AL Cadet programme

Bearcat

XWB wrote: »

Doubt that. You misunderstand psychometric testing
If you want my opinion psychometrics have NOTHING to do with your piloting ability, only a few even remotely relate to pilot apptitudes, but Aer Lingus battle on with the shapes etc..

ditto......I've seen loads of folk walk these tests to end up as grade one bell ends on the line...(initially).;)

XWB

Bearcat wrote: »

ditto......I've seen loads of folk walk these tests to end up as grade one bell ends on the line...(initially).;)

Everyone is a grade 1 ****** when they 1st go on line. Like a right of passage.
But seriously they need to update this whole test situation. Maybe they will this time though, who's to know!
In my day it was a bit more basic I have to say and the volume of applications wasnt as much. Is it all this abstract reasoning and numerical reasoning etc they use now?

xflyer

El tel you owe me a new keyboard you bar steward.[QUOTEThe psychological questionnaire was fun. I can't remember if I saw it the BA or Art Longish assessment but there was a question "would you be interested in a documentary about otters?" That caused a **** load of confusion and much cause for concern afterwards. I answered 'yes' because I am well into my otters, what right-minded person wouldn't? I even love touching the bollocks of the stuffed aninals in the natural history museum, but not the otters as they are in glass cabinets. ][/QUOTE]My wife is seriously considering sectioning me right now because I've been laughing hysterically for the last few minutes.

brotherrabbit

So a link between the natural world and the business end of an aircraft has been found...Good times.. I was rather thinking that the test would include maths but il start reading natural geographic instead of maths notes ha ha ha

XWB

Just remembered a question from my entry exam. "John owns a car dealership, he has a delivery on tuesday afternoon of one car, on friday he has another delivery with 2 extra cars, how many cars would be have in his showroom if it was empty on tuesday morning?"

answer is 4. Not many got it. I did. Was a topic of conversation when we were in training.

BostonB

Its only 4 if you assume a delivery is always 1. A question shouldn't rely on assumption.

inkogneetoe

BostonB wrote: »

Its only 4 if you assume a delivery is always 1. A question shouldn't rely on assumption.

Fail

Tenger

XWB wrote: »

Just remembered a question from my entry exam. "John owns a car dealership, he has a delivery on tuesday afternoon of one car, on friday he has another delivery with 2 extra cars, how many cars would be have in his showroom if it was empty on tuesday morning?"

answer is 4. Not many got it. I did. Was a topic of conversation when we were in training.

That's a great (yet also horrible) question. I agree with the above disapproving of 'assumption', it was my first thought too.

However re-reading the question for the 3rd time I realised that the answer of 4 is purely based on the info given in the question,no external input at all. 'A delivery' equals 1. 'A delivery' +2 must = 3. Therefore 1+3= 4.

I agree that you could question whether or not 'another delivery' is the same as before but unless you have info to say otherwise you must take it as the same.

My new drinking test had been found, to be tested next weekend. Also good insight into the possible challenges ahead of candidate who get through stages 1-2.

BostonB

Well its obvious the HR person who wrote the question is looking for the answer 4 and I take the point in an exam situation you can only answer the question as given. But it would be the wrong answer if you were programming a solution for example. If you want to be pedantic about it, the dealer received deliveries. The play on words is so awkward. In real life if you were asked this, you want someone who would realise there information missing here. But HR people don't think like that. Someone with a technical background wouldn't/shouldn't write a question like that.

Bearcat

And these type of questions are the deciding factor whether you are eligible to go forward. What a load of pig swill. This just gets the introverted boffins thru the system and the good guys get left by the wayside.

el tel

It's so easy to interpret 'with' as 'of', makes all the difference in these type of questions.

XWB

To be honest I just assumed it couldnt be that simple....then again I was torn because it may have been and I would look like the muppet who couldnt add 1 and 2 and get 3!
What decided it for me was the "extra".

It looks as if this is going to be hurdle one this time. hurdle 2 will be a group exercise and hurdle 3 is the face to face interview. Interviews were 1st up when I applied and then the tests. I find that very confusing. You may be a psychometric genius but an complete ******(as is often the case). I suppose with the volume of applicants interviewing all is not an option. I heard on the grapevine that all your online applications are screened by a computer and those that dont have the minimum requirements are just deleted. Those that do are saved and after the close each application that meets the requirements will be mailed a test. When you re-submit your test it is tagged onto your application and whoever fits into the envelope is kept while the rest are deleted out of it. Then they will read the applications for the 1st timke in HR of those who did well in the tests and decide who they want to call for phase 2.
It's very harsh in my opinion, you may have a great CV/experiance/personality but if you cant pair a few circles or run a car showroom you're knackered.......

xflyer

At least it's not as bad as the method allegedly used by another airline boss. Taking half the CVs piled on his desk, he tossed them in the bin, stating: 'I like my pilots to be lucky!'

