Why don't schools 'screen' self sponsored cadets?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why don't schools 'screen' self sponsored cadets?
In terms of people applying for the long courses at UK Flying Colleges, I really think that they must 'raise the standard' of entry for their self sponsored, self selected cadets.
OK, business is business, but I think it is totally irresponsible of the flying scools in the way in which they allow 'applicants' onto their courses with open arms, without any knowledge of a candidates academic ability, personality make-up, and all other factors that would go towards assessing whether someone will go on to pass the course, and more importantly, become a competent commercial pilot.
I believe that ALL ab-inito cadets must under go the same screening as sponsored cadets before being allowed on a course. Even if these results just provide an honest assessment for the candidates aptitude for the course so that he/she can form his own judegment as to whether he/she should go ahead, at least this would be better than some marketing 'pleb' saying, 'sure, give me £60K and everything will be just fine!'
All too often I have seen people joining colleges, and after paying vast sums, realise the course isnt as easy as marketing make it out to be! A few weeks later they are applying for refunds, only to get back £16K out of the £60K!
On a CAA course, a struggling student could get through his exams 'learning' all the practice papers. Under JAR, this just isnt possible. Many regard the training course as 'the' test. In my opinion, a candidate should have been tested before allowed on the course, so that the course and exams are nothing more than a formality.
I dont think just raising the academic entry requirements (e.g. to degree level) would be fair. Many ab-initios choose to complete a flying course instead of uni. I also know a couple of highly successful captains who never had a qualification to their name before starting their flying course.
I recently saw an advert from one UK flying school for assessment days, where aptitude tests and interviews, etc. can be conducted for self sponsored cadets (for around £250).
Anyone have any thoughs on all this?
OK, business is business, but I think it is totally irresponsible of the flying scools in the way in which they allow 'applicants' onto their courses with open arms, without any knowledge of a candidates academic ability, personality make-up, and all other factors that would go towards assessing whether someone will go on to pass the course, and more importantly, become a competent commercial pilot.
I believe that ALL ab-inito cadets must under go the same screening as sponsored cadets before being allowed on a course. Even if these results just provide an honest assessment for the candidates aptitude for the course so that he/she can form his own judegment as to whether he/she should go ahead, at least this would be better than some marketing 'pleb' saying, 'sure, give me £60K and everything will be just fine!'
All too often I have seen people joining colleges, and after paying vast sums, realise the course isnt as easy as marketing make it out to be! A few weeks later they are applying for refunds, only to get back £16K out of the £60K!
On a CAA course, a struggling student could get through his exams 'learning' all the practice papers. Under JAR, this just isnt possible. Many regard the training course as 'the' test. In my opinion, a candidate should have been tested before allowed on the course, so that the course and exams are nothing more than a formality.
I dont think just raising the academic entry requirements (e.g. to degree level) would be fair. Many ab-initios choose to complete a flying course instead of uni. I also know a couple of highly successful captains who never had a qualification to their name before starting their flying course.
I recently saw an advert from one UK flying school for assessment days, where aptitude tests and interviews, etc. can be conducted for self sponsored cadets (for around £250).
Anyone have any thoughs on all this?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fly_777,
I appreciate your points and agree with you, although I seem to have been under the incorrect impression that BAe at Jerez tested their candidates before allowing them to commence the course.
I wouldn't regard such a scheme as 'screening' though as often people get better at aptitude tests and I have seen people fail one set of aptitude tests only to pass another set with flying colours. I have read on these pages that after bmi british midland testing at Oxford, rejected candidates received one of two letters: saying that they had been unsuccessful but either did, or did not, have the aptitude required to self sponsor.
It may well benefit some candidates to have, say, the GAPAN tests included as a prerequisite to commencement of a course, but would wannabes be willing to fork out yet more money to do this?
Perhaps an idea would be for the schools who run airline aptitude tests to just extend the process by a few days, and at nominal cost, allow other potential self-sponsored wannabes to sit the same battery of tests.
Any self-sponsors out there have any thoughts on this? It is an interesting topic... II personally feel that I would sit some tests before shelling out my hard earned money on a course, but what do others think?
And as a random thought that comes to mind, where does BAe test its potential Airtours crews? It must be somewhere in Britain.. no?!
Safe flying,
SB
I appreciate your points and agree with you, although I seem to have been under the incorrect impression that BAe at Jerez tested their candidates before allowing them to commence the course.
