Originally Posted by
On Autopilot
Yea from what my buddy told me they said too many people were passing the test (whatever that means) and that they didn't feel they were getting an accurate gouge of the interviewees' knowledge so they were going to change it continously. I bet those same ones doing the interview used the gouge to get on with PSA.
When I interview/ hire someone, I could care less about raim, and all that other bull fecal matter - the only thing I care about is real world life knowledge, reading charts, jepps or nocs, IFR procedures, and can you fly the damn plane without killing yourself or the operator but this raim crap, when are circling mins published, what prevents compressor stalls, (your flying piston twins or high performance piston, etc in the fleet I look after)
I wouldn't expect you to know or care because I sure as hell don't. I don't care what's in your logbook to a certain point cause I know when i test fly ya, who you really are will come shining through. I think PSA is being hypocritical.
Agreed 100%.
Throwing random questions from the ATP written(which is ridiculously flawed) at an applicant proves much less than having a known gouge out there.
At least with the gouge you know if someone is proactive enough to study and memorize things. With random questions it's almost like luck. Knowing RAIM tolerances does not help you shoot a visual when ATC gives you a vector to a FAF with a 130 degree turn to final.
I've never really agreed with a written as part of an interview anyway. Do any majors have a written?