM Government policy. That role demands a constant appraisal of how we do - both on a daily basis and on a more personal basis, annually in your appraisals. Much of this appraisal process involves giving and receiving criticism that frankly nobody likes to hear. But we do it because at the end of the day, that criticism could be the difference between operational success or a large smoking hole somewhere and operational failure.

The majority of people who take time to post on this forum are experienced operators who have been on active ops since before you were born. Equally, there are a number of individuals on here who are intimately involved with the recruiting process. You would be well advised to pin your ears back and listen when they speak. Whether you take their advice is another matter.

Now I strongly suggest you go and think about who it is you are dealing with - and asking for help from - on here. If you feel the need to apologise to individuals, take it on the chin and do so. However, if you want to keep ranting at people taking time to give you the benefit of their experience, you will simply continue to come across as a more suitable candidate for a position as the next David Brent - or God forbid - Stuart Baggs 'The Brand'.

Go away, learn a bit of humility and importantly, how to accept constructive criticism and then come back with a new profile and start afresh.

Sorry, but you are ineligable for the RAF as English is not your mother tongue.

TON has hopefully taken the advice and admonishment to heart and deleted his post.

Didn't see the alleged offending post, but had a PM from TON apologising to me. Seems there's hope for him yet! :ok:

RAF eyesight - Really pathetic if true!!
 

Hello,

I have just had an optometrist look over my eyes and have received the results. I also had her check me for colour blindness with the Ishihara (colour dot test) among others.

The colour blindness test was fine, with category 2.

My left eye has Plano sight but my right eye is -0.25 spherical. According to websites I've seen listing RAF requirements they don't accept anything other than values between Plano and +1.75.

I was told by the Optician that -0.25 is practically true vision and a small imperfection that would not stop me being a pilot.

Anyone know if the RAF have denied anyone, or yourself based on this slight imperfection?

The role I'm applying for is a Pilot by the way.

Thanks in advance,

George.

Though it may suck somewhat if you're the one with the very very slight eyesight problem, it is very much a buyers market George - if the RAF want perfect vision, they'll get hundreds of applicants who meet the standard, without even having to consider people who may make fine pilots, but have a vision defficiency no matter how small....

:(

Yes I see where you are coming from, they can afford to choose I suppose but think it would be a case of whether they pass it.

Is there any other charts for say, after 2007.? I have heard they have relaxed the rules slightly inline with the Navy/Army pilots.

George.

In all fairness to your queries,

This is not the place, it's a Pro Pilots rumour network.
Try something like E-goat, AARSE type them into google. Look around a few forums where everyone is in the same boat.

Threads like these are often started and don't end with a decent conclusion

Thanks for the advice.