I wouldn't regard such a scheme as 'screening' though as often people get better at aptitude tests and I have seen people fail one set of aptitude tests only to pass another set with flying colours. I have read on these pages that after bmi british midland testing at Oxford, rejected candidates received one of two letters: saying that they had been unsuccessful but either did, or did not, have the aptitude required to self sponsor.
It may well benefit some candidates to have, say, the GAPAN tests included as a prerequisite to commencement of a course, but would wannabes be willing to fork out yet more money to do this?
Perhaps an idea would be for the schools who run airline aptitude tests to just extend the process by a few days, and at nominal cost, allow other potential self-sponsored wannabes to sit the same battery of tests.
Any self-sponsors out there have any thoughts on this? It is an interesting topic... II personally feel that I would sit some tests before shelling out my hard earned money on a course, but what do others think?
And as a random thought that comes to mind, where does BAe test its potential Airtours crews? It must be somewhere in Britain.. no?!
Safe flying,
SB
Guest
Posts: n/a
I do have to agree..
My personal view is not so much as been able to cope with what the course throws at you, but are you "Airline Material" i.e after you've spent your £30,000, can you get a job!
It wouldn't take much for schools to assess this from potential incoming students. Give them a somewhat near airline interview before they take their money.
007
------------------
Hear All...See All...Say Now't.
[email protected]
(I'm away for a while!)
My personal view is not so much as been able to cope with what the course throws at you, but are you "Airline Material" i.e after you've spent your £30,000, can you get a job!
It wouldn't take much for schools to assess this from potential incoming students. Give them a somewhat near airline interview before they take their money.
007
------------------
Hear All...See All...Say Now't.
[email protected]
(I'm away for a while!)
Guest
Posts: n/a
I have to say guys that I agree with everything that has been said so far in relation to this topic. It is only to often that you hear of individuals leaving courses because of their difficulty. In reality this happens to a large number of people who look at the future rewards of this excellent career rather than facing the responsiblity of engaging on a very tough regime of study and self determination on a very demanding course.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Screening / testing is for the benefit of applicants and the airlines.
Many self sponsored cadets, starting their career with smaller operators, will only have an interview for their selection.
I have witnessed two pilots lose their jobs in my short time in aviation purely because they could not handle the pressure of the cockpit, and may therefore react badly in an emergency (anxious introverts rather than stable extrovets perhaps!). Some kind of selection / screening process right from day one would have saved the pilots, and the airline, a whole lot of time and money - and heartache.
Many self sponsored cadets, starting their career with smaller operators, will only have an interview for their selection.
I have witnessed two pilots lose their jobs in my short time in aviation purely because they could not handle the pressure of the cockpit, and may therefore react badly in an emergency (anxious introverts rather than stable extrovets perhaps!). Some kind of selection / screening process right from day one would have saved the pilots, and the airline, a whole lot of time and money - and heartache.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Agree with most of the sentiments but to dissuade everyone who failed the tests which, although geared towards finding out aptitude for pilot training, really in my opinion do not do a very good job, would be a hell of a waste!
Let's face it, anyone with reasonable mathematics ability, general common sense and (most importantly) practice can pass the aptitude tests most airlines put you through when going for sponsorship or jobs. The micropat are slightly different, I think, but the vast majority of self-sponsored pilots have been knocked back by the airlines and their tests at least once yet gone on to make good pilots. I, along with virtually every other person on my course thought bugger their selection tests and went through the ab-initio anyway with no great drama. I can only speak for what I have personally seen, but of the people I saw struggling, most just didn't put the graft in, though I grant that unfortunately there will always be people that do work bloody hard and still don't get there through no fault of their own. Would tests pick these people out? I doubt it.
As for testing to see if you will be able to get a job when you leave...again a nice idea, but does it really happen on ability? IMHO being "airline material" is quite a small part of actually getting a job post training. Can you gauge luck and determination in classroom tests?
It would have taken a lot of testing to convince me not to give my ambitions a good go and spend my life saying "what if"...
Let's face it, anyone with reasonable mathematics ability, general common sense and (most importantly) practice can pass the aptitude tests most airlines put you through when going for sponsorship or jobs. The micropat are slightly different, I think, but the vast majority of self-sponsored pilots have been knocked back by the airlines and their tests at least once yet gone on to make good pilots. I, along with virtually every other person on my course thought bugger their selection tests and went through the ab-initio anyway with no great drama. I can only speak for what I have personally seen, but of the people I saw struggling, most just didn't put the graft in, though I grant that unfortunately there will always be people that do work bloody hard and still don't get there through no fault of their own. Would tests pick these people out? I doubt it.