XWB

xflyer wrote: »

At least it's not as bad as the method allegedly used by another airline boss. Taking half the CVs piled on his desk, he tossed them in the bin, stating: 'I like my pilots to be lucky!'

ha wow!

Something I noticed when I was an instructor on the Fokker(and so had many of the new cadet intake) was it was painfully obvious to us(but not HR it would seem) that some of the new intake were very high achievers and may have aced the entry exams BUT when we started pipinng smoke or engine failures or any sort of problem in during training they went to peices because they had no idea how to recover from "being wrong"....personally id rather see a guy ace 2 sections and score average on another 2 or not answer the questions he found too hard. Atleast then I'd know he was "experianced in being in over his head" and by leaving blanks I'd know that when confronted with a situation that he didnt understand he didnt just toss a coin and pick a course of action...he took a step back and didnt make a decision he wasnt 100% sure was correct. THAT is the apptitude I'd want to see in a pilot, not a guy who is so sure of himself he has no idea what to do when he has no idea what to do....

kiwster

XWB wrote: »

I heard on the grapevine that all your online applications are screened by a computer and those that dont have the minimum requirements are just deleted. Those that do are saved and after the close each application that meets the requirements will be mailed a test. When you re-submit your test it is tagged onto your application and whoever fits into the envelope is kept while the rest are deleted out of it. Then they will read the applications for the 1st timke in HR of those who did well in the tests and decide who they want to call for phase 2.
It's very harsh in my opinion, you may have a great CV/experiance/personality but if you cant pair a few circles or run a car showroom you're knackered.......

If that is the case then I probably should not apply as the min LC requirement has C3 in maths at Ordinary or Higher level as a requirement. I unfortunately got a D3 in honours maths in my leaving cert. This has the equivalent points as a B3 in ordinary level so maybe it meets the minimum C3 in ordinary level maths. That was a good few years ago, I managed to do a degree in computer science and a masters in software engineering so this should mean something as they're both very technical degrees. I'm going to apply anyway, I really hope one exam taken a good few years ago does not go against me. I enquired about this but got a fairly generic response back.

XWB

kiwster wrote: »

If that is the case then I probably should not apply as the min LC requirement has C3 in maths at Ordinary or Higher level as a requirement. I unfortunately got a D3 in honours maths in my leaving cert. This has the equivalent points as a B3 in ordinary level so maybe it meets the minimum C3 in ordinary level maths. That was a good few years ago, I managed to do a degree in computer science and a masters in software engineering so this should mean something as they're both very technical degrees. I'm going to apply anyway, I really hope one exam taken a good few years ago does not go against me. I enquired about this but got a fairly generic response back.

Well of course apply. Have to be in it to win it!

Dr.Crump

Cash is King !

Lets just say, hypothetically speaking, 40 PERSONS make it to the final interview stage, and lets say aerlingus want 20 PERSONS to become future co-pilots.

20 at the final interview are really nice guys but they happen to be from a working class backround and cant secure the funds needed.

The other 20 guys are fortunate to come from a wealthy(ish) backround and funding isnt a problem for them.

Its obvious who aer lingus offer the cadetship too!

Aer Lingus clearly state on the career section that the wannabe cadet must fund a % of the training cost. Rumour has it will be no less than 40-50% anyways!

Cadet entry pilots will most certainly be on a lower salary than a direct entry first officer so shamrock are able to recuperate the portion they invested in the initial CPL and IR training.

YOU NEED CASH TO APPLY FOR THIS!!!!!! If your broke, then your only wasting your own time and shamrocks time by applying.

This is nothing like the previous aerlingus cadetship because those guys had everything handed to them on a silver plate compared to the current system

XWB

Dr.Crump wrote: »

Cash is King !

Lets just say, hypothetically speaking, 40 PERSONS make it to the final interview stage, and lets say aerlingus want 20 PERSONS to become future co-pilots.

20 at the final interview are really nice guys but they happen to be from a working class backround and cant secure the funds needed.

The other 20 guys are fortunate to come from a wealthy(ish) backround and funding isnt a problem for them.

Its obvious who aer lingus offer the cadetship too!

Aer Lingus clearly state on the career section that the wannabe cadet must fund a % of the training cost. Rumour has it will be no less than 40-50% anyways!

