Originally Posted by Baradium (Post 3617509)

The cog test replaced the sim eval, the idea being it was a better comparison since invariably some pilots either flew the same type aircraft the sim was in or had to spend a lot of money if they wanted to get time in one.

Everyone gets that you think military pilots' skills are not to be questioned or tested in an interview. Delta disagrees. You did finally admit that you don't like skills tests unless they are for pilots you deem to have not demonstrated appropriate skill levels in their background, but you are fine with it for them. So shouldn't a military pilot be able to pass the same tests as a pilot from a dual pilot kingair?

You'd have a better result just saying you think the test is too hard, which I think many on here would agree it's quite difficult. Of course we don't know what part anyone actually failed either.

Originally Posted by jozwales (Post 3617279)

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.

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 3618073)

I don't see much value in those silly "tests" for anyone. But if we're heck bent on justifying them, then any shred of applicability could maybe be justified to the very few backgrounds and experience levels where there is the least consistency.

But sure, let's keep justifying the silliness. Bring back the age 30ish and 20/20 vision requirements while we're at it. 3 hour build me an airplane orals. Back in my day a hamburger cost a nickel.

Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3618191)

You could just say that you believe military pilots should be held to a different standard

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 3618339)

Nope. Just that pilots (mil plus many, many other common pathways) shouldn't have to do the silly ab-initio aptitude nonsense. It proves nothing.

I'm trying very hard to play devil's advocate and justify the silly test by philosophically carving out an extreme case for it.

Military pilots shouldn't have to do it. (Feel free to just quote that sentence for another out of context discussion point). Neither should regional pilots. Or (at least) most corporate pilots. Or Boeing/Airbus test pilots. Or most (if not all) other cases.

If...and it's a big if...there is any real predictive prowess in the silly after the fact "aptitude" tests, the only case I can see for them even in high theory is for extreme cases like low time, mostly 172, bare minimum time in something turbine/jet with much less structure, supervision, standardization or quality control than the vast majority of other career paths. And I'm not even advocating for it there; merely attempting to come up with some philosophical justification for them.

Perhaps these types of tests are of some value for pre-career applications, like determining who is suitable for a primary flight training scholarship or something like that. But for a room full of dark blue suits and red ties, ATP's with military training and/or Part 121 type ratings and thousand(s) of hours of proven flight time (and training, and recurrents, and OE, and line checks, and FAA observations, etc) using a theoretical test to measure pilot aptitude to do the very job they've been doing successfully and consistently is just silly.

Unless you're in the "interview/test prep" business. In that case it’s as rock solid as it gets.

Originally Posted by OOfff (Post 3618356)

the test is part of the hiring process. everyone should take it as long as that’s the case. And clearly those in charge agree.

However, the attitude that “I shouldn’t have to take it because I did x” should be the real discriminator

Originally Posted by CAFB 04-12 (Post 3618454)

Having an ATP used to be part of the process too.

Originally Posted by Roll Inverted and Pull (Post 3618457)

Don't remember that, and I was hired in`66.

Originally Posted by BarbaraPalvin (Post 3619110)

I attended some university in Europe and I am having an issue getting the transcripts, they will either give me just a copy that’s not “An official copy bearing a seal from the registrar’s office in an unopened envelope” (or whatever that means) or have me wait one month to get that document legalized by the Chancellor.

I am going to to email the recruiting team about it, but was curious if anybody here had a similar situation.