As for testing to see if you will be able to get a job when you leave...again a nice idea, but does it really happen on ability? IMHO being "airline material" is quite a small part of actually getting a job post training. Can you gauge luck and determination in classroom tests?
It would have taken a lot of testing to convince me not to give my ambitions a good go and spend my life saying "what if"...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fly_777
I have to disagree with your views.
Most tests should be taken with a pinch of salt and I think that if a student is really determined to fly and has a passion for it - he/she will pass the course.
I have a friend who was told by the RAF he had no flying ability whatsoever. He resat the tests a year later only to pass! much to the confusion of the RAF board. He then went onto become a very good airline pilot - what does that tell you?? My view is that is tells you that these tests are C*ap!
Testing for sponsorship is a filter - to get rid of the vast numbers of people. Some people have what a desk jockey has decided pilots need and some don't - it has no bearing on their ability to fly.
I agree that some people are just not upto the job - that is almost expected every now and again but these people would probably be caught out in the training.
Sounds to me like you don't like the fact that guys are getting the same jobs as people who have sat these tests. Are you sponsored by any chance?
I have to disagree with your views.
Most tests should be taken with a pinch of salt and I think that if a student is really determined to fly and has a passion for it - he/she will pass the course.
I have a friend who was told by the RAF he had no flying ability whatsoever. He resat the tests a year later only to pass! much to the confusion of the RAF board. He then went onto become a very good airline pilot - what does that tell you?? My view is that is tells you that these tests are C*ap!
Testing for sponsorship is a filter - to get rid of the vast numbers of people. Some people have what a desk jockey has decided pilots need and some don't - it has no bearing on their ability to fly.
I agree that some people are just not upto the job - that is almost expected every now and again but these people would probably be caught out in the training.
Sounds to me like you don't like the fact that guys are getting the same jobs as people who have sat these tests. Are you sponsored by any chance?
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ....
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to say that I don't agree with any of the above comments (except for the previous two which appeared as I wrote!!!). The flying schools are running a business and, at the end of the day, if someone has the money but not the sense then that is the customers probem (as harsh as it may sound). Would you also expect a used car dealer to check your driving skills before he sells you a car (just in case you end up driving it off the forecourt and into a bus stop)? I don't think so.
Aptitude tests are notoriously unreliable indicators of how good a pilot someone will make, and do not necessarily provide any indication of ones intelligence level as pertains to aviation (they were, after all, designed for 'generic' graduate recruitment schemes). Look at how many people fail the various aptitude tests out there - does that make 98% of the applicants daft? No. They are a tool to reduce the vast numbers of applicants to more manageable levels. In any case, look at how many of the supposed 'chosen few' get chucked off their sponsored courses due to lack of aptitude/interest (more than you would imagine)!
At the end of the day, the JAR exams (ground and flying)are there for a good reason - to test your ability as applies to aviation. If you achieve passes and get the coveted 'blue book' then you should feel rightly proud of it. If you don't, then it was for good reason, and the system has worked. Applying ad-hoc tests to make people like 777 feel 'safe' simply would not work, and may mean that many people who would ultimately make good pilots are put off an excellent career for life!
Give everybody a chance at least eh guys?
Cheers
Busta
[This message has been edited by Busta Level (edited 11 March 2001).]
Aptitude tests are notoriously unreliable indicators of how good a pilot someone will make, and do not necessarily provide any indication of ones intelligence level as pertains to aviation (they were, after all, designed for 'generic' graduate recruitment schemes). Look at how many people fail the various aptitude tests out there - does that make 98% of the applicants daft? No. They are a tool to reduce the vast numbers of applicants to more manageable levels. In any case, look at how many of the supposed 'chosen few' get chucked off their sponsored courses due to lack of aptitude/interest (more than you would imagine)!
At the end of the day, the JAR exams (ground and flying)are there for a good reason - to test your ability as applies to aviation. If you achieve passes and get the coveted 'blue book' then you should feel rightly proud of it. If you don't, then it was for good reason, and the system has worked. Applying ad-hoc tests to make people like 777 feel 'safe' simply would not work, and may mean that many people who would ultimately make good pilots are put off an excellent career for life!
Give everybody a chance at least eh guys?
