fwiw, I said that exact thing a couple pages back.

demonstrated aptitude over time and repeated training success should take priority over abstract aptitude tests. For pilots of any background.

 

sigh.

that wasn't my argument at all.

carry on.

 

And welcome to apc. Where people who might agree still argue to infinity.

 

The crux of the matter is that the actual folks in charge of hiring don't agree with you. When it comes down to it, the vast majority of applicants who get to that test do have the demonstrated aptitude over time and training success as well. You might have an excellent background, but so does everyone else taking the test.

In other words, they give you the test already knowing that you should know how to fly an airplane. They still want to make you do it. Your record speaks nothing as far as the test is concerned, but it does make it easier to get to take it.

I don't necessarily agree with how the process works, but I do agree thinking your background should exempt you doesn't really fly, any more than it does DCI pilots because they flew planes with passengers on Delta tickets.

The real question is are the standards too high relative to the alternative paths available.

 

Neither one is used

 

This gets asked every once in awhile, but what is the most recent date that people who have received a "Top Tier" email are getting the link for the AON assessment? I've been patiently waiting since 2/9.

 

What’s a top tier email? We aren’t hiring top tier right now. We are about 50/50 good people versus “wtf—how did you get here” types. Got some with a sub 2.0 GPA and some pink on their slips. I know these people personally so this isn’t something “I heard.”

 

It’s just a new step in the communication process pre-AON assessment. Assessment invites are now being metered to not overwhelm the system.

 

What if I told you that the airline captain gig is more than just flying a plane (moving a stick and making decisions)? You know, skills like workload management, managing a flight crew, CRM, knowledge of convoluted manuals, ability to compartmentalize, customer service and... wait for it... self awareness. Perhaps you'd agree these are cognitive skills more than physical/flying skills, yes? And perhaps you'd agree that military pilots don't perform these tasks the same way airline pilots do, if at all, especially if they flew fighters?

So maybe the military pilots should pass the same tests as the civilians, since, not much of military flying relates to airline flying.

Or maybe you'd agree that decades experienced regional and LCC pilots should also get to skip the cog test since, you know, they've obviously proven themselves. Funny you don't include them in your calculus.

Cool story, bro. You actually ask all your newhire copilots what their GPA was and if they've ever failed a checkride? And 50% don't pass your interview? And you haven't been called into a sit down in the CPO yet over this interrogation?

Yeah, I call BS.

 

For your first question, correct. I do think that.

For your second question, I never said that only military pilots should be exempt from playing sodoku with one hand and Pong with the other silliness.

I don't think there is any significant value from it. What tiny correlation that may exist in theory could maybe apply to pilot backgrounds where there is far less consistency.

If you hauiled checks at night single engine IFR with no autopilot, then flew turboprops then jets at a regional, then went to a LCC or Part 135 job, all with structured 121/135 training programs, I don't see the value in having to prove you have a scan or whatever its supposed to do.

However, if someone comes from a background with way less structure like Part 91 King Airs or Slowtations where its common for there to be 2 pilots logging PIC in single pilot AC (but the "insurance" requires it! LOL!) then ok, I guess there may be a case for that. Pilots from backgrounds where there is way less consistency and QC in training can be more widely distributed so if a company really wants to motor skills/cog test for that there's at least some logic behind the intent.

BTW that doesn't mean any given pilot from Part 91 flying isn't awesome. They may be the best pilot in the world. Or they may have warmed the right seat of a single pilot King Air dual logging as PIC.

But for most pilots I don't see the point in it. For military pilots, I really don't see the point in it. Not because they are better pilots. Just because to get through that training and fly for the typical 8-20+ years, the consistency of meeting the minimum standard required to do so far outweighs anything the silly cog test reveals.

Its worth nothing that no part of the process is perfect. Every airline has their "one percenters" (flying skills and personality) and every airline has turned down great pilots with great personalities that end up having stellar careers at other airlines.

Its also funny that those defending the cog test aren't also screaming to the high heavens to bring back a sim eval. I don't see a whole lot of value in that either to screen most pilots BTW. But the cog test is just silly. To even get to the point of being competitive for a DL pilot interview, even at the lower end of time/experience, far outweighs some pre-abinitio "right stuff" aptitude test.

Now, if someone wants to make the point that they know its silly, but by making it a requirement you creat a motivational hoop for people to have to jump through (most pilots literally prep for that exact test) then OK, I guess there's some embedded HR personality "soft skill" type stuff behind it. Yea its silly, but maybe it screens people who will do silly things for silly reasons simply beause its asked of them.

Does that justify its existance? IMO no, but at least acknowledging it in that context makes more sense than actually thinking tests like that really screen for pilot potential among already highly qualified pilots.