Obviously I don't think its too hard. I obviously passed it and I wasn't sweating it either. As for it replacing the sim ride, both instantly became something specifially rehearsed. Should a pilot "be able to pass" something? Shouldn't every pilot be able to do an NDB arc in actual with no autopilot with one engine out down to mins? Shouldn't a kidney transplant doctor be able to pass Grey's Anatomoy 101 to prove they are still real doctors?

The tests are silly and prove nothing. I'll put a career's worth of actual flying experience in the real world over those silly tests any day.

Seems like it’s two months, from another post a couple pages back. It seems to vary, but be patient and should come soon. I got my top tier 3/15, expecting to be another month..

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

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 its as rock solid as it gets.

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

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

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

How many people have been hired without an ATP in this decade?

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.

If it's unopened, and in the original envelope they send you, that may work if short on time. Especially, if you just don't have time to get the official one. Request both and see if they arrive on time? Worst case, you tell them during the in-person this was the best you could do with the foreign institution.