Cheers
Busta
[This message has been edited by Busta Level (edited 11 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Agreed. Anyone can pass the aptitude tests with a reasonable amount of practice and an expectation of what they entail.
However, I do agree that there should be some kind of screening for the schools, after all, money can buy you almost anything.
How about more focus on interviewing? I would have thought attitude and personality holds far more importance than having a good day on an aptitude test.
However, I do agree that there should be some kind of screening for the schools, after all, money can buy you almost anything.
How about more focus on interviewing? I would have thought attitude and personality holds far more importance than having a good day on an aptitude test.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi folks,
As I am in the "school interviewing" stage at this moment, I too have strong feelings on this.
No school I have visited, with true intentions of training with them, has tested me in any way. This is wrong. I am not a rich person (whatever is classed as rich these days) who can fork out the dosh for an integrated course "just like that"! I feel a duty to my wallet (and my financial sanity!) to make sure I have what it takes before I do so.
Steps need to be taken by the authorities but unfortunately these steps have to be taken by ourselves and so I am sitting the GAPAN tests next week, at a small cut of what I am looking at paying for a commercial pilots licence, which I hope is going to go some way in helping my cerebral regions to realise this is what I can(?) do. I feel this is wrong.*
Test potential applicants schools please, you will get alot more business (and respect) out of prospective students if you do.
Regards, VFE.
*Not the cost, but the fact I feel this is wrong for a prospective professional. After all, what is it, 60% of pilots are self sponsorers? Hmmm.
[This message has been edited by VFE (edited 12 March 2001).]
As I am in the "school interviewing" stage at this moment, I too have strong feelings on this.
No school I have visited, with true intentions of training with them, has tested me in any way. This is wrong. I am not a rich person (whatever is classed as rich these days) who can fork out the dosh for an integrated course "just like that"! I feel a duty to my wallet (and my financial sanity!) to make sure I have what it takes before I do so.
Steps need to be taken by the authorities but unfortunately these steps have to be taken by ourselves and so I am sitting the GAPAN tests next week, at a small cut of what I am looking at paying for a commercial pilots licence, which I hope is going to go some way in helping my cerebral regions to realise this is what I can(?) do. I feel this is wrong.*
Test potential applicants schools please, you will get alot more business (and respect) out of prospective students if you do.
Regards, VFE.
*Not the cost, but the fact I feel this is wrong for a prospective professional. After all, what is it, 60% of pilots are self sponsorers? Hmmm.
[This message has been edited by VFE (edited 12 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
VFE
ha ha - you should listen to yourself!
If you want to know if you have what it takes - whatever that is - try a flying or gliding lesson. It will teach you more than some stupid test.
But if you are this unsure then maybe you should look at another career.
ha ha - you should listen to yourself!
If you want to know if you have what it takes - whatever that is - try a flying or gliding lesson. It will teach you more than some stupid test.
But if you are this unsure then maybe you should look at another career.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ....
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VFE,
What tests do you suggest would prove that you are capable of completing the course?
Would you be willing to pay for these tests?
If you passed the test and then failed later in the course would you look to sue the school?
What if you failed all the tests you took at every school - would you give up on your desire to be a pilot?
If the answer to the last question is yes, then I suggest that you give up now. Believe me - you will face a great deal more challenges during the training (and afterwards) than you can believe. If you would be dissuaded by the results of a meaningless test, then I am afraid that you will just not make it anyway.
If the answer is no, then why do the test in the first place?!
If you are looking for some sort of guarantee that you will pass the course then you will be equally disappointed. It is all too easy to rely on the opinions of others. If you BELIEVE that you can do it, then go ahead. It is a huge gamble, but it can be successful. There is no one but yourself who can make it a success - and looking for guarantees will get you nowhere. take responsibility for your actions, don't rely on others and you will go far!
Cheers.
Busta
[This message has been edited by Busta Level (edited 11 March 2001).]
What tests do you suggest would prove that you are capable of completing the course?
Would you be willing to pay for these tests?
If you passed the test and then failed later in the course would you look to sue the school?
What if you failed all the tests you took at every school - would you give up on your desire to be a pilot?
If the answer to the last question is yes, then I suggest that you give up now. Believe me - you will face a great deal more challenges during the training (and afterwards) than you can believe. If you would be dissuaded by the results of a meaningless test, then I am afraid that you will just not make it anyway.
If the answer is no, then why do the test in the first place?!