Cadet entry pilots will most certainly be on a lower salary than a direct entry first officer so shamrock are able to recuperate the portion they invested in the initial CPL and IR training.

YOU NEED CASH TO APPLY FOR THIS!!!!!! If your broke, then your only wasting your own time and shamrocks time by applying.

This is nothing like the previous aerlingus cadetship because those guys had everything handed to them on a silver plate compared to the current system

Nonsense. Aer Lingus will secure the loan for the cadet pilots and I am 90% sure they have sorted the details with a certain bank and there are a number of loans ready to go with Aer Lingus's guarantee.

I must pick you up on the final paragraph there. You are clearly ill informed if you think we had it handed to us on a silver platter. You needed 1st time flight test passes and a minimum of 90% in every exam to stay on the course! It was bloody hard work! I would expect the envelope this time to be a bit looser of the cadets have to fund some.

Either you're just pitching in with no knowledge or you are trying to thin out the applications!

IrishB.ie

Dr.Crump wrote: »

Cash is King !

Lets just say, hypothetically speaking, 40 PERSONS make it to the final interview stage, and lets say aerlingus want 20 PERSONS to become future co-pilots.

20 at the final interview are really nice guys but they happen to be from a working class backround and cant secure the funds needed.

The other 20 guys are fortunate to come from a wealthy(ish) backround and funding isnt a problem for them.

Its obvious who aer lingus offer the cadetship too!

Aer Lingus clearly state on the career section that the wannabe cadet must fund a % of the training cost. Rumour has it will be no less than 40-50% anyways!

Cadet entry pilots will most certainly be on a lower salary than a direct entry first officer so shamrock are able to recuperate the portion they invested in the initial CPL and IR training.

YOU NEED CASH TO APPLY FOR THIS!!!!!! If your broke, then your only wasting your own time and shamrocks time by applying.

This is nothing like the previous aerlingus cadetship because those guys had everything handed to them on a silver plate compared to the current system

That makes no sense whatsoever. Aer Lingus are looking for skilled individuals. If you have a situation at 30,000ft, any amount of Daddies money is not going to help you.

(Good luck with your application and stop trying to put others off)

el tel

XWB wrote: »

ha wow!

Something I noticed when I was an instructor on the Fokker(and so had many of the new cadet intake) was it was painfully obvious to us(but not HR it would seem) that some of the new intake were very high achievers and may have aced the entry exams BUT when we started pipinng smoke or engine failures or any sort of problem in during training they went to peices because they had no idea how to recover from "being wrong"....personally id rather see a guy ace 2 sections and score average on another 2 or not answer the questions he found too hard. Atleast then I'd know he was "experianced in being in over his head" and by leaving blanks I'd know that when confronted with a situation that he didnt understand he didnt just toss a coin and pick a course of action...he took a step back and didnt make a decision he wasnt 100% sure was correct. THAT is the apptitude I'd want to see in a pilot, not a guy who is so sure of himself he has no idea what to do when he has no idea what to do....

Your experience as an instructor is apposite given some advice I received before going for my interviews at Aer Lingus.

At the time I had lots of flight crew access because of my job and taht was a great source of practical advice in getting through selection. As well as that, when flying to Dublin for the interviews/assessments I always got myself a jump seat in the Aer Lingus flights which were laid on; the crew I spoke to gave me great confidence that I too could get in.

Anyway, one of the things I was advised (by a non-EI SFO) was that at some point every cadet will fail a progress exam or perhaps even one of their final exams and that often a high-achiever will find this difficult to come to terms with when it happens. He suggested that I perhaps have something ‘in mind’ that I failed and be able to explain how I dealt with it. Lo and behold in my interview they looked at my application form and said, iirc, "you've got great grades in all your exams...so do you think you are smart?" Well, I couldn't believe it - I was ready for that one! I "explained" that I failed a half-module at University (one of the ones which definitely had no possible connection to anything that flies - French for business I think I said :rolleyes:) but that I re-sat it a week later and passed, my approach to everything being to identify my strengths and weaknesses, focus on the weaknesses until they are no longer deficient, while at the same time making sure the other things were not being too neglected in the meantime. Boke or what?!

Another bit of advice from the same chap was to never ever look or sound surprised at anything you might be asked at interview. He put forward an excellent scenario which was identical to one which I was asked by Willie Walsh and very similar to a couple of others which they threw up. Another hypothetical question which he claimed a friend was asked as a DE applicant to a certain airline was “You are on a stop over. You are at the hotel bar with the crew, waiting on the Captain to join you. The Captain enters the bar. He’s dressed in women’s clothing. What do you do?”

eurokev

Just like to say thanks to XWB. I really like your attitude and honesty and its been a pleasure reading your posts. Keep them coming. I find myself looking forward to them everyday and am becoming somewhat of a boards addict:eek:

XWB

el tel wrote: »

Your experience as an instructor is apposite given some advice I received before going for my interviews at Aer Lingus.