If you are looking for some sort of guarantee that you will pass the course then you will be equally disappointed. It is all too easy to rely on the opinions of others. If you BELIEVE that you can do it, then go ahead. It is a huge gamble, but it can be successful. There is no one but yourself who can make it a success - and looking for guarantees will get you nowhere. take responsibility for your actions, don't rely on others and you will go far!
Cheers.
Busta
[This message has been edited by Busta Level (edited 11 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
BAE Systems College in Jerez now test all applicants and provide full feedback on results whether they accept you for training or not. These tests are specifically validated against pilots in E.U. air forces and are a very good indicator of flying aptitude.
Psychometric and Aptitude Testing have strong correlations to success in flying training. Thats why organisations spend so much on them year in year out (think BA and RAF).
Its a hell of a lot better than 2 people on the other side of a desk deciding whether thye like you or not and then looking at what GCSE's you got in school...
If you see the heartache of people failing these courses you would not wish it on your worst enemy. Anything that minimises this is a good thing.
Good luck and remember - consistent hard work and dedication can overcome nearly any deficit in aptitude.
WWW
Psychometric and Aptitude Testing have strong correlations to success in flying training. Thats why organisations spend so much on them year in year out (think BA and RAF).
Its a hell of a lot better than 2 people on the other side of a desk deciding whether thye like you or not and then looking at what GCSE's you got in school...
If you see the heartache of people failing these courses you would not wish it on your worst enemy. Anything that minimises this is a good thing.
Good luck and remember - consistent hard work and dedication can overcome nearly any deficit in aptitude.
WWW
Guest
Posts: n/a
VFE,SCENARIO.On the day of your tests u get out of bed the dog bites u,u cant find your wallet,u have a disagreement with your missus about the mess u left in the bathroom,the car gives u trouble starting,u get snarled up in traffic,your late for your tests,your having a bad day and you fail them.So now you are going to walk away completely from the flying idea and stick with the day job.Just like that.If that was me ide be back till i passed mate.Take no prisoners the decision is made,and thats it.Thats my attitude and not a lot will change my decision,least of all test results on a day i knew was a lousy one.If u really feel u must put yourself through this and it dosn,t go to plan what are u going to do?live the rest of your life thinking about your dream?I dont need the results of some test to tell me i cant cut the mustard,detirmination has showed me i can,
MARTIN LUTHER KING
I have a dream.
If u really want to do it u will,regardless of test results.If the school i went to tested me for entry and i failed,ide just sit it again till i did pass its as simple as that.
MARTIN LUTHER KING
I have a dream.
If u really want to do it u will,regardless of test results.If the school i went to tested me for entry and i failed,ide just sit it again till i did pass its as simple as that.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The reason that training schools do not offer a decent screening process is as busta says because somebody is about to pay them a hefty sum of money for their training, it is a business and they are not going to turn them away.
In my opinion the screening you are put through can be fairly inaccurate but is still better than nothing. It will often show up the people who just can't do it as well as unfortunately many who can. One person who sat a general GCSE maths test ended up with a big fat zero, is this somebody who would be able to think on their feet in the air by adjusting the headings and times in the hold or calculating rates of descent based on actual conditions? Probably not.
However as is pointed out in previous posts, it depends upon how much you want it, more than the ability you have. Most people can probably do it but there will always be the odd person who just can't.
In my opinion the screening you are put through can be fairly inaccurate but is still better than nothing. It will often show up the people who just can't do it as well as unfortunately many who can. One person who sat a general GCSE maths test ended up with a big fat zero, is this somebody who would be able to think on their feet in the air by adjusting the headings and times in the hold or calculating rates of descent based on actual conditions? Probably not.
However as is pointed out in previous posts, it depends upon how much you want it, more than the ability you have. Most people can probably do it but there will always be the odd person who just can't.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ....
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW,
OK. Fair points made. However, just a couple of questions.
How many people have BAE actually turned away due to the results of the tests? I would suggest that it is not that many (business models don't work well with turning away customers with ready cash)! Although business is good at the moment, I'm sure that the tests would suddenly become much less 'important' if things got tough? (or am I just being cynical?!)