At the time I had lots of flight crew access because of my job and taht was a great source of practical advice in getting through selection. As well as that, when flying to Dublin for the interviews/assessments I always got myself a jump seat in the Aer Lingus flights which were laid on; the crew I spoke to gave me great confidence that I too could get in.

Anyway, one of the things I was advised (by a non-EI SFO) was that at some point every cadet will fail a progress exam or perhaps even one of their final exams and that often a high-achiever will find this difficult to come to terms with when it happens. He suggested that I perhaps have something ‘in mind’ that I failed and be able to explain how I dealt with it. Lo and behold in my interview they looked at my application form and said, iirc, "you've got great grades in all your exams...so do you think you are smart?" Well, I couldn't believe it - I was ready for that one! I "explained" that I failed a half-module at University (one of the ones which definitely had no possible connection to anything that flies - French for business I think I said :rolleyes:) but that I re-sat it a week later and passed, my approach to everything being to identify my strengths and weaknesses, focus on the weaknesses until they are no longer deficient, while at the same time making sure the other things were not being too neglected in the meantime. Boke or what?!

Another bit of advice from the same chap was to never ever look or sound surprised at anything you might be asked at interview. He put forward an excellent scenario which was identical to one which I was asked by Willie Walsh and very similar to a couple of others which they threw up. Another hypothetical question which he claimed a friend was asked as a DE applicant to a certain airline was “You are on a stop over. You are at the hotel bar with the crew, waiting on the Captain to join you. The Captain enters the bar. He’s dressed in women’s clothing. What do you do?”

Well I had quite a hair raising experiance when doing some line training with a young lad who was just off the cadetship. We were touching and going in Knock and it went fairly average(glideslope issues) but he was a nice lad. So on the way back I decided to let him redeem himself and i gave him a simulated engine failure. I throttled back the port engine on the fokker without a word(as it would happen...it doesnt tell you it is going to fail). The engine instruments all all went to idle settings BUT....he didnt notice for a good 30 secs. When he did he lost it a little and to my eternal amazement pulled the column back and threw full power into the other engine(my hand was on the port throttle lever) without so much as a thought for the poor rudder......all i can say is we were lucky we were at 10K.....he was a high achiever.....but when the **** hit the fan he went to bits and nearly stalled and spun the aircraft. From that day on I was committed to pushing all my students on any type to breaking point...just to see what happened...most dealt with it well..others didnt, but I found it was the more average joes that stayed calmer and got the job done

XWB

eurokev wrote: »

Just like to say thanks to XWB. I really like your attitude and honesty and its been a pleasure reading your posts. Keep them coming. I find myself looking forward to them everyday and am becoming somewhat of a boards addict:eek:

Thank you eurokev...I shall be selling fan club subscriptions soon!

Jocry

Id also like to take the time to thank XWB and el tel for your input. Experience is king when it comes to this subject, your input is invaluable so thank you

Tenger

el tel wrote: »

.......Another hypothetical question which he claimed a friend was asked as a DE applicant to a certain airline was “You are on a stop over. You are at the hotel bar with the crew, waiting on the Captain to join you. The Captain enters the bar.....dressed in women’s clothing. What do you do?”

Offer to buy HER a drink!

XWB

Tenger wrote: »

Offer to buy HER a drink!

it's a male captian yeh? If it isnt then...what's the issue?

xflyer

But suppose it's a man? Actually it doesn't matter what he or she does off duty is no one's business. There was a time when it mattered. Not any more. Personally I like the feel of stockings in the morning................

directPEPOD

"Personally I like the feel of stockings in the morning................ "

Me too, but not on me

Cessna_Pilot

"We currently have pilots located at a number of bases in Ireland and the UK. When qualified, you may be offered a position at any one of these locations"
:rolleyes:

Milan Cobian

"We currently have pilots located at a number of bases in Ireland and the UK. When qualified, you may be offered a position at any one of these locations"

AL is not a charity, it never did guarantee jobs for cadets. Ask the last lot. Chopped to a man (and woman) post 9/11, which was hardly foreseeable. They all flew elsewhere and not many regret the opportunity to have seen that there's more than Aer Lingus out there - very valuable experience in itself. In fact, a large percentage never did come back and some have since left again.