<<Psychometric and Aptitude Testing have strong correlations to success in flying training. Thats why organisations spend so much on them year in year out (think BA and RAF).>>
Yes - but think how many people fail in both BA and the RAF even AFTER the aptitude tests. I'm not sure that there has been any comparative study to show that the aptitude tests result in a lower percentage of failures than using any other pseudo-random selection procedure. After all - the aptitude tests in both cases are simply a means of reducing the huge numbers involved. The real decisions are made later by <<2 people on the other side of a desk deciding whether they like you or not and then looking at what GCSE's you got in school>> are they not?
I agree that there can be a great deal of heartache involved in 'dropping off' a course, but it is a risk we all take. What I am trying to get across is that too many people are looking for a 'blame' culture here. They want someone to give them absolute assurances of success. As you and I both know, these assurances will often cause more trouble than good...
If we all worried about taking the plunge to go training we'd have no aircraft in the skies today (except for BA and the RAF of course )
Cheers!
Busta
[This message has been edited by Busta Level (edited 11 March 2001).]
OK. Fair points made. However, just a couple of questions.
How many people have BAE actually turned away due to the results of the tests? I would suggest that it is not that many (business models don't work well with turning away customers with ready cash)! Although business is good at the moment, I'm sure that the tests would suddenly become much less 'important' if things got tough? (or am I just being cynical?!)
<<Psychometric and Aptitude Testing have strong correlations to success in flying training. Thats why organisations spend so much on them year in year out (think BA and RAF).>>
Yes - but think how many people fail in both BA and the RAF even AFTER the aptitude tests. I'm not sure that there has been any comparative study to show that the aptitude tests result in a lower percentage of failures than using any other pseudo-random selection procedure. After all - the aptitude tests in both cases are simply a means of reducing the huge numbers involved. The real decisions are made later by <<2 people on the other side of a desk deciding whether they like you or not and then looking at what GCSE's you got in school>> are they not?
I agree that there can be a great deal of heartache involved in 'dropping off' a course, but it is a risk we all take. What I am trying to get across is that too many people are looking for a 'blame' culture here. They want someone to give them absolute assurances of success. As you and I both know, these assurances will often cause more trouble than good...
If we all worried about taking the plunge to go training we'd have no aircraft in the skies today (except for BA and the RAF of course
) Cheers!
Busta
[This message has been edited by Busta Level (edited 11 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Busta Level and Gimpboy.
You are so right keep up the side boys...
RE:Fly_777
Get a life................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have no idea what your background is or why
you appear to be so pro-selection testing, but it is exactly what its name means "SELECTION". It is used for companies trying to get numbers down.
If you get a person turn up with the money why can't he do it?
It is not a difficult course providing you are prepared to put the work in. If you are not you fail - that is a worthwhile selection!
I happened to be at a certain famous flying school where BA turned up to appolgise to the Self-sponsored cadets because their own apptitude tests were a load of rubbish and they had recruited a lot of the wrong people and went on to recruit a load self-sponsored cadets!!!
When you finish the course you have to get a job and go all through selection again.
My point is that if you have problems with selection tests you are illiminatted from further proceedings.
HOWEVER that does not mean you wont be a natural pilot... and you won't be a lot better than people who pass graduate recruitment tests.
Graduate recruitment tests that BA and BMI use are standard tests whether you are going to be a pilot or pen-pusher.
Everyone that gets into an airline job is screened at some point why are so are you so bl**dy dtermined to stop peoples dreams early on?
Are you scared they might be better than you???
------------------
That's right, I am dangerous!!!
You are so right keep up the side boys...
RE:Fly_777
Get a life................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have no idea what your background is or why
you appear to be so pro-selection testing, but it is exactly what its name means "SELECTION". It is used for companies trying to get numbers down.
If you get a person turn up with the money why can't he do it?
It is not a difficult course providing you are prepared to put the work in. If you are not you fail - that is a worthwhile selection!
I happened to be at a certain famous flying school where BA turned up to appolgise to the Self-sponsored cadets because their own apptitude tests were a load of rubbish and they had recruited a lot of the wrong people and went on to recruit a load self-sponsored cadets!!!
When you finish the course you have to get a job and go all through selection again.
My point is that if you have problems with selection tests you are illiminatted from further proceedings.
HOWEVER that does not mean you wont be a natural pilot... and you won't be a lot better than people who pass graduate recruitment tests.
Graduate recruitment tests that BA and BMI use are standard tests whether you are going to be a pilot or pen-pusher.
Everyone that gets into an airline job is screened at some point why are so are you so bl**dy dtermined to stop peoples dreams early on?
Are you scared they might be better than you???
------------------
That's right, I am dangerous!!!